There is a diagram floating around LinkedIn and Twitter that attempts to illustrate an individual’s true ‘purpose’. It’s amusing to me, because it’s short-sighted. It may even be delivering a disservice to some.
Whenever I come across the graphic, I immediately wonder if it’s doing a disservice to employees everywhere.
There are four circles in the Venn Diagram, where the overlapping circles read as follows:
- Passion/Profession – That which you are good at
- Passion/Mission – That which you love
- Mission/Vocation – That which the world needs
- Profession/Vocation – That which you can be paid for
In the middle of all four circles is a blue star, which denotes ‘purpose’.
Cute, but it’s rather myopic.
The diagram suggests your purpose (arguably something that is aided and abetted by whether or not an employee is engaged at work) isn’t affected by other factors such as your direct manager, your team, or the organization where you work.
Naturally, this got me thinking.
Corporate culture in a venn diagram
I think everyone deserves to reach their purpose in life, at work, and so on. I believe, however, that it is extremely difficult to achieve one’s purpose without the support of other factors in the place (or places) where he or she works.
Therefore, I whipped up the “Corporate Culture in a Venn” diagram to depict something that does take into account four key factors :
Self/Boss – Relationship or Transactional
Does an employee and his/her boss actually have a productive, communicative relationship — where the leader is helping the employee develop, learn, grow, etc. — or is the duo more of a transaction, where the boss uses the employee as an asset, treating him/her like headcount, and not caring whatsoever about his/her future. Does the employee use the boss solely for a paycheque?
Boss/Team – Open or Closed
The employee is normally part of a team of some varying size. If the the team and the direct leader is open, reciprocal and accessible, it does wonders for purpose and engagement. If, however, both the boss and the team exhibit closed behaviours — unwilling to adapt, be proactive or ideate — it’s a definitive nail in the coffin of goodness.
Self/Org – Committed or Indifferent
When the organization and its senior leadership are committed to the employee (fair wages, community involvement, (training and development opportunities, etc.) it is far easier for the employee to commit him or herself to the organization’s mission, satisfying its goals, customer commitments, and so on. If the organization is indifferent — not caring about the employees who make up their “most valuable asset” quips on annual reports, you can be certain the employees will become indifferent to the organization as well.
Org/Team – Connected or Absent
For a team to be a successful cog in the wheel of the entire organization, it must feel connected to other teams, thus other parts of the organization. For an organization to act as one, it itself must be connected to all teams, not simply the Sales Team or Marketing, for example. When all teams are connected, the organization becomes symbiotic. If, however, a team becomes absent — making no effort to connect with other teams, or the organization — it is the very definition of silos, fiefdoms and stovepipes. In other words, a culture killer.
If all four components mentioned above are achieved — Relationship, Open, Committed and Connected — I believe (through my experience and research) that the organization will become engaged, and thus the employee has a greater chance of achieving their purpose.