People are more likely to stay at their job when their values and the organization’s mission are clearly aligned. But not every task you are asked to do may fit with your personal system of values. What should you do when asked to do something that causes you discomfort, because it compromises something you hold dear?
Up front, it is important to acknowledge that values conflicts are common. Almost any situation in life involves conflicts between values, but we have developed strategies for dealing with them.
Sometimes people ignore the conflict altogether. When you buy an inexpensive T-shirt at a big-box retailer, you may opt not to think about people who were likely paid a low wage to produce that article of clothing.
At other times, there is a pragmatic justification for compromise. People drive cars, even when they are concerned about climate change, because it is just impossible to live in most areas of the world without motorized transportation. At still other times, people appeal to a broader value to justify a trade-off. Someone may support a war, despite a desire to minimize violence and death, because of a belief that the war may ultimately make the world safer.
That said, almost everyone has at least one protected value. A protected value is one that you feel so strongly about that you are unwilling to accept a direct trade-off between that value and any other. A staunch opponent of abortion may not support any uses of the procedure—even when the mother’s life is in danger. A staunch animal rights activist may not condone any harm or killing of any animals for any purpose. When someone is asked to transgress one of their protected values, they react with moral outrage.
If your job requires you to do something that brings up a values conflict for you, dealing with it depends a lot on the kind of conflict you’re experiencing.
A value where you’re willing to compromise
You might be asked to do something that brings you up short, because you recognize that the action goes against a value you might be willing to compromise but aren’t sure you should in this case. Perhaps you get asked to put in an order for a lot of disposable tableware for an event. You know that it will all be thrown out afterward, and are uncomfortable with the amount of waste this will create.
Organizations should be open to discussions about alternative ways to handle long-standing tasks. Often, workplace routines get established and people do not question why they are done in that way. If you experience a values conflict, that creates an opportunity to talk with your supervisor about whether they would be open to an alternative approach. In the example I just described, you might suggest ordering reusable tableware. Even if nobody wants to wash, store, and reuse that tableware, the company might choose to donate the supplies to a local food bank afterward.
You shouldn’t expect that every conversation of this type will lead to an immediate change in process. But raising the issue creates an opportunity to rethink the way work is done that could lead to a change that is a better fit to your values. And even if no change is made immediately, the idea may stick in the minds of decision-makers, which could lead to a change in the future.
A personal protected value
Sometimes, you’re asked to do something that you personally find offensive. You recognize that this is not something that is common to all members of your organization. At that point, you have a decision tree to go through.
The first question to ask is whether your personal protected value is central to the mission of the organization. A vegan who is asked to pick up food from a barbecue restaurant for a company event is doing something that is not central to the organization’s mission, but may feel like a violation of that person’s values. In contrast, a pharmacy worker with a personal opposition to birth control has a protected value that is directly relevant to the organization’s mission.
When your personal value is not in conflict with the organization’s mission, there is no harm in having a conversation with your supervisor about whether things need to be done in that way, particularly if the task is not central to the mission. If your organization is not interested in changing the task based on the conversation, you may want to ask whether the task could be assigned to someone else. There is likely to be someone else who would not feel compromised by doing the task that would be difficult for you.
The most complex case is the one where you are asked to violate a personal protected value over something that is highly relevant to the organization’s mission. In this case, you have to ask yourself whether this organization is a good fit for you. It is really too much to ask your colleagues to handle every mission-critical situation that violates your personal values. If you’re truly not willing to do something (and living an authentic life is important), then you should look for a job with an organization that is a better fit to your personal values.
A widely shared protected value
A thorny case is when you are asked to do something that violates a value that you suspect is widely held within the organization. When that happens, you should start by thinking through whether the request was tone deaf on the part of the person who asked you to do it, or whether something more nefarious may be going on.
Suppose your organization helps a community organization in a time of crisis and you are asked to bill them an excessive amount for the service. This situation feels like taking advantage of a group in need and could be viewed as price gouging. If you think this is an oversight on the part of the team that asked you to prepare the bill, you might want to start with a conversation with the person who asked. If you have concerns that the individual knew exactly what they were doing, you might want to copy others in the organization into that conversation.
This is a form of whistleblowing, which is a complicated thing to do. Sadly, when you look at almost any story of corruption within an organization, it starts with smaller actions to which nobody objects, and moves forward from there. Whistleblowers are often treated poorly by organizations, but those people who do confront small ethical lapses can often save an organization from more significant fraud.
Â
