How NOT to choose company values
A couple years ago, Harvard Business Review (HBR) published an article about the top 5 values companies should never choose. In this post, I am going to explore some of the most common company values.
One of the most common markers of a sustainable or responsible business today is its MVV (Mission, Vision and Values). Having an explicitly made stated commitment and values demonstrates that you stand for something specific. In terms of brand definition, values are used to develop and position your company. For this reason, they need to be well-chosen.
This is the reason that I will look at the HBR article later in this post more in-depth, it argues that too many companies have variations of the same values. Values should clearly differentiate and clarify what is unique about you. Why do you do what you do? Choosing the same “expected” values as everyone else potentially (not always) loses a chance to stand out.
Before accepting what that HBR article said, I did a little research of my own. This article is one long list of 190 values from top companies, ranging from Google and Adidas to Virgin Airlines. Reading through the list, it becomes obvious that:
-the average seems to be 6 values
-and there certainly are a number of common/popular values that appear repeatedly
Google stands out in that list because theirs are so specific and unique. Interestingly, rather than being written in terms of values (this was before the MVV approach was popular), they were originally written as a list of “10 things we know to be true”. Google publishes their mission clearly but no values. This is the closest thing they have to values, and it certainly works as such. It is also more of an “operating manual” so to speak, that seems quite obviously tied to their actual corporate culture. Perhaps they are on to something.
The main reason - I would argue - values can be problematic is not that they are similar to others, but that they do not seem convincing or connected to any action. At Google, their list serves as values because they are all so clearly embedded in their company culture. Their 10 statements include:
“Democracy on the web works.”
This is certainly more impactful and revealing than stating something such as “We are collaborative.” They have similar intentions and meanings but the first is more obviously rooted in Google culture.
“You don’t need to be at your desk to need an answer.”
This again is more indicative of what they stand for than something such as “We support mobility.” While this may have been extremely radical when they first wrote it (not tying technological solutions to a desktop computer environment), it is now a core value for many technology companies. Yet the way it is stated clearly identifies it as part of their culture.
After considering Google’s statements further, I recognise that none of their statements are necessarily especially different than other companies. They are just written in a way that illustrates their approach and brand much more obviously than the rest. Perhaps it is the model of MVV that is a problem for building branding rather than the company values. If you are writing or reviewing your values, consider re-writing them as “10 things our company knows to be true” and see how that affects them. Does it help them stand out?
The HBR article I mentioned at the beginning of this post certainly believes there is an issue with the way most companies write their values. She points out that those top 5 (often listed by up to 90% of companies) are simply too common or too obvious:
1. Ethical/Integrity
2. Teamwork/Collaboration
3. Authentic
4. Fun
5. Customer-oriented
She goes on explain the difference between core and industry/category values. Essentially, there are some values - depending upon which business category you are in - which will be a “given”. Almost all companies who provide a service directly to people will necessarily need to have good customer service, therefore it is not a unique value worth listing.
The HBR article emphasises that the point of listing values is to build a foundation for your brand which means: differentiation. According to this author, your values need to be more than worthy, they have to be unique. Obviously, not all companies agree with this approach, what do you think?
One of the most common markers of a sustainable or responsible business today is its MVV (Mission, Vision and Values). Having an explicitly made stated commitment and values demonstrates that you stand for something specific. In terms of brand definition, values are used to develop and position your company. For this reason, they need to be well-chosen.
"value and action" by palooja is licensed under CC BY 2.0
This is the reason that I will look at the HBR article later in this post more in-depth, it argues that too many companies have variations of the same values. Values should clearly differentiate and clarify what is unique about you. Why do you do what you do? Choosing the same “expected” values as everyone else potentially (not always) loses a chance to stand out.
Before accepting what that HBR article said, I did a little research of my own. This article is one long list of 190 values from top companies, ranging from Google and Adidas to Virgin Airlines. Reading through the list, it becomes obvious that:
-the average seems to be 6 values
-and there certainly are a number of common/popular values that appear repeatedly
Google stands out in that list because theirs are so specific and unique. Interestingly, rather than being written in terms of values (this was before the MVV approach was popular), they were originally written as a list of “10 things we know to be true”. Google publishes their mission clearly but no values. This is the closest thing they have to values, and it certainly works as such. It is also more of an “operating manual” so to speak, that seems quite obviously tied to their actual corporate culture. Perhaps they are on to something.
The main reason - I would argue - values can be problematic is not that they are similar to others, but that they do not seem convincing or connected to any action. At Google, their list serves as values because they are all so clearly embedded in their company culture. Their 10 statements include:
“Democracy on the web works.”
This is certainly more impactful and revealing than stating something such as “We are collaborative.” They have similar intentions and meanings but the first is more obviously rooted in Google culture.
“You don’t need to be at your desk to need an answer.”
This again is more indicative of what they stand for than something such as “We support mobility.” While this may have been extremely radical when they first wrote it (not tying technological solutions to a desktop computer environment), it is now a core value for many technology companies. Yet the way it is stated clearly identifies it as part of their culture.
After considering Google’s statements further, I recognise that none of their statements are necessarily especially different than other companies. They are just written in a way that illustrates their approach and brand much more obviously than the rest. Perhaps it is the model of MVV that is a problem for building branding rather than the company values. If you are writing or reviewing your values, consider re-writing them as “10 things our company knows to be true” and see how that affects them. Does it help them stand out?
The HBR article I mentioned at the beginning of this post certainly believes there is an issue with the way most companies write their values. She points out that those top 5 (often listed by up to 90% of companies) are simply too common or too obvious:
1. Ethical/Integrity
2. Teamwork/Collaboration
3. Authentic
4. Fun
5. Customer-oriented
She goes on explain the difference between core and industry/category values. Essentially, there are some values - depending upon which business category you are in - which will be a “given”. Almost all companies who provide a service directly to people will necessarily need to have good customer service, therefore it is not a unique value worth listing.
The HBR article emphasises that the point of listing values is to build a foundation for your brand which means: differentiation. According to this author, your values need to be more than worthy, they have to be unique. Obviously, not all companies agree with this approach, what do you think?
