A. Starting Assumptions for Giving Voice to Values
Before we begin to practice possible approaches and scripts for voicing our values in the workplace, it is useful to be explicit about our starting assumptions. You may or may not be certain that you share all these assumptions, but in order to gain the most from this approach, it is useful to approach it as if you do. This is the “story line,” if you will, behind this work.
1. I want to voice and act on my values.
Most of us want to find ways to voice and act on our values in the workplace, and to do so effectively.
2. I have voiced my values at some point in the past.
Even though research and our own experiences reveal many individual and organizational inhibitors, most of us have, in fact, chosen to voice and act on our values on some occasions.
3. I can voice my values more often and more effectively.
We have the potential to expand our capacity, effectiveness, and likelihood to voice and act on our values by acknowledging that we have such a choice, and by practicing what we would say and do if we made that choice.
4. It is easier for me to voice my values in some contexts than others.
Developing the “muscle” for voicing our values does not diminish the importance of selecting and developing organizational cultures and policies and incentives that encourage such choices. In fact, the effort to promote the development of such cultures, policies, and incentives is, in itself, an instance of voicing values. And the more such organizational enablers are in place, the more likely it is that individuals will choose to voice their values. It is a virtuous circle.
5. I am more likely to do this if I have practiced how to respond to frequently encountered conflicts.
There are certain frequently heard “reasons and rationalizations” for not voicing and acting on our values. But there are also possible responses or reframings that we can use to counter these reasons and rationalizations. If we familiarize ourselves with these responses in advance, we are more likely to be able to access them when needed, potentially shifting a conversation or changing a mind. Prior reflection on responses to value conflicts can expand our confidence in the degrees of freedom we have in any given decision situation.
6. My example is powerful.
Just as we want to voice and act on our values, we can assume that many of our colleagues do as well. If we can access credible counterarguments to frequently heard reasons for not voicing and acting on our values, we may encourage and empower others to join us.
7. Although mastering and delivering responses to frequently heard rationalizations can empower others who share my views to act, I cannot assume I know who those folks will be.
The responses we develop and practice to frequently heard reasons and rationalizations are intended to strengthen our own confidence in voicing and acting on our values, as well as that of others who share our value conflict but are unable to find a way to explain their reluctance. However, we cannot assume we know who feels the conflict and who does not simply by observing their behavior because, as we have already acknowledged, we all have chosen to suppress these “felt” conflicts at some points in our past.
8. The better I know myself, the more I can prepare to play to my strengths, and, when necessary, protect myself from my weaknesses.
The greater our self-knowledge, the more likely we are to be able to anticipate and manage our responses to values conflicts. Prior reflection on our own personalities and behavioral tendencies under pressure enables us to play to our strengths and to put mechanisms in place to protect us from our weaknesses. Research tells us that often these “mechanisms” need to be external (incentives, deterrents, automatic review processes, transparency, a preestablished network of sounding boards). Internal awareness of self-bias is important but not enough to prevent us from falling prey to it: we need to go beyond awareness to action or external mechanisms.
9. I am not alone.
We can utilize our personal support networks as sounding boards; reach out to our colleagues to build a network of allies or gather supporting information; and engage in strategic use of the managerial hierarchy. However, we must consider carefully which approach is most appropriate in a particular situation.
10. Although I may not always succeed, voicing and acting on my values is worth doing.
As with any other managerial action, we do not always succeed at what we set out to achieve. We are more likely to voice our values if we have decided that the cost of not doing so, or the benefit of doing so, is important enough that we would do it whether or not we were successful. In order to get to this place of clarity, we need to spend some serious time thinking about our own identity, personal purpose, and definition of success and failure. It is also important to reflect on the risks associated with voicing our values, so that we make this decision with our eyes open and prepared to handle the risks.
11. Voicing my values leads to better decisions.
It is often difficult to be certain that a course of action is “right,” but we are more likely to come to the best decision if we feel empowered to voice our concerns about values conflicts and discuss them with others.
12. The more I believe it’s possible to voice and act on my values, the more likely I will be to do so.
We are more likely to voice and act on our values when we believe it is possible to do so effectively. If we pay attention to positive examples of such voice and action and spend time developing support mechanisms and practicing the development and delivery of responses to frequently heard reasons and rationalizations for unethical actions, we can expand our sense of what’s possible—another virtuous circle.
B. A Tale of Two Stories: An Exercise
In your career thus far, you have likely encountered workplace situations when your values conflicted with what you were asked to do. Often it is not easy to align your own personal values and purpose with those of your boss, your co-workers, your direct reports, or your firm. This exercise is designed to help you identify and develop the competencies necessary to achieve that alignment.
Objectives
1. To reflect on your previous experiences, successful and less so, at effectively voicing and acting on your values in the workplace.
2. To discover which conditions and problem definitions empower you to effectively voice your values, and which tend to inhibit that action.
Part I
Recall a time in your work experience when your values conflicted with what you were expected to do in a particular, nontrivial management decision, and you spoke up and acted to resolve the conflict. Consider the following questions and write down your thoughts and brief responses.
• What did you do, and what was the impact?
• What motivated you to speak up and act?
• How satisfied are you? How would you like to have responded? (This question is not about rejecting or defending past actions but rather about imagining your ideal scenario.)
What would have made it easier for you to speak or act? Things within your own control? Things within the control of others?
Part II
Recall a time in your work experience when your values conflicted with what you were expected to do in a particular, nontrivial management decision, and you did not speak up or act to resolve the conflict. Consider the following questions and write down your thoughts and brief responses.
• What happened?
• Why didn’t you speak up or act? What would have motivated you to do so?
• How satisfied are you? How would you like to have responded? (This question is not about rejecting or defending past actions but rather about imagining your ideal scenario.)
• What would have made it easier for you to speak/act? Things within your own control? Things within the control of others?
Note: In this exercise, a “values conflict” refers to a disagreement that has an ethical dimension to it. That is, I might disagree with your idea about the most efficient process flow design for an assembly line, but there is usually not an ethical component to that decision. However, if one design reflected a commitment to worker safety or environmental concerns and the other didn’t, for example, even this disagreement might be appropriate here.
C. Enablers for Voicing Values: Some Examples
What makes it easier to speak and act on our values?
Things within our own control
• Enlisting allies
• Selecting and sequencing of audiences
• Gaining greater confidence in our viewpoint as a result of securing more information
• Starting with questions rather than assertions
• Greater understanding of others’ motivations, needs, fears
• Lowering the stress by taking the conversation with dissenters or key supporters off-line, one-on-one, at a mutually convenient time and place
• Working through incremental steps
• Changing the frame of the problem: positioning it as opportunity seeking rather than risk management, for example, or as a “learning dialogue” rather than a reproach
• Finding win-win solutions
• Questioning assumptions, professional rationalizations, and seeming truisms (“The market made me do it”; “I’ll behave differently when I’m in charge”; “The invisible hand takes all costs into account so I don’t have to”; “Business is a meritocracy so therefore its painful impacts are justified”)
• Appealing to shared purpose, values (appeal to alignment)
• Normalizing (Managing this kind of conflict is just part of doing the job)
• Playing to one’s own strengths (if better at writing than speaking, develop a memo)
Organizational context
• Explicit organizational policies, values
• Organizational value placed on open debate, discussion
• Existing explicit mechanisms for open debate and discussion within the organization (e.g., town meetings)
• Systems for raising questions (e.g., hotline, ombudsman)
• Consistent and visible organizational track record of values-based leadership and practice and of correcting problems
D. Personal-Professional Profile
In your definition of a well-run company, how important are the following?
Please indicate whether each quality is “very important,” “somewhat important,” or “not important at all.”
a. Provides excellent customer service
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
b. Has efficient and flexible operations
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
c. Offers high financial return to shareholders
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
d. Attracts and retains exceptional people
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
e. Creates products or services that benefit society
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
f. Adheres to a strong mission
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
g. Invests in employee training and professional development
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
h. Operates according to its values and a strong code of ethics
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
i. Is a stable employer
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
j. Provides competitive compensation
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
k. Adheres to progressive environmental policies
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
l. Produces high-quality products and services
Very important Somewhat important Not important at all
Would you add something to the previous list that you think is “very important”? If so, what?
Which of the following issues pose the greatest challenges for today’s CEOs and senior executives?
Please choose a maximum of three alternatives.
____ Lack of investor confidence
____ Increased activism on the part of environmental and social advocacy groups
____ Corporate scandal (e.g., accounting misstatements, conflict of interest)
____ Questions about executive compensation levels and incentive systems
____ Breakdown in trust between employees and management
____ Inadequate regulatory and legal institutions
____ Product safety and liability
____ Economic downturn
____ Growing inequity in the distribution of wealth around the world
____ Lack of public trust in business
____ Managing international supply chain requirements
____ War and international instability
____ Threat of terrorism
____ Other (please specify) _____________________________
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
Please indicate whether you “strongly agree,” “somewhat agree,” “somewhat disagree,” or “strongly disagree” with each.
a. Businesspeople are more likely to care about the social responsibilities of companies when the economy is strong.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
b. When a multinational company is entering a new market in a less-developed country, it has a responsibility to go above and beyond business success and contribute to the development of the local community.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
c. When it comes to the environment, all a company needs to do is comply with the law.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
d. Companies should maintain their employees’ job security even if they incur a short-term drop in profit as a result.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
e. Most companies accurately report their earnings and profits.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
f. Corporate reputation is important to me in making my decision about the organization where I want to work.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
g. Managers place too much emphasis on short-term performance measures when making business decisions.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
h. I anticipate that my own values will sometimes conflict with what I am asked to do in business.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
If you answered the last statement above with “somewhat agree” or “strongly agree,” please specify which kinds of values conflicts you expect to face.
Assume you are engaged in each of the following business activities or practices. How likely do you think it is that values conflicts would arise?
Please indicate whether it is “very likely,” “somewhat likely,” or “not likely at all” that values conflicts would arise.
a. Managing personnel in manufacturing plants
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
b. Outsourcing production operations
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
c. Investing in less-developed countries
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
d. Downsizing
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
e. Financial reporting
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
f. Natural resource exploration
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
g. Awarding stock options
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
h. Setting executive compensation levels
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
i. Conducting performance reviews
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
j. Interacting with government officials
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
k. Raising or borrowing capital
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
l. Negotiating with suppliers or customers
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
If you find that your values conflict with those of the company where you work, how likely is it that you will:
a. Not mind too much
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
b. Experience it as stressful
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
c. Quietly handle the stress
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
d. Look for another job
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
e. Speak up about your objections
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
f. Advocate alternative values or approaches within the company
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
g. Try to get others to join you in addressing your concerns
Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely at all
Think of a few occasions when you encountered a values conflict in your previous work experience. Recall how you handled the situations. Would you characterize yourself and your behavior as that of:
____ an idealist (One who is primarily concerned with moral ideals when making decisions on how to act.)
____ a pragmatist (One who is concerned with his or her own material welfare, but also with moral ideals. “Pragmatists will gladly do their fair share to create a civil society, but not place themselves at a systematic disadvantage” to do so.)
____ an opportunist (One who is only concerned with his or her own material welfare.)
If you placed yourself in the category of “pragmatist,” what can you do to maximize the likelihood that you will act on your ideals? What competencies will you need?
Think of someone you deeply respect. What are the 2 or 3 characteristics you most admire in this person?
Who are you at your best?
Name your 3 or 4 deepest values.
What is the one sentence you would like to see in your obituary that captures who you really were in your life?
Questions of Personal Purpose
What is your personal purpose for your business career? Some possible issues to consider:
• What impact do you want to have? On whom?
• Whom do you want to know you benefited? In what ways?
• What do you want to learn?
• How do you define your impact as an auditor, investor, manager, product developer, marketer, senior executive, and so on?
• What do you hope to accomplish? What will make your professional life worthwhile?
• How do you want to feel about yourself and your work, both while you are doing it and in the end?
Questions of Risk
• Are you a risk taker or risk averse?
• What are the greatest risks you face in your line of work? Are they personal (e.g., livelihood, deportation, legal punishment) or are they professional (e.g., harm to customers, employees, the firm), or are they societal (e.g., impact on environment, profession, industry, nation)?
• What levels of risk can and can’t you live with?
Questions of Personal Communication Style or Preference
• Do you deal well with conflict or are you nonconfrontational? Under what circumstances do you behave in each way?
• Do you prefer communicating in person or in writing?
• Do you think best from the gut and in the moment or do you need to take time to reflect and craft your communications?
• Do you assert your position with statements or do you use questions to communicate?
Questions of Loyalty
• Do you tend to feel the greatest loyalty to family, work colleagues, your firm or employer, or other stakeholders, such as customers?
• Under what conditions and given what stakes?
Questions of Self-Image
• Do you see yourself as shrewd or naive?
• As idealistic, opportunistic, or pragmatic?
• As a learner or as a teacher?
• Other?
Note: The first 14 questions in this profile were piloted at the University of Texas, Austin, in 2003. Questions 1 and 3–7 are used with permission from the Aspen Institute Business and Society Program MBA Student Attitudes Surveys {{www.aspencbe.org}}. Questions 10–14 are adapted from Jim Loehr and Tony Schwartz, The Power of Full Engagement: Managing Energy, Not Time, Is the Key to High Performance and Personal Renewal (New York: Free Press, 2003). Questions 15–19 are based on the Giving Voice to Values interview findings.
The self-assessment here is only lightly focused on values clarification. This is because, as discussed in Chapter 2, most assessments of true core moral values tend to generate a similar short list of values. Rather the focus here is on an individualized assessment of personal strengths, communication style, and so on.
Idealist,” “pragmatist,” and “opportunist” categories and descriptions are drawn from Gregory Dees and Peter Crampton, “Shrewd Bargaining on the Moral Frontier: Toward a Theory of Morality in Practice,” Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 2 (April 1991): 135–167.
E. Guidelines for Peer Coaching
Insightful and supportive peer feedback on discussants’ proposed “scripts” and strategies for responding to values conflicts is an essential part of the Giving Voice to Values approach. This does not mean that there is no critique. Rather it means that those who share their proposed responses to the values conflict, as well as those who are serving as peer coaches, all adopt a stance of joint problem-solving. This includes noting the strengths of a proposed response (so that they can be retained) as well as identifying the remaining questions (so that the group can collaborate on more effective solutions). What follows is a template for listening to and debriefing the sharing of proposed “scripts” and strategies for responding to values conflicts.
Preliminary Reflection
Directed to Listeners
After listening to your colleague’s response to the values conflict under discussion but before discussing it, take a moment to silently consider your responses to the following questions.
• What is your immediate response to your colleague’s strategy and “script”?
• What are the strengths of this response?
• What questions do you still have for your colleague?
• If you were the target of this response, how do you think you would react?
• What might improve this response?
Directed to Speakers
After sharing your response to the values conflict under discussion but before discussing it, take a moment to silently consider your responses to the following questions.
• What do you see as the strengths of your response?
• What still concerns you?
• What do you think would be helpful in enabling you to respond more effectively? What would you like to ask for from your peers?
Process Questions
• Invite speakers to share their answers to the questions above.
• Invite listeners to share their answers to the questions above.
• Invite speakers to respond to the following: Is that a helpful response to you?
• If yes, why?
• If no, why not? What would be more helpful?
When designing, reflecting upon, and discussing responses to values conflicts, the following questions may be useful:
• Who is the critical audience(s)? What is at stake for them?
• What is the optimal timing for your effort? Should it be broken down into stages in some way? Sequenced?
• Will you do this solo? With allies? (If yes, whom?)
• Will you do this off-line or in public? One-on-one or in a group?
• Do you have all the information you need (research, interpersonal insights, examples of past successes or failures, etc.)?
• Do you have adequate sources of support, inside or outside the organization? You might brainstorm all the possible sources of support and what you think each of them may be best able to provide. For example:
Peers within the organization may have information and be able to confirm or disprove your data.
Family members may be able to place the choice into a larger perspective, with regard to your deepest values and your per-sonal identity. It may also be helpful to discuss your situation with family members as a way of engaging them in the process with you so that you are not on this journey alone, particularly when the risks may affect them as well. Otherwise, fear of admitting the risks to those close to us can hinder our sense of free decision making.
• Given your own self-assessment of your typical reactions and blindspots, have you insured that you have consulted advisers who are best suited to raise what you are likely to miss?
How would you describe the approach you take in your proposed response:
A learning stance: Open-minded (e.g., “Help me to understand your thinking about this…”)
Dialogue (e.g., “Can we keep this decision open for a while longer, so that we can consider other perspectives?”)
Persuasion: You are convinced of your position but want to per-suade the other (e.g., “I have done a lot of thinking about this situation and I have concluded … I would really appreciate the opportunity to share my perspective with you”).
Adversarial: You are convinced of your position and your goal is to simply state your position and let the chips fall where they may (e.g., “I have done a lot of thinking about this situation and I have concluded … I am sorry if you disagree but I cannot pursue this course of action”).
One-size-fits-all arguments, or somehow tailored for audience(s) (“It’s not honest” is a one-size-fits-all argument. A more tailored argument might be: “Our firm’s reputation for honesty is its greatest asset. Remember how our customers stood by us when we discovered that data theft last year? That was because they believed we would never deceive them about their risks.” Both can be effective in different situations, but it is best to be aware of our choices.)
Problem-solving (e.g., “I see what’s at stake here and why you are suggesting this course of action, but I am confident we can find another solution if we bring all our talents to bear here.”)
Other approaches?
• What is the biggest challenge or thorniest argument you face?
• What are your strongest arguments?
• What will it take to do this?
• For your target audience: How will you need to frame this choice to tap into your audience’s commitment?
• For yourself: How will you need to frame this choice to tap into your own commitment and courage?
F. An Action Framework for Giving Voice to Values: The To-Do List
1. Values
Know and appeal to a short list of widely shared values, such as honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness, and compassion.* In other words, don’t assume too little—or too much—commonality with the viewpoints of others.
2. Choice
Discover and believe you have a choice about voicing values by examining your own track record. Know what has enabled and disabled you in the past, so you can work with and around these factors. And recognize, respect, and appeal to the capacity for choice in others.
3. Normality
Expect values conflicts so that you approach them calmly and competently. Overreaction can limit your choices unnecessarily.
4. Purpose
Define your personal and professional purpose explicitly and broadly before values conflicts arise: What is the impact you most want to have in your work, profession, and career? Similarly, appeal to a sense of purpose in others.
5. Self-Knowledge, Self-Image, and Alignment
Generate a “self-story” or personal narrative about the decision to voice and act on your values that is consistent with who you already are and builds on the strengths and preferences that you already recognize in yourself. There are many ways to align your unique strengths and style with your values. If you view yourself as a “pragmatist,” for example, find a way to view voicing your values as pragmatic.
6. Voice
Voice is developed over time and with practice. Practice voicing your values using the style of expression with which you are most skillful and which is most appropriate to the situation. You are most likely to say those words that you have pre-scripted and already heard yourself express, at earlier times in your career or in practice sessions.
7. Reasons and Rationalizations
Anticipate the typical rationalizations given for ethically questionable behavior and identify counterarguments. These rationalizations are predictable and vulnerable to reasoned response.
* Rushworth M. Kidder, Moral Courage: Taking Action When Your Values Are Put to the Test (New York: William Morrow, 2005).