3 ms·

This actual vs described values mismatch is a red flag and it could be an easy way to discover toxic culture. When applying for a job, you usually have multiple

This actual vs described values mismatch is a red flag and it could be an easy way to discover toxic culture. When applying for a job, you usually have multiple interviews - HR, team, direct manager. It makes sense to ask all of them about their values and compare the answers.

puszczyk 5y ago
I’d say the opposite, there needs to be a delta between values and actual behavior. I want to be a good husband, dedicated employee, etc. Am I? I’d like to think more often than not. But we all err, and I value the transparency/courage to ack that we are not perfect on our values and still have a long way to go. For me the a flag would be if a person/company is not willing to acknowledge they are not as good as they public values are. (Because how can they improve if they can’t even ack it).
- marcosdumay 5y ago
  You mean that you should not hide of the difference between values and behavior? Because there's nothing on that comment that actually supports the difference. And if you are being honest, descriptive values should describe your behavior very closely.
  - ARandomerDude 5y ago
    The thing you're struggling with is the parent's humility. Value: be great at everything all the time Parent: I try very hard but often fail You: then you must be dishonest about your values Humility is a virtue not a vice.
    - shadowfox 5y ago
      Not the OP, but that situation seems to indicate espousing unrealistic values at the least or am I misreading what you are saying?
    - marcosdumay 5y ago
      > then you must be dishonest about your values Hum, no, but then he is talking about the "aspirational values" that the GP pointed.
alecbz 5y ago
There are some reasonable explanations though: * The actual values have changed over time but the value statement hadn't been updated in a while * Different parts of the company genuinely have different values I don't think either of those necessarily indicate a toxic culture.
- ivan_gammel 5y ago
  Totally agree that it does not point to toxic culture per se. It's just an easy way to spot something wrong at this angle. Though both explanations may also point to something: * If values changed, but company did not bother to communicate them, then they are not important and not applied in daily life. This is not necessarily a bad thing at the moment of observation, but it may lay a foundation to toxic culture eventually. * If different parts of the company have different values, then the decisions where those values would have been applied may result in a conflict between those parts. Red flag.

puszczyk 5y ago

I’d say the opposite, there needs to be a delta between values and actual behavior. I want to be a good husband, dedicated employee, etc. Am I? I’d like to think more often than not. But we all err, and I value the transparency/courage to ack that we are not perfect on our values and still have a long way to go. For me the a flag would be if a person/company is not willing to acknowledge they are not as good as they public values are. (Because how can they improve if they can’t even ack it).

marcosdumay 5y ago
You mean that you should not hide of the difference between values and behavior? Because there's nothing on that comment that actually supports the difference. And if you are being honest, descriptive values should describe your behavior very closely.
- ARandomerDude 5y ago
  The thing you're struggling with is the parent's humility. Value: be great at everything all the time Parent: I try very hard but often fail You: then you must be dishonest about your values Humility is a virtue not a vice.
  - shadowfox 5y ago
    Not the OP, but that situation seems to indicate espousing unrealistic values at the least or am I misreading what you are saying?
  - marcosdumay 5y ago
    > then you must be dishonest about your values Hum, no, but then he is talking about the "aspirational values" that the GP pointed.

alecbz 5y ago

There are some reasonable explanations though: * The actual values have changed over time but the value statement hadn't been updated in a while * Different parts of the company genuinely have different values I don't think either of those necessarily indicate a toxic culture.

ivan_gammel 5y ago
Totally agree that it does not point to toxic culture per se. It's just an easy way to spot something wrong at this angle. Though both explanations may also point to something: * If values changed, but company did not bother to communicate them, then they are not important and not applied in daily life. This is not necessarily a bad thing at the moment of observation, but it may lay a foundation to toxic culture eventually. * If different parts of the company have different values, then the decisions where those values would have been applied may result in a conflict between those parts. Red flag.