As an intern at a stock-listed company, I researched corporate values. The company was preparing a new strategy period, and company culture was seen as a crucial factor in it. A subsection of culture were values.
Until that research, I never cared about corporate values. I was just ‘happy to be there’, as they say, and whatever unpleasant moments I encountered or heard of had nothing to do with the company in my eyes, more so reflecting an individual’s choices.
I’ve come to respect values since then, both corporate and my own. I once had a big crisis of conscience and it took me a while to understand that I suffered because what I was observing around me was in stark contradiction to my personal values – such as integrity, honesty, and overall being a good human being (all beautiful but loose terms).
So, I’ve been doing some values research as a throw-back to my intern days. In this post, I analyse the values of the biggest stock-listed companies in the Helsinki stock exchange. I begin with a few thoughts on company values, and then proceed to the analysis.
What Kinds of Corporate Values Are There?
When doing the value research as an intern, I used this article by Patrick M. Lensioni as my theoretical starting point: Make Your Values Mean Something. He listed four types of values: core; aspirational; permission-to-play; and accidental. I won’t paraphrase the typology here as it’s succinctly written in the linked article, but I’ll spare a few words on the last three categories.
Aspirational values, as Lensioni understands them, are values the company doesn’t currently have or exhibit, but wants to. Good examples are something related to sustainability for a company that typically has not acted terribly sustainably (think oil, manufacturing), or agility for big, old companies that have suffered from being too slow in decision-making or strategy implementation.
Permission-to-play values are often similar across companies, Lensioni notes, particularly when operating in the same industry or region. In my research, I found that the most frequently stated value was ‘integrity’ or a related value, like ‘trust’ or ‘honesty’ – interestingly, ‘integrity’ is the one example Lensioni uses in his article of a permission-to-play value. I agree with Lensioni that this type of a company value is often bland and dull (‘shouldn’t it be obvious we act with integrity?’), yet I understand highlighting certain ‘obvious’ values in certain industries. It is perhaps more important to highlight ‘trust’ for a bank than for a gaming software company.
Accidental values may not be written down anywhere, but they may be sensed for better or for worse. Lensioni describes how accidental values can lead to exclusionary hiring practices. One negative accidental value I know exists in many companies is ‘don’t rock the boat.’ A terrible value that prevents true growth, allows bad practices to fester, and worst of all, poor managers to keep doing a bad job.
What Are Values Good For?
I think the reason why I never paid much attention to company values was that I didn’t see them in my daily work, neither implicitly nor explicitly. As I said above, I assumed and still do that people behave in whatever way is suitable to them, not in accordance with company values – unless those values are weaved into every aspect of work in the company.
I came across a great example of this in Essentialism – The Disciplined Pursuit of Less by Greg McKeown (2020). He recounts a terrible cyanide serial murder case from 1982, where seven people died after consuming Tylenol. Some of the containers of the product, manufactured by Johnson & Johnson, had been tampered with. McKeown suggests that the company, then controlling 37% of market share, could have chosen to prioritize stock owners and try keep it quiet and not pull back the remaining bottles of Tylenol, potentially worth $100 million. But Johnson & Johnson chose to prioritize their customers: they pulled back all of their products from stores. McKeown argues the choice was made due to Credo: a statement carved in stone at the company’s headquarters, that stated that in the hierarchy of stakeholders, customers were at the top. Shareholders at the bottom. He suggests that the difficult, costly decision was made easier with the value held true: customer comes first.
It’s a big example, and at the bottom I’ve added some resources if you’d like to read more about it. But I find company values fall short not in the exceptional (or where one choice, no matter how difficult, is obviously the right one), but in the everyday.
Let’s take one of the most common values, ‘care’. Great! What do you care about? How do you care about it? Is ‘care’ on the same level as something else? One company has both ‘care’ and ‘deliver’ as values. What if they are contradictory? What if to deliver you push your employees to far, work them too much, and they end up on sick leave for burnout? Then what do you care about? This leads to another observation: values must be equal and simultaneously valid. You cannot trump one over the other when it suits you right.
Values guide us. In this research paper published in Future Business Journal, Taher (2023) defines corporate values as “[v]isionary, ethical, and managerial orientations organizations choose to declare, promote and practice as public commitments toward all stakeholders”. A complex definition typical for academia, I still like it. Many others have referred to values as a ‘moral compass’ pointing us to the right direction when we are lost. I like that one, too. Now it’s only a matter of making sure the compass is properly magnetized. And that every one else’s is, too.
Corporate Values of Large Cap Companies in the Helsinki Stock Exchange
Nasdaq Helsinki currently has 33 Large Cap companies listed. Of them, I found company values of 30. In my analysis, I’ve excluded the three companies for which I could not find corporate values (not saying they don’t have any, but I could not find them on their official websites with their search functions nor with a Google search for “[company] values”).
| Company | No. of Values | Values |
|---|---|---|
| Cargotec | Not found | Not found |
| Citycon | Not found | Not found |
| Elisa | 5 | Customer Orientation, Responsibility, Renewal, Results Orientation, Collaboration |
| Fiskars | 3 | Creating Change, Celebrating the Everyday, Growing with compassion |
| Fortum | 4 | Curiosity, Responsibility, Integrity, Respect |
| Huhtamäki | 3 | Care, Dare, Deliver |
| Kemira | 4 | We drive performance and innovation. We are dedicated to customer success. We care for people and the environment. We succeed |
| Kempower | 4 | Together, Impact, Integrity, Courage |
| Kesko | 1* | Customer and quality – in everything we do |
| Kojamo | 3 | Happy to serve, Strive for success, Courage to change |
| KONE | 4 | Care, Customer, Collaboration, Courage |
| Konecranes | 4 | Putting customers first, Doing the right thing, Driving for better, Winning together |
| Mandatum | 6 | Benefit the customer, As one team, By far the most active, We dare to be different, Straight talks, We want to win |
| Metsä Group | 4 | Responsible profitability, Reliability, Cooperation, Renewal |
| Metso | 4 | High ambition – always, Customer in center, Getting it done – together, Open and Honest |
| Neste | 3 | We care, We have courage, We cooperate |
| Nokia | 4** | Growing together, Leading lights, We belong, Experience is everything |
| Nokian Renkaat | 3 | We care, We drive innovation, We deliver high results together |
| Nordea | 4 | Collaboration, Ownership, Passion, Courage |
| Orion | 4 | We Orionees appreciate each other…strive for excellence…build the future |
| Outokumpu | 6*** | We operate Safely. Always. We leverage the power of one Outokumpu. We deliver. We grow people and value diversity. We act sustainably. We are a trusted partner. |
| QT Group | 3 | Innovation, Transparency, Collaboration |
| Revenio Group | Not found | Not found |
| Sampo | 3 | Trust, Integrity, Excellence |
| Sanoma | 4 | We always look ahead, We share views…. We engage people… We make it happen… |
| SSAB | 3 | Driven (Together we create value), True (Do what is right), Ahead (Future in mind) |
| Stora Enso | 2 | Lead, Do what’s right |
| Telia Company | 3 | Dare, Care, Simplify |
| TietoEvry | 3 | Openness, Trust, Diversity |
| UPM-Kymmene | 3 | Trust and be trusted, Achieve together, Renew with courage |
| Vaisala | 4 | Customer focus, Innovation & Renewal, Strong together, Integrity |
| Valmet | 4 | Customers, Renewal, Excellence, People |
| Wärtsilä | 3 | Customer, Success, Passion, Performance |
I’m proudly a nerd and spend my free time on these kinds of projects!
A Number’s Game – How Many Values Make the Perfect Sum?
On average, these large cap companies have 3.6 values, with the median of 3.5. Of the values, 57 are non-verbs (mostly nouns) and 50 verbs, of which 40 are in the active voice (‘do’, ‘lead’, ‘we care’).
Rule of three seems to apply in values, too: three are easier to remember than five, for example, and you can often create a rhythm to them. In this analysis, two companies had six values and two companies had one or two values. Quality over quantity applies in values, too, but it is hard to determine which values are the most important to highlight and codify. Some companies use brute force to mash up several in one: for example, ‘Growing with compassion’, ‘Innovation & Renewal’, ‘We deliver high results together’. The last one especially is a mouthful: deliver (reliability), high results (performance), together (collaboration).
The lengthiest values in this list are ‘We leverage the power of one Outokumpu’, ‘We grow people and value diversity’, and ‘Customer and quality – in everything we do’. I’m on the fence on the last one. It’s the only value I found for Kesko which operates in the grocery, construction, and car trade. On the one hand, adding ‘in everything we do’ seems superfluous. Aren’t values all about ‘everything we do’? On the other, it serves as an accent and makes the otherwise ‘uninspiring’ values more poignant. Since it appears to be the only value, accentuating it is not quite as bad (having only one value is a curious choice).
Values should be easy to remember. The more you have, the harder; the lengthier, the harder.
(Active) Actions Speak Louder Than Words?
I didn’t expect to have a clear preference over verbs and nouns, but as I have worked my Excel sheet I’ve noticed that I prefer the values that are active. Even the simplest of values ‘Care’ sounds better to me as ‘We care’. ‘Care’ can be interpreted as both a noun and a verb, and it is frequently used in negative and positive contexts (I don’t care or Who cares?; Take care, care-taker). We care has a connotation of responsibility, too. I also think that ‘We do…’ values seem the most actionable and exude ownership (whether that’s the case or not).
Categories
I tried to categorize the values to see which kinds of things large Finnish companies hold in the highest regard. These categories are not mutually exclusive nor super scientific, and the largest category is the ‘no category’. That may not be a bad thing. In any case, here they are:
| Category | No. of Values included |
|---|---|
| (None) | 27 |
| Integrity, right, open, honest, trust, responsibility, transparency | 18 |
| Collaboration, together, team | 15 |
| Success, excellence, deliver, results, performance | 14 |
| Customer | 10 |
| Innovation, renewal, change | 9 |
| Courage, dare | 7 |
| Forward-looking, future, growth (non-monetary) | 6 |
| Care | 6 |
I was fascinated to see that Integrity was the top category – I was expecting for Care or Customer to take the top position. I started to wonder why integrity, or any of the other formulations of the same theme, like trust or honesty, were so prominent. For a genuine analysis, I would need to know when the values were created to pinpoint any past crises. 14 companies listed one of these values, and four listed two of them (Fortum, Metsä Group, Sampo, TietoEvry). Trust, openness and integrity are not synonyms, but I question why several of these need to be lifted as values when surely there are other things that are important enough to highlight. Personally, it makes me wonder if the company struggles with what I consider a permission-to-play value – being reliable. In light of recent events from some companies, values like ‘responsibility’ and ‘integrity’ are hallow and outright mockery.
I was also surprised by the lack of employee-orientation in the values. Granted, most of these values have subpoints and explanatory text which I have not included in the analysis (it would take forever, and I also think that a value should be simple enough for anyone to be able to follow it, without explanation), so ‘Care’ may well have a subpoint that reads ‘We care for our employees by not overworking them.’ Of the non-categorised values, ‘Celebrating the Everyday’, ‘Diversity’, ‘People’, ‘We belong’, ‘We engage people’, ‘We leverage the power of one Outokumpu’, and ‘We Orionees appreciate each other’ are the ones I’d link to employee experience and appreciation most directly.
Standing Out with Unique Values
There were three values I found really unique, and another three that were both uncommon and seemed particularly well-suited to their respective companies.
Unique Values
The truly unique values are: By far the most active; Straight Talks (Mandatum), and Leading Lights (Nokia*). For the first two, I did not find additional information which is a shame as the values are so unique. I did, however, look them up in Finnish, too, and they come across better in that way: ‘Ylivoimaisesti aktiivisin’ and ‘Suoraa puhetta’. The former in Finnish could be used as a stand-alone quote for a commendation (e.g. ‘Most used application’) and probably refers to their operations in asset management (instead of sitting by and hoping their positions will continue to strengthen, they actively curate their portfolio). The latter was actually the name of a Finnish podcast, and the idea is to speak directly, honestly, and without reservation, especially on contentious matters. I actually really like this value, although the English translation is, frankly, quite poor.
Being direct reminds me of the debate on the value ‘passion’. It is considered a concept that varies considerably from culture to culture (you may have heard people from Southern Europe and Latin America being referred to as ‘passionate’, but did you ever hear that for Finns?), and that could be used as a blanket excuse for boorish behaviour. I find that a sad excuse – can you really say that screaming in someone’s face in a meeting is a sign of passion for work? And if you fear that ‘passion’ will allow that in your company, you’ve got bigger problems. Especially if you are a leader and feel that you cannot ensure that that type of behaviour is never accepted, no matter what.
Nokia’s ‘Leading Lights’ is described as follows on their website: “Our leaders create a working environment in which people can be open, fearless, and empowered, developing themselves and their teams.” Given Nokia’s well-documented fall from grace and the inability and unwillingness of the top leadership to welcome questions, new ideas, not to mention out-right criticism, this value was probably highly aspirational at some point (again, I do not know when this was created) if not still. Hats off to all those who fought to save what was left of once world’s leading mobile phone manufacturer (RIP).
I will add here that I noticed that Nokia’s ‘Experience is everything’ does not, as I thought, refer to tenure or skills, but the employee experience.
Unusual Values
‘Happy to serve’, ‘Celebrating the everyday’ and ‘Simplify’ were all unique in this analysis. I thought they were all good values, and the last two perhaps particularly well suited to their respective companies. Fiskars is a household brand best known for their orange handle scissors (they have a cute origin and Fiskars Orange is in fact trademarked both in Finland and the US!), and the value’s context is this: ‘We are present in the little things we do, as we know they have a big impact on us and our future.’ I think this is a beautiful way to approach one’s life and work, being present in the moment, valuing the big value of the smallest action. As for Fiskars’ values overall, they state that they ‘are careful to keep [our values] relevant and actionable in our everyday.’ Exactly as you should.
Telia Company is a TelCom operator whose value Simply is activated in simplifying execution, teamwork and operations. I think this is a great value: it’s simple in itself, and it is incredibly easy to follow in any role (not necessarily to execute, but to see things from a simplifying perspective). There’s plenty of research showing that unclear priorities and processes, and complex and too layered hierarchies cause fatigue, frustration, and finally, a resignation, whether as a two-week notice slammed on the (figurative) desk, as burnout leave, or as quiet quitting. Keeping ‘simplify’ as a rule of thumb in your work is a great way to bolster a healthy culture, no matter the organization.
Kojamo is a private residential real estate company. Their value ‘Happy to serve’ resonated with me because I’ve recently been thinking about customer service and sales quite a bit. There seems to be a sense of disrespect for service jobs in certain industries by the people in the roles, specifically by temps. When you don’t work on commission, don’t have any aspiration to advance in the role or the company, why would you strive for superior customer service? Because that’s your job. Or it should be. Companies who fail their onboarding so miserably that they don’t instill any sense of pride in the work they do for their employees amaze me.
Who Upholds Values?
Culture eats strategy for breakfast. Believe it? I absolutely do. Maybe it’ll eat it in tiny bites and take breaks. But it will eat you up if you don’t feed it. How do you feed culture? You nurture it every. Single. Day.
Many companies ‘assign’ culture to HR (or ‘People’ as it’s often called – I’ve my thoughts on that, too, for a later post). But you cannot have one person or team ‘own’ culture. Every single member of the organization has to own the culture, hold it in value, and proactively make sure it thrives.
Values for Everyone
I think ‘customer’ may be the worst value of them all. What are values? If they are, as quoted above, orientations organizations choose to declare, promote and practice, how does customer fit there? How do you practice customer? As an intern, someone I worked with noted that the values should be what help you serve the customer. One the other hand, in the Johnson & Johnson case, having ‘customer’ as a value was what potentially saved the company.
Customer is a funny value because every single company serves customers. It should be obvious that customer is key, for every single company. But the problem is, not every employee directly interacts with the customer. How do you derive meaning from ‘customer’ if you work in the back-office and have no contact to the customer, or even anyone who works with the customer. I’ve worked in those roles, and coming up with examples of ‘how I helped the customer’ was agony. I had most likely not adversely impacted them, but I couldn’t think of a single real, meaningful thing I had done that served the customer. Many colleagues expanded the term to include colleagues, thinking of them as internal customer, which prompts a whole other discussion on why it is detrimental to treat people who work in the same organization as customers (let’s head for that sidetrack another time).
Whatever your role in the company is, the values should be easy to follow and implement.
When to Consult Your Compass?
At the beginning of this scenic route of values, I mentioned that I came to value values through a pro-longed sense of profound discomfort. I saw people treated in a way that was contrary to my belief system; I saw things overlooked that I felt shouldn’t have been; and I witnessed a complete lack of leadership from management (there’s a reason why those are two different words). I couldn’t intellectualize the behaviour. But when I looked at it from the point of view of values, I understood it completely. They’re not stupid, but they do not act in a way I respect.
Here’s why culture is an everyday lived experience: every time you let something contrary to your values slide, you help erode the culture. Sure, don’t sweat the small stuff. Sure, no-one’s perfect all the time. But if one day you don’t know what to do and you consult the company’s values and feel that acting in accordance to them will cause you more problems than going against them, you know things have gone too far and the situation will not be rectified quickly.
Make sure your company’s values are actionable, clear and that you’ve got ways to check that the organization is living by them. And if you can’t influence them? If you’re someone who cannot operate in a toxic culture, live by your values. You’ll feel the weigh fall off your shoulders. You’ll sleep at night again.
References and more information
Helsinki Stock Exchange: https://www.nasdaqomxnordic.com/
Lensioni, Patrick M. 2022. ‘Make Your Values Mean Something’. Harvard Business Review. Accessed June 27, 2024. https://hbr.org/2002/07/make-your-values-mean-something
McKeown, Greg. 2020. Essentialism. The Disciplined Pursuit of Less. Currency, New York.
Taher, A. 2023. ‘Do corporate values have value? The impact of corporate values on financial performance’. Futur Bus J 9, 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-023-00254-9
Tylenol crisis
Latson, Jennifer. 2014. ‘How Poisoned Tylenol Became a Crisis-Management Teaching Model’. Time. Accessed June 27, 2024. https://time.com/3423136/tylenol-deaths-1982/
Case Study on Crisis Communications Strategies: https://www.ou.edu/deptcomm/dodjcc/groups/02C2/Johnson%20&%20Johnson.htm
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/23/your-money/IHT-tylenol-made-a-hero-of-johnson-johnson-the-recall-that-started.html
Sidetracked 