Time for a debate on values
During the busy political summer, the media has been full of headlines about the vacuum in the values debate in Finnish society. The crises of previous years have welded the nation together, as the pandemic and the war, which have shaken everyone, have demanded a common willpower and a belief in the rightness of the measures taken. Although there are still no signs of an end to the war in Ukraine, the European war has become the new normal. It has given the media and the public space to discuss other issues. The public debate on values was launched in the run-up to the parliamentary elections and became even more strident after the formation of the government.
The choices people make are driven by values. Nordic welfare societies are built on a generally accepted culture of unity and shared values. In recent decades, people's everyday realities are thought to have drifted further apart, or at least perceptions of the kind of life people generally lead have become more differentiated beyond the reach of their own everyday language. Values are reflected in everything that individuals do. However, very often people do not feel the need to stop and reflect on their own values, but rather take them for granted in the way they see the world and the way they live. Values are not immutable, but adapt to new phases of life.
When values guide people to act, work or business cannot be separated from value choices or their designation. Almost without exception, every company and organisation has a set of values on its website that guides its activities. Are these values merely aspirations expressed in words, rather than daily guidelines for management or the basis for carrying out work? Identified and shared values will, in the best case, increase motivation at work and, at the same time, work productivity. The most important thing is that these values are committed to, especially at management level, because it is from there that the values-based behaviour is passed on to all employees as a matter of practice.
In Finnish politics, the role of the government and its party chairmen in the values debate can be compared to that of a company or organisational management. The government programme is created on the basis of the shared values of the government base. A narrow common value base also means that the scope for government action is narrow and vulnerable to crises in unpredictable situations. The recurring debate on the rules of the game in media coverage aims to create a way and a framework for effective cooperation. Rules of the game are a proactive preparation for the future.
In politics, too, it is not enough to simply state values; it is only actions that show how values are prioritised. One solution to understanding others is to stop at one's own personal values. Although they typically seem self-evident, reflection is never a bad thing, especially in changing contexts. There is also an opportunity for reflection; to see if one's choices are still aligned with one's values. The same reflection should be undertaken in companies and organisations. If one's own practices are still in line with one's values, there is good reason to be satisfied. On the other hand, if you find a mismatch between your values and your actions, you should take concrete steps either to change your practices or to be prepared to get to know yourself and the community you represent by listening and discussing again and again.
Eeva Honkonen
The author is an expert on social change and an analyst at Blic.