Why That Mission Statement Matters
Mistakes happen when employees take their eye off the implications of their actions. It helped sink Volkswagen, proof that an ethical refresher course can make a big difference.
Heads up: this content is over 5 years old, so some information may be out of date.
I confess: Iâm a little skeptical about pronouncements about the importance of mission statements and âthe tone from the top.â Most employees are too dug into the day-to-day matters of their to-do lists to feel terribly invested in a mission statement they likely didnât experience after their day-one orientation. As for âtone,â action matters more, no?
But consider whatâs been going on at Volkswagen.
You probably arenât in a hurry to think of your humble organization as comparable to the global auto manufacturer, especially these days (opens in a new tab). In the wake of revelations that the company installed âdefeat devicesâ to cheat on emissions tests, the company announced a massive recall, saw its stock-market value plunge, had its CEO resign, and suffered a global loss in reputation. But what sunk Volkswagen, one argument goes, is the same thing that can sink the smallest nonprofit: You start to believe in your own nonsense, and then you keep doubling down on it.
Why risk getting fired when it can be somebody elseâs problem down the line?
In the Atlantic, Jerry Useem explores the Volkswagen scandal (opens in a new tab) in the context of other cases where flaws were tragically ignored: the explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger, the Ford Pinto, B.F. Goodrich trying to fob faulty brakes onto the Air Force in the â60s. In each of those cases, and in Volkswagenâs, Useem argues, leaders adhere to a script that allows for what one sociologist calls the ânormalization of deviance.â
âExecutives are bombarded with information,â Useem writes. âTo ease the cognitive load, they rely on a set of unwritten scripts imported from the organization around themâŠ. But therein lies the danger. Scripts can be flawed, and grow more so over time, yet they discourage active analysis.â
The worst of it is that these arenât cases where employees were wringing their hands over whether something was right or wrongâthey were fully persuaded that everything was OK. A little O-ring damage isnât so bad, a melting brake pad isnât so bad, a defeat device isnât so bad. To make this a little less dramatic but bring it closer to home: A flawed new-member strategy isnât so bad, a handful of disengaged board members isnât so bad, a missed meeting attendance target isnât so bad, a site-selection process thatâs based mainly on who offered the swankest fam trip isnât so bad, a chat about price-fixing isnât so badâŠ.
And so on (opens in a new tab)âyou get the idea. A lot of associations, I suspect, feel a need to act to the press releaseâthat is, find the element of every failure that speaks to success. That attitude is problematic on two levels: It leads employees to believe that shortcomings will be papered over, and it generates a culture thatâs afraid to speak up when things are really and truly wrong. Why risk getting fired when it can be somebody elseâs problem down the line? (And, hey, maybe nobody will notice the problem anywayâŠ.) As Useem puts it: âFaced with the immediate certainty of a bossâs wrath or the distant possibility of blowback from a faceless agency, many will focus mostly on the former.â
So whatâs the fix? Useem argues for the value of introducing âcounterscriptsâ into an organizationâs conversationâa radical transparency that makes clear that employees will not be punished for speaking honestly about problematic actions. Or to put it another way: A mission and values statement. Useem argues that it was Johnson & Johnsonâs insistence on making its credo of compassion a âliving documentâ that allowed it to act fast during the 1982 Tylenol scandal.
âIf employees feel they can speak up, it not only makes for a healthier workplace, it also eradicates problems before they become big and public (opens in a new tab),â University of Michigan business professor Cindy Schipani told Dividend magazine last fall. That article includes an âethics checklistâ that covers hiring, training, decisionmaking, and overall culture. There are 30 on the list, but two of them seem the most critical: âEmployees have a lot of skill in recognizing ethical issuesâ and âEmployees rarely feel pressured to compromise the organizationâs ethical standards to achieve business objectives.â Your staffers are surely busy enough with their to-do lists to dwell very long on ethics. But a moment spent on it can save an organization from a lot of headaches, and itâs a message that the person at the top can deliver. And if youâre not sure what to say, itâs probably all there in that values statement. Whenâs the last time you looked at it?
What do you do to keep ethics an active conversation at your organization? Share your experiences in the comments?
(iStock/Thinkstock)
Comments
Comments are for ASAE members. Learn more about comments on this site.
Log in to your member account or join ASAE!