Last week global events forced an unusual situation – what has been referred to in the US as the need for ‘Bi-Partisan Working’. The need for both sides of Congress to agree on the financial ‘bail-out’ package for the US economy has contrived a situation where the most senior politicians have been asked to put their beliefs, opinions and ideologies aside in favour of the national good. Tellingly, at the first time of asking they were unable to do so, with Republicans who believe in a free market economy refusing to sanction the $700billion influx of cash.
In their press conference after the initial failure to pass the bill, the Democrats repeatedly referred to the need to work in a bi-partisan manner for the good of the American People, but couldn’t quite resist criticising the Republicans for their inability to do so – thereby making political capital out of the situation ahead of the forthcoming presidential elections. It seems that all parties are so entrenched in their tribal values these days that hardly anyone is capable of just thinking about the good of the country.
This set me thinking about how this relates to working life – it seems to me to be pretty important that people with strong beliefs and values (often the very characteristics that drive leaders to success and prominence) have the ability and desire to switch these off when it comes to the crunch for the organisation. Like the example of the US economy, sometimes the message is clear- “it doesn’t matter what you think or what you believe or where this decision leaves you personally – this is the only decision available to us right now that is for the common good.” You could probably have heard discussions along these lines in the Boardrooms at HBOS, Bradford and Bingley and Lehmann Brothers recently!
I don’t think that being able to embrace these tough decisions is a skill or ability as such – it’s more an outlook, a certain level of emotional maturity or morality. It leaves us all hoping that our own organisational (and national) leaders were selected for such qualities and that they would make the right decision if the time came. But this is not to underestimate the challenge – it’s easy to group those who opposed the US financial package together with the greedy few who played such a big role in creating this crisis, but I think we have to admit this would be an difficult dilemma for us all.
Most of us are unlikely to ever find ourselves in this situation, but imagine an equivalent. What if you believed passionately in the workers’ rights to a happy healthy working life, but you were told that delivering this over the next 6 months would drain resources and probably cause the downfall of your organisation – what would you do? Yes, you could go elsewhere, but if you want to stay because you care about your employer’s fortunes you may be forced to re-consider the importance of values that you hold dear for the greater good.
In some ways, I see parallels here with the debate and recent law change regarding smoking in public – many people who were committed to the principle of freedom and the right of people to choose how they want to live their lives changed their minds when it became clear that this was actually damaging people’s lives and, in turn, the very health of the nation! This would be a good example to present to the Republicans and Democrats alike in a country which was amongst the first to adopt anti-smoking laws – it may remind them that sometimes it’s necessary to take a hit on freedom for the good of the many!!
