Our integrity is all we’ve got. It’s “our word”, a “handshake”, a “promise”, “showing up”, and many other acts we perform in our daily lives.
Because of this, our personal integrity is what we are measured against – and the most revealing of who we are being in that relationship.
We see it in the “stories“ or “drama“ of our lives. The Grey in our black and white world.
Whenever I consider the actions of myself/others, I have this tendency to measure (judge) the motivations behind those decisions/actions.
Of course, I’m not talking about decisions to do everyday sort of things; rather, I’m talking about decisions/actions that make a relative difference in my life – especially when it comes to business with others. I’ll explain further as we go along.
So, what is this “ELM Test” and how is it used, you ask?
ELM is an acronym for:
Ethical: working in accordance with fulfilling the principles of right or wrong (especially within a profession).
Legal: a statutory obligation to exercising the principles of right or wrong.
Moral: an individual conscious decision as a human being to live the principles of right or wrong.
The process when I use this is not only for my own behaviours, but also that of others in my ‘official’ or business relationships.
Personal relationships do not usually need the Test because they don’t involve legal or ethical questions, only the question of morality. Of course, I wouldn’t want to chill with a Ponzi schemer or a wife-beater – that crosses the line for me.
The way in which I use this test is by questioning the motivation or logic behind my (our) decisions before I decide to take action. By doing so, it keeps my integrity in check and lets me gauge my sincerity behind my actions. (I am always learning about myself, too! Ackkkkkkkk!)
If I profess to love people,
I better be ‘walking the walk’
instead of just ‘talking the talk’, right?
Now let me digress just a little (my little humanistic caveat). I am by no means implying that I am this walking edifice of righteous indignation – not like I was 15 years ago when I was the top of my capitalist game. Heck NO! I am human too.
Like you, my dear reader, I make mistakes – and some of them intentionally. That’s what we do sometimes. Sometimes out of fear, sometimes out of ignorance, and sometimes out of spite.
Yup, we are always stretching the boundaries
of our moral compass – right?
And stuff will happen. But …
When I enter a relationship, I feel I have an obligation to follow the ELM Test in order to ensure the best outcomes can be reached. In other words – to get what I want. There are many benefits:
it maintains a measure of respect and dignity for each other,
it allows us to know the boundaries of acceptable decisions/actions, and
it fertilizes the trust that is required for each other to be effective in the decisions/actions.
Here’s an example of how I recently employed the ELM Test:
I was recently looking for a job, and I wanted to work in a community organization doing outreach and providing support services like resume writing. I found several opportunities (at least for summer work) that piqued my interest, so I applied. Most replied and I went on a few interviews.
Keeping in mind that interviews are a good place and time to find out more about the agency as well. I always want to ensure the agency is a good fit for me as well. I always come prepared with questions for the interviewer as well as have word prompts to help me remember to make and note specific observations within the agency as it operates day-to-day.
I didn’t get a job.
I guess I could have been a little easier on my judgment of the agencies; yet, I wanted to work somewhere that was actually making some kind of difference.
After employing the ELM Test when deciding on these job opportunities, this is what I saw and determined from one of most obvious failures:
This agency’s main focus is to offer daily meals and snacks to feed the hungry, have a space to drop-in, and have access to free computers and telephone. The typical user is homeless, poor, hungry, speaks another language, men, recently landed, and between 30 and 50 years old. The programs they offer are creative writing, painting, resume writing, how to find work, and how to write a cover letter to name a few.
FAIL ELM TEST
They failed their Ethical obligation to know the needs of the services users and offer them the programs and services they need.
To walk into the agency – and even to the untrained eye, it is obvious the service users are not in a position of using the above-mentioned services offered. Besides language barriers, literacy is an issue. Many are homeless and less-skilled. Most were older men.
They failed their Legal obligation to use public funding to provide services according to the requirements from official needs assessments.
To hire staff to fill an agency need for funding does not give us value for the money we invest in human potential. I witnessed a lot of casual conversations between staff (not with service users – they watch TV – in Spanish).
When the time came to offer the services, an announcement is made, a sheet of paper is checked, and the facilitator then goes back to the conversation at the front desk.
They failed their Moral obligation to reach into the lives of their service users and find out what they need and want to develop themselves as “productive citizens”.
Again, even to the untrained eye, it is obvious they are employed by the agency just to have a job.
Granted, government funding makes it impossible to find qualified staff because of funding restrictions; but at least those that do work at the agency must have some sense of compassion, integrity, or desire to help others genuinely in need. The staff were just floating around looking busy, but really – they were not accomplishing much more than feeding the neighbourhood.
Given this is their main intention, they would be a better agency that address the main issues that confront the services so they indeed do make a difference – as intended!
Needless to say, I ran away from that agency.
I couldn’t honestly work for someone who is just playing the game of life. I don’t want to just fill a hole – I want to make a difference in my little corner of the world. From the results of their decisions and the actions the staff were taking, my observations compelled me to make a critical decision from this question:
Do I take the job and try to make changes from the inside,
or do I walk away and pick an issue where
I can invest my time and resources into something
that will actually achieve a difference?
I had to keep my personal goals in the social struggle in perspective – and I had to invest in my emotional balance, so I chose to walk away.
Updated from 2009