By James Whitford, originally printed in the Joplin Regional Business Journal
A small group of company leaders visited the mission recently to tour and then discuss ways to partner. We wound our way through the century old building and then through the new annex and upstairs to our learning center. There, we sat and talked about the issue of poverty and some of what I’ve learned over nearly 20 years of work in the urban mission field. Something in that discussion cued me to pick up a piece of chalk and begin teaching the 5 Steps to Dependency from Bob Lupton’s Toxic Charity. He proposes that one way handouts elicit a cascade of responses in the recipient:
Appreciation -> Anticipation -> Expectation -> Entitlement -> Dependency.
I went on, sharing that the march to dependency through both welfare and thoughtless charity not only hurts those we want to help, but adversely affects us all. One way transactions not only lead the recipients into dependency but the benefactors into paternalism. Our simple redistribution of goods to the poor may feel good at first but soon decays to a bitter and unhealthy end for us, as well:
Exhilaration -> Purpose -> Necessary -> Essential -> Paternal.
I’ve summarized this parallelism at many times with different groups, but never have I had the response this one gave me. “You must come speak to our management team.” They went on to explain their own problem of entitlement describing it as pervasive through hundreds of their downline staff.
A week or so later, I was surprised to receive a follow up call to join them at their management meeting. I admit I felt more than a bit strange as I sat on the front row waiting to be introduced. What place does an inner city missionary have to advise a room full of business managers? I hit the main points and we went into Q and A. I only remember one question and I remember it because I feared it would come. “So what advice would you give us to deal with our employees who act so entitled?” It was the crux of their invitation.
We talked about the importance of clear expectations and, no less critical, holding to them. I learned that somewhere along the route, this company’s management had let their employees off the hook. What hook? The one they agreed to be on.
I know. The labor market is not exactly teeming with applicants who have timeliness, reliability and effort in their DNA. But the relaxation of agreed upon expectations is the slippery slope to an entitlement mentality. It does no one any good and as virtuous compassionate employers, we want to do good especially to those we employ.
It’s vital we understand that each individual’s reverent regard for expectations within agreements is not just fundamental to healthy markets. It’s fundamental to the preservation of individual dignity. That freedom to enter into any contract through mutual agreement is essential to individualism because integral to any agreement is a representation of the individual’s offer and desire, what he can do for what he wants. And to expect less than what one said he can do is an affront to his individuality and dignity.
That is not unilateral. It is for both parties who, through unregulated negotiation, reach an equilibrium for a mutually beneficial transaction. For an employer to allow below par performance (without a proportional adjustment in remuneration) is to shift that equilibrium out of balance. It equates to a handout. And the effect of handouts in the workplace is no different than handouts in the ministry. It’s only a matter of time before an employee advances to Lupton’s stage 4, Entitlement, suffering injury to his self-assurance and self-worth.
My advice is to follow the wise teacher’s exhortation: Let your yes be yes and your no be no. And out of care and concern for your employees, hold them to the same.
This article is just the tip of the iceberg for the practical resources available through the True Charity Network. Check out all of the ways the network can help you learn, connect, and influence here.
Already a member? Access your resources in the member portal.
Victor Claar
Ed Emery
James Whitford