When I first became an executive at a large academic health system, the focus was on maximizing local market share — that is, providing care to as much of the local population as possible. We also focused on increasing the scope of services we could provide to our patients. But I wasn't long into my career before the organization became increasingly determined to expand that geography through acquisitions. Then there was more and more interest in pulling patients in from around the country — and then from around the world. After that, there was a big push to become heavily involved in improving hospitals around the world, a trend that continues today among many leading U.S. healthcare providers. Meanwhile, the goals at health care organizations have been shifting, from providing as much care as possible to patients, to finding ways to hold down the amount and costs of many types of care, while improving outcomes.

I don't think healthcare is unique when it comes to having to repeatedly make course corrections in strategy, directions and goals. Most organizations are doing different things, and doing them differently, than they were 20 years ago — and these days, many don't make it three years without having to shake things up.

But that raises a question: In an environment of relentless and accelerating change, does it still make sense for a leader to try to develop and espouse an organizational vision? Leaders are supposed to keep their eyes not just on today's challenges but also on the horizon, where the next set of challenges are gathering. By articulating a vision, a leader can inspire the organization to prepare itself for the tests and opportunities to come. That's why the vision always been a valuable part of the leader's toolbox.

But if the vision has to be discarded or at least heavily modified as frequently as every three years, a new vision is unlikely to be taken seriously by employees, the marketplace, investors, or anyone else. Perhaps even worse, there may be a risk that a particular vision works so brilliantly at first that it could blind an organization to the changes it needs to make. That's a real trap.

In spite of these legitimate concerns, I'd argue that forming and selling an organizational vision is as important as it ever was. In an era of rapid change, the answer isn't to give up on a durable vision — it's to come up with a vision that makes room for and even helps guide the institution through that change. 

Ideally, a vision provides a framework within which many different types of goals and approaches could fit. I call that type of vision an "adaptive vision," because it's capable of rolling with the change while continuing to drive the organization forward within a broader set of aims. Without the framework provided by an adaptive vision, an organization might find itself adrift in a vast ocean of possible routes, none of which feels more relevant than the others. 

An adaptive vision, on the other hand, can exert a sort of gravity that points the way to a preferred direction, without overly constraining choices. Employees and other stakeholders need the reassurance that there is a general sense of where the organization is going, even if there are plenty of zigs and zags along the way. 

In the healthcare industry, an adaptive vision might spell out the intention to expand geographically while delivering ever-more-value-driven services. Or to give an example from another industry, Ford Motor Company has spelled out its vision to become a 21st century transportation company that may put as much effort into operating fleets of self-driving taxi-like vehicles as it does into building cars. These sorts of visions spell out bold ambitions that can cover a lot of ground, and that shouldn't require replacement every three years.

Organizations stuck in a pattern of re-visioning risk employee burnout and confused customers and partners. Those that do away with vision risk losing their readiness for the future. But an adaptive vision can keep an organization on track to meet new challenges, even if that track is a very broad one.

Originaly published on Linkedin Pulse.