Defining Corporate Values


We'll return to strong and weak cultures later, but first I want to plant a stake in the ground on the way we define values.

We sometimes refer to core values, as though these particular values transcended other, less worthy, values. But then I get lost when I read that a company has 17 core values. This does not make sense to me. There can't be that much room at the "core."

Still, I believe that some values do transcend others, and we get to pick which ones run our lives. Maybe some people can keep a hierarchy of values straight in their minds and hearts, but I'm too simple for that. I have a very small set that I try to hold myself to and evaluate others by. I keep the set small so that I don't have to worry about order and priority, or about balancing one value against another.

I've also learned that it's not helpful to label as "values" those qualities that everyone endorses. Take "citizenship," for example; who is going to argue that we shouldn't be good citizens? The problem is, this word is always interpreted according to more "local" values that define the behavior of a good citizen within a given culture. So, paradoxically, the more general and vague the term, the closer it gets to being a universal "value," but the narrower and more culture-bound its interpretation becomes.[3] The value of such a value is really very small.

[3] It is sometimes said that it is impossible to be all things to all people, but some values are bland enough to fit that bill. The American colloquialism for such values is "apple pie and motherhood"things everyone is in favor of.

In defining a set of desirable values for a corporate culture, then, I will choose terms not for their relative popularity, but rather for their utility in describing a company that is worth working for. I want to work with people who share these values. If others don't, I hope they will gravitate to another organization that has values more to their liking. We will all be happier in the long run.

My list has three items, few enough that I can keep them in "registers" at all times.[4] They are integrity, customer focus, and results.

[4] In the olden days of programming, we could specify things we wanted to keep in fast memory so we could access them rapidly, on the principle that we would be using them often. Such locations were called registers.

Integrity

The cornerstone of all that is honorable, integrity is a value that requires usin all our relationships, both internally and externally, with colleagues and customersto conduct ourselves in an honest, truthful, and straightforward way. There may be dishonest people in the world, but we don't have to admit them into our company. We can choose to associate only with those whose conduct meets our standards.

Integrity is a high standard, but it is exceedingly easy to know whether or not you have acted with integrity. It is as easy as knowing right from wrong. It is not complicated.

Many desirable characteristics of corporate culture that I have written about in previous chapters[5] are based on integrity: a high-trust environment, honoring commitments, an absence of noxious politics, true teamwork, and an open interchange of ideas. Without integrity, we cannot hope to achieve or implement any of these. Later, I will discuss why these characteristics are so crucial in a software development organization.

[5] See, for example, Chapters 13, 14, and 15.

Customer Focus

Anyone working in the business world is torn over and over again by having to make difficult choices. Sometimes the choice is obvious; we usually have no problem doing something that is clearly required or rejecting behaviors that are clearly wrong. It gets tricky, however, when there are conflicting requirements, a gray area, or something that involves reasoning on the margin. At these times, success means getting a higher percentage of these choices right than we might otherwise do by flipping a coin.

I'm not talking about technical decisions here. Instead, these are judgment calls such as, "Do we ship the product today or work on it for a few more weeks to get it to a better state?" There is usually no single, unambiguous answer. But is there a simple criterion you can use to help frame the decision?

I believe there is. The question I always ask is, "What is right for the customer?"

To further complicate matters, however, there is rarely a single customer.[6] So you must visualize the customer base as a distribution, and try to reason what is best for the mainstream group of customersthe greatest good for the greatest number. If you can put yourself in the customers' shoes and reason through what is right for them, my belief is that you will get many more of these decisions right.

[6] And even if there were just one, there would be conflicting priorities within that organization as well.

Note that doing the right thing for the customer may sometimes cause a great deal of internal pain. But if you don't do that, then all you are doing is deferring the pain to a later date. And, most likely, that deferred pain will be far worse than the pain you'd have to bear early on to create a responsible, responsive solution.

Customer focus has many cultural manifestations: a drive to release products on time, a passion for creativity and quality, and products that are genuinely fit for use. But it all starts with having the courage to ask the question, first and foremost, "What is best for the customer?"[7]

[7] Needless to say, this means you have to know who your customers are and what problems they face. I can't conceive of running any business, let alone a software business, without this knowledge.

Results

This third value has to do with results. I believe in results, not excuses.

Today, people seem to expend a lot of time and effort on excuses. It is almost as though they believe that a good explanation for failure is a legitimate replacement for the desired result. But this is not something you can build on.

The simplest way to differentiate the good from the bad is to evaluate results. Not intentions. Not effort. Not "does what he's told to do." Not "easy to work with." All these are irrelevant if results are not achieved. Note, however, that I am not saying "success at any cost" or "the end justifies the means." That kind of Machiavellian perversion means you are willing to act without integrity, and that is not allowed.[8]

[8] This is one of the rare places where one might have to prioritize even among the small number of core values we have here. Lest there be any doubt, integrity always trumps the other two. Customer focus and results orientation rarely come into conflict with one another, so there is no need to look for prioritization there.

Finally, we must realize that most goals worth achieving are not accomplished in sprint mode but in marathon fashion. Persistence counts. For those people for whom "failure is not an option,"[9] I salute you.

[9] Attributed to Gene Krantz of NASA, during the Apollo 13 rescue mission.




The Software Development Edge(c) Essays on Managing Successful Projects
The Software Development Edge(c) Essays on Managing Successful Projects
ISBN: N/A
EAN: N/A
Year: 2006
Pages: 269

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net