Developing organisational values

26/10/2012

There's a lot of talk about organisational values and an equal amount of cynicism from people who believe values are nothing more than words on notice boards. I'm interested. Anyone know of any innovative, collaborative ways to develop organisational values, especially in the third sector?

120 Comments

Rennie Ambrose

26/10/2012 03:59:02 am

A very critical issue at tihis time. Values have a significant impact on behaviours; and we have seen in recent times the behaviours of org'al leaders that are devoid of ethical values. I'm also struggling with this issue. I have tried to engage employees at the floor level to define what are the beliefs that drive their conduct/performance and what beliefs should drive their organizations as a whole.

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:01:38 am

Hi Rennie and thanks for your comments. I like the connection you draw between values and ethics. I'm also interested in how to bridge (a) values that people in organisations hold and (b) what the organisation's strategy calls for, if there is a signficant difference between them. With best wishes. Nick

Grainne Pulver

26/10/2012 04:04:36 am

I worked in a company that was rebranding for marketing puposes. The CEO wanted to make sure there was alignment between the exterior brand and the internal culture. The approach we took was to gather groups of employees together (or they could do this online) and asked them to write a story about why they were proud to work at the company. We asked them to give it a title, set the scene, tell the story, and then why it made them proud. We heard stories about going the extra mile, respecting the dignity of customers, innovation, creative problem solving, and much more. The stories told us what values were really alive in the company and also the aspirational values. Employees would share their story with another employee, we asked them to listen for the values they heard in the story and them we shared them describing the similarities. The employees loved it and when we refreshed the values - based on their input - and they felt much more aligned with them when they were published. The things that made them proud were also the behaviours we needed to drive the business forward. I have used this with other groups with similar results.

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:09:52 am

Thanks for the note, Grainne, and for sharing such a great example of process. I agree with the connection between exerior brand (where brand is an external expression of internal culture) and internal culture (where culture is an internal expression of external brand). I too have used similar approaches to those you describe, drawing on appreciative inquiry, with similar results. You may be interested in the 'culture' section of this short article/write up: http://www.nick-wright.com/a-journey-towards-od.html. With best wishes. Nick

Nathida Sukmala

26/10/2012 04:12:07 am

I used to arrange the innovation project competition in company value concept, it success.

We have 3 phases. First, let your employees define their company core value, you can use Cameron&Quinn model or Deal&Kennedy Model as well. Second, give the stage for them to present and use this chance to promote and draw attention from all employees. Third, arrange the contest in teams or individual and award to a winner. From that time I have many ideas and projects to continue and follow.

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:15:38 am

Hi Nathida. Thank you for sharing the Cameron & Quinn and Deal & Kennedy models. I haven't heard of them before so will do a Google search to find out more. It sounds like you used the contest to raise awareness of the values and reward good examples of the values being worked out in practice. In one organisation I worked for, we did something similar which involved staff voting annually on who they believed had best exemplified each value in practice, then we held a public reward ceremony to affirm them. With best wishes. Nick

Nathida Sukmala

29/10/2012 08:55:06 am

Hi Nick. I would be grateful to share the knowledge with everyone here. I think the values should come from the shared beliefs of employee: that is a mental state of their experiences. We cannot give force to use but we can make the environments to make them trust that the values exist. The more experience the better.

Terrence Seamon

26/10/2012 04:17:20 am

Nick,

I have recently had the good fortune of working with several charitable organizations here in New Jersey, on their missions, visions, and values (MVV). What's interesting to me is how much they struggled with these concepts. I concluded that they are so focused on the day-today details and operating problems of program delivery to the clients and systems they serve, that to step back and look at the whole is a shift that is difficult for them.

What has seemed to help is when I translate mission, vision, and values into questions that they can grapple with; for example:

What do you do, for the people you serve, each day? (Mission)

What is the impact you are trying to make on the communities you serve? (Vision)

What principles do you hold most dear to your hearts as you work with the people you serve? (Values)

I'd say the one they have the most difficulty with is Values, though once they get a couple, the rest seem to flow.

From a facilitative standpoint, I have them work in small groups, using visual techniques to draw their MVV. In one recent session, when the groups were presenting their colorful charts to one another, one participant said, "This is deep."

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:22:48 am

Hi Terrence and thanks for the note and the examples. I can identify with the struggle you describe, especially in activist-orientated organisations. If people find the notion of 'values' too abstract, I will sometimes ask about concrete experiences or behaviours instead, especially those people feel most strongly represent what they like/feel is important or vice versa, as a route to eliciting underlying or implicit values. I like your idea of using visual techniques (could you give any examples?) and your final participant comment, 'This is deep'. :) With best wishes. Nick

James Davis

26/10/2012 04:24:17 am

I recently worked with an organization to help them articulate their values. The 5 values were developed and roughly defined by the Executive Team. We then created an employee survey to help us define the behaviors that demonstrated those values.

If I could do it again I would have encouraged the Executive Team to bring some employees in when identifying and defining the values. This would have helped employees have buy-in. Having the Execs define the values in silo created some tension with the employees...they felt like the values were being put on them...and viewed the Execs. as thinking that employee did not already exhibit these values.

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:30:19 am

Hi James and thanks for sharing so honestly. In my experience, many organisations try to develop values by an executive discussion followed by a communique and a call for employees to buy into them. Unfortunately, the method itself communicates something about the executive team's values that can evoke an apathetic or adverse reaction from employees. It seems to me it's important to model the values that already feel intuitively important in the way that values are developed. For example, if 'collaborative working' feels like a core value, testing that value is best done collaboratively. With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

26/10/2012 04:32:12 am

Great "if I could do it again" comment, James. That's one of the values of OD, in my view: we continuously learn from our own experiences and improve our practice.

I'd like to suggest that values can be identified the other way around: start with the behaviors that people are already doing everyday and ask, What values are represented in our actions?

David Sloan

26/10/2012 04:33:21 am

The book 'Funky Business' by 2 madcap Swedes talks about creating a social emotional enterprise mentioning employee networks aimed at unlocking an organisations human and social capital. Whilst not a direct response to your ask - well worth a read! http://www.amazon.com/Funky-Business-Kjell-Nordstrom/dp/1405822074/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1351078803&sr=1-9&keywords=Funky+Business

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:34:12 am

Thanks David. I haven't come across that book so I will check it out! With best wishes. Nick

Dave Burton

26/10/2012 04:36:17 am

It's a good question because often "shared" values are developed by a small number of people sitting at the top of the organisation and then everyone else is "educated" in them! If you want people to really share the values get them involved in developing them.
Of course, the practicalities of this depend on the size, complexity and working priorities of the organisation but I quite like approaches like "open space technology" which involve large group activity to encourage the development of ideas and agreement. If this is not a practical approach (it may just not be possible to get everyone together because we need to keep services going; everyone is spread out geographically etc), you could set up smaller events which are designed to get people to reflect on what values underpin the organisation.
If even that is too challenging, another approach is to do the top down stuff and then get teams to work together withe question: "Here are the values - what practical things can we be doing, day by day, to demonstrate them?"

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:43:44 am

Hi Dave and thanks for the ideas. I too worked in one organisation where we used an appreciative open space approach with quite dramatic impact. As you say, it's much more difficult if people are geographically dispersed. I like the pragmatism in your approach. An alternative to developing the values and engaging people with how to implement them could be, first, to draft values and invite people to comment on how well they resonate with things that feel most important to them. The tricky thing I've found is that people often stumble over language. They may agree with the underlying value but don't like the words that are used to express it. In light of this, in one organisation I worked with we shared images and clusters of words to capture the spirit of each value ('this kind of thing') rather than tightly wordsmithed definitions. That seemed to help. With best wishes. Nick

Dave Burton

26/10/2012 05:15:15 am

Hi Nick,

Thanks – and your examples have reminded me of one approach which involves
groups developing a “coat of arms” (you can download lots of elements for
this from the web and people love cutting them up and pasting them on
sheets!) – same idea really, to use pictures as a way of getting agreement
on the symbols that express an organisation’s values and allowing the words
to come later.

Regards,

Dave Burton

Sonia Inniss

26/10/2012 04:47:20 am

My thinking on this is that the custodians of the values (what we stand for) of an enterprise are the Chairman and the CEO as part of their shared leadership space.

If employees cannot articulate what the values are, it is because that subject and its associated issues are not deemed to be important enough - either as part of the ambitions/strategy of the organization or as part of the operational reality in their dealings with clients, partners, suppliers etc

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 04:55:59 am

Hi Sonia and thanks for the stimulating note. You raise an interesting point in terms of who the custodians are of organisational values. I guess accountability for upholding the values lies with the chair and CEO in many organisations but the responsibility and reality for living them out on a day-to-day basis lies at some level with everyone in the organisation.

I think you also raise an interesting point about what it could signify if employees can't articulate the values. It could mean the kind of things you have pointed towards. However, I have worked with people who instinctively live out the values in their attitudes and behaviours, especially if they coincide with their own personal values, even if they couldn't remember or articulate them.

With best wishes. Nick

Geoffrey Morton-Haworth

26/10/2012 04:58:08 am

Role/ Arena/ Competitive Advantage/ Resources is sometimes a helpful grouping of such issues.

Role. Supplier, channel, broker, whatever.

Arena: What you're not in the third sector.

Competitive Advantage. Crudely, for example, low-cost, high-value or most-innovative. It is tough to do any one of these well. Impossible to excel in all three.

Resources: time, money not-least talent.

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 05:01:08 am

Hi Geoffrey. Thanks for the note. Are you proposing a sample list of core values for third sector organisations, examples of categories that could be used to define them...or something else? I would be interested to hear more. With best wishes. Nick

Alex M. Dunne

26/10/2012 05:02:01 am

Post a large blank sheet of paper on the wall for a day and ask folks to write on it the values-in-action that they observe...

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 05:03:11 am

Hi Alex. What a great idea. Have you used it in practice? I would be interested to hear more about what you did as the next step. With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

29/10/2012 08:37:35 am

What Alex suggested (put a large sheet of paper on the wall) and what I do with visuals are not too far apart.

I get participants into groups, provide them with markers and large paper, and give them some sort of visual idea (e.g. a shield, a gameplan, a house etc) which provides a framework and a stimulant for them to create a colorful depiction of their mission, their vision, and their values.

Once done, each group presents their chart to one another and there is a great deal of appreciation, affirmation, and often applause. Very energizing.

Aldo Delli Paoli

26/10/2012 05:05:16 am

Good corporate governance is the key to develop organizational values, competitiveness and to create innovation. For this purpose, any company can't abstract from fundamental values such as transparency, integrity, ethics, absence of discrimination, the participation of women, strengthening equal opportunities for women, young people and all forces that characterize a society. In this context companies must engage in respect for human rights and, more generally, develop social responsibility, practices and tools to establish a relationship based on trust, honesty and mutual respect. The more the model works so it's easier to make strong and responsible managers increasing the competitiveness of the company.
That means, in short, invest on Human Resources able to develop professionalism, excellence, strategic vision and capacity. Encourage them to integrate with different people for social background, language, mentality and needs into a single and cohesive corporate culture. Promote growth of employees with strong mental flexibility and solid methodological tools. When are choosing employees, try to take some original person as well and, than, create a suitable physical environment for creativity, stimulate and measure the originality (e.g. awarding the oddest thing is made by an employee or even a flop). Focus above all on young people who bring new ideas. The system of curricula (and then, of course, of training) should be revised to expand the skills of future professionals. In the near future will form the "dual thinker", professionals who are able to combine the content-type technology with gestional-management

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 05:13:18 am

Thanks for such a detailed response, Aldo. It sounds like you may be emphasising the importance of reflecting the ethics and values the organisation holds implicity in its mission (e.g. social transformation) in the way it thinks about and develops itself internally as well as how it behaves externally. Have I understood you correctly? In that sense, it's at one level about developing a sense of organisational integrity.

It sounds like you have a fairly clear and strong view of the values that ought to be reflected in third sector organisations. I would be interested to hear more about how you developed that view, e.g. what has helped inform or influence it. With best wishes. Nick

Aldo Delli Paoli

29/10/2012 08:38:41 am

Hi Nick, thank you for attention. I try to summarize my thought. It is now shared principle that social responsibility is one of the goals of the company, because it must deal with the problems of cultural and spiritual growth of its employees, of the issues of full employment, the need for a clean and pleasant environment, etc. Ethics concerns individual behaviors to ensure proper performance, corporate loyalty, in interpersonal relationships and with third parties (customers, suppliers, financiers, etc.), in sensitivity to the needs of the community, etc. And business ethics concerns corporate behaviors induced by individual ethical behavior. The company then must rely on people that possess, develop, transmit ethical values.
I wasn’t referring specifically to the non-profit sector, with whom I had however some useful contact. But, reflecting, I believe that it could, for sure, be taken as a reference because it is a morally connoted. These institutions tend to incorporate volunteer individuals, driven by altruistic spirit and sharing the ideals of the Institute, with a flexibility and commitment difficult to match in the world public and private for profit. Their business models characterized by distributive and procedural fairness that underlies higher levels of employee satisfaction. the result of their work must be assessed in relation to the quality of social needs met, or social utility they produced. Also, tends to enrich those values with their own principles or with the qualities laid the basis for its mission.

Stuart Belle

26/10/2012 06:43:36 am

What Terrence noted in his post was exactly my observation in another discussion (in another group) - there is a 'crunch' to address the day-to-day with little time left to think about what makes the work (and the workplace) meaningful.

That said, over the last year, I have been leading the organizational development process for a small nonprofit (a preschool). Prior to this work, there were no core values in place. We now have a set of 8 core values because we felt that if we wanted to teach and nurture important citizenship and humanitarian values in the next generation, we should honestly practice them (honesty and integrity is one of our core values, by the way). How were we innovative and collaborative in developing these? We asked clients/customers what they would like to see and why they think we are different. Living these core values in the day-to-day is expected to set us apart.

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 06:55:25 am

Thanks for the note, Stuart. I particularly liked your emphasis on approaching values from a client/customer perspective, rather than purely as an internal process. I think that helps an organisation to stay relevant and connected to its external environment, constituencies and purpose. With best wishes. Nick

Alan Arnett

26/10/2012 06:56:50 am

Hi Nick. I'd be interested to understand why you think you need a defined set of values?

I've seen a lot of people in organisations who can remember all the right definitions of values and behaviours, but still interpret them in line with their own biases/preferences, so the definitions themselves have little impact on behaviours.

Its also perfectly possible for people to have different values but still behave in useful and collaborative ways for your customers i.e. some employees might be motivated primarily by having experienced the problems a family member had from hearing loss, while someone else may be motivated primarily by a technology which could help people with hearing loss, but may also have other applications. Both could work together in engaged, successful ways, but they don't need to agree common values, just understand each other's values.

So, I'm curious. What's the driver for this?

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 07:09:42 am

Hi Alan and thanks for your thoughts. I've similarly seen people who know the stated values but ignore them, or don't know the stated values but model them anyway. I think you raise some interesting issues about people with different values working together successfully. I wonder if there's something there about different parties sharing a common pragmatic value to achieve shared goals.

'What's the driver' is a great question. An organisation I'm working with at the moment already has a strong values base but would like to refresh its values to ensure that, as far as possible, they reflect the organisation's identity, converge with its brand, support its new and evolving strategy and represent well the organisation at it's best: 'what we want to be more like, more of the time'.

With best wishes. Nick

Tricia Lustig

26/10/2012 07:11:41 am

I'd suggest some very interesting questions and an enquiry (because people need to examine their own values first) and then move into Appreciative Inquiry to develop or co-create a set of shared values for the organisation. You are welcome to talk to me to find out more in detail, or you can also google 'Appreciative Inquiry Commons' and find lots of information and ideas if you don't know much about it. I can also send you some information if you like.

Best regards,
Tricia

Nick Wright

26/10/2012 07:15:33 am

Hi Tricia and thanks for the note. I've used appreciative inquiry as a method to surface and develop organisational values in the past and it has proved very effective, particularly in terms of surfacing what matters most to people. I guess a challenge can emerge if what matters most to people at the time is significantly different to what the demands of a new situation call for. I would be interested to hear more about how you have used AI, including any examples from your practice. With best wishes. Nick

Tricia Lustig

29/10/2012 08:40:13 am

I've used Ai a lot, Nick. Used it to develop a strategy with a very large team in an INGO in Bangladesh, and with a huge multi-stakeholder team in Nepal. Used it in UK too - both in corporate and 3rd sector.

I think the most important thing is to craft the question/focus very carefully. If the situation calls for something specific, it must be part of the discovery phase - in a sense we focus the enquiry through the questions we ask.

In 2010 I co-authored a book which has a whole chapter on tools to use to uncover organisaitonal values! Perhaps you could find it in a library? It is Beyond Crisis: achieving renewal in a turbulent world published by Wiley & Sons. I'd offer to send a copy of the chapter, but would get in trouble with the publisher unfortunately. Appreciative Inquiry isn't the only tool to use in this case, although it can be an excellent one. I think whatever tool you use will need to be based on enquiry though. i.e. good questions.

Hope this is helpful?

Nick Wright

29/10/2012 08:41:46 am

Thanks Tricia. Yes, that is very helpful and I will check out the 'Beyond Crisis' book you mention. With best wishes. Nick

Sarah Keizer

29/10/2012 08:44:55 am

I have seen great things come from using the Barrett model combined with appreciative inquiry. Check out Barrett Values Center. It can be used easily in NGOs, governments as well as the private sector.

Nick Wright

29/10/2012 08:46:34 am

Many thanks, Sarah. I haven't come across the Barrett Values Center so will certainly have a look at its website. Do you have an examples of its application from your own experience that you would be willing to share here? With best wishes. Nick

Ryan Simmons

29/10/2012 08:48:44 am

Hi Nick. We have done some cool work on values here at Children's Hospital. We have a whole process we created to get people involved in creating the values. We started with the premise that people already live our values should help articulate them, so we asked leaders to identify who those people were.

Then they went out and gathered stories. It was a very inspiring process which supported our belief that "the process is the intervention". We are actually going to publish our process next year, but I'd be happy to let you know more. Thanks. Ryan.

Nick Wright

29/10/2012 08:52:38 am

Hi Ryan and thanks for the note. I would love to hear more about the process you used at the Children's Hospital. It sounds like you already had some core values in mind, then looked for people who exempified those values. I would be very interested to hear how you arrived at the original values, how you did the story gathering and what you did with the stories that emerged. With best wishes. Nick

Peter Cooper

2/11/2012 08:08:28 am

Nick you might find some new insights if you look into what you mean by organisational values. It might be that we are talking about behaviours that are valued by the organisation. If that is the case then I'd suggest you look at Systems Leadership Theory as a way of thinking about this.

Nick Wright

2/11/2012 08:11:17 am

Thanks Peter. I think 'what do we mean by organisational values' is a good question. It relates to similar questions such as, 'what do we mean by organisational culture'. I haven't heard of Systems Leadership Theory before so I will do a google search to find out more. If you have any examples from experience that I and others here could learn from, I'd be glad to hear them! With best wishes. Nick

Gry Højklint Schneider

2/11/2012 08:14:48 am

I have worked a lot with organisational values and engagement of volunteers in sports. My experience is that you need to involve all levels of employees and volunteers at an early stage, and make sure you balance expectations and create a common set of values. Charitable work often brings people together, but they can have very different motives for participating, and this means different modes of engagement, and different takes on the organisational values.
I have often had succes with vission workshops or seminars, where you bring as many interested parties and individuels together as possible, and try to leave possitions at the door and try to describe the values, and put some specific goals and actions to them. Then you try to locate some cultural bearers, that has the interest, energy and ability to take this forward, and you work more closely with these afterwards.
I agree with Tricia, that AI can be a very useful tool in this process and the following implementation.

Nick Wright

2/11/2012 08:21:29 am

Hi Gry and thanks for your comments. I agree that involving people is a kind of prerequisite in many charitable organisations, perhaps revealing an underlying value concerning participation, collaboration, contribution or something similar. I like the idea of translating values into goals and actions so that values are part of the lived experience of an organisation, not simply an aspirational concept. I'm interested in hearing more about 'culture bearers'. It sounds like you have identified people, or people have identified themselves, who feel passionate about the values and are motivated to influence how they are applied to practice. Could you share any examples of how they did this in practice and what you/they learned through the process? With thanks and best wishes. Nick

Dave Rippon

2/11/2012 08:22:53 am

I'd also add that it will help if you link the development/discovery of your organisational values, with the values that your customers want/need from you. Values should drive behaviour and your people's behaviours become your customers' experience. I hope this makes sense.

Nick Wright

2/11/2012 08:28:53 am

Thanks Dave. I like your way of expressing these core principles so succinctly. Creating or unearthing values does feel like a kind of development-discovery experience in practice. I like your emphasis on the customer perpsective and experience too. This helps avoid the risk that values become too internally focused and detached from what matters most to key stakeholders in the organisation's wider environment. Do you have any experiences you could share of developing-discovering customer values in order to align organisational values with them? With best wishes. Nick

Dave Rippon

2/11/2012 08:58:50 am

Hi Nick. In Sunderland City Council we were facing some very difficult challenges (efficiencies, downsizing, etc) and much uncertainty. We needed something that would act as a guide for our decision making. Our chief executive set us the task of discovering the values which were widely and deeply held by our people and would help us on our improvement journey. We started with a group of managers drawn from across the council and went through a series of excercises (supported and challenged by Newcastle Business School - this external challenge was very helpful). From this we developed an initial set of values and then through a series of focus groups (all levels all areas) tested, challenged and refined these and then described them in behavioural terms. Finally we shared the results with the whole organisation and found that these values were indeed what mattered to people. We refer to them constantly but don't pin the up on the wall to remind people - we don't need to. The whole process and the outcomes felt very different to previous experiences of values being imposed from above - much more "real"...Whoops, forgot to mention, we also took soundings from customers, not asking them specifically about values, rather what mattered to them in working with the council and how did they view the council. A particular advantage we have is that 70% of our workforce live in the city and are therefore our customers.

Nick Wright

2/11/2012 09:04:39 am

Hi Dave and thanks for your helpful explanation of how you developed the values. You may be interested in the 'culture' section of an article I wrote, describing a similar approach we used in a previous organisation: http://www.nick-wright.com/a-journey-towards-od.html. There's something about discovering what matters most to people that, as you say, feels less imposed and more 'real'. I guess the challenge arises if the values and associated behaviours people hold currently are not the same as the values and behaviours the organisations needs to progress. In that case, using the current values as a guiding principle for how to move forward is probably a useful approach to bear in mind. With best wishes. Nick

Jim MacQueen

2/11/2012 10:00:32 am

I'm impressed with the drivers you mentioned because I've come to see the values question as intrinsic to group/organization identity (as it is to personal identity). I've been doing some very productive work around helping folks figure out their brand based on a framework of a brand is a promise about providing a consistent experience both internally and externally - an idea that has many values laden implications. Rather than address the values question head on, I do some version of asking people to articulate what it is that they do, how do they do it, and why is it important. As they begin to explore the commonalities in their responses, one of the several things that is emergent in those conversations are their commonly held values. There's a way in which this rather like Alex's sheet of paper. It just offers the opportunity to treat values a bit more from the realm of inquiry and offers some immediate conversation around them. Part of the key here, I think, is that the ideas come out of activity and behavior to begin with so that the group can readily see the relationship.

Nick Wright

2/11/2012 10:07:00 am

Hi Jim and thanks for such a thoughtful response. I like the approach you use because it could help people who may find conversations about values too abstract, at least as a starting place. I guess questions such as 'what do you do' and 'why is it important' are even more powerful when people describe the what's and why's of what they freely choose to do rather than, say, what they feel expected by others to do. The conversation could also include 'if all pressures and constraints were removed, what would you do and why' to understand people's values and motivations. With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

2/11/2012 10:11:11 am

By the way, just came across a blog post by Jesse Lyn Stoner on the subject of values
as they relate to vision

http://seapointcenter.com/enduring-vision/

Nick Wright

2/11/2012 10:13:26 am

Many thanks for posting the link, Terrence. I foundJesse's comments very helpful, particularly in terms of how she relates values to 'purpose' and 'picture' as dimensions of 'vision'. With best wishes. Nick

Peter Cooper

5/11/2012 12:06:56 pm

If you want to explore the ideas behind systems leadership and how it is used successfully in practice I would strongly recommend a conversation because the written material tends to be academic and a bit dry. Given the nature of the discussion above I think you would find it illuminating because it is located in understanding how people experience work. To give you a bit of a taste, some very practical leadership tools can be derived from considering the interplay between "core values", a specific practical definition of what culture and the leadership tools that can be used to shape culture. So in this modelling of organisational life, the core values are those that are observable across all cultures and which when triggered generate a strong emotional reaction. The idea is the individuals looking at the world through their lens make judgements about what they are experiencing based on these core values. For instance two people looking at a football match that where their two opposing teams are playing might have two quite different judgements about a referees decision. One says that was fair, whereas the other says that it was not. Each person is looking at exactly the same thing, using a core value of fairness to make judgement but coming up with a different personal experience. The reason is that in their sports interests they belong to two different cultures associated with their different teams. Everyone involved knows their view is based on the same question about fairness but they may wind up saying they have different values whereas a more accurate description is that they value certain behaviours differently. So what we mean by organisational values becomes very important. To be honest I think there is a lot of muddled thinking around values and a lot of approaches are based on too shallow an understanding of what is actually going on. Peter

Nick Wright

8/11/2012 10:48:30 am

Hi Peter and thanks for the note with such a great explanation and example from the sporting arena. I particularly liked your comment that, 'core values are those...which when triggered generate a strong emotional reaction. The idea is the individuals looking at the world through their lens make judgements about what they are experiencing based on these core values.' Bolman & Deal in 'Reframing Organisations' make similar observations about how people experience the same apparent phenomena differently, using the notion of interpretive schema or filters. I also liked your differentiation between 'having different values' and 'valuing certain behaviour differently'. It's something about surfacing underlying beliefs and values rather than focusing on surface behaviours and superficial inferences derived from them. With best wishes. Nick

Dwight Gaudet

5/11/2012 12:08:01 pm

I've also found that visuals can provide a way around the obstacles many have to thinking big picture - both horizontally (mission and vertically(values), with vision applying to both. The way I've done this is to provide a few dozen magazines of different types that have lots of photos. I then ask the participants (ideally cross-functional and not just executive), working individually, to page through the magazines and cut out pictures that they think somehow captures an aspect of their work experience and what is best about their organization. This is followed by their pasting them onto a large communally created collage. The next step is for them each to write down the values and emotional drivers that the collective images represent. These interpretations are then shared with the group, written on a flip chart or whiteboard. This "uncooked" grouping of primordial values is then crafted and wordsmithed to reflect a set of organizational values.

From that thinking/feeling space the questions of what difference do they want to make in the world can be more fruitfully entertained and discussed in group - with ideas collected onto another board - these will become the mission following further incubation and reflection - from hours to weeks depending on the setting.

Finally a visualization set 10+ years in the future is set up - depending on the group the technique can just be a bit of inspirational narrative or if accepted a full on visualization induction technique. Without the limitations experienced today, what does the ideal organization they work for/with look like if achieving all of its potential? What scale of work is it doing? Where and with whom, with what result? What is the feeling within the organization as they imagine walking around in that future setting? What are people saying about it? What difference is being made now? These thoughts and experiences are then collected onto flip charts, etc, discussed without critique and like the beginnings of the mission, they are incubated, reflected upon and eventually wordsmitthed with several rounds of group dialogue and modification.

Nick Wright

8/11/2012 11:10:59 am

Hi Dwight and thanks for providing such vivid examples. Much appreciated. I too have used the magazines technique and found that, by doing so, (a) it energised and engaged participants, (b) it enabled participants to be more creative than using conventional reflective conversation and (c) it opened up fresh ideas and perspectives that I don't think would have surfaced through rational thought and analysis alone.

I've also used a similar appreciative-futuring approach to the one you described in your final paragraph. We empasised the langage of 'imagine' and invited people to present the imagined, hoped-for future from a range of stakeholder perspectives. Again, it felt powerful and engaging. I really liked your idea of creating a future imagined world, perhaps doing something physical to represent it and inviting people to enter it, experience it, feel it etc. Sounds quite Gestalt! With best wishes. Nick

Dwight Gaudet

10/11/2012 06:33:32 am

Thanks Nick, I appreciate the thread you have initiated.

Paul Quaiser

5/11/2012 12:09:20 pm

We have found a contagion process very influencial in situations where there are no common values. We start however with environmentally conscious individuals within the organization. There is some organizational design and evaluation that goes into this step first however. Then we work with those individuals one on one to identify what their personal values are initially before they are translated into cultural aspirations. Then we transfer those individual values into a cultural navigation map - a mind map of the organization. In some cases, we create an organization portal using smartphone technology to feed a database of occurences realtime within the organization so the map becomes dynamic. This crowd technology enables the organization to witness and contribute real time to the "cultivation" of the organization. This is more powerful than mandates coming from authority structures within the organization. Once we have worked with the initial group of individuals for 3-6 months, they also influence everyone around them with vitalized perspectives for the cultural development of the organization. Everyone's wellness is a critical component to the value analysis. This makes it personal on multiple levels. There are support and communication processes that go along with the efforts - better explained once a more thorough understanding of the organization is acquired.

Nick Wright

6/11/2012 04:53:27 am

Hi Paul. I was fascinated by the approach you used. Could you say more about what a 'contagion process' involves and an example of a 'cultural navigation map'? I liked your idea of using technology to create a sense of shared, real-time development of the map, especially for people based in dispersed geographical locations. With best wishes. Nick

Paul Quaiser

8/11/2012 11:14:44 am

Nick: the contagion process is more about how you intervene the organization. Visualize a Petri dish that you want to grow samples of something. You spread the samples throughout the dish evenly so they can eventually grow together. Rather than the traditional top down approach to training that typically has a low retention factor, you influence key points in the organization with transformational changes of those individual. All of the people in their periphery notice those changes. Now you have created a "me too" motivation to the transformation.

Cheryl Young

5/11/2012 12:10:27 pm

I recently designed a large-scale workshop for volunteer sector orgs (sponsored by a business school's volunteer sector centre), after a study was done saying VS orgs didn't live their values. The 'theme' was around 'how we can practise what we preach',. Used a design team to establish purpose, outputs, the day design and so on, so it may not be entirely applicable but happy to share the design if anyone would find it useful.

Nick Wright

6/11/2012 04:13:06 am

Hi Cheryl and thanks for the note. I would love to hear more about the process and design you used! With best wishes. Nick

Pablo Piekar

5/11/2012 12:11:30 pm

have successfully used an approach based on Jim Collin's "Trip to Mars". Worth checking it out:
http://www.jimcollins.com/article_topics/articles/aligning-action.html
I'd be happy to offer more detail if needed.
Great discussion. Thanks everybody.

Nick Wright

6/11/2012 04:19:56 am

Many thanks Pablo. The Jim Collins article definitely looks interesting. I would certainly be interested to hear more about any experiences you have had of applying these principles to practice. With best wishes. Nick

James Ross

6/11/2012 03:29:25 am

If you are looking for a process that engages people from all levels and provides the opportunity to ask what people do and don't need so they design their own solution, have a look at www.theworldcafe.com.

Also check out Dan Pink's & Simon Sinek's work on what motivates people on Youtube and TED.com

Nick Wright

6/11/2012 04:42:45 am

Hi James and thanks for the link and reference to additional resources. I've used the world cafe methodology quite and few times and found it very engaging and effective. With best wishes. Nick

Prof Suresh Kumar

6/11/2012 03:30:22 am

Key Take Aways
Here are my key take aways:

Define what matters. I think the reason the values are so important for an organization is because it’s really about defining what matters and where people will spend time and energy.
Actions are louder than words. I’ve seen first hand when an organization states one set of values, but operated under another. I don’t think it’s on purpose. I think it happens when people write their values down without really first observing .
Use dimensions to frame and understand the values. Consider the following dimensions: prosocial, market, financial, achievement, and artistic.

I find the dimensions particularly helpful as a way to frame out values in core areas that matter.

Prof Suresh Kumar

6/11/2012 04:10:19 am

Grady is true guide here
In A Simple Statement: A Guide to Nonprofit Arts Management and Leadership, Jamie Grady writes about organizational values:

What are Organizational Values
Grady writes the following on organizational values:

Organizational values are abstract ideas that guide organizational thinking and actions.
Organization values represent the foundation on which the company is formed.
Defining an organization’s unique values is the first and most critical step in its formation and development
While difference in opinion and skills may be beneficial to the success of an organization, a unity of purpose must be maintained.
In order for the institution to be successful, the values on which the company is built must be appropriate for the time, place, and environment in which the organization will operate.
A company’s organizational values let others know what it is, why it has been created, and how it is different from other companies.

How Do You Find Organizational Values
Grady writes the following point on finding the values:

In order to understand and identify the values of an organization and to gauge their influence on the company, managers must carefully examine how that organization operates.
While it may be helpful to listen to people describe what they believe the values of the organization are, it is far better to observe those people in their day-to-day activities.
Note how employees spend their time, how they communicate within the organization and how they go about their daily job responsibilities and tasks.
Although values are often difficult to define, they are usually revealed by employees’ actions and thinking, how they set their priorities, and how they allocate their time and energy. An employee’s actions are more revealing than their words.

Dimensions to Understand Values
Grady writes the following dimensions help to understand organizational values and how those values drive an organization:

Prosocial dimension. Not-for-profit theatres have a responsibility
to provide community access to their performances, remove economic and cultural
barriers to attendance, and educate audiences in theatre arts.
Market dimension. Theatres struggle between creating art of art’s
sake and meeting customer needs and expectations. A purely
market-orientated philosophy is typically the mark of a commercial theatre, with its complete reliance on ticket sales for revenues, but all theater managers recognize the realities of the marketplace.
Financial dimension. Although all theatres must content with the
reality of financial demands while pursuing creativity and artistic excellence,
fiscal stability is a particularly high priority for some theatres.
Achievement dimension. Public recognition and acclaim can affirm
an organization’s creative activity, and some theatres particularly strive for
external recognition.
Artistic dimension. For many theatres, the top priority is
internally focused creativity, innovation, and artistic dependence.

Dawn Johnson

6/11/2012 04:22:18 am

Great discussion! I agree with James regarding including employees. You definitely need buy in from employees. Simply dictating values down from the top can actually end up doing more harm than good.

I love Alex's idea with the flip chart--great organic and fun way to gather ideas!

In my workplace we did something a little more stuctured, but along the same line. We already had our organizational values named, but we wanted to know what these values meant to employees--what behaviors would employees use in living out our values. We got departments together and brainstormed words and behaviors that embodied each value from the employee perspective.

Nick Wright

6/11/2012 04:25:04 am

Thanks for the note, Dawn, and for sharing a helpful example from your experience. I would be interested to hear more about what happened once you had done the work with the different departments...what happened as a result, what in retrospect you would do the same or differently next time. With best wishes. Nick

Fi Haywood

6/11/2012 04:28:57 am

It would interesting to know your objectives.

A couple of things. We have a ready made a boot camp for embedding corporate values - bringing them alive into behaviours etc. We also have a many activities for developing them too. http://cafestylespeedtraining.co.uk/boot-camp-a-box/embedding-corporate-values/

There is also this article that is more about developing and considering rather than embedding which may be a useful read. The House that Jack Built http://cafestylespeedtraining.co.uk/category/articles/

And another on embedding corporate values. http://cafestylespeedtraining.co.uk/how-to-embed-your-corporate-values/

Nick Wright

6/11/2012 04:33:03 am

Hi Fi and thanks for the links to such helpful, user-friendly resources. With best wishes. Nick

Fi Haywood

6/11/2012 04:46:45 am

You are welcome Nick, if you want me to send you a few to try let me know. Take care and best wishes with your programme!

Harold Russell

10/11/2012 06:19:18 am

Nick. May I offer a different line of thought on the subject of Values?

So many organisations for such a long time have been struggling with the whole exercise of Values, principally because along the way they lose the link between Values and commercial success. They focus on the ‘what should be’ as opposed to the ‘what is’.

With Values work the question needs to be – ‘What is it about the way we think and operate that has produced each moment of exceptional success?’ Only by taking specific examples and analysing the repetitive patterns within them can one get a feel for the strengths underlying the way the organisation works, i.e. its Values. The Values are already there; but may well be camouflaged by people’s frequent tendency to focus more on what’s not right rather than what is. The task then is to unearth current success reality which people tend to find easier than creating what ‘should be’ scenarios.

So if an organisation wishing to establish what its Values ‘should’ be were to change the initial question/task and ask itself – ‘What are the strengths within the way we think and work that have already given us success and that we need to make more use of?’ – it will find this exercise to be easier, quicker and a lot more meaningful.

Nick Wright

10/11/2012 06:30:28 am

Hi Harold and thanks for the note. Your comments reminded me of appreciative inquiry and solutions-focused approaches. It's about noticing and building on 'critical positives' rather than focusing on negatives in an attempt to problem solve them.

I found your approach to linking 'what are our strengths...given us success' and values interesting because it moves the values conversation away from ideological or ethical-type identity questions towards a more pragmatic orientation.

Do you have any examples from your experience of applying this approach that you would be willing to share? I would be very interested to hear more, e.g. how did you approach it in practice and what happened as a result. With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

10/11/2012 06:34:51 am

Nick and Dwight, Your exchange reminded me of a recent experience at my church. As this is our jubilee year, we invited a spiritual poet/artist to lead a retreat. Her theme was "thresholds of hope" and the exercise she facilitated was to create doorways made of magazine cut ups.

Her general instruction to us (60 + parishioners) was to select headlines and pictures and put them together in such a way that it expresses our hopes for the future of our parish.

As the participants busily cut and pasted their individual artworks, there was an exciting buzz in the room. When everyone brought their works together at the wall, creating several huge doorways, it was an amazing result. The awe and wonder were palpable as we stood there, gazing at the images and messages that participants had assembled.

Nick Wright

10/11/2012 06:48:12 am

Hi Terrence and thanks for the note. I was interested to hear of how you used this type of artistic approach in a church context.

The Bible itself uses so much creative enacting, metaphor, language, imagery etc. but much of the Western church in recent times has focused almost exclusively on rational, logical reflection, analysis and discourse.

I believe that's a great pity because creative right-brain activities can open people to different kinds of spiritual awareness, insight and experience.

I liked the way you created physical doorways symbolising hope for the future. I loved your rich, vivid language to describe how the experience felt and impacted on the group too, with words like 'awe' and 'wonder'.

Did you do any activity that involved actually walking through the doorways together in Gestalt style, reflecting on how it felt and what awareness/motivation it evoked as you did so?

With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

12/11/2012 11:50:51 am

No we didn't do anything like that but it was the start of a year long journey that I describe here:

http://tseamon.blogspot.com/2012/10/meeting-prophets-on-way.html

Harold Russell

12/11/2012 11:52:43 am

Nick. I have a couple of contrasting examples to share:

a) A Division of a private sector corporate – wanted to establish new Values. In spite of my advocating a focus on strengths they pursued the traditional path which ended up going nowhere. A nice academic/conceptual exercise which, as is so often the case, made no difference.

b) A not-for-profit organisation – wanted to update their Purpose and Values. Adopting the Strengths approach each function Heads assessed the strengths of their unit and presented/shared these with each other. This helped to answer the questions –

‘What do we need to pay especial attention to if we are to continue being as successful as we are?’
‘What do we need to preserve in the way we work?’
‘How can we use this to successfully fulfil our (updated) Purpose?’

I had asked senior management beforehand what they thought the organisation’s Values were, and not unsurprisingly got many different answers. So we deliberately avoided talking about them.

Focusing on strengths, though, created a new found recognition of what each function did, and could, offer to underpin future collective success. It also generated a new energy and sense of respect across the organisation. So they got the behaviours and thinking without ‘doing’ Values.

On a general note – I have operated in the OD field for some 30 years and have become surprised (perhaps disappointed?) at how readily we perpetuate OD approaches which often don’t work. ‘Values’ work is such an example where I sense the OD community keeps grappling with how best to do it. My feeling simply is – if it doesn’t work naturally, then we need to do something different. My comments on Strengths vs Values is a contribution in that direction.

Harold

Nick Wright

18/11/2012 03:01:19 am

Thanks Harold, and for including such helpful examples of the kinds of questions you would pose. It made me wonder...what if the strengths an organisation holds currently, or has developed historically, are very different to the strengths it needs to move forward, e.g. in the case of a fundamental shift in strategy or external competition? With best wishes. Nick

Harold Russell

22/11/2012 01:48:59 am

Nick. You ask - "what if the strengths an organisation holds currently, or has developed historically, are very different to the strengths it needs to move forward?"

A great question because it raises the issue - should a business stick to its knitting and keep doing more of what it's shown it's best at? (i.e it plays well to its strengths.) Or should it spend time, money and effort developing new strengths where a change in strategy has been forced upon it? (e.g. to ensure on-going survival.) And, incidentally, what does it mean by 'strengths'?

The answer will depend on the circumstances and the size of the business, as a small business will be more nimble at change than a larger corporate. But I would suspect that the change in strategy has become necessary because the business hasn't actually been making best use of its strengths. They have not been properly identified, understood or nurtured. For example, is their training and development focused on helping people address weaknesses, or learn how to apply their strengths more productively? Are project teams organized around what people excel at, or do people have to slot into given project roles? Does it know which strategies, decisions and policies (and the thinking that lies behind them) have tended to produce the best results, and is it doing more of these?

If we think of an inspirational small business, we see that invariably its success stems from the skills, strengths and values of its founder(s). As it grows it continues to outperform its competitors because it sticks to what it's best at, and it keeps focused on the contribution it wants to make to the world (business, social, community etc). When it needs to adjust its strategy in response to competitor pressures it will use its strengths in the way it makes the adjustment.

So my general comment on the question, Nick, is - 'why is the business contemplating adopting a strategy that ignores the very basis on which it has become successful to-date? May be it's an inappropriate strategy change which will cost the business dearly in terms of time, effort and opportunity cost.'

My suspicion, based on the different types of businesses my 'Strength Based Business' colleague and I have worked with, is that too many businesses don't actually know what their real innate strengths are.

Just food for thought....

Joe Lauletta

13/11/2012 02:02:50 am

Sharing values is a great opportunity for staff to not only improve the symbolism framework of an org, but also develops cohesion between employees working together.

I once had success with "finger painting." Had individuals in an org put their handprints on a big sheet of poster paper. Each person wrote their name, then wrote 1 value that was meaningful/inspirational for them. At the end there was a very colorful artifact for the client to represent staff core values. (An alternative approach, tracing hand on construction paper, cut it out, write 1 core value on palm...... One client (a JHS) decided to string them all together and hang them in the teacher's room.)

Lately, I'm finding the power of bringing artwork to the office; seems to create an atmosphere of fun, decreases feelings of vulnerability and improves the flow of "learning in public"-which I feel is important for business sustainability.

Nick Wright

18/11/2012 03:08:45 am

Hi Joe and thanks for sharing such creative examples of how to surface and share organisational values. I loved the finger painting idea. I've seen it used for campaign purposes (where people made a hand print and a written commitment on it) but not for this kind of activity.

I agree that this kind of creative technique can engage people in different and often more energising ways to conventional conversations and can produce more vivid, evocative results.

I wonder what would happen, however, if the activity produced a level of concensus around values that was different to the values the organisation needs to move forward? I haven't had that experience but am curious to hear from anyone who has and how they handled it.

With best wishes. Nick

Joe Lauletta

10/12/2012 02:16:50 am

SO, as far as "values"changing in an organization . . . This is what I love about the complexity of emergence; allow the system to move into a new (and different) direction. (Peter Senge wrote about the tension to maintain the "status quo"-I believe he used an image of a teeter-totter). Orgs should be comfortable to take the risk and allow for the "teeter-totter" to switch.

I haven't yet been in an situation like in your question. My answer:

If I were the consultant in the room, I would have us all stop and "notice" what has emerged. Then have the client process this value-changing event on their own (maybe in dyads) and then do some "sharing out". This would be a great learning experience for client to work together and examine the Symbolism framework of the organization. I would ask these two questions to the group; perhaps it is time for new value statement, vision, etc? Why not work towards change? (Maybe individuals in the org has fluxed? Business Practice Changed? . . . This would be an exciting time for some organizational effectiveness to occur.)

Michalis Kourtidis MCIPD

18/11/2012 03:11:58 am

So far I've come across all sorts of reasons why organisations want to identify and establish a set of values.
a) to tick the box so that they get funds from a banking organisation (!) or to complete the paperwork for their ISO9000 or for any other similar reasons...
b) to create a completely new set of values as nothing existed previously. They usually see it as a step towards strategy formation
c) to update an already existed set of values because they realise it tells little to their organisation's members. What they often really want in this case is to establish a foundation to motivate their people towards a common direction, without havin to tell them what ad how to do what they should do according to the culture and reputation of the organisation. These are the type of most of my projects.

I appreciate AIM a lot and have used it at the first stages of my consultancy. Eventually I developed my own approach whch is based on the triplet: self - team - system. I call it VCW (Values Creation Workshop). It's a workshop based approach which helps particpants feel ownership and get more engaged when time for implementation comes. Speaking about implementation, I link the set of values with certain behaviours (I suppose likewise the process already mentioned by others in this discussion). Behaviours are also distinguished to internal as well as external customers. Because of the linkage to organisational values, which are in turn linked with the team and the individuals, behaviours come naturally and are rarely disputed.

I've applied my workshop to hotel organisations, management consultancies, retail stores, insurance companies, construction companies, universities and the public sector (senior managers - home office). The hardest to compromise and reach to an agreement was the public sector; the most enjoyable the hotel industry; the most positively challenging the construction companies.

I hope the approach mentioned above sheds light to another perspective that perhaps you might like to consider in your project.

Best,
Michalis

Nick Wright

18/11/2012 03:18:26 am

Hi Michalis and thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic. I liked the relationship you explained between values and motivation. People are naturally motivated to fulfil purposes that are consistent with their deepest values. I also liked how you linked values and associated behaviours to external and internal customers.

I was fascinated by your reflections on how you experienced working with organisations in different sectors. Could you give some examples about what make it difficult in the public sector, enjoyable in the hotel industry, challenging in construction companies? Do you think it says anything about their instrinsic values and culture?

With best wishes. Nick

Michalis Kourtidis MCIPD

18/11/2012 03:12:24 pm

Public sector: I've found it hard to move people out of the box. Managers of the public sector have proved to me very precise to those set of values that justify absolute job security and their indesputable right to money earning not linked to performance at all. I've had to employ all coaching skills, ask challenging questions to probe answers that broaden their horizons and accept what they did believe, but failed to articulate, because of the fear of being looked different to the eyes of their colleagues. A lot of work needed to be done to get over those fears and guilt and accept that collegeality is not based on complete agreement. The fact is that once you instil trust among everyone, values workshop runs wonderfully, with a flow of ideas and good planning. That was one of the points I could raise here.

Hospitality Industry: people in hotel organisations have learnt to work with people and excel in customer service. Knowing that means they've learnt to be flexible and allow changes to happen all the time. That creates an attitude which brings in a borad set of values that differs from individual to individual. To move from that point to the organisational level is a journey in which the crew is -usually- lively, provocative but also accepting, imaginative, and enthusiastic at the end. What else to ask in a workshop?

Construction companies: I've had a strong experience with a majon construction company of public projects (semi-private). All teams where consisted of civil & mechanical engineers. Their attitude agains anything is 1 + 1 = 2. Everything needs to be justified and lead to something specific, otherwise is considered as non-existent. On the other hand, values in the workshop are by definition non-concrete notions, but eventually they lead to concrete values (e.g. behaviours). To take engineers onboard it needs additional effort: need to explain everything to the single detail; answer any rational question you are asked; give sufficient answers that keep their interest high whenever answers do not result to a "number" right from the beginning. (BTW I can now tell if an engineer is a Chemical Eng or any other kind of Eng by the fact they show understanding of Systems Theory). It may be tiring, but it's worth every penny because while it makes participants aware of things they are not used to value, at the same time they stretch my knowledge and ability to understand the importance of Organisational Values in a more rational setting.

Thanks for asking to clarify by examples Nick.

Nick Wright

18/11/2012 03:16:26 pm

Many thanks, Michalis, for providing such insightful and intriguing cultural analyses for different kinds of sector and organisation, and how you have adapted your style to work with them. I found your account absolutely fascinating. I've spent most of my adult life in the charity/NGO sector and would be fascinated to see what you would notice in that sector! With best wishes and thanks again. Nick

Peter Cooper

19/11/2012 12:15:02 am

Hi Michalis,

You've pushed a button (positively) here with me. I started corporate life as a Chemical Engineer and wound up in leadership roles and then starting a business. Likewise I have worked across the public sector, not-for-profits and extensively in the private sector (finance, mining, telecommunications). I have reflected on the relationship between the systemic perspective (vs reductist) that you observe in differnt types of engineering and I think it arises because Checmical Engineers are forced to deal with complexity and especially ambiguity in processes. They invent strange things like non-dimensional numbers to handle this. Many wind up in senior leadership roles. However, moving beyond that to other disciplines like economics and law which you see in the public sector and accounting, it seems to me that the ability to work with kess tangible things is less to do with the specific discipline and more to do with the complexity of thought that a person develops.

With regard to working with "values" in technical areas, I previously mentioned Systems Leadership which provides a readily accessible way of helping people who need structure and process to understand how leadership works and to make intangible things more tangible. The practice of Systems Leadership does however require an ability to understand people issues at depth - as you seem to infer is required in hospitality?

Michalis Kourtidis MCIPD

19/11/2012 02:50:14 am

I completely see you points Peter. You see, back in my corporate life as an employee I've worked in a German multinational in the gas industry which was full of Chemical Engs and I was the only psychologist in there! You can imagine me working with them for 1,5 years; I have indulged in their way of thinking... I can now tell who is who from miles away!

Referring to the hospitality industry case, may I clarify: it is indeed required to be able to understand people's attitudes and spot certain behaviours, but this not enough. That was one of the critiques of the Human Realtions movement of the mid 20th century after all. It's not only human psychology that cures everything. For example, organisational members of hotels are usually (not always) characterised by a sense of understanding of difference, that being in people, in bookings, in inventory, in entertainment, in natural unpredictabilities, in sudden changes, in most strange clients' demands, etc. It's this familiarity with flexibility which I perceive is a reason for understanding Systems quicker - with the guidance and support of a coach this becomes even easier and effective.

Barry Stein

23/11/2012 10:47:32 am

Hi Nick.

I would strongly suggest that the entire attempt to define, observe, measure or teach "values" is misplaced. The truth is that "values" cannot be observed; only behavior can (and of course, communication is behavior.) It is much better and more appropriate to call these sorts of statements "standards." They should all be put in operational and action-focused terms.

After 40 years of teaching, consulting, lecturing and writing about this stuff all over the world, I conclude that if you magically switched the "Our Values" posters and documents around from one organization to another, no one would notice, for two reasons: 1, they are almost all essentially the same, and 2, they're so global and "nice" that no one can really disagree.

Really, there is only a small number of "fundamental" values in the modern world and it's a waste of time to re-invent them How many ways can you say "We treat people with respect"? If you don't believe me, get a sample of the "Values Statements" of respected organizations, for-profit and not. You'd be hard put to tell them apart. But, if you see how people actually behave and focus on that, the important issues become clear and the information becomes useful to the people.

Nick Wright

23/11/2012 11:39:07 am

Hi Barry and thanks for your challenging comments. I enjoyed reading your polemical style. I agree that many organisations have very similar values statements and that behaviours are easier to observe, monitor, evaluate etc. The gap between espoused and common behaviour in organisations is one of the reasons for so much scepticism or cynicism about values today.

At the same time, I would feel a real sense of loss if I were to let go of the values piece altogether. There's something more important to me about values than behaviour alone. It's something to do with heart, spirit, intention, meaning; a kind of social dynamic or social glue that can motivate, unite and focus people together in an organisation at a deeper level.

So, whereas the management of an organisation can prescribe, encourage, promote and reward certain standards and behaviours (and, hopefully, model them too), I believe it takes a special kind of leadership to surface, engender, enter and sustain shared values within an organisation. This kind of leadership is characterised more by discerning and nurturing than dictating and enforcing.

I will be interested to hear your thoughts! Incidentally, you may be interested to have a glance at this blog I wrote last year, touching on some related issues: http://www.nick-wright.com/1/post/2011/02/qualities-of-leadership.html. With best wishes. Nick

Dwight Gaudet

23/11/2012 11:40:17 am

Well Barry, you did a good job with demonstrating one particular value system and I would agree that traditionally created and imposed value statements represent the original greenwashing, though typically unconsciously generated as such. Fortunately, for approximately 2 decades there have been companies that reflectively and consciously put together value statements and not so much taught them, but modeled and invited others to consider them. Perhaps still a minority, they should be a celebrated minority though as they typically outperform traditional models multiples to one.

Barry Stein

23/11/2012 11:46:56 pm

Hi Nick;

Thanks for your very thoughtful and insightful note. Of course, you are right. But there are TWO different drivers underlying behavior. One, the familiar one, is a whole set of dispositions and (often implicit) values, to say nothing of teachings and the (sometimes implicit) lessons from past experience. The second, which in my view is more important in determining or shaping people's actions, is the structure and reality of their organizational world. which makes some things (much) easier and others (much )harder.

There is every reason to help people go beyond the rote tasks and integrate and internalize their learning. How to do that is a big question.But I also believe, from my own experience as well as my view of human behavior, the most important driver is the extent to which a possible action is made easy to do. What's made difficult is much less likely to happen.

One other thing. People obviously have choices and there are many possible,actions at nearly every point. So they do not have either the time or the inclination to do a thorough assessment of the alternatives. Rather, they tend to do what is not inconsistent with internal standards but is easier i n practice. Note also that work behavior is relatively surface behavior. Most people are not that deeply committed to their work, so the likelihood of exercising really thoughtful but difficult or chancy decisions is small. When all is said and done, it's just a job.

Nick Wright

24/11/2012 12:14:29 am

Hi Barry and thanks for the note. I found your distinction between different kinds of underlying drivers for organisational behaviour interesting and helpful. I once wrote about a similar distinction and potential for synergy in an article, looking at L&D through an OD lens. In the 'capability' section, I aimed to explain how, for instance, learning best leads to change when there are wider organisational conditions to support it. If interested, have a glance at: http://www.nick-wright.com/paradigm-4c-dynamic-model.html.

I also found your description of what influences day to day behaviour interesting. It sounds like you are saying, unless people are strongly motivated or incentivised to do something different, they will typically take the easiest path, the least risky path, the path of least resistance and to do so on something like auto pilot. Again, I think that probably depends on what the individuals' underlying interests, beliefs and values are, i.e. what matters most to them.

I've worked in the third sector (charities and international NGOs) for the past 25 years. People are often drawn to work for such organisations because they identify with the cause and want to work out their own values and purpose by aligning with it. This often leads to high levels of intrinsic motivation, high levels of engagement and flip-side risks of disillusionment and burnout. I've met others too who work in different sectors and commit to high standards of work because they want to be and do their best.

In my personal life, I worked in industry as a shop floor worker when I was a teenager. It felt completely meaningless and I only did the work for the money. It was, as you said, 'just a job'. A thoughtful colleague gave me a copy of Jonathan Livingstone Seagull and it completely changed my outlook, even in that environment. If you would be interested to know more about that journey, have a glance at: http://www.nick-wright.com/sense-of-destiny.html.

It sounds like you've had some very different experiences with organisations. I would be interested to hear more about that too, including how you have worked with them. With best wishes. Nick

Barry Stein

24/11/2012 02:36:36 pm

Hi Nick. Thanks for your nice and thoughtful comment. It was very helpful. I would only make one small but important adjustment to your words: “unless people are strongly motivated or incentivised to do something different, they will typically take the easiest path.” Even if people are strongly motivated, what they wish to do may be harder than necessary, or even impossible. The appropriate task is to make it easy for people to do what is most helpful to the organization.

I have found over and over again that motivation is not a problem. Roadblocks are. People actually are mostly highly motivated – or were until worn down by fighting the “system”, frustrated by the difficulties thrown up by the organization’s policies, procedures, requirements, etc, etc. That’s the real killer. People mostly know what would be best in a given situation, but they find it hard or impossible.

Nick Wright

24/11/2012 02:54:16 pm

Hi Barry. I think we are in agreement on this point. A wider OD/systemic view will consider the various factors that help or hinder individuals and organisations to perform well. I felt that experience of being worn down actutely when I worked in industry. It felt as if the system had taken on a metaphorical life of its own and defeated my every attempt to change or improve it.

I experienced this issue this week too when trying to resolve a problem with a mobile phone company. I raised a complaint as a customer, with a suggestion of how to improve things to our mutual benefit. The customer service advisor agreed with my proposed solution but had no way to resolve it. Her company's policies and procedures prevented her doing it and she felt deeply frustrated.

I think these issues point back to the need to address values at a fairly fundamental level. For instance, this latter company has lost sight of the customer and designed its policies and procedures in such a way that may have a degree of internal logic but, in this instance, proved self-defeating, leaving both employee and customer feeling frustrated and powerless.

With thanks again for your healthy challenge and reality check on this issue. With best wishes. Nick

Cindy Turner

24/11/2012 02:55:43 pm

Hi Nick,

I just wrote a blog article (for grad school) on the topic of culture and values and it might have some resources you'd be interested in... I found a values assessment in SHRM's Testing Center and also some great books that address organizational culture and values.

http://psychlearningjournal.wordpress.com/2012/11/21/organizational-culture-and-values/

- Cindy

Nick Wright

24/11/2012 03:15:29 pm

Hi Cindy and thank you for sharing your link to such an interesting piece of research. You may find some of the comments under this separate blog interesting too, tackling the same topic area: http://www.nick-wright.com/1/post/2011/11/what-is-culture.html.

I based my own masters research some years ago on Schein's view of culture, combining it with psychodynamic and social constructionist perspectives. I still find Schein's concept convincing, coherent and helpful as a foundation for this field of research.

I haven't heard of P-O fit before, although the concept is familiar. I presented a similar view to that of Golden in a leadership meeting recently, distinguising between 'ideological' values (linked to identity and beliefs) and 'pragmatic' values (linked to strategy and practice).

I haven't come across the VALOR tool before so will be interested to explore it. Have you had any experience of applying the models and frameworks you mentioned to practice? I would be interested to hear more about what you discovered. With best wishes. Nick

Geoffrey Morton-Haworth

25/11/2012 08:19:35 am

Peter Robinson has just made a fascinating posting in a parallel discussion going on in this forum about Leadership, Power and Ethics in which he argues that values emerge from the complex adaptive system that an organization is, and can't be inflicted top down or from the centre.

Here is the paper he cites
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2097240

I urge you to read his posting.

Nick Wright

25/11/2012 08:21:49 am

Thanks for the link, Geoffrey. Appreciated. The paper looks interesting and I look forward to reading it. With best wishes. Nick

L. Anthony Watkins

25/11/2012 08:23:44 am

Hello Nick

I am joining this dialogue a little late but some of what I say can be added to the previous comments.

As long as the organisation has been in operation for some time, the values have existed. Maybe it is not so much how to develop the values as much as to first unearth the values that have been guiding behaviour in the organisation all along.

My apporach to this is to have huddles in which people tell the organisation's stories ... the history, the anecdotes, the things that stick out in their memory and to probe those to identify what really has been driving behaviour all along.

At that stage, the issue then becomes "what do we want / keep", what do we "reshape", what do we "introduce" ... and that is where the "developing values" conversation takes off?

Anthony

Nick Wright

25/11/2012 08:30:16 am

Hi Anthony and welcome to the conversation! Thanks for the note. I agree with your view that surfacing values already held by people in an organisation can be very important and useful. I've used a similar process to that which you described, albeit using appreciative inquiry. We invited people to share stories of when the organisation had been at its best, to identify the key factors then to depict these to the wider group using art, role play, narrative etc. The process felt both illuminating and engaging. I found your comment about engaging the group in what do we want to keep, change etc. helpful, especially if 'working in partnership' or some similar value is important to the organisation culturally. With best wishes. Nick

Hazel Douglas

28/11/2012 03:27:55 am

I also like AI very much and agree that crafting the questions carefully is key.

I think it is important to be aware, however, that not everything is harmonious in charities - indeed the very strong, passionately-held beliefs that bring people into the charity sector can lead to bitter division - look at the C of E recently - and the shadow side of charities can be very dark.

If those issues are aired and allowed to be spoken, it helps a lot.

Good luck.

Nick Wright

8/12/2012 12:20:43 am

Hi Hazel and thanks for the note. Yes, it's true that charities experience their own distinctive dynamics and, as you say, the shadow side is often the flip side of what motivates and makes charities successful. I agree that airing such issues can be cathartic, healthy and productive and avoid the shadow side becoming a derailer. Did you have any examples in mind of where this has been done successfully, with positive results? If so, could you say more about how it was addressed and achieved? With best wishes. Nick

Hazel Douglas

8/12/2012 06:12:19 am

I can imagine that Appreciative Inquiry might be interesting...

Arthur Lerner

8/12/2012 05:46:29 am

I have joined this discussion over a month since it started, and am impressed by the generosity and intelligent/cogent nature of most of the comments, as well as by Nick's ongoing participation at it flows and develops.

Nick, you asked for innovative. I have three ideas that I think are relevant, depending on your physical circumstances, but if you mean "new" in terms of innovative, they don't apply. All of them were developed more than 20 years ago (one by me), but have proved astonishingly effective when presented at the right time and facilitated well. The caveat is that all these presume require all relevant people (or a "critical mass" credible representation of them) are in one room at the same time.

The first is derived from a yet older activity designed for Values Clarification over 40 years ago. If you are not familiar with it, you can find it in the VC book by Sidney Simon. It an individual personal activity designed for sharing. I adapted it to be collaborative and interactive for use in corporations. I will outline it here,but if it appeals,feel free to contact me for a more complete design. It is a Values Crest (or shield),originally predicated on the idea that people are fairly well guarded early in an acquaintance process, and metaphor is knights who rode around well armored (and masked),but could be recognized as friend or foe by the heraldry on their shield. The great value in this is that it forces and frees people to go deeper than they would in normal conversation. Questions are posed for all to answer, but the answers must be pictures as parts of a crest, and the symbology to be explained after the shield is complete. As others have mentioned, asking the right questions is critical, and they vary based on whom you are working with. The key distinctions in process when designed for corporate type purposes are a) small teams create crests simultaneously, b) there are fewer frames/elements on the crest, and c) that after all are shared a second process involves coming to agreement on what ONE crest would work for all. It works well alone, and I also used it as prelude for the executive team of a company with a new CEO from the outside to craft a new mission.

Another, even older method, to do an Oral history of the organization. Notes of key points of what is being said get recorded publicly (e..g flipchart, whiteboards). The tale begins with whoever has been in the organization longest. Again, there are prompting and probing questions that a facilitator needs to ask. Others join in as apart of the story is told for which they were present, especially if they see the the event(s) differently in fact or in meaning. This is best done with a group of 20 or less. If there are a lot more then most are present as witnesses to a selected group discussing, but are able to participate in a following debrief. A key is to be alert to something important changing, not just in who is there,but in direction, management style, culture, connectedness, etc. Each time that happens, start a new page. I've found it useful when doing this to ask participants to name each new chapter as it begins.

Finally, in addition to AI there are other models of Large Group methodologies that work well. They include Open Space, Whole Scale Change, the Conference Model, and the Future Search Conference among others. I have been involved in three of these, and have a bias toward Whole Scale type methodology, but others work well, and the nature of the organization and the issues it is facing often indicate which approaches are better than others. Like AI, it can't be summarized well here,but most of them are very good not only in generating shared conversations toward an end, but in building community and "living"some of the values in the moment.

Sorry for the length. I hope this is helpful.

Nick Wright

8/12/2012 07:26:30 am

Hi Arthur and thanks for sharing such helpful ideas and approaches. I've heard of the shield approach before but hadn't considered the 'defensive' aspects which I found insightful and helpful in your notes. I've also heard of the oral history method and used something similar known as 'River of Life' which has proved powerful, including for conflict resolution in teams where people have shared their own story and how they have experienced it. I particularly liked your participative approach and emphasis on noticing key changes and starting new chapters. I've tended to encourage the group to focus on that which felt significant, whether it implied change or not. Finally, I've used Open Space and World Cafe but haven't come across the other methodologies you mention. Are there any particular resources/websites you would recommend to explore them further? With thanks and best wishes. Nick

Arthur Lerner

8/12/2012 09:13:13 am

Nick -

There are tons of resources for every methodology I mentioned. First,there are books by the creators of each of them (sometimes multiple). Rather than list them here, you will find them(and often Wikipedia references) if you just google each one. For an overall look threre are some helpful books out there. Two of them are by Bunker and Williams who were early champions of this kind of work, and talked and observed extensively with those of us who were pioneers in one or the other. The first book, Large Group Interventions: Engaging the Whole System fir Rapid Change is less cutting edge today (in large part due to their success is spreading the word), but is a remarkable account and analysis of several models, their use, and their practical and theoretical roots, and helped bring attention to this way of working in the OD community as none (save one) was able to before. They wrote a second book based on things that transpired after the first book, including detailed accounts/case studies of interventions using different methods, a range of different client situations, etc. Both books are expensive (all the ones I'm mentioning are), but if you can find a library copy, great. If not, used copies of the first book are out there. I bought my replacement copy recently for under $10.00 including shipping. Another good omnibus book is edited by Peggy Holman, The Change Handbook: The...." While less conceptually explicit (my opinion), it has two advantages. First, it is a compendium of the different major methods as described (sometimes quite briefly) by the co-inventors or their close colleagues of each major method. Second, it is now out in paperback, and retails, I think, for under $30 new.

I did a quick check while writing this to check my memory of prices, etc., and stumbled across a wonderful list put out by Vista (downloadable, and in your homeland). It contains dozens of resources in print that are considered "essentials" in OD, and while there may some different judgment about categorization, books are listed by categories such as Participative System Design, Large Group Methods, Meeting Design & Facilitation, Leadership Development, and more. I thought this would be a good resource to share in general. Here is the url:
http://www.vista.uk.com/library/pdf/Book%20List%20Aug%202009.pdf

You comment about my comment about "defensiveness" - I used the term guarded deliberately, btw - led me to some thinking that is off the main thrust of your question, but I think germane to the dynamics of getting people to connect more deeply. I made the remark based on my study and work over the years consulting to/intervening with working groups and organizations profit, non-profit,governmental, and civic, not on anything discussed in the original crest/shield design. I may add a comment later if it doesn't seem like it will be a tedious. pedantic, distraction.

Rob Bernstein

10/12/2012 02:15:11 am

I have just come into the discussion having read the above and whilst I agree with a lot of what has been said, I might take a slightly different approach having been involved in experiential education all my life and looking to 'bring things to life' for people. I have found over the years that having values posted on a wall does nothing for people as they really need to experience or feel them at the emotional/behavioural level using a range of different interventions which are either aligned to an organisations culture or in fact challenges that. So if a company want to be more risk taking I would challenge them to undertake in intervention which actually enables people to do that and then reflect on that experience and the link back into their values. I have used drama/theatre, storytelling, music, art, the outdoors, screen printing , business simulations to get a 'safe environment where people can open up and begin dialogue which enable them to explore underlying beliefs, which drive core values and then ultimately behaviour.

I just had a thought, given your work - take some of the folks back to the core purpose of the charity, Undertake some problem solving exercises which have the participants having to use specific 'senses' or not being allowed to use others - mirroring some of the challenges their clients face - - Ie being blind folded or not being able to hear - let them experience this and ask them how it felt - what did it take to be successful, what did they find out about themselves - who are are stakeholders and how does that impact our values? Sorry - an ENFP.....!

Nick Wright

10/12/2012 01:48:50 pm

Hi Rob and thanks for the note. I loved the creativity in the ideas and approaches you mentioned. I agree that experiential learning can raise awareness and engagement in a more powerful and dynamic way than conventional rational-reflective processes.

I would be very interested to hear more about how you have used the different methods you listed, e.g. what the issue was that you were working with, how you approached it practically, what happened, what you would advise to enable success etc.

On a bit of a tangent, I wondered if you have come across Gestalt? If not, you may be interested to have a glance at this article which draws on similar approaches to those you described: http://www.nick-wright.com/just-do-it.html. With best wishes. Nick

Gary Kenward

10/12/2012 09:27:27 am

Take a look at the Barrett Values Centre.

Nick Wright

10/12/2012 01:02:58 pm

Yes, thanks Gary. Its website has some interesting resources. Do you have any examples of applying them to practice that you would be willing to share? With best wishes. Nick

Arthur Lerner

10/12/2012 11:26:55 pm

Nick -

I restrained myself from adding a second comment immediately after my last one, but Rob's comments have me wanting to add some of it now. I agree with his comments, especially the first, and will have a note about his last sentence.

By design EVERY idea I shared with you, including each of the selected methodologies was grounded in three aspects of being experiential, both of which Rob also incorporated. The first is that the activities are designed to address things that are real in your organization (whether they know it or not yet), I say this as Rob so astutely mentioned some specifics, e.g. the use of blindfolds, etc. Activities like those have long been used by trainers, but usually for groups of otherwise (organizationally) disconnected people. Same for things like ropes courses, etc. One of mentors (co-inventor of one of the large sale methods) was adamant about not doing "exercises" while working within a real working until (e.g. team) or organization. Basically this means eschewing training such training activities because, while rich and meaningful, they require individuals to make analogies individually and separately to "back home" situations. They are playing at, rather than playing with, which is how Rob framed the idea. Said another way you will find that whatever structured activity you do will take and take hold better if it is a mix of experience and content, i.e. affective and cognitive.

Second, this is rooted in what you asked for (that it be collaborative). Experiential basically means that you "lived" something through, not just thought it through.. The first ever work designed for what became known as Whole Scale seminar to change management culture. It was repeated separately for the top management of seven different divisions. Be they time the first round ended, we witnessed hundreds of men (managers in the org were about 95% male) in a command and control company culture for 10-30 years each break down in tears based on the transformative experience of having something as "simple", but unheard of, as having the only genuinely personal/intimate conversation with their team mates in their entire careers. Of course, it took a day and a half to get them prepared for it, all, however, mixing working with the experience they were in. (Some of that work was designed to help them be self reflective. Other parts were intended - for the moment - to be subliminal but healthy processes.) It was by working together in carefully structured and varied participative activities in ways the never worked before that was the core of the experience. Some of these we debriefed with them, some we let the impact for them to process alone (e.g. the activity that left them crying).

This brings me to the third point. Certain breakthroughs in culture, and other "invisible" factors that derive from it or affect it, e.g. values, norms, degree of public candor, "depth" of relationships) can only take place in a group context. OD is not therapy. It's focus by intention has always been on what will improve outcomes for people and the group/organization they are in, regardless of whether or not an activity is based on a psychological or psychiatric theory. Things happen in groups where everybody is going through the same process aimed at the same (relatively) specific thing that can go on nowhere else and in no other way. Sometimes, especially in healthier organizations, this happens in the normal course of doing work, e.g. early HP, and (still current) Apple, Google, Zappos.

In group settings part of each person's experience is, in many ways, amplified. First is the direct experience of work as one does it. Second, is the experience of doing it in a "healthy" participative/collaborative way with others. And, in larger groups, a third dynamic is witnessing other people's experience (those you are not working with directly) of going through the same thing. Having it happen and be witnessed/mirrored at the same time, is then part of the overall experience itself, a sort of virtuous cycle reinforcement, and - perhaps - a multiplier - of what can be "learned" and how fast. The chief advantage to large group methods is that for organizations with big challenges they can manifest at an organizational level (not just executive) what could only be done as team intervention + talking at or writing to others, which - with no irony - puts you back into what seems like cognitive only. Only - and here is the caveat - despite people's protestations no interpersonal activity is purely cognitive, people just don't, or don't want to, surface the experiential/affective/process aspect of what's happening. This means the experience is seen as boring, frustrating,even with curiosity or thinking of possibilities, but unshared. How people communicate is a reflection and manifestation of their values, even if not the ones they say they are proud of.

As an addendum, I also want to note something that Rob said. He is an E

Arthur Lerner

10/12/2012 11:29:08 pm

(...cont) As an addendum, I also want to note something that Rob said. He is an ENFP. This brings to mind that, depending on circumstances - doing a brief (e.g. 2 hr or less, only about 20 min lecture, and 10 min reading some material) workshop on MBTI w/in a large group context is often very beneficial. We don't use it when doing large group strategy sessions, but did and do in culture issues. Unless previously exposed, the participants are often not able to understand why certain others act as they do, much less be able to have a mutual "decoder" mechanism. Certainly type affects how people express and act on their values. Again, the design of this workshop is not like a public one it is predicated on - and discussion largely framed within - issues of how it affects communication and behavior as communication within the organization. Unfolded judiciously MBTI learning and interacting is virtually guaranteed to help people connect differently and positively.

Nick Wright

12/12/2012 11:27:15 am

Hi Arthur and thanks for the notes. I can feel your passion for the topic! :)

I liked your comment on detached vs experiential learning, 'playing at rather than playing with'. The latter sits closely with principles in Gestalt coaching and groupwork where experimentation, experience, awareness and change are intrinsically linked.

I found your reflections on the distinctive dynamics and value of group in contrast to individual experiences very insightful and helpful, e.g. the effects of mirroring and amplification, the value of experiencing a healthy group interaction and process.

I've found this particularly transformative when working with leadership teams on values and behaviours. It's one thing to identify and commit to such things at a rational level, it's quite another thing to experience what they actually look and feel like in practice.

I found your comments, 'no interpersonal activity is purely cognitive', 'people don't want to surface the experiential, affective process aspect of what's happening' very profound. Also, what this may signify in terms of values and culture.

I too have found similar benefits from using MBTI with groups, including those experiencing conflict or facing or dealing with change. Interestingly, profiling groups can also shed light on group culture, e.g. raising awareness of group preferences and norms.

With thanks for sharing such interesting and helpful thoughts. Nick

Rob Bernstein

12/12/2012 11:28:29 am

Hi Nick

Yes, I have come across 'Gestalt' and a great friend of mine who used to work with me on a number of experiential interventions is Gestalt Trained.

Please see below a couple of examples of using an experiential approach:

Organisational Culture Change -

Challenge/ Issue

Technologies Division of a global org had just restructured following top 5 consultancy. New strategy, but nothing in the organisation had changed. The Senior VP described it like 're-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic. There was a lot of uncertainty and ambiguity in the business. The division we seen as 'barriers as opposed' to enablers of business - individuals who were extremely bright high IQ (low EQ) tended to deliver solutions for the business that were not wanted/relevant to the need. There needed to be a change in culture towards more: collaboration and teamwork, more effective leadership greater business awareness, innovation.

Solution

Design and run an experiential development programme. Rather than begin the programme with all attendees going to a conference centre, talking through the aims and objective we decided to start from a totally different position. We wanted to replicate (well more of creating a metaphor) that would enable which individuals to experience 'uncertainty and ambiguity' right from the off. More importantly letting them have an experience at the emotional rather than just cognitive level. They were asked to be at a signpost in the middle of the English country side (bags and cases were taken from them) and then like a John le Carre novel - a car drove past and threw out a brief case (which has a tin of red herrings - my humour, a computer, note books ,novels) etc. The team only had that information and NOTHING else. The had an unknown problem with an unknown solution at this point. They had choices, do nothing or try and work with what they have got and make sense of the data they had. This they did and over time as the began to take risks, and actions things slowly unfolded.....

This was just the beginning of a 4 day programme which was originally 21/2 days (which we said was too short) but eventually having gone through it the Exec Leadership Team said people needed more time to reflect/internalise- great!) The programme combined experiential with cognitive pieces as well as MBTI/ 1:1 coaching etc and the end of the programme saw the team create a video of "why the should not be outsourced as a division" (we provided them with, editor, film crew to coach them, and all editing, camera equipment). 600 people late - having run the programme in UK, across the USA, in Australia/Japan etc the programme began to realise the benefits. Individual behaviour
change, the number of new products brought to the market increased dramatically, the product cycle time which had been a couple of years was cut down to months.......We we asked to undertake individual and team coaching across the business. (Different example to follow)

Rob Bernstein

12/12/2012 11:29:43 am

(...continued) Challenge/Issue

Coaching process with an organisation was stale - individuals had done a lot of work, role play etc to practise coaching behaviours etc- they were detached from it at an emotional level

Solution

Designed and delivered an experiential workshop which had a real goal - team had to produce a final output to raise money for a charity(and live the org values of 'being a good citizen in the community'.) The output was a 'live circus' event. The whole department over 120 were broken up into small group and each learn't a circus skills (we provided professional circus folks) they then had to coach another group in that skill, practice, practice, practice and then put on a show in the evening for friends, family and other invited guests.

There was an integrative process which saw facilitators working with each group to de-brief and process 'live' what was happening at a cognitive and emotional level and how this changed during the process. Key learning insights, experiences (personal and group) were
shared. The real power of the experience was that long after the event itself people's behaviour, coaching ability, memories/experiences and collaborative ways of working continued deep into the organisation for a long period of time and coaching came to be a "way of life".

During my career I have designed/developed numerous interventions but they all start from the business context - where is the business, what is it trying to achieve, what are the key challenges and what are the implication if they don't address these. Then what impact does all this have on the people driving the business?

Hope this all makes sense to folks - any questions please ask.

Nick Wright

12/12/2012 11:44:45 am

Hi Rob and thanks for sharing such interesting examples. It was helpful to see how you approached the issues in practice. I couldn't help wondering how you enabled transfer of awareness and learning from the experiential activities into the real-work environments.

I attended events some years ago at outdoor pursuit activity centres, intended as leadership development initiatives. It was fun but it all felt so removed from the cultural-political constraints we experienced in our real work environment that it made little or no difference at all.

I would be very interested to hear how you addressed these issues of transferability and application in the organisations you worked with. With best wishes. Nick

Jackie Le Fevre link

27/7/2013 04:09:43 am

So much good stuff to agree with here - the importance of experential methods, of exploring the "real" as well as the "desired, how artwork brings the iteration of values in words to life and endows them with a sense of feeling as well as meaning.

So my brief contribution to the conversation is this:

all organisations have values - not all organisations are conscious of and/or consciously harness their priority values

there is no choice in terms of being values based as an individual or an organisation, the only choice lies in the degree to which you want to deliberately connect with key values - values are the basis for all decision making (we might think we rationalise everything out but......)

individuals and groups will socialise to a set of mutually prioritised values - the degree of affinity being influenced by the level of alignment between the values of the individual and the socialised set of values

Values are hard to work with as, I'm sure many colleagues know, they sit in the limbic part of the brain and there are no language centres there. So to try with our prefrontal lobes to find the vocabulary to wrap around the abstract ideas that have meaning and energy for us is wildly difficult especially if we come into the question relatively cold....... but hey - do love a challenge!

Specifically on the topic of values in/for third sector organisations I shall now say something that may not chime with the perspectives of others. By way of preamble let me state that I am voluntary and community sector born and bred and have spent thirty years doing different things in non profits. There is as much if not more fuzziness about values in the third sector as there is in the private sector. A key challenge for me when working with organisations be that with trustees or staff or volunteers or any combination of the three is to not let them off the hook with the lightweight front of mind stuff they almost always want to claim are their values."Diversity" "Inclusion" "Equal Opportunities" are particular pet hates of mine - these things are not values they are principles - they are the rules you chose to follow in the way that you do your work. As principles they will be underpinned by certain values - Human Dignity perhaps or Limitation/Celebration or Equity/Rights - and those values are why you chose to embed anti discrimatory practice in the way that you do.

So, I agree with other commentators about the importance of observing and interrogating the "what goes on around here" but those things aren't the values - the values lie in the "why" those things go on around here in the way that they do and are considered sufficiently valid to be taught to the next generation.

Human beings are gloriously varied in their individual patterns of priority values so it's no suprise that the organisations in which they come together are just the same!

Nick Wright

29/7/2013 02:04:58 am

Hi Jackie and thanks for posting such interesting and though-provoking comments. I agree with you that people and organisations have values, whether they are aware of it or not.
I particularly liked your explanation of where a sense of values is held or experienced in the brain and why we can struggle to find language to articulate them fully.

I've found this when running values workshops to surface what matters most to people. When invited to depict values graphically, physically or artistically, people often communicate with real passion, energy and conviction. When we try to summarise the values in words, however, the passion dissipates and the group risks falling into dry analysis and word-smithing.

I agree with your final comment that values lie in 'why' we do what we do. Insofar as values and associated ways of working are shared and fairly normative, we are probably talking about culture. With thanks again for such a stimulating and helpful response. With best wishes. Nick