Whether it’s a romantic relationship, a work relationship, or a financial investment, the adjective “toxic” means a storm is brewing.
In our last article, we talked about “inefficient” values. Most of the time, their neutral nature means that they are neither a behavioral anchor for employees nor a sufficiently attractive aura for prospects or potential employees.
The latter at least have the “merit” of not damaging the company’s image. Unfortunately, this is not the case with what we call “toxic” values. What they have in common is that they contradict the organization’s image at some point
Don’t give ammunition to your critics
Especially in times of institutional crisis, they are the first to be attacked by the public or the media. While in times of calm they may seem to serve the institution well despite their incoherence, in the midst of a storm they tend to make a bad situation even more complex.
Let’s take the example of a company that has promoted integrity as one of its core values in its corporate communications. The day the media reveals that the company has not paid its suppliers for many months, its reputation is already severely damaged. Choosing integrity also gives the impression of an organization that has little sense of its own identity. Not only has its image been damaged, but the contradictions in its corporate communications have been exposed. The crisis of confidence is already here; with toxic values, it’s only going to get worse.
Stay lucid and cautious
Corporate values need to be considered in the light of the reputational risk posed by a company’s activities. The first step is to be willing to take an objective look in the mirror. The greater the delta between what an organization really is and what it wants to appear to be, the greater the risk of facing this situation. Another important step is to map out the threats it might face. It will then be easier to choose values that align with the company’s essence.
To illustrate our point, let’s imagine a chemical company with a high turnover rate and a large number of employees on long-term sick leave. The company knows that this situation is partly due to brutal management practices that leave little room for error. Nevertheless, the company has decided to make benevolence one of its core values. Of course, given the company’s internal situation, we would have discouraged this choice. Fortunately, the range of values to consider is very broad, and it would have been easier to move the cursor to a lexical field more in line with the services or products the company offers. For example, curiosity, the driving force behind innovation, might have been preferred.