Head of the pack—what radical looks like

So, what does it look like to radically embrace your values? Is it some anarchist dystopia—or the capitalist paradise of Sam Altman’s dreams? Reader, you be the judge.

August, a management consulting firm, values transparency so much that they “default to open”—sharing their IP, financial models, hiring processes, and more all on a public drive anyone can access. Why? They believe sharing their work attracts like-minded people, surfaces and helps solve for biases in their hiring practices, and models what radical transparency looks like for the rest of the world.

And then there’s paid vacation. Like, actually paid vacation. FullContact gives its employees $7500 to use on vacation, but they only get the money when they take the time off. Why? Because teamwork. Or, per their CEO Bart Lorang, it’s a powerful way to eliminate behaviors that contribute to a team becoming dependent upon one individual (aka “hero syndrome”), and creates a culture truly wired for teamwork. It’s also a pretty damn good way to make sure people take a break.

Heart in the right place — but dig deeper

Silicon Valley is full of progressive business practices. One of the more popular ones is unlimited paid time off (PTO). It is generous, alluring, differentiating — but what value is it trying to signal? Companies with unlimited PTO policies, ask yourselves, what value are you trying to express through this benefit? If the answer is “give employees time to relax and recharge”, perhaps a policy closer to a vacation bonus, like FullContact’s, is better than unlimited time off — which people may or may not use. Companies looking to express their values through their employee benefits should be sure the perks they offer honor the behaviors behind the values they’re incentivizing.

False flags — when values and actions are in conflict

Meritocracy sounds like the promised land of performance management. But meritocracy requires nuance. Context. Considered complexity. Compare that with forced rankings, the celebrated tool of management consulting, and until very recently, the performance review process favored by industry titans like GE, Microsoft, and Ford. Why would places that strive to be meritocratic suddenly ditch forced rankings?

If you value meritocracy — and have a room full of high-performers — why would you apply a forced distribution? It forces some of those high-performers to be ranked average, regardless of merit (and can breed a competitive, survivalist culture.) The two are inherently at odds. When values clash with process, values always perish.