values > rules

An insight from my wife set me thinking: Values are more important than rules.

Both values and rules are things that shape your behavior. They determine what you'll do or refrain from doing in any given situation. We need guiding structure in life to give us direction in life, and both serve this purpose. We mentally reference these standards countless times throughout our day. We choose to embrace or eschew them in every circumstance we encounter. Rules and values differ, however.

Rules have a negative connotation. They define boundaries that we should not cross. Often these behavior boarders are drawn by authorities that impose these on others. The authority tends to either be a leader tasked with control or a community majority that decides what actions are off limits. Rules tend to rouse the rebel in us, as everyone can finish the phrase, "Rules are made to be...". (And the answer isn't "followed".)

Values have a positive connotation. Rather than define what we are not or will not do, they define what we are and what we do. Simply put, values encapsulate what is valuable to us. They create a vision of what we desire and hope to achieve, not what we strain to avoid. In contrast to the outward imposition of rules, values flow from within an individual or community. Rules imply punishment; values bring the reward of becoming what is valued.

To be fair, often rules and values are related. Rules are established to enforce values. They prevent dilution caused by deviation of the divergent. More simply put, they try to keep bad apples from tempting others to reject the values of the community. Rules provide a degree of control of those that do not embrace values, preventing them from creating the negative leadership of bad examples.

The problem with relying on rules to maintain culture is that it creates a shell of obedience without embedding values within individuals. They create compliance, not community.

If your goal is a task, write rules. If your goal is community, nurture values.

Taking bread from a poor man

If you were feeling a bit snacky as you walked down the street and you passed a homeless man, would you steal his bread? Probably not. We good citizens taught not to steal. What if you were authorized to take it? He's not offering it to you, but you have been entitled to remove the loaf from his mitts if you want. Would you? Probably not. Taking bread from a poor man is bad form.

I recently had a business conversation with a man who stepped on my toes. He used the measure of authority that had been given him to be disrespectful and controlling. A terse, "Let me explain to your role in this contract" followed by a suggested call to his supervisor would have melted him. I easily could have stepped past Kafka's gatekeeper, and part of me really wanted to put this guy back in his seat. Fortunately, God-fueled patience won the day, and we resolved the matter without me bringing clarity to my biggness and his smallness. Later reflection on this made me realize that I was tempted to take bread from a poor man.

The fellow on the other end didn't have much proverbial bread. He only had the authority to say 'yes' or 'no' as he interpreted the will of his superiors. Throwing this switch was the only 'bread' that he had in his life. Honestly, I was angry because he took a choice that belonged to me. I have plenty of bread, but in that moment he took a slice of my loaf. I came close to taking all of his. Not classy.

I can still get what is needed without crushing other people. Even if it takes a conversation with a supervisor, it can be done without gutting the subordinate. Frankly, his position is humble enough without me pointing it out. I can check my ego to save his. Stepping on him wouldn't make me any taller--it merely reveals my own insecurity. Power isn't for overcoming the little guy, it's for helping him. I pray that God helps me not to destroy the dignity of others. Taking bread from a poor man is bad form.