Question: (E-081)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on December 17,
2003
"Security's not something
we can trifle with"
Dear Jim:
On Tuesday, December 9, I flew to Dallas from San
Francisco, on United Airlines (Flight # 478) having
been upgraded to the front of the plane. Flying along
at 30,000 or so feet in the sky, I became anxious
and alarmed to be watching first three and then as
many as four fellow travelers collect in the area
directly behind the cockpit door, waiting to use the
restroom. After 9-11, it seemed to me that everyone
was aware that having more than one person in that
area was risky. Flight attendants and pilots requested,
strongly, that one person approach the bathroom area
at a time. When I confronted the flight attendant,
he assured me that he was watching and he knew things
were o.k. Another flight attendant assured me that
this procedure was at the discretion of the head flight
attendant.
How soon we forget. In a little over two years,
are we returning to our casual ways, and on airlines,
no less? What kind of integrity for travel safety
is this? Is this an isolated incident or is this
the new laidback practice by airlines and flight
attendants? The terrible disasters associated with
9-11 - have we forgotten? What does this mean?
Response:
For those who have traveled recently, the security
process, inside the airline terminals, is certainly
cumbersome. Whether or not it is effective will
be determined over the longer term. Beginning shortly
after 9-11, it appeared that metal knives and sharp
objects were banned anywhere around airports. Today,
plastic knives are used in airport restaurants.
Travelers are subject to many "checks" of their
carry-on goods, including metal content in their
shoes, belt-buckles, etc.
Painstaking and time-consuming as they might be,
few grumbles are heard. Security and safety are
the purpose of the processes. Maintaining the integrity
of safety is crucial for regaining the trust and
confidence of travelers.
However, when flying at hundreds of miles per hour
toward one's destination, with only the flight crew
to protect the traveler, it is even more important
to know the policies, understand how they apply
to each fellow traveler and then see the procedures
consistently implemented. Incidents, such as the
one you describe, must be reported to the airlines.
Even if it is a one-time error in judgment, it is
potentially dangerous to the travelers and to the
reputation for safety and security.
Maintaining our vigilance is critical, not simply
for the short term, but for the longer term as well.
When airline organizations accept travel dollars,
adding surcharges for security, it is not out of
the question to expect them to care about security
and safety, 100% of the time. When casual behavior
replaces professionalism and competence, then lives
could be endangered unnecessarily. Is our society
being lulled into a false sense of security that
could backfire? What did we learn from 9-11? Can
we afford to be casual about important and consistent
flying and safety practices? Naïve confidence
that evolves into complacency can lead to disaster.
Might this incident be an important early warning
that when things seem calm and settled our society
could be even more vulnerable to another surprise
terrorist attack? Outside of the United States,
airline vigilance is alive and well. Traveling on
some airlines is clearly an encounter with safety
and security. Their rules are clear and passengers
comply, no exceptions. Do we deserve any less in
the United States?
What is today's traveler asking of the airlines?
Perhaps little more than integrity in all aspects
of their encounters with the providers of transportation,
especially air travel:
- Courtesy and appreciation, along with competitive
pricing
- Competency and professionalism between and among
all participants in the delivery system:
- Travel companies, ticket suppliers and airline
counter employees
- Curbside assistants and baggage handlers
- Security officers
- Flight attendants
- The flight team working in the cockpit
- Ground crews
- Food and drink suppliers
- Safety and security in all areas related to
travel (clear and intelligent procedures, carried
out consistently)
When these expectations are not met by the airlines
on behalf of the flying public, then fear, uncertainty
and doubt are likely to generate anxiety and loss
of confidence - first in the airlines themselves,
maybe even in transportation systems generally.
When the integrity of safety and security are perceived
as at risk and are not guaranteed consistently by
each and every airline, nervous and insecure customers
may become even more reluctant to fly. These frustrations
and fears could fuel more governmental restrictions
and rules. More costly demands might be placed upon
the airlines, making a complicated system, already
way too close to financial ruin, an even bigger
potential financial burden for those who are currently
feeling already heavily taxed for previous airline
bailouts.
Integrity requires that airlines fulfill the promises
of courtesy, competency and especially security.
Question: (E-082)
"Creating Workplace Integrity"
What is the responsibility of Management to create
a workplace that fosters Integrity? And how do they
do that?
Response:
Management must assume all of the responsibilities
for creating the values and culture that become
the foundations for the ways their people will tend
to operate. Leadership by example is the key, whether
at home or one's place of employment. Owners and
leaders, as well as parents and public figures (whether
elected or acknowledged as famous, well-known or
simply of a celebrity status), know that what they
do, how they behave, is a standard that will be
recognized and emulated by those who look up to
them.
Integrity in the workplace evolves from the basic
rights and privileges leaders owe to those who assist
them in the achievement of their goals and objectives.
Integrity in the workplace is an obligation of management
and ownership directly to those who contribute their
time, energy and commitment to provide their knowledge,
skills and abilities toward the accomplishment of
a common cause. Management is accountable for this
environment of integrity to each employee, whether
the mission of their respective enterprise addresses
the delivery of health care, food service, transportation,
education, spiritual guidance, entertainment, government
service, financial counsel, waste disposal, communications,
food, clothing or shelter. Integrity is everyone's
business and responsibility.
When selecting to do business with an organization,
consider the quality of the integrity of their working
environment. How well an organization stacks up
against these eight attributes will clarify its
level of commitment to sustaining integrity in the
workplace. Any organization can build toward an
environment of integrity by taking actions in these
eight areas:
Build an Integrity-Centered Company
CHARACTER: consistency between
word and deed.
Do the leaders of your organization exhibit congruence
between what they say and what they do, as well
as what they say about what they did? Do leaders
exhibit the right behavior?
HONESTY: truthful communication.
Do you have confidence that your leaders would never
engage in or sanction misrepresentation?
OPENNESS: operational transparency.
Is appropriate information about your organization
readily available?
AUTHORITY: employee encouragement.
Are you able to correct a customer problem? Do you
have confidence that your actions will be supported?
PARTNERSHIP: honor obligations.
Does your organization pride itself on timely fulfillment
of all commitments?
PERFORMANCE: accountability throughout
the organization.
When individuals, including senior executives, under-perform
repeatedly, are they given due process and then,
if necessary, replaced?
CHARITY: generous community stewardship.
Does your organization reach out to those in need?
GRACIOUSNESS: respect and discipline.
Does your organization demonstrate care and concern
for all stakeholders?
When leaders behave along the lines outlined in
the eight attributes listed above, they will have
demonstrated that an environment of integrity exists
in their organization. When they exhibit the disciplines
necessary to "live integrity" then those who work
with them and do business with them will know that
their workplace will be healthy, supportive, constructive,
purposeful and productive. Integrity is possible
with personal commitment and the consistent repetition
of appropriate behaviors. Integrity matters are
best addressed by leadership examples.
Question: (E-083)
"An integrity measurement?"
Dear Jim:
After following your Integrity Matters column
for the past year or so, it would seem that there
should be a way to assess a company's integrity,
or at least how the people in the organization practice
it. It occurs to me that if a company were to score
higher than its competitors, it might be a great
advantage. Frankly, I am sick and tired of shrewd
operators taking advantage of the public with dishonest
practices.
Response:
Yes, because of concerned readers like you, we have
created an objective process that can evaluate the
integrity of an organization, utilizing a survey
that quantifies performance and incorporates stakeholder
input. In fact, the inspiration for this process
came from one of the readers of the Integrity Matters
column in January, 2003, and was addressed in the
February 5, 2003 column. However, before addressing
the process of measuring behaviors related to integrity,
it might be prudent to respond to your comment about
questionable practices of those who are taking advantage
of the public.
As you may be aware, the FBI recently raided the
offices of Financial Advisory Consultants, 22972
El Toro Road, El Toro, California, alleging that
more than 1,800 clients were victims of a long-running
confidence hustle, sometimes referred to as a "Ponzi
scheme" where early investors are paid with money
from later investors. According to the news story,
James Lewis, aged 57, has been investing millions
of dollars for clients and claiming extraordinary
financial returns for 20 years, without being licensed
or regulated, as required. At one point he told
an investor that this growth fund had $62 million
in assets. One of the clients who witnessed the
FBI raid fears that he will lose his total investment
of $350,000. Since July, 2003, Lewis has been delaying
withdrawal requests with the excuse that millions
of dollars in investments have been frozen by the
Department of Homeland Security - a freeze the Associated
Press reported does not exist.
Many of us know that "if it seems too good to be
true, then chances are that it is - too good to
be true." Get rich quick schemes are "schemes" and
are unlikely to attract the most honorable of individuals.
There is an expression that reminds us of the risks
of uncontrolled greed: "You can't cheat an honest
man or woman." The comment suggests that when two
parties are each using the other, one or both are
likely to get stung, taken to the cleaners, bilked,
conned. Usually the more street-wise of the two
will walk away with the money and/or the victory.
The 1,800 individuals who may have suffered in the
"Ponzi scheme" described above ought to have known
better. Even if they got out of the deal with some
profits, chances are that they led some of their
own friends into a bad situation. So, who is to
blame? If it seems too good to be true, then don't
risk your own money or your own reputation by inviting
your friends to risk their hard-earned dollars.
Regarding your comments about the need to assess
organizational integrity, yes, the confidence of
the American people in corporate leadership is low.
The stain of scandal has undermined consumer trust
and lowered stock prices. However, our own "Corporate
Confidence Survey" has been designed that can benchmark
an organization's behaviors. Objectively looking
at integrity performance sets a company apart from
its competition. Leveraging information from this
survey can strengthen stakeholder trust, increase
revenues profitably, and enhance stock value. Forthright
communication that can be quantified by our "Corporate
Confidence Survey," can rebuild trust with partners:
Wall Street, Main Street, Customers, Employees,
Suppliers and Communities.
As we know, Integrity is the keystone of leadership
and measuring an organization's level of integrity
is critical to effective leadership. Tracking and
sustaining continuous improvement enhances productivity
and increases profitability. Thoughtful, consumer-responsive
and culturally-sensitive leaders are aware that
they need know the effectiveness of their employees
operating styles and the level of their organization's
integrity, especially as it is perceived by each
of their stakeholders.
RESULTS leaders expect to be included are the survey's
ability to:
- Quantify the level of integrity-centered behavior
in an organization.
- Deliver a representative, predictable and statistically-reliable
sampling of stakeholder perception of how a client
organization compares with its key competitors
on our Eight Attributes of Integrity.
- Benchmarks organizational behavior in relation
to the Bracher Center's Eight Attributes of Integrity
- Provides boards of directors and senior leaders
with tools to document and monitor progress of
their respective organizations over time
- Enables leaders to:
- Assess and mitigate problems;
- Seize opportunities;
- Set a strategic course.
- Strengthens stakeholder trust with partners:
Wall Street, 'Main Street', customers, employees,
suppliers, and communities
- Increases revenues profitably
- Enhances stock value
What we know for sure is that "Integrity-centered
leadership is the only reliable foundation for long-term
success!" Integrity matters and it always will.
Question: (E-084)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on January
14, 2004
"Let both sides beware (Practice
your professionalism)"
If a small business owner comes to find out that
a (former, current, or potential) customer has a
history of taking advantage of several local small
business owners on a regular basis by dishonoring
work contracts and failing to pay for services rendered,
does that business owner have an ethical responsibility
to alert other merchants who may be vulnerable?
If so, how does the business owner do so in a professional,
dignified, and ethical way that doesn't reflect
poorly on him/her?
Response:
Here is the first question to ask: what is the right
thing to do for all parties involved? Toughen up
and accept that some customers and clients simply
cannot be satisfied. Their negative energy drags
down others, in all kinds of situations. Chances
are that slow payers and complainers will be buddies
with similarly-motivated gougers and cheats. Get
rid of them. Understand their operating habits and
avoid future associations with them. In contrast,
good clients often attract other high-quality clients.
These are the relationships to nurture and the customers
to cultivate.
Integrity, dignity and graciousness (and the law)
are sometimes able to discourage dishonest and hateful
behaviors. Dishonest actions – whether from
the customer or the supplier – create climates
of mistrust and can slide into animosity that can
be costly, in many ways. Hateful behaviors are corrosive
and can lead to the destruction of relationships
and sometimes even to litigation.
My immediate advice is to be prudent. In a phrase,
"Do not get into a spraying contest with a skunk."
There are unpleasant and unsavory characters who
operate just enough within the law that they can
inflict harm without risking any obvious damage
to themselves. When these people develop a pattern
of inappropriate behavior, thoughtful and responsible
citizens know them for what they are. The sooner
and the further you are able to distance yourself
from them, the better.
Should you determine that scurrilous and slanderous
language is being used by unhappy or dissatisfied
customers about you and your work, consider protecting
yourself with the advice and counsel of your attorney.
A long time ago our society accepted a principle
in commerce that the buyer alone is responsible
for assessing the quality of a purchase before buying.
The Latin phrase caveat emptor translates, "let
the buyer beware". Given the situation you are describing,
about a terrible customer, there may be a need for
another protection. Perhaps we need a new phrase
that suggests modern society ''let the seller beware".
However, until a new law is passed, make sure you
remain aware! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me
twice, shame on me.
In the meantime, practice your own profession with
dignity and let the chips fall where they may. Monitor
your own behavior. And when asked about you perceptions
of such cruel people, consider the advice my father
gave me a long time ago. "If you cannot say something
good about someone, then say nothing." In the case
of these naughty clients you describe, should anyone
ask you about them, practice my father's wisdom
with the introduction that you were once told that
you shouldn't say anything if you had nothing good
to say. Then tell the questioner that you have nothing
at all to offer with reference to the person named.
Thoughtful listeners will get the message. Further,
you will seldom need to apologize for what you did
not say.
Appropriate silence is golden as is your good reputation.
Acknowledge the rights of others to say what they
choose. Regulate your own behavior and enjoy the
moments when you are able to rise above the pettiness
and viciousness of those who attack you. In the
long run, integrity pays great dividends by providing
a foundation for strong relationships and creating
a track record of honesty and graciousness. Remember:
Integrity Matters.
Question: (E-085)
"It's the people first and
foremost "
Newspapers tell us the economy is growing again,
but with little in the way of job creation--a jobless
recovery, per the pundits--do you have any comments
as to how we should be dealing with this malaise?
Response:
Yes, I do. Before getting into the complete response
to your concern, it is well to remember that job
recovery almost always lags the actual beginning
of an economic recovery. Prudent bosses wait until
they are sure they need more help before they hire
additional talent, preferring to rely on overtime
and system improvements to carry the additional
work load.
Now, let's move on to your specific concerns. We
have been bombarded by bad news, concerns about
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, disturbed by threats
of terrorism and flight cancellations, confounded
by an economy that has lingered in this slowdown.
Many honest folks communicate disappointment and
even anger about some elected officials who have
postured and dwelled on personalities rather than
step up to the hard questions of job and productivity
transfers overseas, excessive deficits, ethical
misbehavior and the need for increased levels of
accountability. Our people are our nation's workforce
- whether unemployed, underemployed or struggling
with boardroom issues related to the implementation
of accountability standards reflected in the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act 0f 2002. And when our nation's employees are
upset, so is business. And, why not?
Part of the issue is the nature of what is reported
as news. The gradual unfolding of positive change
too often escapes attention because it is assumed
or unspectacular. Perhaps we Americans are too sensational,
believing that anything less than the extreme is
unworthy of media attention, the public's agenda,
or the government's concern. Unless the item is
the recent devastating earthquake in Iran, the most
serious snowstorm/avalanche of the century, the
death of a large group of soldiers in Baghdad, the
biggest financial disaster, the most massive suicide
bombing, or the longest-winning streak in sporting
history – our media tends to yawn and ignore
the item. If readers aren't interested, then the
news staff won't publish or broadcast it.
Listen daily to the "free-market heartbeat"
of some of America's most dynamic, growth-oriented
businesses. This is what is being communicated,
namely, that leaders need to focus on the integrity
of their behavior and grow the competence of their
people. This investment in people ensures a better,
more productive nation tomorrow: one that is more
trustworthy both at home and abroad. There is no
cure-all, but business leaders say that our eight
integrity-centered attributes for building productivity
are working: character, honesty, openness, authority,
partnership, performance, charity and graciousness.
If you are in a leadership position, clear the
decks for economic growth, now. The recovery is
breaking through, and new jobs will come, likely
requiring skill performance enhancements. Use this
time to stop and reflect on what was good and could
be good again. If your business remains slow, view
it as an opportunity to re-evaluate your operational
approaches with stakeholders--employees, customers
and suppliers. Are you organized in the best way
to serve them well? Conduct an audit of your culture
and survey the effectiveness of your leaders. Do
you and your leaders do what they say they are going
to do and tell the truth about what they have done?
The results will allow you and your organization,
large or small, when the economy rebounds, to increase
effectiveness by learning ways to accommodate and
complement diverse styles. Pay attention to opportunities
for self-regulation, both within your organization
and within your industry. Remember, unless free
markets regulate themselves, governments will!
Resolve to communicate better with your co-workers—and,
if in management, with your employees. Start holding
more regular meetings. Find out what is on your
stakeholders' minds. You can't reduce the uncertainty,
but you can reduce the tension. Place greater emphasis
on an optimistic future. Devise and implement new
people strategies that will improve understanding
and interaction among diverse team members. Employees
who have been laid off are already among the ranks
of the unemployed; the people you need to worry
about are the employees who remain but are growing
more anxious. Move now to reassure them and help
improve production. Is there anything wrong when
levels of anxiety plummet and productivity soars?
No.
Resolve to communicate better with your customers.
Reach out. Encourage your employees to reach out,
too. Take the time to renew common bonds with the
customers and clients who have made your business
an economic reality. Such opportunities take many
forms: professional organizations, service groups,
sporting events, a follow-up letter or simply a
telephone call. Make that extra effort to keep the
channels of communication open by returning all
phone calls sooner rather than later. Rely on personal
contact, instead of voicemail, faxes and email.
Talk with your customers directly, even if it is
only to commiserate with them: "I'm all right.
How are you doing in these challenging times?"
Acknowledge openly that now may not be the best
time to travel and that travel savings realized
because of today's difficulties could evolve into
permanent cost-saving measures. The threat of terrorism
can be as debilitating as terrorism's actual attacks.
For those in business who must fly, anxiety levels
can be high. Acknowledge those concerns. The internet
does have an added benefit: it enables us to communicate
more frequently, crisply and concisely.
Seek "balance." In general, everyone
is more productive and creative when caught doing
things right; while we all want and need to know
what is going wrong, we also benefit from reports
about what is going well. Rumors and bad news feed
on themselves, and darken the attitudes of your
employees and co-workers if allowed to go unchecked.
Do your part to offset the overload of the ever-present
bombardment of bad news.
Unemployment and underemployment breed frustration,
and frustration is an obstacle to progress. We can
teach a person a new way over the wall, new skills
or a way that may entail finding an "Invisible"
door rather than embarking on a conventional climb.
Smart leaders know the whereabouts of such doors,
and "people enhancement" is one of them.
If we respect individuals and help them grow with
openness, honesty and graciousness, and by embracing
the integrity-centered way, then we can revitalize
business and society. Integrity Matters!
Question: (E-086)
"Jeff Garcia and suspicion
of drunken driving"
Dear Jim:
Three-time Pro Bowl quarterback from the San Francisco
49ers, Jeff Garcia, was arrested in downtown San
Jose on January 22, 2004, while driving with nearly
three times over the legal alcohol limit. What is
a 33-year old superstar thinking? The reports state
that he spent the night in jail and was released
on $2500 bail. If convicted, Garcia could face anywhere
from 48 hours to six months in jail and fines up
to $1500.
Why are these young, wealthy superstars behaving
like this? Why don't they think about the responsibilities
to be role models for young and adoring fans? Don't
they owe mature behavior given their notoriety?
Response:
Yes, public figures (such as a talented and successful
athlete, Jeff Garcia) owe their fans a great deal.
It should be a part of an unwritten contract between
those who achieve positions of high visibility and
their fans that they will conduct themselves appropriately
so as to avoid bringing embarrassment and shame
on those who reward them with fame and financial
freedom. Specifically addressing this "celebrity"
integrity issue in our soon-to-be published book,
Integrity Matters, available in bookstores May 3,
2004, we offer the following: "Integrity-centered
leadership . . . to be exhibited by celebrities
and public figures...on behalf of their fans...requires
that they model admirable behaviors, including appreciation,
humility and self-discipline." (p. 2)
Jeff Garcia's decision to drink and drive was wrong.
It was immature. It was irresponsible. It was not
appropriate for him to appear "drunk" and risk lives
of those riding with him in his automobile. It was
thoughtless of him to place the lives of innocent
by-standers at risk of being injured or killed by
his impaired driving skills should his vehicle have
veered into out of control.
Jeff is 33. He is young. He made a poor decision.
However, he can learn from this experience. His
professional career indicates that he can learn
from his mistakes. He will likely behave differently
in the future. At least, those who appreciate his
skills and success would hope that would be the
case.
In describing Integrity-Centered Leadership, the
first of Bracher Center's eight attributes is Character:
consistency between word and deed. This attribute
asks two questions: Do the leaders of an organization
(including Jeff Garcia of the 49ers) exhibit congruence
between what they say and what they do, as well as
what they say about what they did? Do leaders (in
this case, Jeff Garcia) exhibit the right behavior?
Celebrity athlete, Jeff Garcia, has an opportunity,
even a responsibility, to live up to the high-integrity
image he has exhibited. There can be little doubt
that he is aware that his behavior was inappropriate.
When he acknowledges his mistaken actions, apologizes
to his fan base and the communities that admire him,
he will have answered the integrity questions, with
honesty and forthrightness. In Jeff Garcia's life,
this disappointing circumstance can become a watershed
event: as he learns for himself and communicates to
his fans – others will learn (we hope) how to
handle the responsibilities of being role models.
The proper integrity-centered response applies to:
- Parents and families for the next generation,
to provide unconditional love and acceptance,
while nurturing socially responsive values;
- Educators for students, to enable learning for
all who seek to grow their minds;
- Spiritual counselors for believers, to exhibit
and live their messages;
- Elected and appointed employees of the government
for their constituents, to transcend self-serving
goals and truly serve all of the people;
- Celebrities and public figures for their fans,
to model admirable behaviors, including appreciation,
humility and self-discipline
- Bosses for their teams, to build a healthy environment
for productivity. (from Integrity Matters, pp.
1-2)
To make a mistake is human. To forgive is divine.
Leaders who acknowledge obligations and seek the
compassion of their support base, even when they
have made errors, can become even more powerful
role models. Jeff Garcia's public error is a reminder
for us all. How he deals with it (how each of us
deals with our mistakes) is the true test of character.
Integrity Matters – for everyone.
Question: (E-087)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on January
28, 2004
"Integrity has been shown
by the police
Paying money back shows character
"
A big headline on the front page of Tuesday's The
Salinas Californian read "City Overpays Its Cops
by $327,000" with a subtitle mentioning that a payroll
error three year ago means officers will see checks
decrease. The police officers did not make the accounting
error that caused them to be paid slightly more
than was budgeted. A $25 overpayment could go unnoticed.
Someone in the payroll office made a mistake, a
1.5 percent addition to the Salinas Police Officers
Association's base salary scale, in January, 2001.
There is not even a hint of inappropriate intention
or behavior. Asking for those still on the force
to pay the dollars back could appear as a pay cut.
Since some officers have retired or left the department,
making overpayments collections from them difficult
or impossible. This seems unfair.
These officers risk their lives for us all the
time. With current concerns about violent crime
and safety in our neighborhoods, is there anything
that can be done to avoid placing an economic hardship
on our police force and not violate the integrity
of those in authority? What is the right thing to
do? We certainly cannot afford to demoralize our
police officers?
Response:
Integrity on this economic issue seems clear. The
officers and their association have agreed to repay
the money. They have demonstrated character showing
consistency between word and deed. They have gone
public with their willingness to correct a mistake.
According to the article about the overpayment,
the average amount was $2,400 over 36 months. Three
years, 36 months of four weeks each and five days
of work. The error is about $3 per day. Taken to
this simplified level of the costs and losses, we
are not talking about major economic sacrifices.
Yet, averages are not where people live.
Some officers may face painful cutbacks that affect
family. No one who appreciates the services of the
police force wants these officers and their loved
ones to suffer.
Salinas is facing an interesting dilemma.
The police officers association has offered to
pay. An error was made. Integrity has been shown.
As one looks at some alternatives that would demonstrate
integrity by those who made the error in calculation,
perhaps the old-fashioned word graciousness should
be applied.
Our research at the Bracher Center identifies eight
attributes that are manifest by integrity-centered
organizations. In addition to character, there are
honesty, openness, authority, partnership, performance,
charity and graciousness.
Graciousness means respect and discipline and
asks this question: Does your organization demonstrate
care and concern for all stakeholders? Might it
be appropriate for those who manage the budgets
to take a long and hard look at the probable and
positive impact on those who take an oath to protect
others, sometimes risking and losing their lives
to make our lives safer? Despite the harsh economic
times in which cities, like Salinas and others throughout
the United States, are living through – is
this a time to reach out and celebrate the heroes
among us and not ask them to pay for the error of
others?
Would there be a way for our generous community
to "give" again, as it has done in so many areas,
to address this shortfall? Would a community fund-raiser
for the police force be a stand- up way for Salinas's
leadership (government, business and community-at-large)
to be gracious and demonstrate integrity through
respect?
Contact us and offer your suggestions. We will
forward what you say to those in authority. Encouraging
our police force is an integrity matter.
Question: (E-088)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on February
4, 2004
"Officers
continue to show integrity
Police officers wish to restore the funds"
Dear Readers:
Last week, in this Integrity Matters column, we
asked you to offer suggestions on ways to approach
the $327,000 error in payment for the Salinas Police.
The clerical mistake of one and one-half percent
increase in police salaries had gone unnoticed from
January 1, 2001 until late last year. When the mistake
was addressed, the Salinas Police force demonstrated
integrity with their commitment to pay back what
was owed. My column last week asked if there were
gracious (and legal) alternatives for the community
to consider to ease any immediate financial sacrifices
that might have to be made by the affected officers.
Those who enforce the law (our police force) communicated
that they were and are completely committed to following
the law, and would be paying back the overpayments,
but did appreciate the outpouring of concern.
On behalf of the officers many of you have contacted,
"thank you" for your calls, emails and interest.
Two leaders from the Police Officers Association
have communicated to me about the positive impact
on morale generated by your personal contacts and
words of appreciation, often directly to members
of the police force. Community support has been
constructive and positive. Thank you for responding
and for caring. Encouraging those who provide security
to our community is wise.
Law enforcement is the bedrock upon which to build
and maintain a safe and healthy environment. The
more confident citizens are in the safety of their
community, the better will be the quality of life.
In addition, neighborhoods are secure, the more
likely it is that property values will rise along
the way. Also, when communities support their public
servants with fair salaries and actions that demonstrate
respect, turnover in the department is likely to
remain low. Everyone understands that turnover is
expensive. Replacing well-trained officers is costly
because it requires hiring, training and launching
a new person into the "business of law enforcement."
It simply makes sense, where possible, to retain
those who already know and understand the local
community and its citizens. It is important to keep
those officers who have been, and are, doing a good
job.
Yes, the feedback from last week’s Integrity
Matters column was encouraging. Individuals responded
positively, making suggestions regarding ways to
help the officers avoid the need to return the overpayment.
For a variety of reasons, creating a fund to direct
dollars directly to the officers was determined
not to be legal, and therefore it is not appropriate
to move along this pathway. Once this was explained
by those in authority, it seemed prudent to look
elsewhere for ways to be of support. The police
officers have already committed to the proper restoring
of funds and the Police Officers Association supports
the decision, as has been reported by this newspaper.
So, what else might be done to sustain and even
enhance the levels of effectiveness of the Salinas
Police?
- Thank members of the police force, in writing,
emails, face-to-face, for doing their jobs even
on those infrequent occasions when they might
need to "regulate your actions" ( when you might
have forgotten to stop at a sign or when you might
have been driving above posted speed limits).
- Offer assistance to those officers who donate
their own time, weekly, to work with youth in
sports and physical fitness programs – strengthening
the confidence of young people while attempting
to prevent negative stereotype images about law
enforcement from continuing with younger people
- Share positive stories about the "above and
beyond the call of duty" efforts of officers and
help blunt the cynicism of those who might have
had a negative experience
- Contact the Police Officers Association directly
through Officer Steve Long, President, 758-7131.
In addition to saying "thank you," consider offering
a tax-deductible contribution and ask if you might
earmark your dollars for one of the many special
needs that might assist those on the police force.
- Invite members of the police force, through
the Police Officers Association, to attend and
even speak at your community and service organization
meetings, providing them with opportunities to
identify concerns and issues that they see in
and around the community and offer a forum for
give and take that enables communication to strengthen
the overall quality for all stakeholders
Integrity throughout the community can be strengthened
with and through those who are stewards of safety,
security and peace; namely, our police force. When
a community combines Character
with Graciousness (two of the Eight
Attributes of an Integrity Centered Organization)
it is obvious that Integrity Matters - and perhaps
that is the way that Salinas remains on the pathway
as a City of Champions.
Question: (E-089)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on February
11, 2004
"Super show wasn't super"
I was more than just disappointed in the Super
Bowl half time show last weekend, I was repulsed.
More than just the Janet Jackson “accident”
but the entire show was a crude display of classless
and badly misdirected talent. Do you have any idea
why CBS would give such a display even a second
thought?
Response:
The half-time show during the recent football championship
game, played on Sunday, February 1, 2004, received
mixed reviews. Some folks like certain types of
talent and others do not. The Janet Jackson decision
to cross lines of propriety speaks volumes about
integrity, or the lack of it. Certainly, poor judgment
was evident, in lots of circles related to the airing
of an “event” that has been bankrolled
by advertising directed to the mass markets for
all age groups. According to several reports, CBS
denied that its executives in charge knew anything
about what was to happen during the “crude
display” that you referenced in your question.
However, according to the news reports, CBS will,
at the upcoming Grammy Awards show, broadcast the
event on a delay, in order to be in position to
monitor words and actions and censor what they determine
to be inappropriate. What makes this so interesting
is that we know that when institutions and individuals
do not regulate themselves, governments and other
agencies and powers can and will.
The lack of respect shown by Ms. Jackson along
with those who may have assisted her with this escapade
may create a “trust question” for those
impacted by what was broadcast around the world
and into people’s homes. Was this a one-time
event or does it signal an erosion of what is acceptable
in prime time? Did those in positions of standards
and control slip up or were they hood-winked? Did
Ms. Jackson make a mistake or was it a malicious
flaunting of freedom of expression, regardless of
who might be hurt or embarrassed? Or, was it simply
about the money that can be leveraged by those who
have mastered the use and abuse of the media?
Ms. Jackson has said, since the February 1, 2004,
half-time extravaganza, that these changes in her
act were her responsibility. She has stepped forward
to assume accountability. Was this changing of routines
after final rehearsal really about the potential
for increased dollars that might be made as a result
of this behavior? Was it pre-meditated? Is the entire
“hullabaloo” really related to the sensationalism
and the press coverage? Was this a vile attempt
by what some fans might describe as a certain falling
star and her attempt to hijack the world’s
largest “mass media moment” to gain
attention (positive or negative) that might spark
a comeback and attract larger and new audiences?
Was this a cruel “trick” played on those
in positions of power in the mainstream media as
well as upon innocent younger children?
If and when the dust settles around Ms. Jackson’s
behavior, one fact will become clear: irresponsible
actions by a small group, even an individual or
a small team, can make things tough on the overwhelming
majority of folks who say what they are going to
do and then go ahead and do what they promised.
Here is what can be said related to what was seen
on national and international television during
the half-time show that involved Ms. Jackson:
1. For her personal satisfaction and gratification,
at least so it appears, from her own words, she
violated her promises to behave and entertain a
world audience in a certain way;
2. She did not exhibit Integrity-Centered Behavior
with reference to her own Character, Honesty, Openness,
Partnership, Performance or Graciousness.
3. Her irresponsible actions will likely cause financial
pain for others (entertainers, agents, television
organizations, etc.) when they are required to construct
even more stringent contractual relationships with
one another, to prevent future “shocks and
embarrassments” for sponsors, venue owners,
program directors and collaborators
4. Her carelessness, as it creates more work for
attorneys and managers, and increases the costs
of doing business – will then be passed along
to the fans, to those who purchase the tickets and
pay for the advertising. Janet JACKSON, SURELY you
know better. Shame on you.
5. Breaking the rules and behaving irresponsibly
will encourage some powerful elements of society
to re-instate certain rigid constraints that may
inhibit legitimate creativity. Janet Jackson, you
have brought about embarrassment to your profession.
6. However, and this might be the silver lining
in this entertainment and media mess. Maybe your
inappropriate actions will cause many to think more
constructively about what is proper for public figures
and celebrities to conduct themselves.
Sadly, Janet Jackson and those like her who violate
socially-acceptable styles of behavior and flaunt
their freedom ARE allowed to tear at the “fabric”
that guarantees rights and privileges for everyone.
Her actions ignore the importance of mutual respect
which is a foundation principle of any healthy society.
Celebrities and public figures are supposed to model
admirable behaviors, including appreciation, humility
and self-discipline. When celebrities ignore their
moral contract with their fans, they have lost sight
of the real truth, namely, that Integrity Matters.
Question: (E-090)
"Superbowl Halftime Show Feedback
to Integrity Matters"
Last week’s column, regarding the Superbowl’s
“crass” half-time show generated energetic
responses, from across the country and around the
world. Some local residents contacted us to offer
praise and appreciation for the Integrity Matters
column addressing the half-time antics on CBS. Others
felt differently. Here is a sampling of a few dramatic
comments:
1. “Where do you get this drivel? Do you
make it up yourself or do you have a team of monkeys
chained to word processors to assist you?”
(My answer is that this really is what I think
and what I hope will become a standard for future
generations. Though we may disagree, isn’t
it great that we can converse openly and without
rancor?”)
2. “I think that in your zeal for a good
one-liner to promote your Integrity Matters column,
you waste a lot of ink going over this same moralistic
routine.” (My answer is that restraint
is important, and will remain a valuable message,
regardless of the protests.)
3. “Janet Jackson was not alone in her tasteless
stunt. Justin Timberlake deserved mention for his
new low as well.” (My response: true enough.
We do not know all of the names of those who were
and are responsible for the Superbowl half-time
carnival, but we do know who was willing to go along,
to get along and capitalize upon the marketing opportunity.)
4. “I appreciate your thoughtful comments
on this matter.” (Thank you.)
5. “Even the Grammy’s wasn’t
very good. Middle America must have thought it looked
like a freak show. CBS also chose to run what I
thought were inappropriate PG-13 commercials (about
R-rated movies) when they could have attempted to
make the show family friendly.“ (There
is an off-on button on televisions.)
6. Though I am not familiar with you, or your
world view I argue that the morals and ideals of
the American golden age are quite done with, and
not because of the media but rather because of the
throngs of willing and valueless fans ready to absorb
and embrace this revolution of the Shock era. Don't
blame Janet or CBS for this social shock incident
but rather look to the millions of screaming fans,
or to the sensationalist journalism that makes incidents
like this seem so important. (My response is
that we are not yet a fully evolved society and
we are going through some incredible social stresses
and we will be better because of them and why? Because
we know that integrity matters.)
Question: (E-091)
"CHARITY: generous community
stewardship -- ATTRIBUTE # 7"
You listed Charity as one of the Eight Attributes
to building an Integrity-Centered Company. Did you
mean as in to volunteer time and money to local
charities? If either of these is lacking, how do
you think it affects the company?
Response:
CHARITY means giving generously where and how one
is able. When organizations or individuals choose
to live and work, in a community, and where they
are able to prosper (by whatever measuring stick
they use) – then they have a moral responsibility
to give back. Some well-respected business leaders
believe that public corporations ought not to give
money away because the dollars donated rightfully
belong to the investors and should be “earmarked”
for charity only by the rightful owners of those
profits.
In contrast, there are other wise and successful
leaders who approach the situation with the opposite
perspective. They believe that we are all partners
in the communities in which we live and ought to
take ownership of problems and challenges facing
others less fortunate and contribute from pre-tax
dollars, just like any individual might.
Regardless of how you justify, explain and demonstrate
the importance of “generous community stewardship”
– be very wary of an organization or an individual
that ignores or abandons those less fortunate, either
organizationally or individually. Folks who lack
compassion and empathy will not be prone to listening.
Since listening is the key to success, this critical
flaw in behavior will likely lead to lower productivity
and reduced profits – and that does not sound
like a good place to invest hard work in hopes of
a secure, positive and purposeful future –
for you. So, in answer to your question, does such
short-sightedness affect a company or an organization:
YES!
CHARITY is not defined exclusively by donated dollars
to worthy causes, even though cash helps a great
deal. CHARITY also includes individual and organizational
efforts that involve investments of time, energy
and concern (including supportive listening and
simple prayer). When seeking to join a firm or an
individual (whether for a career or as a partner,
maybe even including marriage) consider these six
questions before making a final decision:
1. Is the mission of the enterprise worthy of my
time and energy?
2. Is the organization going someplace I want to
go?
3. Do those already involved in the enterprise seem
to be people I want to be around?
4. Do the leaders talk about and treat those less
fortunate in ways I would?
5. Does the leadership, by its own example, encourage
employee participation in community service?
6. Can I trust that this individual or organization
would reach out to me, should I ever have a need,
when the observable behavior says that this is not
the way people in need are currently treated?
If you have more than one NO answer to the six
questions above, then make every effort to look
elsewhere or be prepared to face some difficult
times, organizationally and personally. CHARITY
is essential for an integrity-centered relationship,
(business or personal), because INTEGRITY MATTERS.
Question: (E-092)
"Reputation and Relationship"
Why should we trust you (or any provider of services)
to do the things you claim you can do for our company?
How can we be sure of what we are getting?
Response:
Customers and clients make decisions to purchase
and hire, for many reasons. However, two reasons
are almost always present, and of that we can be
certain. Reputation and relationship are key factors
for significant decisions. Sometimes customers are
aware of these two powerful influences and at other
times decision-making may happen so spontaneously
that the process itself may seem to evaporate, seemingly
happening outside of any conscious effort on the
part of the decision maker. Before important purchases
are made, the buyer will often analyze both the
reputation and relationship that he or she has with
products or services. Consistency and predictability
represent a certain level of integrity.
A hamburger purchase, when an individual is hungry,
can be pretty important. So, the choice between
the 99-cent drive-through brand and the fancy $9.00
variety may still involve the same two questions:
what is the quality and consistency between what
I want and expect measured against my budget, time-allocation
and taste-buds needs, right now? Once the individual
is clear about answers to the above, the problem
for the provider is to live up to the expectations
of the customer/client. When the provider builds
a reputation, over time, of consistency and predictability
– then the customer/client has confidence
that he or she will receive that for which they
are paying. This is integrity.
Same story applies to teachers, consultants, airline
pilots, physicians and baby-sitters. Track record
and references – personal or third-party testimonials
– determine reputation. Consistency over time
is another form of integrity.
The second question may also be addressed at a
similar speed. Relationship is an emotional connection
that relies upon reputation, but is not dependent
upon it. For example: family ties and childhood
friendships can go a long way in cementing trust
and confidence. Many long-term friends choose to
do business one with the other. Do they know going
into the transaction that they might be giving up
something in order to sustain the relationship (like
price or quality or variety) – probably so,
however, the service and follow-up more than make
up for the shortfall on the front end. Even so,
many business deals can still “go south”
among the closest of relationships – family,
cultural, religious, ethnic, etc. – when the
quality, the quantify and follow-through do not
match the commitment that was “assumed”
from the depth of the connectedness of the parties
involved.
The old line that “You get what you pay for”
may not always be true, but when combined with reputation
and relationship – the odds go up in the buyer’s
favor. Combining these two elements increases the
likelihood that Integrity Matters to all parties
and thereby emphasizes that what you are sold is
what you will receive. Reputation and relationship,
combined, build upon quality and integrity.
Question: (E-093)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on February
18, 2004
"Mickey Mouse battles
Comcast - Could deal hurt the reputation
of Walt Disney?"
What happens to the integrity of the Mickey Mouse
brand if Disney Corporation sells to Comcast? I
have grown up believing in the quality and the integrity
of the Disney promise: child-friendly and family-centered
entertainment. What might be at risk to the Disney
image with Comcast’s likely unrelenting drive
for immediate profits if it succeeds in closing
the deal?
Response:
Regarding your questions – we cannot know
for certain what will happen to the integrity of
the Mickey Mouse brand – down the road –
no matter who owns it. As far as the Comcast’s
impact on the Disney image – that too will
depend upon the leadership of Comcast, the demands
of their investors and the buying habits of those
who choose Disney products and services.
However, Integrity appears to
be at the very heart of Comcast’s battle for
control of the Disney organization. An African proverb
states: “When elephants fight, it is the grass
that suffers.” In this instance, with Comcast
and Disney as the heavyweights doing battle, the
world of high finance, brinksmanship and sophisticated
bargaining may be more the issue than protecting
the innocence of Mickey Mouse and the long history
of making PG movies and instructive videos –
safe for viewing by any member of the family. This
battle may be more about shaping media influence
than caring for the needs of future generations
of young people who may have never fallen in love
with a Mouseketeer or sobbed when Old Yeller was
hurt.
Posturing by these power-brokers is certainly a
part of this “dance” that has captured
the attention of the viewing public. Depending upon
who “blinks” first, stock prices can
determine how a controlling bid can become a minority
position. Depending upon which stock given investors
own, they might more easily be influenced on which
side they back with reference to what is the right
thing to do regarding the Disney “deal.”
Comcast is bidding for one of the entertainment
industry’s top names, whose assets include
not only Mickey Mouse and Disneyland; but also the
ABC network, ESPN and classic films such as “The
Lion King” – and if Comcast is successful,
it will be able to leverage Disney’s wealth
of history, materials and intellectual property
to build digital entertainment and video-on-demand
systems.
For those who have visited Disneyland parks and
enjoyed the family-oriented nature of the brand,
it is not surprising, at least for those on the
outside, who do not assess the raw economics of
the situation, that Disney’s board of directors
“unanimously” rejected Comcast’s
$48 billion, all stock offer. Not surprising because
the brand of Disney seems warm and personal. Comcast’s
image, so far, appears built upon hardware, technology
and financial transactions.
Just as we can learn from the African proverb,
the destruction of the grass is certain when elephants
do battle, and the situation is similar to the suffering
of values that is likely for the next generation
when “corporate titans” decide to enter
into a zero-sum game of control, without having
provided the intellectual framework (including high-quality
materials) to sustain the reputation that was originated
by Walt Disney and those who were loyal to his priorities
and values. The issue on the table in this financial
transaction centers around Character
(consistency between word, deed and brand) and Honesty
(truthful communication between and among the stakeholders
who will be impacted by this change of ownership).
Integrity in this situation also involves Partnership
(the honoring of obligations, including the timely
fulfillment of all commitments, especially those
whose lives are being and will be shaped by the
content that the new institution will provide).
Even with any flaws in Disney’s leadership
(past and present), the question remains: is this
offer by Comcast about the dollars or about the
risk of violating the cultural integrity
of our society?
Question:
(E-094)
"Cultural Integrity"
When looking for a job with a company/firm, what
are key aspects one should look for to make sure
that they're going to be working for a company/firm
that contains cultural integrity and is an integrity-centered
company/firm?
Response:
In your question, you ask about the key aspects.
We describe certain behaviors that confirm the health
and strength of an organization. We refer to these
ways of behaving as Eight Attributes.
The single most important factor, in observing how
an organization operates, is congruence. It is seen
in the character of those who lead an organization
or institution and the match between word and deed
will tell you what you need to know.
INTEGRITY starts with senior leadership.
The boss sets the tone. If he or she exhibits the
agreed-upon cultural values of an organization,
then one can assume a greater likelihood that others
will model similar behaviors. When the boss exhibits
congruence between what is said and what is done,
as well as what is said about what was done, the
character exists.
Wise
leaders understand that every behavior admired and
tolerated, and demonstrated, by them is observed,
recorded, remembered and repeated – rightly
or wrongly. For example, when everyone is supposed
to park away from the entrance to the office building,
in order to provide convenient spaces for customers,
suppliers and visitors, and then the “big
shot” ignores the rule by settling into a
prime spot, close to the door, one is already aware
of the true values of the company’s leadership.
There are economic risks, often very counter-productive
financial consequences, for hypocrisy. After observing
the behavior of the boss, in ignoring the rules,
what would discourage employees in such an environment
from “bending a few rules of their own”
when the mood hits or the opportunity arises? Steal
a few pencils, take home some food, forget to reimburse
the company for gasoline, used for personal reasons
that had been purchased on the business credit card!
When the “corporate culture” demonstrates,
by examples that begin at the top, that the rules
apply to everyone but “me” as demonstrated
by the breaking of parking rules by the boss, then
there is no doubt that integrity
and accountability are at risk, as well as productivity,
mutual-respect and profitability.
Healthy and effective leaders set the boundaries
and live within them. Variations on this theme can
spell trouble and ought to be signals that the organization
will, sooner or later, hurt a lot of people. So,
when you see the inconsistencies, go the other direction
and work someplace else.
Question: (E-095)
"Asking Integrity-Centered
questions and answering truthfully"
What are some small, quick and effective team-building
exercises an organization can do to obtain these
8 components of an Integrity-Centered Company?
Many times before meetings people try to do exercises
to promote team collaboration and it doesn't really
work because they are quick but ineffective.
Response:
Building positive and productive habits is seldom
an accident. Top quality performance requires preparation,
practice, refinement and closely monitored implementation.
After all, isn’t this how infants and young
people learn language and behavior? Caring and nurturing
parents speak to their children and then observe
their efforts to emulate what is being modeled for
them. This feedback process continues – in
areas that extend far beyond pronunciation and expression
--to social behavior, and this refining effort often
extends for many years. Some younger people might
suggest that this “feedback” lasts way
too long. Certain parents wish their influence should
have been even stronger.
Parallels in business ought to be obvious. Yet,
many leaders wish for the transfer to values and
culture to be instantaneous and painless, requiring
little effort and almost no obligation to lead by
example. The question asks if there are quick (presumably
effective) ways to pass along constructive organizational
values, which we suggest emerge from the employment
of the Bracher Center’s Eight Attributes
for an Integrity-Centered Company. These
Eight Attributes offer guidelines for behaviors
that strengthen levels of trust and enhance interpersonal
and organizational effectiveness. When colleagues,
bosses and associates, exhibit consistency, openness,
respect and accountability – then their likelihood
for success is improved. So, with this set of ground-rules,
the answer is yes, with limitations.
One round of feedback and critique for a child
learning a new language is seldom adequate. Similarly,
infrequent and often superficial attempts to build
trust harmony and accountability – in the
form of a “quick, down and dirty motivational
team session” seldom have lasting positive
effects. The greater likelihood for longer-term
success emerges when all of the stakeholders are
given permission and encouragement to remind one
another when organizational values are either honored
or violated. Straightforward, not confrontational,
communication is possible when it has no limits
regarding who can provide the input. Bosses listen
and so do peers – to reminders of what “fits”
within the acceptable rules and what does not.
When this tone is set and is implemented, then
short sessions, built upon clearly stated expectations,
work and work well. The expression: walk the talk
and talk the walk is shorthand for saying: Integrity
Matters. Listen and learn from all colleagues and
hold yourself accountable to the values espoused
for the organization - beginning at the top.
Question: (E-096)
"Navigating Integrity Compromises"
Have you ever been in a situation in which your
integrity was compromised? If so, how did you handle
it?
Response:
The answer to your first question: yes, more times
than are pleasant to remember. My earliest memory
of not living up to my highest standards occurred
when attending a birthday party at age 5. The game
was drop the cloths pin into the milk bottle while
keeping one’s eyes tightly shut, with the
winner determined by the total number pins inside
the bottle in less than one minute. Because I had
played the game before, and was a full year older
than the other participants, my moment had come,
being the final player. Facing the bottle, while
standing next to the wall, I carefully closed my
right eye and kept the left open so that I could
more accurately aim at the top of the milk bottle,
unnoticed by other players, including my young friend’s
mother, whom we all called Mrs. Margie. I won, by
four pins over the nearest challenger. The four-year
olds were in awe of my skills. Actually, my cheating
had guaranteed my victory.
Using my advantage, more pins zipped into the bottle
and I received the prize and the cheers. For 53
years, the memory has remained. When I came home
that fateful Saturday afternoon in 1950, and my
parents learned of my victory, I was told that my
behavior (having earlier confessed my larceny to
my sister and she made sure those in higher authority
knew of my lapse in judgment) was not appropriate
and that the prize had to be returned. Since this
happened a long time ago, some of you will understand
that the award was a double-size of chocolate cake
and two-scoops of vanilla ice-cream. Explaining
that one has eaten the prize, at least in our family,
was not the end of the story. I was escorted to
the party-giving home and was told to apologize.
My tears were a by-product. Did I learn about character
and honesty that day? Yes. And, the memory of the
chocolate cake and ice-cream, extra delicious in
large portions, still lingers. To this day, cheaters,
at any game, really irritate me. So I learned.
Since 1950, there have been academic examinations,
driving tests, speed limits, alcohol consumption
before and after the legal age, stop signs, performance
schedules and timetables, promises to friends and
even loans from financial institutions – on
multiple occasions there were and are opportunities
to fulfill commitments or shirk responsibilities.
There have been business relationships that were
pleasant and some not quite so enjoyable. Yet, in
every instance that I can recall, when I fell short
of my moral obligations to be the best that I could
be, it never occurred to me not to employ the advice
of the famous Captain Kangaroo. This television
institution, Dr. Bob Keeshan, taught young people
(and those adults wise enough to watch his show
with their children) how to behave constructively.
The “Captain” offered three important
phrases that were supposed to get one through most
tight spots, perhaps even some compromising situations.
Don’t forget to say: “Please”---“Thank
You”--- and “I am sorry, I made a mistake”
– “these are powerful messages and they
will help you.”
Guess what? He was right. I have done things right
and I have done them wrong. At no time have reasonable
people been unwilling to accept my apology.
Perfection is not what being human is about. Addressing
our shortcomings and rebuilding relationships –
such are the challenges that confirm that Integrity
Matters.
Question: (E-097)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on February
25, 2004
"Ethnic humor not funny"
I've received many emails from people containing
ethnic humor. Polish jokes (my wife’s family
came to America from Poland), Black and African
American jokes, moron jokes, dumb blonde jokes (my
wife is also a blonde), Irish jokes (and my own
family comes from Ireland) --you name it! No ethnic
block is spared, but these are all likely to offend
someone. I am offended. I don't want to hurt the
feelings of friends and relatives who send me this
garbage and demand that they stop. However, even
though I immediately delete them all upon receipt,
still it keeps coming. What is wrong with our society
that people feel free to send this garbage around?
Response:
The answer to what is wrong with our society regarding
cruel humor may come as a surprise. The answer is
you, along with a large segment of our society.
Good people just like you, who are not quite sure
how much risk to take to stand up for what is important
to them, are responsible for why this cruel and
sarcastic material continues to be shipped around.
When caring and thoughtful people confront these
insensitivities and say they are not going to put
up with it anymore, then, quite a bit of it will
stop. Being gracious, an essential attribute of
integrity-centered behavior, involves respect and
discipline and the demonstration of care and concern
for all stakeholders, all who are a part of the
community we call humanity.
World-famous singing group, Peter, Paul and Mary
present a wonderfully thoughtful song entitled:
“Don’t Laugh At Me.” Their words
address this issue of cruelty and insensitivity,
both maturely and compassionately:
DON'T LAUGH AT ME
Steve Seskin/Allen Shamblin-
Sony/ATV Tunes LLC dba Cross keysPublishing Co,/David
Aaron Music/Built On Rock Music- ASCAP
I'm a little boy with glasses
The one they call a geek
A little girl who never smiles
'Cause I have braces on my teeth
And I know how it feels to cry myself to sleep
I'm that kid on every playground
Who's always chosen last
A single teenage mother
Tryin' to overcome my past
You don't have to be my friend
But is it too much to ask
Don't laugh at me
Don't call me names
Don't get your pleasure from my pain
In God's eyes we're all the same
Someday we'll all have perfect wings
Don't laugh at me
I'm the beggar on the corner
You've passed me on the street
And I wouldn't be out here beggin'
If I had enough to eat
And don't think I don't notice
That our eyes never meet
Don't laugh at me
Don't call me names
Don't get your pleasure from my pain
In God's eyes we're all the same
Someday we'll all have perfect wings
Don't laugh at me
I'm fat, I'm thin, I'm short, I'm tall
I'm deaf, I'm blind, hey, aren't we all
Don't laugh at me
Don't call me names
Don't get your pleasure from my pain
In God's eyes we're all the same
Someday we'll all have perfect wings
Don't laugh at me
As these singers, troubadours and
teachers remind us, the answer is truly “blowin’
in the wind.” Obviously, there is risk in
confronting one’s friends and colleagues.
Even though they understand that they are cared
about, there is a certain discomfort, even anxiety,
in announcing personal standards and requesting
that those values be respected. There is a potential
high price for maintaining principles. With true
friends, the risk is small. With others, the rejections
can make a significant part of life, very lonely.
Remember, often the best humor is
self-directed. Laughing at one’s self can
be engaging and sometimes even charming, and poses
few pitfalls to relationships. Practically any other
kind of perceived, intended or otherwise, “personal-attack
joking” carries risks of hurt and suffering.
So, if you are hurt by cruel and insensitive “humor”
then evaluate the consequences of being direct with
colleagues and communicate how important your own
integrity is and why integrity matters to you. Ask
others to lay off the sarcasm and the zingers and
see what wonderful things might happen. Interpersonal
integrity matters, all the time.
Question: (E-098)
published in Jim Bracher's
Integrity Matters newspaper column on March
10, 2004
"Include charity, graciousness
with integrity"
Of your Eight Attributes, which
do most companies or organizations lack the most
when you and your consulting company provide initial
evaluations? Which attribute can a Company not function
without?
Response:
Very much like individuals, a significant number
of companies appear to possess constructive and
productive values and priorities. In all likelihood,
they operate with integrity. If they did not, most
would not survive, let alone prosper. During our
25-years consulting, we have not focused exclusively
on systematically searching for ways that the Eight
Attributes are exhibited, either by individuals
or by organizations. Rather, on our way to building
leadership effectiveness, our process found us listening
to the words and observing the behaviors of successful
managers.
Certain
ways of operating (with integrity) simply stood
out. We have been privilege to work with many who
have built lasting organizations, not only by sustaining
high quality reputations in meeting shareholder
expectations and employee objectives, but also as
admired corporate citizens in their respective communities,
giving back in multiple ways.
More specific to your inquiry about which of the
Eight Attributes might be missing, especially in
younger companies, let me reflect on two. Number
one is Charity. Number two is Graciousness.
Emerging companies, with frequently cash-strapped
owners are hard pressed to take their eyes off the
target: staying in business and not running out
of cash. One bright business executive offered two
pieces of wisdom: “99% of the time surprises
are not good news.” and then he offered this:
“If you run out of cash, they will throw you
out of the game.” The early stage leader,
who intends to be successful, is keenly aware of
these truths. As a consequence, entrepreneurs can
be so self-absorbed, legitimately, that they forget
to be grateful or gracious about community-stewardship.
Even though they know what to do, time and circumstance
can get in the way of their “giving back”
whether in terms of time or dollars.
Graciousness also suffers in many
early-stage enterprises. And, some companies, even
when they reach billions in annual revenues, never
adopt a pattern that demonstrates care and concern
for all stakeholders. These companies move from
abrasive upstarts to haughty upstarts and then finally
to ruthless enterprises. Customers who need their
business may tolerate the abuses, quietly seething
and despising the fact that they must deal with
the insensitivities. One story stands out, because
it portrays an individual who had every reason to
be kind and thoughtful. He had come to the United
States, shining shoes, and worked his way through
college, earning a PhD and have acquired in excess
of a billion dollars. He was so cruel to his computer
engineers that when one of them brought his product
to the office of the founder for review, the product,
with a small error, was thrown to floor exploding
into thousands of pieces.
A few years later, when the man was unable to hire
a person to take the top position in his company,
he asked what was wrong. The candidate, who had
worked with our company for several years, suggested
that the “abrasive boss” call me for
some assistance. When the man did call, dutifully,
he made the following remarks: “Mr. So and
So suggest I phone you to talk about addressing
problems with people management. When I have such
a need, I will call you. Good bye.” That was
the end of the conversation.
Three
years later, the individual was almost bankrupt,
divorced and still convinced he was right.
In his case, he did not listen, was not gracious
and seemed not to care. There are other ways to
operate, and most of them underscore that Integrity
Matters.
Question: (E-099)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on July 14, 2004
"Openness helps keep business
on the move"
Why do you feel that openness is so important
in an integrity-centered company?
Response:
Openness in organizations encourages two-way communication.
Leaders listen as well as talk. Sales professionals,
managers, front-line employees and customers all
know that the way relationships are built in a “give-and-take”
culture builds trust. As a consequence, the politics
of “manipulation” is replaced with a
process of direct and immediate feedback –
confirming the importance of helping one another,
making a legitimate profit and sharing credit for
success while energetically owning mistakes. Integrity-centered
organizations – whether creating cash for
profits or simply enhancing the impact of a not-for-profit
endeavor – accept the importance of providing
stakeholders with necessary and appropriate information.
Privately-held institutions, those not having outside
investors, may manage their finances and their operations
more discretely; however, their values and culture
will always be visible. And, if they have been in
business for a generation or more, their reputation
will speak volumes about who they are and how they
operate.
Many years ago, while consulting with a well-known
entrepreneur, he offered the following advice regarding
how to lead and manage. His words were: “Never
do or say anything that you would not want your
parents to know about.” This may not be profound,
but it could have modified the behaviors of many
who find themselves and their companies on trial
for illegal and inappropriate actions.
Openness does not mean foolish and irresponsible
“giving away” of trade secrets or profitable
business relationships. Nor does openness suggest
that “skilled executives” are masters
of secretive manipulations, always playing their
hands “close to their vests.” Integrity-centered
organizations know that talented individuals require
trust and deserve to understand the larger picture
in order to leverage their talents in the best ways
possible. Such forthrightness and transparency are
risky, but are not nearly as costly as not enabling
those who are central to the enterprise to bring
the best of their skills and abilities to bear on
the projects that lie in front of them. Since human
beings are not mushrooms, very few would seem to
enjoy being left in the dark and simply having manure
tossed on them until they could be harvested and
consumed. Openness allows the sunlight to shine
and bring life to the enterprise. Yes, openness
is important.
Question: (E-100)
"24-7 is the only time that
Integrity Matters"
Does integrity matter most in a larger corporation
setting or primarily in a small business firm?
Response:
The larger the organization means that more individuals
will likely be impacted by decisions and behaviors,
for better or worse. However, there are no occasions
or circumstances that come to mind in which the
application of the Eight Attributes would not be
appropriate, for the individual entrepreneur, small
business leader or corporate officer. Integrity
can be and should be a part of all transactions
and relationships beginning with friendships, marriages,
family units, community activities, political obligations
and economic projects. To make the point more dramatically,
please think of these Attributes and let me know
of a situation where they might not be applicable:
Eight Attributes of an Integrity-Centered
Company or Organization
1. CHARACTER: consistency between
word and deed.
Do the leaders of your organization exhibit congruence
between what they say and what they do, as well
as what they say about what they did? Do leaders
exhibit the right behavior?
2. HONESTY: truthful communication.
Do you have confidence that your leaders would never
engage in or sanction misrepresentation?
3. OPENNESS: operational transparency.
Is appropriate information about your organization
readily available?
4. AUTHORITY: employee encouragement.
Are you able to correct a customer problem? Do you
have confidence that your actions will be supported?
5.
PARTNERSHIP: honor obligations.
Does your organization pride itself on timely fulfillment
of all commitments?
6. PERFORMANCE: accountability
throughout the organization.
When individuals, including senior executives, under-perform
repeatedly, are they given due process and then,
if necessary, replaced?
7.
CHARITY: generous community stewardship.
Does your organization reach out to those in need?
8. GRACIOUSNESS: respect and discipline.
Does your organization demonstrate care and concern
for all stakeholders?
Because trust is an essential element for success
at most if not all activities, one must assume that
integrity is at the heart of the matter. Productivity
depends upon trust and confidence in the words and
actions of those with whom we relate. What stands
as the very focal point of these various transactions
is integrity, whether interpersonally or internationally.
Integrity is the keystone of leadership. It is reflected
in discussions, decisions, directives and diagnostics.
Leadership emerges from listening, demonstrates
character in behavior, and leverages energy with
integrity. Integrity is the stabilizing factor that
sustains effort and causes energy to create the
canopy for accomplishment. Integrity enables the
achievement of Vision; whether in one-on-one promises
between best friends and marriage partners, students
and teachers or high-powered executives managing
nations or multi-national organizations.
<<
Back
