Lucy Kellaway: No real worth in all those corporate value statements

It’s all guff, the same words crop up over and over again

Integrity is particularly feeble. It makes no sense to assert integrity as a value, as no one would ever dream of asserting the reverse.

Integrity is particularly feeble. It makes no sense to assert integrity as a value, as no one would ever dream of asserting the reverse.

 

A few weeks ago I stood up in front of a group of managers from two dozen well-known companies and forced them to play a parlour game.

In advance I had visited the websites of each of their employers and harvested a list of their values. I then read out the lists one after another, and asked everyone to raise a hand when they recognised their own.

I knew this was a low trick. I was pretty sure most people would fail and was rather looking forward to the spectacle. I was not disappointed.

Out of 24, only five correctly identified their company’s values and in three cases it was because they had been on the committees that drafted them. The remaining 19 each raised a hand confidently – only to pick out the wrong values.

These upstanding managers cannot be blamed for their wretched performance, as all corporate values are much of a muchness. Maitland, the financial PR company, has just finished an audit of the values of the FTSE 100, and found that three words – integrity, respect and innovation – crop up over and over again.

What a splendid trio they sound. Alas, all are duds.

Integrity is particularly feeble. It makes no sense to assert integrity as a value, as no one would ever dream of asserting the reverse.

Respect sounds good, but is meaningless unless it is made clear (as it never is) who is meant to be respected. Some people deserve respect; others do not.

And innovation makes its way on to the list more as a wish from frumpy companies to be seen as a little groovier.

Three reasons

First, self-describing is always dodgy. If someone goes out of their way to tell me they are honest or creative, I immediately conclude the reverse.

Second, far from being a point of difference, values make every company look the same, as there is only a finite list of desirable corporate traits. And third, public professions are a hostage to fortune. Volkswagen must be ruing the day it made “sustainability” a core value.

A better reason to publicise values is to remind employees how they are supposed to comport themselves.

Yet my experiment shows this fails before it even gets started: if people can’t remember what their values are supposed to be, they aren’t going to be very good at “living” them.

So which companies do it well? According to Maitland, the shining example is Pearson, whose values are “brave, imaginative, decent”. As I have spent the past three decades working for this company (a relationship that will end shortly when its sale of the Financial Times goes through), I ought to take some pride in this.

Yet on my way to get a Diet Coke out of the vending machine just now, I stopped everyone I met and asked them to name the Pearson values. Eleven people went: “Errr?” Only one colleague managed all of them.

Next frontier

Is it brave of me to be writing this? Possibly; but it may also be stupid given that until the deal is complete, Pearson still pays my salary.

Is it decent? Probably not, but then decency is not necessarily an asset in a columnist.

Is it imaginative? Certainly not – if your subject matter is corporate idiocy, there is no need for imagination given the bounty provided by real life.

The report then questions how many values a company should have and concludes – entirely arbitrarily – that the perfect number is four. For me the ideal number is zero. Values may be important, but they are also slippery. The minute anyone tries to write them down they become trite and unhelpful.

Seventeen of Britain’s 100 biggest companies are sensible enough to have no values at all – or at least none they care to disclose on their websites. Maitland suggests these companies are laggards and that they should get in line. Values, the report says portentously, are the “next frontier”.

Absolute nonsense, and I have facts to prove it. I asked a man in our statistics department to crunch some numbers and compare an index made up of the 17 values refuseniks with one made of 83 who are toeing the line. He has come back with data so conclusive that I hope it will stop all windy talk of value statements forever.

Over the past 10 years the 17 valueless companies have outperformed the others in the FTSE 100 Index by about 70 per cent. – (Copyright The Financial Times limited 2015)

The Irish Times Logo
Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.
SUBSCRIBE
GO BACK
Error Image
The account details entered are not currently associated with an Irish Times subscription. Please subscribe to sign in to comment.
Comment Sign In

Forgot password?
The Irish Times Logo
Thank you
You should receive instructions for resetting your password. When you have reset your password, you can Sign In.
The Irish Times Logo
Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.
Screen Name Selection

Hello

Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.

The Irish Times Logo
Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.
SUBSCRIBE
Forgot Password
Please enter your email address so we can send you a link to reset your password.

Sign In

Your Comments
We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.