5 ms·

Firstly: This should be changed to link to the original Gallup article [0] since the submitted link is just a shameless reformatting of their original work (and

by vosper 10y ago

Firstly: This should be changed to link to the original Gallup article [0] since the submitted link is just a shameless reformatting of their original work (and is harder to read). Secondly: Something I think people are missing is that breaches of company values are part of the ammunition that can be used to fire people. I'd wager that's as much of the purpose of (big-company) "values" as anything else. [0] http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/195506/few-workers-apply-company-values-jobs.aspx?g_source=WWWV7HP&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/195506/few-workers-app...

shostack 10y ago
I don't see this as a negative thing having witnessed someone terminated before in part due to misalignment with values. It can be a very useful tool for getting rid of someone who is quite obviously causing damage but might be hard to get rid of for other causes. Values dictate how a company should operate and how employees should treat each other. It is a way of codifying the culture and can serve as part of the company's immune system to expel threats to that culture. Making sure I understand and align with the values of companies I work for is something I've found to be tremendously helpful in ensuring I enjoy working there.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  But most people, I'd wager, are either misaligned with at least one or two of the company's values, or have acted contrary to them at some point. Yet, they don't get fired. "Values dictate how a company should operate and how employees should treat each other. " So, not management, then?
  - shostack 10y ago
    They apply to management as well. Practice what you preach and what not. But I agree that it is quite possible to be misaligned with one or more values or acting contrary to them at some point. That's just reality. It really depends on the person and situation and usually it takes more than being off on one or two. At the very least the hope is that those are trainable things that can be improved.
- cyphar 10y ago
  > I don't see this as a negative thing having witnessed someone terminated before in part due to misalignment with values. It can be a very useful tool for getting rid of someone who is quite obviously causing damage but might be hard to get rid of for other causes. That's just the Al Capone argument. Should we have insane tax laws that everyone has broken at some point just so that the state can send the "right person" to jail? Should we allow planting of contraband on the "right suspect" because if they didn't have anything on them today you're making up for when they'll have something on them tomorrow? Holding a 5 tonne weight over everyone's head is no way to foster a good culture. You're just forcing people to live in fear of unjust reprimands.
  - shostack 10y ago
    That's a bit of an extreme comparison, no? FWIW, the values were pretty clear on this point, and it was pretty apparent to all (not just management) that the change needed to happen. And again, it was just in part due to this. There were other reasons. There was no real sense from anyone I knew that the values were being unreasonably held over people's heads or that they were asking too much.
    - cyphar 10y ago
      I can accept that it probably worked out in your case. It also worked out in the Al Capone case. The problem is that it's the wrong way of solving the issue, and could cause unjust carrying out of the rules. Because if everyone has broken the rules, then you have lost your effective ability to do anything in fear of reprimand. It's very reminiscent of thoughtcrime. Which is why I have a problem with it.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - r_smart 10y ago
    There's a huge distinction here you overlook: Private enterprises vs the government. Honestly, I think it should be fairly easy for companies to let people go, and ideally we worry more about making sure they do a good job of offering severance rather then forcing them to continue to employee people that are damaging the business. Then businesses don't need to just this kind of indirect foolishness, they can just let people go. Absolutely the government shouldn't be doing the things you describe.
losteverything 10y ago
This. Company value: respect. Ok. Your boss rips you a new one. Screams. Name calls. Uses profanity. Play the "respect card" this will work. Company value Integrity: you are suggested to do something shady or wrong to boost a metric. Play the integrity card.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  How'd that work at Wells Fargo? Whistleblowers were promptly fired. "More than ever, our customers need a safe, trustworthy, capable financial services provider that can help them plan for and achieve their financial goals" https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate/vision-and-values/our-future/ https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate/vision-and-values...
  - losteverything 10y ago
    It didn't. Or maybe there were some who just walked away and see now unnoticed. I used to think all that stuff was useless until i found out how to use it to my advantage.

by vosper 10y ago

shostack 10y ago

I don't see this as a negative thing having witnessed someone terminated before in part due to misalignment with values. It can be a very useful tool for getting rid of someone who is quite obviously causing damage but might be hard to get rid of for other causes. Values dictate how a company should operate and how employees should treat each other. It is a way of codifying the culture and can serve as part of the company's immune system to expel threats to that culture. Making sure I understand and align with the values of companies I work for is something I've found to be tremendously helpful in ensuring I enjoy working there.

st3v3r 10y ago
But most people, I'd wager, are either misaligned with at least one or two of the company's values, or have acted contrary to them at some point. Yet, they don't get fired. "Values dictate how a company should operate and how employees should treat each other. " So, not management, then?
- shostack 10y ago
  They apply to management as well. Practice what you preach and what not. But I agree that it is quite possible to be misaligned with one or more values or acting contrary to them at some point. That's just reality. It really depends on the person and situation and usually it takes more than being off on one or two. At the very least the hope is that those are trainable things that can be improved.
cyphar 10y ago
> I don't see this as a negative thing having witnessed someone terminated before in part due to misalignment with values. It can be a very useful tool for getting rid of someone who is quite obviously causing damage but might be hard to get rid of for other causes. That's just the Al Capone argument. Should we have insane tax laws that everyone has broken at some point just so that the state can send the "right person" to jail? Should we allow planting of contraband on the "right suspect" because if they didn't have anything on them today you're making up for when they'll have something on them tomorrow? Holding a 5 tonne weight over everyone's head is no way to foster a good culture. You're just forcing people to live in fear of unjust reprimands.
- shostack 10y ago
  That's a bit of an extreme comparison, no? FWIW, the values were pretty clear on this point, and it was pretty apparent to all (not just management) that the change needed to happen. And again, it was just in part due to this. There were other reasons. There was no real sense from anyone I knew that the values were being unreasonably held over people's heads or that they were asking too much.
  - cyphar 10y ago
    I can accept that it probably worked out in your case. It also worked out in the Al Capone case. The problem is that it's the wrong way of solving the issue, and could cause unjust carrying out of the rules. Because if everyone has broken the rules, then you have lost your effective ability to do anything in fear of reprimand. It's very reminiscent of thoughtcrime. Which is why I have a problem with it.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- r_smart 10y ago
  There's a huge distinction here you overlook: Private enterprises vs the government. Honestly, I think it should be fairly easy for companies to let people go, and ideally we worry more about making sure they do a good job of offering severance rather then forcing them to continue to employee people that are damaging the business. Then businesses don't need to just this kind of indirect foolishness, they can just let people go. Absolutely the government shouldn't be doing the things you describe.

losteverything 10y ago

This. Company value: respect. Ok. Your boss rips you a new one. Screams. Name calls. Uses profanity. Play the "respect card" this will work. Company value Integrity: you are suggested to do something shady or wrong to boost a metric. Play the integrity card.

cmdrfred 10y ago
How'd that work at Wells Fargo? Whistleblowers were promptly fired. "More than ever, our customers need a safe, trustworthy, capable financial services provider that can help them plan for and achieve their financial goals" https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate/vision-and-values/our-future/ https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate/vision-and-values...
- losteverything 10y ago
  It didn't. Or maybe there were some who just walked away and see now unnoticed. I used to think all that stuff was useless until i found out how to use it to my advantage.