Career Responsibility (Blog)

[Steve Pavlina]

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Career Responsibility

[cdn2wheeler]

This is SO true it's scary:

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

A common pattern I see is that companies with questionable values that make their employees uncomfortable usually prioritize physical world values over nonphysical values. For example, they may value profit (a physical world construct) over fairness (a nonphysical ideal). Companies with strong employee loyalty typically place a higher priority on nonphysical ideals, such as creativity, leadership, and service.

It's worth bearing in mind that in large organizations, it's often those that sit around the boardroom table are those devoted to ideals like service, creativity and leadership. I know, I've sat there.

But those "in the trenches" are often pressured by their managers to delivery a 15% return every quarter, without exception. That's because career advancement of those managers is so often tied to tangible results, rather than intangibles.

As well, there's often a dichotomy that emerges from mission statements. There are LOTS of organizations that include considerations such as leadership, responsibility and whatnot as their over-riding goals and objectives, but if there's ever a conflict between living those goals and attaining an extra 1% profit or increased "shareholder value", it seems that money wins out every time.

[KeithHandy]

I wonder how many readers here have seen this movie:

The Corporation Film: Welcome

P.S. -- all I pasted in here was the unformatted URL (copied from the top of the browser, not from a link); I expected that it might turn into a link, but I'm impressed that it actually grabs the title from the website!

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

If you assist your company in achieving its objectives, you’re contributing to its results. So naturally you’ll share responsibility for the consequences of those results.

How about responsibility for tax dollars used to build weapons / fund violence?

[Steve Pavlina]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

How about responsibility for tax dollars used to build weapons / fund violence?

Same rules apply.

This concept comes up a lot in the vegan community too, such as when vegan product companies are bought by larger entities with very non-vegan values.

[Kaja]

I think the people who are in the position to spend tax money for weapons feel as well that they are providing a service. They probably think they are helping by protecting citizens. From how they see the world they do us a good thing. I am pretty sure that your president (he is not mine as i live in nz) feels he is doing what is best for all americans.
I think the clue how things then take such an ugly shape is what was mentioned earlier, the discrepancy between what is said in a board room meeting and what then is actually put into action through a chain of acting persons.

In that movie that was mentioned, "the corporation", the CEO of some oil company meets up with people who are demonstrating against his company. And they find that their values are actually quite similar. But even the CEO doesnt feel not powerful enough to change the direction the corporation takes. And if not him, who can? Maybe it is us, by not working for them as Steve suggests? What to do?

[Baltar]

This is a good point, Steve. It also boggles the mind that so many people work for companies like Phillip Morris (almost 200,000 employees according to Wikipedia). How could anyone in good conscience work for a company that makes cigarettes?

[Jaben]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

How about responsibility for tax dollars used to build weapons / fund violence?

If this is a concern we can minimize tax payments by investing in the exchange of value while minimizing cashflow.

I guess if cashflow really equated to value flow than I'd agree with Steve's preference for

a strong connection between my value delivery and cashflow.

But you can only control your own flow. Any cash flow is likely to have tax residual effect if only indirectly.

Wouldn't building a stronger connection between value delivery and value flow while minimizing cashflow be more 'responsible'?

If you resonate with fear you might be worried as to how the reciprocity would be regulated, but with an abundance paradigm an unregulated exchange should be considered possible and beneficial.

[garym]

This is an incredibly timely article for myself. And Steve, this series of articles has been a major catalyst in my decision to hand in my resignation this week. I work for an managed services company in Australia, and directly support the operation of a major alcoholic beverages company. When I considered the implications of supporting the operations of a company that contributes to great harm in society, I could not in good conscience continue.

The challenge now is working out where to move on to. I have always put the emphasis on physical values, but with the challenge of living consciously I can no longer do so. It is so true what Steve wrote: "Staying in this situation can be morally and emotionally draining." I have been feeling this way for far too long.

[KeithHandy]

Originally Posted by Kaja

In that movie that was mentioned, "the corporation",

Okay, that's one person so far. Anyone else?

I think it's an incredibly thought-provoking movie. Pretty long, but there's lots to cover.

[cdn2wheeler]

Originally Posted by KeithHandy

Okay, that's one person so far. Anyone else?

I think it's an incredibly thought-provoking movie. Pretty long, but there's lots to cover.

For those who haven't seen it, the basic premise is this: A corporation is, in legal terms, a "person." So what type of person is a corporation?

The thesis is that if the corporation were actually a human being, that human being would be... wait for it... a psychopath. Completely without conscience, focused on one thing and one thing only - the pursuit of profit to the exclusion of everything else.

It won't appeal to the Republicans in the crowd, and even the centrists (like me) and lefties have argument with some of it. All that said, it's worth seeing. KeithHandy is right, though, it's pretty long. When I saw it on TVOntario it was broken up over 4 evenings, I think.