Spades.

We initially define another's Widget based upon what they say it is.

If they say it's a spade, and we buy it, and it performs as we assume that a spade does, then no problem.

If it performs as an axe, then we have a problem. We say 'But I assumed that this would dig holes' and they say - whatever.

We could argue or complain and perhaps win.

But the real problem is that we can't rely on them any more. Even if we win and convince them that it isn't a spade but it's an axe - we might get a refund or an exchange - but we can never trust them again because we can't rely on what they say aligning with what we think that they mean.

That's why defining our Widget and then acting consistently with it is such a fundamental and important part of what any person or organisation needs to do. One tenth of the job is defining the Widget. Then the other 90% is communicating it in both words AND actions such that it aligns with what people expect the Widget to be. 

We are all ethics teachers both internally and externally. Everyone watches to see what we DO and then there is almost no going back.

Employees won't usually say 'Hey - you said that people are your most valuable asset and yet you treat me like dirt'. They will just absorb it into their assumptions about the worth of your words and then treat everything that you say with skepticism and begin to silently disengage without trace.

This is why our response to people or organisations who do not deliver on the Widget as we expect them to do is critical and where our freedom really lies. If we accept the Widget as delivered - axe not spade - then we accept the organisation's definition of the Widget.

As employees, consumers, or observers, we do contribute to defining an organisation's Widget - but not through saying 'You're wrong' (especially as an employee) but through how we choose to act in response. 

Debating whether a person or organisation's Widget is 'correct' is wasted energy, especially if it involves conflict. It's their Widget not ours.

A better response is to say 'Oh - so that's what you meant when you said 'Integrity''.

We make our decisions in response to their newly-defined Widget. If we're a customer, we don't give any more business and tell our friends to do likewise. If we're an employee, we quit. If we're an elector, we vote out the Government. If we do none of these things then we're accepting and affirming the organisation's definition of its Widget. It will continue to sell spades that chop trees, disrespect our work, or make bad laws.

Once an organisation loses our trust by saying its Widget is one thing yet delivering another, it's very very hard for it to recover. Because even if it says (as many do when their profit, polling or other measure of their Widget success begins to fall) 'We were wrong and now we're going to do things differently' - how do you know what 'differently' means?