Values can range from generic to specific. Generic values might be referred to as the philosophical or ethical position that an individual holds. These are the deep beliefs that are routed in the individual's history, and drive many of their intuitive and instinctive decisions. Specific values are the things that people will give priority to and spend energy on pursuing in the short-term or in a certain area of their life. On a second dimension, it might be possible to consider them in relation to the rigidity of the value set. Are the beliefs entrenched, and hence will never change, or is there a possibility that over time some modification will take place? Using these two variables, it is possible to develop a matrix that can identify the individual’s value map and therefore, their propensity to exist within a culture of a differing value system.
Helping the individual to understand and map their value set is the first step that the leader can take towards aligning the relationship with the organisation. The next stage is to undertake a matching exercise where a comparative analysis is undertaken between the person's value and that of the organisation where he or she is working.
Value matching takes the value that an individual has mapped and aligns them with the stated values of the manager or organisation. It is a comparative process whereby the values that the individual holds to be important are compared and reconciled with those the organisation holds to be of importance. This process means that the individual and their manager should go through a fairly deep and personal experience to allow them the chance to offer their schematic view of the world. To clearly understand what the other person’s values are, and why they are held to be of importance.
As Value Matching becomes more accepted and discussible, so it might make sense for it to be included as part of the contracting process. The proposition is that people who derive satisfaction from having values that are aligned with the organisation, will typically be more effective, happy, and willing to share learning with others in the team. If an individual feels that the organisation or colleagues do not operate from the same value set, there is every chance that the learning process will be slowed down or even blocked.
At the end of the contracting process there will be a clear view of four areas:
1. The values that the organisation will reinforce.
2. The values that the organisation is prepared to put aside for the individual.
3. The values that the individual will follow which are over and above those offered by the organisation.
4. The values that the individual is prepared to forgo whilst working with the organisation.
This process offers the benefit of raising and clarifying those issues that are often left unspoken. It might not directly resolve problems where there is a difference between the two, but at least in recognising this, sensitive action can be taken to resolve the differences. Clearly, this type of process will be difficult to manage, but in many ways, it is the process of dialogue - discussing and understanding each others values that can be of more benefit that any final agreement on the matching process.
The relationship between Value Matching and the creation of organisational knowledge, should never be underestimated. In most cases it should be expected that people will put their best effort into doing something they care for. The more the activity is valued, the more they will express energy, imagination, initiative and proactivity. Once the knowledge has been created by an individual, it will then be amplified through the process of socialisation as people connect with each other. If this process of interaction is corrupted or inhibited in any way, the idea of facilitating organisation wide learning will be severely impinged. One of the primary forms of corruption is where the individual believes that either they, or the work they are undertaking, is not seen to be important by the organisation.
Hence the need for alignment between the individual’s and the organisation’s value set. The suggestion is that the leader cannot simply dictate what the values of the company are, as these will simply be a manifestation of what is important for the people at the top. It should be an over-riding goal of any organisation to discover and capture as much as possible of the value that is held within its people. It is clearly not in its interest to slowly reduce the level of variety and diversity to a point where the business employs clones of the senior managers. So the need is to create a pincer movement, to offer direction from the top, where the senior managers share their beliefs in the values that are important and additionally, to gather reality from the bottom, using a bottom-up discovery process to identify what values the people believe are important.
The outcome of the value matching process can be a statement that embodies the needs of the organisation and the individual. This will then act as a major factor in creating an open flow of information through the organisation. No longer is it possible for the communication of company values to be a brainwashing process. The objective is not to enforce a process of behavioural change. It is about creating a shared mindset, one that can help to create a common sense of resonance, even across a diverse and varied organisation.
Values are the things that move people together, push them apart and generally make the world go round. One of the primary roles of the leader is to make sure that this is a positive process, and not one that distorts and corrupts the learning process.
(c) Mick Cope