——The Avodah Institute's —– Faith & Work Blog

An oracle is a term ascribed to someone who is deemed to have unique access to wisdom and truth.  In ancient Greek mythology oracles were understood to have the ear of the gods, and able to impart divine wisdom to humankind. For decades, Warren Buffett has been held in such lofty esteem that others in the investment community call him the Oracle of Omaha, in recognition of his uncanny knack for finding and creating value in the companies his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, acquires.

Warren Buffett is also the antithesis of the Gordon Gekko win-at-all-costs caricature. Buffet is a down-to-earth, straight-shooting, modest-living, common sense sort of guy who believes in the highest standards of ethical probity.

He once famously said, “Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding; lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless.” Perhaps realizing that to uphold such a high ethical standard, you need ethical people, Buffett said this about his hiring process: “In looking for people to hire, you look for three qualities: integrity, intelligence, and energy. And if they don’t have the first, the other two will kill you.”

Buffett is now feeling the full force of those words. Ahead of the usually upbeat Berkshire Hathaway shareholder meeting this past weekend, a number of Warren Buffett’s followers were questioning the Oracle of Omaha’s reputation as a judge of character after the scandal surrounding the resignation of top Berkshire executive, David Sokol.

For those not familiar with the case, the basic fact pattern is that Sokol purchased stock in the company Lubrizol for his personal account, shortly before making the recommendation to Buffett to buy the company. Berkshire eventually did, and Sokol made approximately $3 million on his personal shares. When this came to light, he resigned shortly thereafter, forcing Buffett to explain the departure in a press release. Curiously, in this release Buffett was not critical of Sokol’s behavior, and even seemed to be defending it.                

In a company, like Berkshire, that has always had the reputation of being ethically beyond reproach, this revelation came as a shock. Sokol was one of Buffett’s favorite executives. Some even thought he would be Buffett’s successor. As highlighted in a recent New York Times article, the two investors shared humble upbringings in Omaha. The similarities seem to end there, though, as the article portrays Sokol as seeking the glitz and glamour of Wall Street, in contrast to Buffett’s consistent frugality. How did the Oracle, who’s so good at picking companies to invest in, pick the wrong person as a protégé? Or, perhaps, maybe he picked the right person, but what went wrong?                                                           

Buffett has received widespread criticism for his initial statement about Sokol. As the pressure increased last week, Buffett still did not acknowledge any wrongdoing by his lieutenant, instead hiding behind legalisms; something completely out of character for the plain-speaking Buffett. The Berkshire audit committee, on the other hand, came out swinging and condemned Sokol’s actions as violations of the company’s insider trading policies, and are considering legal action.

At the shareholder meeting, as expected, the Sokol issue came up again. While taking some of the blame for not having asked Sokol when he bought the shares of Lubrizol, he also called Sokol’s actions “inexcusable and inexplicable”. Also, with regards to the still open question of succession, Buffett said that he will make sure that his replacement “is straight as an arrow.” This stance seems to have temporarily mollified Berkshire’s investors.

Buffett’s management style is famous for being hands-off, and relying on his executives to run their businesses ethically and profitably. However, some now argue, if those controls were tighter, Buffett wouldn’t have found himself in the predicament he’s in now. But others, including Buffett, argue that even an army of compliance officers cannot prevent someone who wishes to

Bloomberg News

cheat the system from cheating the system. In a 1991 testimony before Congress, when he was chairman of scandal-ridden Salomon Brothers, Buffett said:

“In the end, the spirit about compliance is as important or more so than words about compliance. I want the right words and I want the full range of internal controls. But I also have asked every Salomon employee to be his or her own compliance officer.” 

Focusing more on the “spirit about compliance” and personal integrity, Buffett prefers to instill general principles in his employees with folksy words of wisdom, rather than stress memorization of ethical handbooks. One of Buffett’s more publicized pieces of advice to his executives was that they ask themselves, “Would I be absolutely comfortable for my actions to be disclosed on the front page of my hometown newspaper?” Ironically, Sokol quotes this same piece of advice in his own book, Pleased but Not Satisfied. They both now have the opportunity to reflect on the ‘newspaper test.’

But could greater restrictions, oversight, or corporate governance practices have kept David Sokol and Berkshire from “losing its way”?  When thinking of this question of governance, I can’t help but think of the differentiation that the apostle Paul makes regarding the spirit and the letter, “the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life”(2 Corinthians 3:6). In a sermon on this same passage, Martin Luther says this about the Law: “… though noble doctrine, it remains on the surface; it does not enter the heart as a vital force which begets obedience. Such is the baseness of human nature, it will not and cannot conform to the Law; and so corrupt is mankind, there is no individual who does not violate all God’s commandments in spite of daily hearing the preached Word…”

AP photo

 Although, the “Law” that Luther refers to is God’s Law, there is an important principle being highlighted here. Even in the age of Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank, perhaps Luther’s interpretation of this ancient New Testament teaching is worth pondering. Laws and ethical codes can delineate where the ethical and legal boundaries of corporate behavior are – and, indeed, people and organizations need to have boundaries clearly articulated – but they alone do not and cannot make employees more ethical.

Some lament the loss of the good old days when business lacked the thousand-page legal tomes that are now so common, and when deals were done on a handshake. And yet, most of these same people would probably say that having ethical codes of conduct and improved corporate governance are good things. There seems to be a tension here between regulating and trusting. Perhaps part of Berkshire Hathaway’s success over the years has been its ethos based on trust rather than controls, on the ‘spirit’, you might say, rather than the ‘letter.’

I would not argue for Buffett to over-react to the Sokol embarrassment. It simply appears his trust ended up being misplaced, and loyalty got in the way of integrity. I would advocate for Buffett to reflect on how loyalty can sometimes blind one to ethical lapses. Perhaps, Buffett would have benefited from remembering President’s Reagan’s famous line when negotiating with the Soviet Union, “Trust but verify.”

It’s often said that things happen in patterns. And three seems to be the magic number. Bad things happen in threes, say some. Within the course of the past three days, I heard three stories about three successful sporting figures, and all three had one common theme. This wasn’t a case of bad things happening in threes but good things, countercultural things if you will, happening in threes. I observed three instances – in the narcissistic, star-studded, money-driven, media-frenzied world of professional sports – where three people at the top of their profession, play the game differently than so many of their peers. And all three were dancing to the same countercultural tune.

The first of the three was NY Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte. You don’t have to be a Yankees fan to be excited about spring training, an annual ritual that reminds us that the seemingly endless winter is coming to an end, and giving way to spring and the beginning of America’s “favorite pastime.”  This spring training season, Yankees fans have been particularly interested in the team’s pitching rotation. Stunned that pitching ace Cliff Lee spurned their eye-popping multi-million dollar offer, and chose instead to play for the Phillies (essentially choosing family, familiarity, and fit over money), this left the Yankees pitching staff with a big hole.  As a result, the question of whether Andy Pettitte, long-time and highly respected Yankee pitching star, would return for one final season or retire became all the more pressing. Andy, a loyal, decent, good guy if there ever was one, felt an extra responsibility to return to help his beloved teammates and bolster their starting rotation. 

A press conference was held last Friday for Pettitte to announce his decision. He shared that he felt healthy and strong enough to play. Yet after much prayer and reflection, he concluded he no longer had the heart and internal drive necessary to compete at the highest levels. So it was not

(Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty Images)

 age or injury that led the 39-year-old ace to retire, but heart.

During the press conference, with his wife at his side, the winningest pitcher ever in post-season play commented how as he got older he seemed to get calmer, better, and more confident even when pitching behind the count or in a jam.  The higher the stakes, the better he pitched. “Why?”, he was asked. His answer? When he was younger, he focused just on himself, his needs, his readiness, his body, his pitching, his objectives. But as he got older, he focused less on himself, and more on the needs of his teammates. He said (to paraphrase), “the less I thought about myself and the more I thought about helping the other guys, serving the guys, the better we played as a team. And ironically, the more I focused on them and serving them, the better I played. I learned it was all about serving others, not myself.”

The second of the three was Coach Spagnuolo, head coach of the St. Louis Rams. In a sports radio call-in talk show, Coach Spagnuolo spoke of the differences between being an aspiring assistant coach, and now in his first job as head coach. He had just taken a team that was 1-15 last year to 7-9 this season, almost making the playoffs.  He commented that one of the big lessons he’s had to learn is that leadership is all about serving

(UPI /Jim Bryant)

people, not the other way around. He said (to paraphrase), “I used to start each day with a to-do list of ten things I needed to accomplish that day to consider that day a success. Now, I still prepare that list each day and I still need those targets and the focus the list provides. But somedays, I don’t even get a single thing on the list done. Why? Because I now see that my people need me; they have questions, problems, worries, concerns. And I need to be there to serve them. That’s my job. Serving my team, my staff, my organization.” That’s leadership.

The third of the three was Coach Tomlin, head coach of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Amid a professional sports league that’s known for tough talk, tough play, and tough men, it would seem that the only way to get to the pinnacle of coaching in the NFL would be to be a tough taskmaster. Coach Tomlin is one of those rare coaches who has made it to the top of the NFL, taking his team to the Super Bowl twice in three years, winning it once.  During his tenure, he has built a system that wins year in and year out. In other businesses, commentators would call that “sustainability.” When Tomlin lost his all-star quarterback Ben Roethlisberger to a four game suspension earlier this season due to violations of the NFL’s professional code of conduct, most sports pundits wrote off the Steelers’ season, while Dallas was touted to be a shoo-in to the Super Bowl.  Well, last Sunday night the Dallas team watched the Super Bowl from the comfort of their living rooms, while Coach Tomlin led his team onto the field for a chance to win a second Super Bowl championship.

And though Tomlin’s Steelers eventually lost to the Packers, they made it to the zenith of the NFL world: they played in the Super Bowl. Does Tomlin do it by intimidation, bullying, and wielding his authority like a fearsome weapon? Apparently not. According to a pre-game interview with him reported in the New York Times, Tomlin says the secret to his consistent success as a head coach is heavily influenced by former NFL Coach Tony Dungy. Tomlin said. Dungy “tries to lead through service, and I do the same. I learned that from him in providing the men what they need to be great. Every day when I go to work, I don’t think about things I have to do, I think about the things I can do to make my men successful. So I have a servant’s mentality in terms of how I approach my job, and I get that from Coach Dungy.” In a sport defined by egos and toughness, Tomlin adopts a posture of service. Now let’s not think for a minute that he is not tough. But his toughness is manifested in a servant leadership style. Service to his players. Service to the fans. And service to management and the Rooney family, long time owners of this proud and storied football team in a city that has seen tough times, and made it through them.

Pettitte. Spagnuolo. Tomlin. Three intense competitors. Three consistent winners.  Three servant leaders. Maybe good things do happen in threes. How Trinitarian!

I arrived a day early to acclimate, and adjust to the time zone difference. I resisted the lure of my hotel bed and took the tram to the most famous of Vienna’s many Christkindlmarkte, the one at the town hall called Christkindlmarkt am Rathausplatz. These so-called “Christ-child Markets” have a long history in Austria, dating back to the 1600′s. Originally called Krippemarkt (crèche market) and even Thomasmarkt (named after theologian Thomas Aquinas), these once simple local celebrations have increasingly become large commercial affairs.

Some of the smaller, hidden markets still have neighborly charm and mange to conjure up a reminder of the religious significance of Christmas. But the bigger ones paint a largely secularized image of the Christkindlmarkt. Now, mass-produced Santa Claus products are more plentiful than the hand-made nativity sets that once typified the more traditional markets.

Perhaps this is a reminder that to find the spirit of Christmas, we need to leave the main square and explore the side streets. Maybe, when we leave the commercialized crowds and go off the beaten path, we’ll discover that which we’re seeking. Sometimes, going through the narrow gates and less trodden roads of life leads us to precious things. Often, we find what we’re looking for in the least expected of places.

So why did I take the road to Vienna? Maybe Freud (one of Vienna’s many famous residents) would say that was my subconscious motivation in travelling to Vienna – to see if I would find something unexpected. Yet the conscious reason was to give a paper at an international conference, held at WU (Vienna University of Economics and Business), convened by them, the International Association of Management, Spirituality & Religion, and the The Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion. That’s right, a prominent secular European business university hosting an off the beaten path conference on management, spirituality, and religion. Maybe, by sharing my research and learning what others are doing in the field of workplace spirituality and faith and work, I might find the unexpected.

How fitting that this conference took place in Vienna, home not just to Mozart, Schubert, and Haydn, but also home to three of modern history’s great (if not controversial) figures who changed how people think about humanity, religion, society, and work. Namely, Sigmund Feud, Max Weber, and Peter Drucker. While Freud criticized the role of religion and work, Weber embraced it. And Drucker felt that management was a liberal art, which required attention to the soul, as well as the hands. We convened expectantly, in the air that bred these giants.

The conference presenters and attendees were a diverse group. Professionally, it was a mixture of business academics, marketplace practitioners, and consultants. From the perspective of faith, it represented some of the world’s main religious traditions, including Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, as well as other spiritual orientations. Geographically, people came from many countries, including Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Spain, France, England, the United States, and Canada, as well as from South Africa, Thailand, Qatar, and India. The common thread was the desire to explore new research and practical ideas on the subject of management, spirituality, and religion.

My area of focus and professional inquiry is this: how can and should leaders create a faith-friendly culture that allows the benefits of spirituality at work (of which there is ever-increasing evidence) whilst avoiding the pitfalls and prejudices that sometimes accommodate this same subject? Invited to give part of the opening address, I presented on the link between leadership theory and “The Integration Box” theory. Collaborating with Professor Timothy Ewest of Wartburg College, he and I are testing and developing The Integration Box (TIB) theory to explore its usefulness for individuals and the corporate world. In the research paper, we compare and link developments in leadership theory with the growth in workplace spirituality and faith at work; offering TIB as a possible new solution for individuals and workplaces alike, who are looking to understand how they and others manifest their faith at work, and develop corporate policies that align this phenomenon with business objectives and best practice. Our paper was one of many presented at the conference.

To give a sense of the wide and rich content, here is a sampling of titles of some other papers and workshops:
• Balancing material and spiritual lives–when excellence meets ethics
• Between Tikkum Olam and Tshuva
• Spiritual Leadership: taking stock & moving ahead

One paper struck me as particularly creative and interesting; it was a rigorous empirical study of Catholic religious orders (Benedictines, Cistercians, etc) who have maintained market share (so to speak), continue to provide quality goods and services (for themselves and often to sell to outsiders), and survived for centuries (far outlasting the average life of the best run companies). The aim was to understand how governance, beliefs, and other factors impacted workplace motivation, and if or how leaders in the secular workplace could gain new insights into worker motivation. To the surprise of many a major finding was that “belief matters”… belief in something bigger than the bottom line was fundamental to success and longevity, more important than ROI, and more meaningful than one’s own compensation.

The unexpected was found.

I’m in Beijing for a week, visiting with different business leaders and entrepreneurs, both Chinese and Western.  I’m also giving a paper on “Religion and Business Ethics” at a conference entitled, “A Value-Based Economy for China and the World,” attended by Chinese and Western academics, business leaders, and government and Communist Party officials. The dinner conversations are, to say the least, very interesting.

Part I: Meetings with business leaders and entrepreneurs

Two meetings in the same day.  Held in different parts of booming Beijing, they couldn’t have been more different.

One was a gathering of male and female Chinese entrepreneurs and rising business executives. We met in a private room of a bustling typical Chinese restaurant. The  room was private partly so we could hear each other, and partly so no one could hear us.  We sat packed like sardines at a round table, the center which contained a large wok-like cooking basin that soon became full of many unidentifiable fish and other food parts. Few of the Chinese people there had been born to privilege; all had hustled and worked hard to build businesses and careers out of nothing. For instance, one woman used to be a factory textile worker who now, with her husband, owned and ran their own thriving textile business with 40 employees. She struggled to compete as she paid her employees decent wages, a practice not followed by many of her competitors. One man was starting a photography and videography business. He struggled whether to accept assignments to shoot images and objects he found offensive. Another person, armed with an American MBA, and a former  employee of an American software company, recently started his own high-tech firm. He questioned whether all the hard work and risk was worth the dream of making lots of money. Another was a mid-level professional in the auditing department of a large Chinese media company, struggling with issues of corruption.

The other meeting was a gathering of all men, mostly Western executives. Some were long-term expatriates, committed to an international career, while others were on shorter-term rotational assignments. Most worked for Western multinationals, and lived in secluded enclaves for expatriates. We met on the  top floor of a towering skyscraper. What should have been a stunning view of the surrounding city, was marred by the smog; we could barely see the adjacent buildings. These westerners were players; by all external measures they were leading successful business careers in a complex and often baffling culture. Yet internally, and in this private setting, they let their hair down with their worries and vulnerabilities.  One man, confessed he was “behind the curve” regarding attaining his personal financial targets, yet at the same time realizing how money can become a false idol, fleeting and ephemeral. Another executive chimed in, lamenting how he as a businessman and most companies define success almost exclusively in monetary or career terms. Another lamented to pervasive and corrosive nature of corruption found at all levels doing business in china.  A vigorous discussion developed around the question of when does a gift become a bribe? One man wept, sharing that his wife had just been diagnosed with advanced stage cancer; suddenly business didn’t seem to matter.

The two meetings couldn’t have been more the same. Both were comprised of current and rising business leaders. Both were asking hard “real world” questions about business ethics, how to get ahead without selling your soul. Both were commenting on the prevalent and corrosive effect of corruption. Both were trying to find deeper meaning and purpose in their daily work other than a big paycheck and luxury car. Both were wondering how to cope with all the pressure of being an executive and entrepreneur in a hyper-competitive context. Both were wondering how to live integrated holistic lives, instead of bifurcated, compartmentalized lives.  Both groups were comprised of people who described themselves as being followers of Jesus.

Two meetings in the same day. They couldn’t have been more similar.

“If you build it, they will come”

The title of this blog is the popularized version of the classic movie line, “If you build it, he will come” from Field of Dreams. This is one of those special movies that has become part of pop culture lore and language. Starring Kevin Costner, it is about an Iowa  farmer who, following the instructions of a mysterious voice, builds a baseball field in his cornfield.  At stake is his reputation in the community and his farm which is about to foreclosed by the bank.  A bit like the biblical figure Noah, Costner is mocked by friends and misunderstood by family. But build the baseball field he does, repeating the message “If you build it he will come.” Eventually, after the field’s completion, Costner is visited by the ghosts of Shoeless Joe Jackson and the other seven Chicago White Sox players banned from baseball for throwing the 1919 World Series.

AP file

My research assistant and I spent this past week among the corn fields of Iowa, not too far from the actual Field of Dreams, doing a different type of building. We’re constructing a model to test a theory first advanced in my book, God at Work. There I chronicled and analyzed the “faith at work” movement; a phenomenon where people, wanting to live integrated and holistic lives, are increasingly drawing on their faith to shape and inform their work lives.  My research on the movement also led me to propose a theoretical model about how individuals actually integrate their faith/spirituality in the workplace. Called The Integration Box (TIB) and the 4 E’s, it describes four manifestations or ways that people typically bring their faith to work.

Many people seeking to understand the faith at work movement ask me, “So, what does it look like when people ‘bring their faith to work’? How does it manifest itself? Can you measure it? Is it disruptive or good for business?  What about different faith traditions? What are the benefits and risks? How do I harness the good while avoiding the problems that always seem to accompany religion? “

These and other related questions are what brought me to Iowa. After building a prototype instrument to measure individual and collective manifestations of faith/spirituality at work, I’m now collaborating with Prof. Timothy Ewest, professor of business administration at Wartburg College in Waverly, Iowa to construct a revised and more robust TIB scale. Notably, The Integration Box instrument is designed to function for people of all faith traditions and in all kinds of workplace settings. During this stage of the research, we are ensuring the TIB instrument meets best practice social science scaling standards so as to ensure academic credulity and functional reliability.

Soon we’ll be conducting pilot tests of TIB in various corporate and other workplace settings. Let us know if this is something you might be interested in someday.  Who knows, if you build it…

- Former HP CEO Mark Hurd - Photo Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Unless you have been on an archaeological dig in Outer Mongolia, you will have read about Mark Hurd, the highly-regarded CEO of HP, having to resign over expense account irregularities and other breaches of HP’s Standards of Business Conduct. These breaches were discovered as a result of an internal investigation responding to charges of sexual harassment filed by an external contractor he had employed. While Hurd was found innocent of those charges, during the investigation inaccurate expense account submissions were discovered; apparently done by him  to disguise meals and other expenses incurred while with the female contractor. While Hurd and his accuser have each denied sexual intimacy, Hurd has paid her an undisclosed sum and she has dropped all claims and litigation. Due to the discoveries made during the investigation, The HP board said it lost confidence in Mark Hurd, and forced him to resign citing expense account irregularities, misuse of company assets, and an inappropriate personal relationship with an outside contractor.

I teach a course at Princeton University that every so often echoes the rhythms of a call/response  worship experience in a Black church, where the pastor calls out the first half of a line, and the congregation knowingly responds and fills in the second half of the line. No, I’m not preaching a particular brand of religion, nor do the students come to class to worship; I can assure you of that! But sometimes I’ll say, “If you remember nothing else from this class…” and without skipping a beat, they all give the response.

The course I’m referring to is called “Business Ethics and Modern Religious Thought.” Unlike many business ethics courses that approach ethics from a legal or compliance point of view, my philosophy is that ethics is fundamentally about character and culture. And if ethics is in large part about character and culture, and not simply laws and rules, that begs an important question: what shapes and informs ethical character and cultures?

Of course, many things influence and ground our character and culture. Certainly family, friends, coaches, clergy, and teachers have to be in the list. But where did they and their predecessors find their ethical grounding and teachings? For many, they find ultimate ethical formation in the teachings of their faith tradition. In light of that, my course explores the religious foundations and resources found in the three Abrahamic traditions that underpin or apply to business ethics. Students are challenged to become familiar with the broad themes, commonalities, and differences between the three traditions. Without fail, most are both surprised and delighted to learn how many of these teachings bear direct relevance to ethical formation, and provide guidance and wisdom when dealing with contemporary business ethics issues.

So what does Mark Hurd/HP, the Black Church, and my business ethics class have to do with the title of this blog: “If you remember nothing else from this class…”?

Amid the rigorous readings, intense discussions about moral philosophy, and intellectual inquiry into how the resources of the three Abrahamic faiths apply to contemporary business ethics issues, I often pause. Sometimes it’s when I see a glaze coming over students’ eyes and I know I’m losing them. Sometimes it’s when I feel a glaze coming over my own eyes, and I know I’m losing myself.  I pause to remind myself that as important as these scholarly points are, at the end of the day, even the most dedicated students will not remember all of the nuances and fine points of the course syllabus.  But over the years I have found, both in my former capacity as a executive and now as a teacher, that there are two or three things about ethics that every student, employee, and business leader must never forget. Never.

So throughout the course, I often stop mid-sentence, take a step back from the particular topic under discussion and say this: “If you remember nothing else from this course, please remember….” And like the congregation who sees it coming and enjoys the interactive to and fro with the pulpit, my students always shout out the punch line: “never cheat on your expense accounts!”  I also remind them that we are all capable of doing that which we know we are not supposed to do, so it is important to stay vigilant. To stay ethically fresh. Even with something so minor as expense accounts. So, friends, if you remember nothing else from this blog…