From trad to Yoda-esque: what type of values will work best for your org?
What does a good set of values look like?
Here are some of the rules we live by:
Ideally, you have no more than three values.
Your values go beyond tablestakes values like Trust, Integrity and Respect.
Your values are uncovered from below, not imposed from above.
And the values are role-modeled by your leaders before they’re launched.
But beyond these guiding principles, you have choices. Specifically, when it comes to the format and tone of your values.
Here are four types of values we typically see. The option you choose will depend on your culture.
Traditional values
Traditionally formatted values take the form of a single word. They might be abstract nouns like:
Innovation
Collaboration
Accountability
Or adjectives like:
Innovative
Collaborative
Accountable
These are the the types of values people most often expect to see. They don’t rock the boat in terms of style, so they are, perhaps, appropriate for cultures where stability matters most.
Pros: They’re for orgs where it’s important to do things properly and in a controlled way. So they might be your preferred choice if you’re operating in a highly regulated industry, like banking or law.
Cons: One of the drawbacks of traditionally formatted values like these is that those single words have to do a lot of heavy lifting, meaning it can be hard for the team to agree on just three. They also lack originality. If you want to be seen as a highly distinctive brand with a unique tone of voice, you may prefer one of the other approaches. Monzo, for example, might be a bank — but its way with words is far from staid and sets the brand apart.
2. We-statement values
We-statement values do what they say on the tin. They tell the world what we, at this org, are like and how we all work together. An example would be these values from the software company Teradata:
We dig deep and aim high.
We rise as one.
We raise up our customers and our world.
Pros: These types of values work best for organisations that have a warm, inclusive culture, where employees are open to collaboration. They convey a sense of belonging and pride in collaborating toward a shared mission.
Cons: We-statements might not work for you if your values are still aspirational. When a team takes the step to uncover their values, it’s not unusual for them to identify values people are not yet fully living. Instead, they opt for values they want to be known for — and want people to work toward. If those values aren’t yet fully understood and embedded across the org, expressing them as we-statements might ring hollow.
3. Yoda-ish axiom-type values
What we call “Yoda-ish axioms” are short aphorisms that sum up the org’s philosophy. A famous example is Google’s “Ten things we know to be true”, a list that includes dicta such as:
You don’t need to be at your desk to need an answer.
You can make money without doing evil.
You can be serious without a suit.
Pros: This approach works well for organisations with a distinctive brand and culture that, like Google’s, emphasises new ways of doing and thinking.
Cons: They might not work for you if your culture is a more traditional one, where such sayings might be perceived as inauthentic and, well, a little bit cringe. Be aware, too, of the risks of being perceived as not living up to your stated philosophy (Google’s “don’t be evil” line being a case in point).
4. Imperative-verb-phrase values
These types of values include an imperative verb — that is, the command form of an action word — paired with another word. A great example is the set of values we uncovered for the AI company Afiniti, which included:
Work smart.
Be open.
Spread joy.
Thanks to that imperative verb, these types of values have a distinct energy about them. They work well for most organisations, but particularly ones where your people will be motivated by bold calls to action.
Want to uncover, articulate and embed your org’s values? Let’s have a conversation!
