This is not a post about gay marriage. It is a post about whether principles matter – they do.
In my lean seminars when the subject turns to culture I have been using a slide with this graphic for years:
The point is not that any particular religious beliefs should be imposed on the business in order to achieve a sound culture. It is that principles matter. The best companies are led by people with a clear sense of right and wrong that supersedes profit concerns – that profits must be realized in a way that is fair, honorable and fully respective of employees, suppliers, customers, shareholders and communities – all of the stakeholders in the business.
The alternative is the 'Godfather approach' – you know – when Sonny got after Michael for making things personal when they were really just business. It is the idea that personal feelings and principles have no place in business … that all that matters is profit.
When a business is driven solely by the Godfather principle the slippery slope that begins with abandoning what the Cathy family believes about gay marriage in order to avoid losing sales to those who disagree cannot help but lead to abandoning loyalty to employees and the Chick-fil-A communities for the same narrow reasons.
You can read an eloquent rationalization from the conventional business thinking community of why the Cathy's should keep their moral compass out of the business … "Leaders tend to perform best when everyone feels welcomed and valued," says the Bloomberg Business Week author. I would suggest that, when a leader keeps the principles he professes to believe in church on Sunday or a synagogue on Saturday or wherever else he or she goes to connect with what drives the soul out of the business, no one is valued because nothing is valued but money.
I happen to be a big supporter of Chick-fil-A and their principles driven business model, and I don't agree with much the Ben and Jerry's people believe in, but I have equal respect for Ben and Jerry's for the simple reason that they have a long track record of driving their business on clearly stated and firm principles. People know where they stand with these companies because their leaders make it clear that decisions are made in a manner relentlessly consistent with principles. People work for, sell to and buy from these companies because their principles align with those of the business.
When the only principles driving the business are market share and profit, and decisions are made on the basis that anything advancing those goals is acceptable, people are little more than cannon fodder.
Every truly lean company I have ever known is guided by a north star that reflects the values of its leaders, and those leaders profess the same values on Saturday and Sunday they do at work from Monday throuh Friday. They make a lot of money because people are inspired and driven in large part by those values. There are lots of companies without principles that lose an awful lot of money.
Wes says
Bill – While I well agree with your thesis regarding a moral compass driving and guiding your business principles, in general, the case for Chic-Fil-A does sit well with me. While I am not personally affected by the particular “guiding principles” presented here, I have many friends and family members who are. Thinking back to stories my dad told, of growing up in the 1950’s southern US, I am reminded about how it was these same “christian” principles that prevented black men and women from eating at the same lunch counter, using the same public restrooms and drinking from the same water fountains as white folks…. I could go on. Simply put, principles, however strong and seemingly well founded, that allow for one group of people to be singled out for exclusion is wrong. I understand you may say that gay people are welcome to eat at CFA, so it’s not the same as the examples I presented above. I would then put it in these terms; would you say the same for a business, especially a franchise format, where the real “in the trenches” line ownership may feel different, that donates money to the KKK and speaks out publicly in favor of a “white nation” even while serving black clientele is using sound principles to guide their business.
Therefore, using my personal christian principles and faith to guide my decision, I must respectfully disagree with you position in this post.
Thanks – wes
Bill Waddell says
Wes,
If Christians cannot apply any principles to their business because some Christians supported the KKK, then no principles espoused by any faith have a place in business. We are back to every man for himself.
Every moral principle implies criticism of people who do not believe in that principle, thus, every moral principle is ‘discriminatory’ and ‘exclusionary’ by your logic. By your logic, it follows that every moral principle is inherently immoral. Is that really where you want to go?
Mike says
The real argument here is Moral Objectivism vs. Moral Relativism. If right and wrong are relative to each individual then any “moral compass” is as effective as any guess. Basing your business upon personal principals would be useless due to the supposed fact that no principals are better than any other. Therefore companies should be run only for profit, if that profit motivation might overlap any moral guidelines that is only a coincidence and should be regarded as such. Moral Relativism is dangerous and has repercussions beyond business. I personally reject Moral Relativism for the mere fact that I believe there to be a right and a wrong and I commend any individual who has beliefs and principals and sticks to them in the face of staunch opposition.
Jeff says
Wes said “Simply put, principles, however strong and seemingly well founded, that allow for one group of people to be singled out for exclusion is wrong.” So the government should single out for exclusion anyone who disagrees that no one should be singled out for exclusion? How about diversity is so important we will not tolerate anyone who disagrees with diversity? Chick-fil-A succeeds because the owners have a deep respect for every person – no matter what – Wes and the media twist that fundamental respect into some sort of exclusion where there is no evidence either of a culture of exclusion or any specific action towards a specific person.
Bryan says
Take religion out of it for a moment and go with a principle that is natural – “first, do no harm to others, that others could do to you.”
Pretty sure Chick-fil-A has demonstrating a good job of keeping that principle in mind from a business perspective and separating it from a certain individual’s religious beliefs about sodomy, homosexuality, etc.
As an individual he has every right to express his feeling on those matters. His mistake is thinking that other individuals wouldn’t mix that in with a business move and use the power of the government, protest and the media against him and violate his first amendment rights.
R. A. Conway says
Adolph Hitler led his “business” based on his firm belief in a set of principles – that 80 years later still haunt the German People. Slaveholders did the same and 150 years later there is still damage to be repaired from their “good business”, and the Catholic Church from the Inquisition to the contemporary “value based” rules for discourage birth control and the subjigation of women is not far behind (membership declining rapidly).
The part of the premise of bringing personal principles to drive business that you miss altogether is that the principles have to be good ones in order to drive a good and profitable business. The benefits must come not only to the owner and the workers but to the community as a whole. Yes, I am comparing Mr. Cathy to Adolph Hitler as he believes other humans are “less” than him and are not entitled to the same rights and privileges. You are correct in stating that he has not attacked any specific individual, what he is done is far more aggregious – he condemns an entire population, and yes that is beyond “intolerance”, it is bigotry. Bigotry based in religion is still bigotry and Mr. Cathy deserves every protest, lost dollar, and the tarnished reputation his mouth brings to his business. Mr. Cathy is devolving, not evolving, excellence and his backwords outlook will certainly lead his business into the abyss of blindness and market limiting exclusion that his (lack of) vision brings
Bill Waddell says
Robin,
Comparing a widely held moral conviction concerning the sanctity of marriage stated by a man who has never been accused of denying anything to anyone with the systematic genocide of 12 million people is, without a doubt, the most intellectually pathetic comment I have seen in my seven years of writing for Evolving Excellence.
Mark Welch says
All of us in this argument would benefit from Matthew, Chapter 7, whether we’re Christian or not, by leaving the judging to God and not to each other.
Wes says
While I don’t necessarily agree with the position Robin took above (and tried myself quite dilliently not to go there) I do see a connection to the commentary on slavery, and subsequent state and business sponsord bigotry. Whle we today hold the entire business of the cotton economy as morally repugnent, this issue so bitterly divided our country at one time that we fought a war over it. Morals and morality does change, Bill. Morals and morality must be taken within the context of the society in which we live. Otherwise we might still be stoning people in the streets.
I don’t see how you make the leap to connecting all moral principles, by nature, immoral in my argument. I think that you are reaching there.
I don’t think that morality should be legislated, as others suggested, or that we can’t disagree. What I think is that if you stand up and say “ABC” and the society in which you live objects to what you say, then you get what you get. I don’t like his stance, so I won’t put my money there (even if the sandwich is fantastic). That’s called the “free market.”
I think you and Kevin have both been talking about this concept for a while.
Bryan says
Amen, Wes. Sorry, Robin.
Bill Waddell says
“Morals and morality does change, Bill. Morals and morality must be taken within the context of the society in which we live. Otherwise we might still be stoning people in the streets.”
Actually, Wes (and Bryan), morals and morality do not change. At times people try to redefine them and rationalize immoral behavior through a distorted, self-serving interpretation of scriptures. It does not sustain because the majority of Christianity soon enough jerks them back to the truth.
Yes, the Catholic Church strayed from the path and did some pretty heinous things under the banner of Christianity, and it triggered the reformation and a splintering of the church … that eventually forced the Catholic Church back to the true path.
Yes, southern Christian churches concocted a theological justification for slavery. The abolitionist movement, the Underground Railroad, and defiance of the Fugitive Slave Act were the response of the majority of Christians. Harriet Beecher Stowe – daughter and wife of ministers – wrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin. When Lincoln met her he said, “So you’re the little lady who started this big war.”
Yes, discrimination was rampant in the south and supported by many white southern churches. Remember that Martin Luther King was actually the Reverend Dr. Martin Luter King, and most of the support for his movement came from northern white Christian churches, and black Christian churches everywhere. The civil rights leaders were almost all ordained ministers
None of those terrible things you guys cited redefined morals and morality – they were temporary abominations that did not sustain, and were crushed by mainstream Christians. Government did not drive their banishment – Christians did.
The principles Cathy espouses have been fundamental Christian principles from day one. There is no basis for comparing him to leaders of the Inquisition, slavery or Jim Crow laws. Nor is there any basis for the argument that Christian principles are some oozing, evolving mass based on popular thinking that will sooner or later come around to supporting gay marriage.
Final comment: When President Obama came out in opposition to gay marriage I wonder why the mayors of Boston, Philadelphia and Chicago didn’t ban him from their towns and announce that Obama’s values are not their city’s values? Anyone able to explain that one?
Bryan says
Bill, on the statement – “morals and morality do not change”, we could not agree more on that statement.
However, the church doesn’t make morals any more right by a self proclaimed blood line to Jesus Christ.
I’m straying off topic, but I’ve said before (maybe not here) that the ten commandments are simply derivatives of the golden rule.
As for government, they cannot legitamize theft through law (debasing the currency) and declare it to be “right” vs. wrong simply because it is the law. If I were to do that, then I would go to jail.
The government cannot legalize homosexuality, well they can, but it doesn’t make it moral – that is simply a matter of opinion. And the bible story doesn’t make it immoral by authority of the Pope via a blood line over 2,000 years old. Nor does banning sodomy make it the act immoral. The only time it is immoral is if it done to to somebody without their consent. The real question to ask is if two individuals are engaging in something voluntary that does not violate natural law. Other than that, what do you care, as long as they are not harming you?
So, my amen for Wes is aimed at his claim about true “free markets” as the only mechanism for individuals to realize true justice in all matters that are natural and voluntary – not coercive through the force of law or the guilt of the church. (my words, not his)
Wes #2 says
You can say this post isn’t about gay marriage, but by posting a CFA theme, you immediately make it about gay marriage and the individual beliefs (call it religion if you must) of people. To me this seems to be just a ploy to get people to react to your blog while doing nothing for “Evolving Excellence.”
Lean is about respect for people above everything else – This post does not show respect for the GLBT community.
Your statement:
“The best companies are led by people with a clear sense of right and wrong that supersedes profit concerns – that profits must be realized in a way that is fair, honorable and fully respective of employees, suppliers, customers, shareholders and communities”
tells me that you believe that you above all others know what is truly right and wrong, fair and unfair, honorable and not honorable….
for shame.
Nadine says
With that said this company is doomed cause their north star is in a different spot than that of most of the potential customers, suppliers etc. And the trend is against them. So by sticking to drawing their line in the sand they are actually digging their own grave.
Very lean chicken!
Bill Waddell says
Wes #2
It doesn’t sound like you actually read the post … like the part where I wrote, “I don’t agree with much the Ben and Jerry’s people believe in, but I have equal respect for Ben and Jerry’s for the simple reason that they have a long track record of driving their business on clearly stated and firm principles. People know where they stand with these companies because their leaders make it clear that decisions are made in a manner relentlessly consistent with principles. People work for, sell to and buy from these companies because their principles align with those of the business.”
Where you got the idea that I see myself as the setter of the north star is a mystery. Sounds more like as soon as you saw something positive about Chick Fil A you lost all objectivity.
Nadine
Suggesting that CFA has alienated “most of the potential customers, suppliers etc” sounds more like wishful thinking than anything else, especially in light of the record sales day they had on Wednesday.
Nadine says
But previous polls showed a growing support for marriage equality. The trend is against them. And if not for that then for guys like the defiant dude. This company is bullying people left and right. Just because they can. Doesn’t matter what book they hold while doing.
Bill Waddell says
“This company is bullying people left and right. Just because they can.”
In fact Nadine, the driving principle of Chick fil A that has been public since the company’s founding is “To glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us. To have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.”
Their service policy is “to treat every person with honor, dignity, and respect—regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation, or gender.”
I have seen no evidence that ever violated either creed. This whole firestorm is the result of statements made by the CEO in an interview with a religious publication – having nothing to do with business policies or business practices.
It takes a particularly curious world view, as well as a severely limited understanding of Christianity as practiced by the likes of the Cathy’s, to define anything Chick Fil A does as “bullying people left and right”.
Finally, if you think that having a practicing Christian serve you a chicken sandwich is bullying you, then eat somewhere else. Then the “just because they can” no longer applies.
Nadine says
What is that respect if you turn around and they spent their profits on supporting anti gay groups? Cause the cfa foundation did give 5 million. That’s evidence? Where is the respect when they bully everybody out of the use of the words” eat more” with lawyers an so on? They force their values on to everybody while you can only apply them to yourself and share them with others. Otherwise they become dictates. Z specially in unequal relationships of employer/ employee.
And finally…. If God is involved and judging in all of my life i don’t want to be caught eating one of Gods creatures that whas abused and distorted , forefeed and kept in the dark, genetically alterd and slaugters apart of a supply chain
There might be God at the serving. It seems to be quite godless everywhere else.
Bill Waddell says
As I said Nadine, it takes a particularly curious world view … I rest my case.
Jones says
“None of those terrible things you guys cited redefined morals and morality – they were temporary abominations that did not sustain, and were crushed by mainstream Christians.”
…and that’s exactly what we need to see happen here.
We’re not talking about your Chick Fil A dollars going to an honorable and honest religious minded civic group like the Salvation Army. The Cathy’s have donated millions of dollars to extremist hate groups that are listed by the SPLC right alongside other extremist hate groups such as the Klan, the Black Panthers, and Aryan Nations…
True Christians need to be informing themselves better and speaking out against this, not lining up to lend their blind support to any and every organization that simply claims to be “Christian.”
Bill Waddell says
As I said, it takes a particularly curious world view to describe “Focus on the Family” as an “extermist hate group” …the opinions of the extremist left wing Southern Povery Law Center notwithstanding.
At some point the liberals have to learn that villifying the character of everyone who disagrees with you is a losing strategy. Until then, the left wingers just sound like a bunch of uniformed, unreasonable, screaming children.
Bart says
Hey, I don’t think you can get either left or right wings at Chick-fil-A. But that would be a great idea! Whoops, wrong topic. Sorry, I easily get distracted by fried chicken, as do most Americans, regardless of sexual activity. Go Cathys — Rock that first amendment! (can I get a BOG for this?)
Nadine says
If they are considerd left wing then i’m probaby 10 feet we
East of that wing. And that makes this discussion pointless for me.
Bill Waddell says
Yeah Nadine, any organization that assails the Boy Scouts and Focus on the Family, yet gives a free pass to eco-terrorists and the most radical, violent gay/lesbian organizations is left wing.
And yeah, discussion with you or anyone out on the irrational extreme of this or any issue is always pointless.
Bryan says
Well, that went off rather smoothly. Next topic: Abortion rights when the father is a member of the clergy!
Bill Waddell says
Ah Brian, as Jimmy Stewart said in Harvey, An element of dissent in any discussion is a very good thing. It means no one is left out and everyone is taking part.”
Bill Waddell says
By the way, Brian, I like your idea
Any thoughts on the topic Nadine?
Nadine says
Sorry i’m out. Apparently I have to see a God about a chicken.
Bryan says
Bill, you should have a contest to come up with a new punchline for “why the chicken crossed the road.” If someone can tie Chick-Fil-A, Religion and Homosexuality into the punchline, they win a lean book!
Rick Bohan says
I hate getting to a discussion late but, oh well…
I don’t go to Chick Fila because I don’t know where the nearest one is and I think its product is bland.
I don’t eat Papa John’s pizza because I think its product isn’t really pizza. I’m not sure its really food.
I don’t eat Domino’s pizza because it’s only marginally better than Papa John’s.
I don’t go to WalMart very often because the lines are always long and its selection is actually pretty limited…lots of different brands of relatively few things.
My point is that, as committed a liberal as I am, I don’t make many consumer decisions based on a company’s principles other than those surrounding commitment to a good product at a fair price.