Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Espoused Values of the “Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For”: Essential Themes and Implementation Practices

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study identifies and describes the values espoused by the 62 companies that have consistently (2014–2018) appeared on the “Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For” (FBCWF) list. We identify 24 separate values and offer an analysis of the keywords and phrases used to promote them. We confirm that these values fall within the categories of four well-accepted theoretical frameworks of corporate values and culture. We then provide evidence for three underlying dimensions transcending all four models. They are values that guide relationships and self-regulation; values that describe desired outcomes and performance; and values that inform learning and change. Next, we present the results of a qualitative study describing how these companies put their values into practice. Finally, using publicly available information from the Great Place to Work® Institute, we show how the espoused values we identified relate to: (1) what employees report about their experiences and (2) company self-descriptions. Our findings highlight connections between leadership and values and they offer guidance to those seeking to understand keys to values-based cultures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argandona, A. (2003). Fostering values in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1–2), 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Begley, T. M., & Boyd, D. P. (2000). Articulating corporate values through human resource policies. Business Horizons, 43, 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourne, H., & Jenkins, M. (2013). Organizational values: A dynamic perspective. Organization Studies, 34(4), 495–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourne, H., Jenkins, M., & Parry, E. (2017). Mapping espoused organizational values. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3734-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyatzis, R. E., Murphy, A. J., & Wheeler, J. V. (2000). Philosophy as a missing link between values and behavior. Psychological Reports, 86, 47–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, M., & The Great Place to Work® Research Team. (2018). A great place to work for all. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2011). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on Competing values framework (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardona, P., & Rey, C. (2008). Management by missions. London: Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collin, J., & Porras, J. I. (1996). Building your company’s vision. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 65–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, M. W., Smith, B. D., Grojean, M. W., & Ehrhart, M. (2001). An organizational climate regarding ethics: The outcome of leader values and the practices that reflect them. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 197–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feintzig, R. (2018, May 1). Now emoting in the corner office: The oversharing CEO. The Wall Street Journal, Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com.

  • Fleishman, E. A. (1953). The description of supervisory behavior. Personnel Psychology, 37, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartenberg, C., Prat, A., & Serafeim, G. (2019). Corporate purpose and financial performance. Organization Science, 30(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goleman, D. (2013). Focus: The hidden driver of excellence. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Place to Work® (n.d.). Criteria for making the Fortune 100 best companies to work for list. Retrieved from https://www.greatplacetowork.com/.

  • Great Place to Work®. (2018). Top five employee experience ratings. Retrieved from https://www.greatplacetowork.com/best-workplaces/100-best/2018.

  • Grøgaard, B., & Colman, H. L. (2016). Interpretive frames as the organization’s “mirror”: From espoused values to social integration in MNEs. Management International Review, 56(2), 171–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2013). The value of corporate culture. Journal of Financial Economics, 117(1), 60–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, K. O., & Velasquez, M. (1988). The Boeing company: Managing ethics and values. New York: The Business Roundtable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, J. N. (2003). The relationship of leadership style and CEO values to ethical practices in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 263–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 321–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, A., Kirk-Brown, A., & Cooper, B. K. (2012). Does congruence between espoused and enacted organizational values predict affective commitment in Australian organizations? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(4), 731–747.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaakson, K. (2010). Management by values: Are some values better than others? Journal of Management Development, 29(9), 795–806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsen, K., Galunic, C., Weeks, J., & Braga, T. (2015). Evaluating espoused values: Does articulating values pay off? European Management Journal, 33(5), 332–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabanoff, B., & Holt, J. (1996). Changes in the espoused values of Australian organizations 1986–1990. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17(3), 201–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23, 187–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lord, R. G., & Brown, D. J. (2001). Leadership, values, and subordinate self-concepts. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(133), 152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malbašić, I., Marimon, F., & Mas-Machuca, M. (2016). Is it worth having focused values? Management Decision, 54(10), 2370–2392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malbašić, I., Rey, C., & Potočan, V. J. (2015). Balanced organizational values: From theory to practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 130, 437–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padaki, V. (2000). Coming to Grips with Organisational Values (Les valeurs organisationnelles maîtrisées / Lidando com os valores organizacionais / Enfrentándose a valores organizativos). Development in Practice, 10(3/4), 420–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T., & Waterman, R. H. (1981). In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruzan, P. (2001). The question of organizational consciousness: Can organizations have values, virtues and visions? Journal of Business Ethics, 29, 271–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R. E. (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29, 363–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, A. (2011). Built on values: Creating an enviable culture that outperforms the competition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology, 48, 23–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. R., & Brinkmann, J. (2002). Leaders as moral role models: The case of John Gutfreund at Salomon Brothers. Journal of Business Ethics, 35, 327–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavru, S. (2013). What do we know about organizational values? A systematic review. Technical report, Sofia, Bulgaria: Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”.

  • Urbany, J. E. (2005). Inspiration and cynicism in values statements. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 169–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2015). Developing management skills (9th ed.). New York: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9, 15–32.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Ms. Lila Despotidou and Dr. Theodore Lappas for their contributions to initial steps in this research project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, Stevens Institute of Technology, 1 Castle Point on Hudson, Hoboken, NJ, 07803, USA

    Peter G. Dominick, Gregory Prastacos & Richard R. Reilly

  2. Department of Communication, Media and Culture, Panteion University, 136, Syngrou Avenue, 176 71, Athens, Greece

    Dimitra Iordanoglou

Authors
  1. Peter G. Dominick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dimitra Iordanoglou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gregory Prastacos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Richard R. Reilly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter G. Dominick.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table

Table 9 Key words used by the companies to express their espoused values
Full size table

9.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dominick, P.G., Iordanoglou, D., Prastacos, G. et al. Espoused Values of the “Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For”: Essential Themes and Implementation Practices. J Bus Ethics 173, 69–88 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04564-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04564-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation