Values, or there and back again…

For many of us, this is the most difficult piece of the Body/Mind/Spirit puzzle. In the case of the first two, we have managed to efficiently and quite quickly reduce the body and mind to simpler, tangible questions, and as a result to specific and easily verifiable daily behaviours. I work out or I don’t, and why. I get enough sleep or I don’t, how and why. I have an intellectual passion to take me away from the routine or I don’t. We have also managed to name and quickly and intuitively understand the effects of individual behaviours. The more so, as depending on your choices you get a reward or a punishment relatively quickly and they are also very much tangible. By "we have managed" I mean the two previous articles (links):

Self-reflection, question no 3 - Body, Mind, Spirit or why won't we go faster and further?

Self-reflection, question no 4 - is our brain like an ancient sword?

The job is more difficult with the issues of Spirit. In this case, the sphere of words is much more significant. At least that’s what we often think. Are these concerns valid? Not necessarily. To start with, here we must call for the commonly used word, although the universality of its use does not come from its frequency. The word is values. So far I haven’t met anyone who would claim not to have any values and that they do not matter to them at all. One might even say that every one of us has some values, although they are different. Everyone defines them a little differently, even if they are seemingly the same. The difference comes from defining their boundaries, i.e. areas of permitted and forbidden behaviour. When we deliberately take somebody else’s wallet, we call it stealing. When the same wallet is found on the street, then not everyone will immediately make an effort to find the owner, although probably still the majority would. What if the store makes a mistake in our favour? Does everyone always and immediately run to return it? It probably depends on how much money the mistake was and how far this store is. What about using music, movies or books in PDF format, which the Internet is full of, and which can be downloaded without paying a penny to the author or the publisher? Is it still stealing or is it already acceptable? And so on and so forth. This is what I meant by a thin and very subjective boundary that each of us sets for ourselves. Often, we do not realize it. It's quite easy to talk and declare your values based on extreme situations (a murder, an assault, a wallet theft). It gets harder when you have to relate them to the mass of small everyday events when each of them is a decision with a shade of ethics and proclaimed values.

Values have also made a career in business. Most companies have made the first step, i.e. they have identified their most important ones. By "companies" I mean the owners and the management boards, less often the employees themselves (although it happens that they are asked for their opinions). The values are communicated on websites, printed in annual reports and advertising materials, and hung on walls in hundreds of thousands of offices.

Much fewer companies have taken the second step, i.e. they defined specific daily behaviours that result from these values, or even described specific daily behaviours that are characteristic of this company (and not the vague like "we treat people with respect"; of course, it is important, but still everyone can interpret it differently). Behaviours that actually happen in this environment on a daily basis and require constant choices. Then the combination of value/behaviour becomes a point of reference in moments of a doubt what to do in a given situation. Because every now and again life makes us face issues in various shades of grey, and not just simple black and white (to steal a wallet or not).

Unfortunately, even fewer companies and environments decide to take the third step. This step is nothing less than... consistent compliance with your own values and defined behaviours. What does it mean? Formally, this is something very simple - promoting compliance with them and explicitly condemning their violations, regardless of the person's position and professional results. This last remark is crucial. If not everyone, then most of us have for sure seen situations in which we turned a blind eye to someone's inappropriate behaviour, because of “special circumstances". There can be many such justifications. Well, maybe this salesman is generating conflicts and is arrogant towards colleagues, but he has great sales results. Well, you must understand... How can you punish or even sack such a man? He would go to the competition and he will have great results there. You must understand... Or how do we deal with the president now, at the turning point of the company on the local market? After all, we have appointed this president ourselves. Well, he is rude, offends people, his ego is like Kilimanjaro, in the past few years he fired four commercial directors, because there is never anyone as great as himself; sexist "jokes" are a standard for him and he does have an affair inside the company, but... you must understand... You have to turn a blind eye because higher matters require it. Isn't it right? If in these types of quite common situations we do turn a blind eye, then we are back to step one. This means that we define values, hang them on the walls, put them on the website and immediately forget about it. We do it because it is necessary, because others do it, but we do not believe it ourselves. This makes no sense. We also destroy the employees' motivation and faith in any communication because if you fail in such a flagship case, you can't expect trust and commitment in any other one.

Why have I written about companies and the three steps at such great lengths? The same rules and the same three steps also apply to each of us.

Step one - define and write down your key values. Preferably up to five, because the more you have, the more they will be blurred. Five most important ones. Try to go beyond the most obvious oneslike "do not kill, do not steal". If you neither kill nor steal, that's great. But a bit too little to announce the final success in the "Spirit" area. The fact that you don’t do something is one thing, but what you do and how you do it is also important. Formulate the postulates pertaining to action, and not just giving up something reprehensible. At this stage, the aforementioned value like "respect for people and nature" is just that. Here is its place. There is also a very high probability that in one way or another you will include your family and its primary role in this list. Do not define values that sound good to your environment, because "it should be like that". Don't fool yourself. Define the ones you believe in. It's your truth, not a beauty contest. Of course, nothing prevents you from confronting the results of your personal thoughts with values considered universal and socially or religiously prompted if you are religious. I’m not assuming any conflict of values. Rather, it's about recognizing your centre of gravity and the distribution of accents.

You will probably find making the first step relatively easy.

Step two - now translate your written (this is important!) values into specific behaviours that result from them. Let me emphasize it, the more specific, the more ordinary and common, the better: at home, at work, in the street, behind the wheel, during discussions (including online forums), shopping and so on. In relation to your spouse, children, parents, friends, colleagues, bosses, subordinates, salesmen, waiters, strangers in the street, etc. Recall more and more new situations that happen to you every day and draw conclusions about what behaviours in these situations result directly of the values you considered as key. It can get harder here, right? You descend from Olympus of generalized postulates to earth and you begin to see their direct connection with your everyday life. You probably also begin to more or less clearly sense what might happen in step three.

Step three - analyse your current behaviour (preferably from yesterday and today!) for compliance with what you described in the previous two steps. Simply put, whether and how consistently you behave as it should result from the values set out at the beginning. Also, use this method to analyse your further behaviours. This is an important and specific element of everyday self-reflection.

This is the way, also in the sphere of "Spirit", to translate big questions such as "how to live" into small and tangible elements of every day. Can this be done? Yes, it can. We won't do it in one afternoon. However, since the thing is about our entire past and future life, it is worth devoting a little more time to. Once it’s done thoroughly, it requires only minor maintenance and corrections later.

With the above three steps outlined, you can ask yourself a few further key questions. For example, does the environment in which I live/work have the same values as I do and gives evidence of it. If not, then what am I doing in this environment? I am turning a blind eye. So, in effect, I accept actions against my values. That is, I question these values myself.

Another question - when I observe actions against my values, can I protest? Even risking if the person who breaks the rules is the boss? Am I able to give up my environment or work for these reasons? Or do I rationalize to myself that it's not me, that it's not in my part of the office, that I still have a mortgage to pay off, and this colleague was practically asking the boss to subject him to mobbing, and generally he “only” humiliates but doesn’t hit, etc.?

Another one: am I consistent and treat everyone equally in terms of the written down values and behaviours? If, when and for whom do I have a “reduced fare” and... I turn a blind eye, although when others do it, I am outraged. I will give an example. A friend once mentioned that at home he smokes cigarettes only on the balcony. When asked why he replied that it was out of concern for his daughter's health. He was surprised and offended when we pointed out that he chain-smokes when we’re around and poisons us mercilessly... A classic example of this are also behaviours that outrage and make us laugh at politicians. It is common for them to excuse their party members from acts for which they demand the resignation of members of opposing groups. You can (and should) ask more such questions on a regular basis. However, the necessary condition is to go through the three steps described above.