I knew what was important to my boss because she would often talk about it.

And it was important to her because her boss talked about it.

If I failed to talk about it with my direct reports, the chain was broken.

It’s a weakness of the “tone at the top” approach. If one manager breaks the chain, some of the front-line employees don’t get the message. The higher that manager sits in the organization, the more employees are impacted down the line.

When the entire organization needs to hear an important compliance message, the E&C team will make sure that they target all three audiences: the c-suite, middle management, and the front line.

This LinkedIn post by Adam Balfour got me thinking: how would I include the concept of good faith in a corporate policy without using the term “good faith”?

To me, an action taken in good faith is one that filters out dishonesty and bad intent. So instead of saying “employees must report their concerns in good faith,” we could say, “employees are expected to report concerns they believe to be true and not solely with the intent to harm someone.”

Do you agree? Would you define the concept differently? Let me know in the comment section below.

If leaders communicated as clearly and often about business ethics as they do about financial goals, their organizational culture would improve significantly.

The only reason they don’t communicate this way is because they fail to realize that a weak culture creates a drag on their performance.

Show your people you care about the “how” and watch all other metrics improve.

I often sit down to create a document that will be helpful to the ethics and compliance officers (ECOs) that I support. It could be a policy summary, an FAQ, or a quick reference guide.

In the middle of it, I’ll sometimes realize that the information I’m including could also be very helpful to the employee population at-large. So I’ll change the focus and try to write a document for all employees that my ECOs could also use.

I’ve learned that this is usually a mistake. When you try to write for different audiences in one document, the needs of one audience (or both) will be neglected in the process. It might be more work, but writing a separate document for each audience is better.

Heraclitus said that no man ever steps in the same river twice. Not only does the river constantly change, so does the man.

Similarly, every time we read a book, we see something new. The book may not have changed, but we have.

As such, we should not hesitate to exhort our employees, over and over again, to do the right thing. Between the last time we’ve asked and now, they have changed, and so have we. This time, it will click for some of them.

And for others, it’ll be the next time.

Keep it up.

As things happen to us today, our brain will filter most of it out.

For example, as you read the previous sentence, you didn’t pay attention to the color of the floor, you didn’t notice the background noise, you didn’t smell your coffee, and you weren’t aware of the pressure of your chair on your back.

And as we later recount to someone what happened to us today, we will omit most of it.

“How was your day, honey?” “Oh, great! Sam and I met for lunch and I had the best salad. Then, after work, I went to check out the new gym near the office… leg press machine… then picked up some wine… kids’ homework…”

And whoever listened to our day’s recap will only absorb some of it.

This is just how brains work. They pay attention to what is important to this person at this moment.

It’s helpful to remember this when we attempt to communicate with, or train our employees.

Keep it short. Keep it simple. Make it impactful. Make it useful.

If your employees need to remember something, make them want to remember it. Once they want something, they will pay attention to anyone who offers it to them.