Example from a fictional company:

Scenario 1: Critical Security Vulnerability vs. Product Launch Timeline

Situation: Three days before a major product launch that has been marketed to customers for months, your security team discovers a potential vulnerability in the payment processing system. The vulnerability has a low probability of being exploited but could potentially expose some customer financial data if it were. Fixing it would require delaying the launch by at least two weeks.

Tension: This creates tension between our values of "Customer Trust First" and "Bold Innovation." The product launch represents months of innovative work and meeting commitments to customers who are excited about new features, but proceeding with a known vulnerability, even a low-risk one, could undermine customer trust if exploited or discovered later.

Value Guidance Questions:

• How do our values help us decide whether to proceed with the launch or delay?
• If we believe in "Customer Trust First," does that automatically mean we delay the launch, or is there nuance here?
• How might our value of "Transparent Communication" influence how we handle this situation regardless of the decision?

Stakeholder Perspectives:

• Customers: Excited about the new features but would be deeply concerned if they knew about any security risk to their financial data
• Product Team: Has worked tirelessly to meet the deadline and may feel demoralized by a delay
• Security Team: Concerned about potential risks and their ethical obligation to protect customer data
• Leadership: Balancing growth targets and market positioning against long-term reputation
• Regulatory Bodies: Would expect immediate disclosure and remediation of any security vulnerability

Scenario 2: Competitor Poaching and Counteroffer Decision

Situation: A key competitor has offered substantial salary increases (30% higher than your standard rates) to several of your top-performing engineers. These engineers have been honest about the offers and are willing to stay if you can match them. Your compensation structure wasn't planning for such increases, and matching would create internal equity issues with other team members.

Tension: This scenario creates tension between our values of "Growing Together" and "Sustainable Success." Losing these engineers would impact product development and team morale, but dramatic compensation exceptions could create unsustainable precedents and inequities that undermine the collaborative culture.

Value Guidance Questions:

• How do we apply "Growing Together" when external market forces create potential inequities within the team?
• What would "Sustainable Success" look like in our compensation approach—both in keeping key talent and maintaining internal equity?