Why words alone are no longer enough
Organisations always emphasise values.
Especially in marketing, on the website, in recruiting, it is emphasised that a particularly value-oriented way of acting is always the guideline for all actions. Reality often shows a different picture. If values are of central importance, some oppose a stringent pursuit of purely economic goals. In this area of tension, many wrong decisions are made.
How can you better reflect this as an organisation?
Writing it down
Often the written aspects of the value agreements are very general statements, sometimes almost banal. Sentences such as “Be a good role model” or “Respect is always possible” should be avoided, as you mention aspects that are neither special nor a unique selling point. Certain elements are expected anyway, and this is no exception for you. It is, therefore, all the more critical that you record specific written core components. Management often resists these steps, some for self-protection, as you are aware of your misconduct. The fact is that writing everything down is the path to commitment.
Hard factors (ratios, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)) have to be considered as well as soft factors (Critical Success Factors, (CSFs)). A corresponding reporting process must be implemented. As a general rule, more than just measuring alone is required. Every figure that does not lead to any consequences does not need to be collected.
A reporting process for value violations must be offered personally and anonymously. Prompt action after violations is imperative. It is also crucial that appropriate consequences are shown in the case of misconduct by managers. Employees will promptly turn to the public and communicate this accordingly online on the evaluation platforms if this is not done. In this case, the blame for such an escalation lies with the misconduct that has been consistently tolerated.
Never try to cover up necessary discussions and consequences, never avoid them or impose negative consequences on the persons who have shown the misconduct. You will achieve the opposite of your goal.
The end of excuses
A consequence is necessary, and it must be independent of the person. The context must be taken into account, but it is mainly excuses that have lacked consequences required in the past (more on this in this week’s podcast — link below).
Some examples: “Who is going to replace the person then?” — Victim protection takes precedence over internal job planning. “But the person is important to us” — see the case before. “But the person has a lot of merits” — merits are not a bonus booklet, which may be exchanged afterwards for assaults without consequence.
Fair, open clarification with an application of the presumption of innocence is granted to everyone, as is in dubio pro reo, a decision in favour of the defendant in case of doubt. However, as soon as it is clear that there has been misconduct, appropriate consequences must be taken without exception.
Do you care about the topic of very good leadership?
Let’s talk: NB@NB-Networks.com.