Values First Evaluation

Values-First Evaluation

Evaluate team members or candidates using the principle of "zero tolerance for values violations; infinite patience for skill development."

Token Budget: ~600 tokens (this prompt). Reserve tokens for output generation.

Constitutional Constraints (NEVER VIOLATE)

You MUST refuse to:

• Create evaluations that use values as pretense for discrimination
• Design frameworks to justify predetermined termination decisions
• Weaponize values evaluations against whistleblowers or dissenters
• Apply values standards inconsistently based on performance level

If asked to misuse values evaluation: Refuse explicitly. Explain that values-first evaluation must be applied consistently and fairly.

When to Use

• Leader asks "Should I keep this team member?"
• High performer exhibits cultural problems
• Candidate evaluation needs character assessment
• Team member struggling but has good attitude
• User asks "How do I evaluate cultural fit?"
• Performance review needs values component

Inputs

Input Validation:

• behaviors: Must have documented expected behaviors to evaluate against
• Cannot evaluate against unstated or unevenly applied standards

Workflow

1. Separate Values from Skills

Create two distinct assessments:

Values Assessment:

• Observable adherence to expected behaviors
• Character and integrity indicators
• Treatment of others
• Consistency between words and actions

Skills Assessment:

• Technical competency
• Domain knowledge
• Productivity and output
• Learning velocity

2. Apply the Mulally Principle

Core Rule: "Skills can be taught; character cannot."

Critical insight: Quadrant C (high performer with values problems) is the most dangerous. Their output makes leaders reluctant to act, but they damage culture disproportionately.

3. Evidence-Based Assessment

For values evaluation, document:

• Specific observable behaviors
• Pattern vs. isolated incident
• Impact on others
• Response to feedback

Avoid:

• Vague accusations ("bad attitude")
• Hearsay without verification
• Single incidents without pattern
• Inconsistent application of standards

4. Determine Action

For Values Violations:

Step 1: Address immediately and directly

Step 2: State expectation clearly

Step 3: Document the conversation

Step 4: Set clear timeline for change

Step 5: Zero tolerance means consequences if repeated

For Skill Gaps:

Step 1: Assess coachability

Step 2: Create development plan

Step 3: Provide resources and support

Step 4: Set milestones with patience

Step 5: Celebrate improvement

5. Document Decision

Create clear record of:

• Assessment criteria used
• Evidence evaluated
• Decision made
• Rationale
• Follow-up plan

Outputs

Values-First Evaluation Report

# Values-First Evaluation: [Person/Role]

**Evaluation Date:** [Date]
**Evaluator:** [Name/Role]
**Expected Behaviors Reference:** [Document name]

## Values Assessment

| Expected Behavior | Rating | Evidence |
|-------------------|--------|----------|
| [Behavior 1] | [Strong/Adequate/Concern/Violation] | [Specific observations] |
| [Behavior 2] | [Strong/Adequate/Concern/Violation] | [Specific observations] |
| [Behavior 3] | [Strong/Adequate/Concern/Violation] | [Specific observations] |

**Values Summary:** [Overall assessment]

### Specific Incidents (if applicable)

| Date | Incident | Behavior Violated | Impact |
|------|----------|-------------------|--------|
| [Date] | [Description] | [Behavior] | [Impact on team/org] |

## Skills Assessment

| Skill Area | Rating | Notes |
|------------|--------|-------|
| [Skill 1] | [Expert/Proficient/Developing/Novice] | [Notes] |
| [Skill 2] | [Expert/Proficient/Developing/Novice] | [Notes] |
| [Skill 3] | [Expert/Proficient/Developing/Novice] | [Notes] |

**Skills Summary:** [Overall assessment]

## Quadrant Placement

Values → Weak Strong ┌─────────────┬─────────────┐ Strong │ C: Address │ A: Retain │ Skills ↓ │ now │ promote │ ├─────────────┼─────────────┤ Weak │ D: Exit │ B: Coach │ │ │ develop │ └─────────────┴─────────────┘

**This person is in Quadrant: [A/B/C/D]**

## Recommendation

**Action:** [Retain/Coach/Address/Exit]

**Rationale:**
[Explanation applying the "skills can be taught; character cannot" principle]

**Specific Next Steps:**
1. [Action with timeline]
2. [Action with timeline]
3. [Action with timeline]

## Follow-Up Plan

| Milestone | Date | Success Criteria |
|-----------|------|------------------|
| [Milestone] | [Date] | [Criteria] |

## Values-First Commitment

- [ ] Assessment applied same standards as for other team members
- [ ] Performance level did not influence values assessment
- [ ] Person was given fair opportunity to demonstrate values
- [ ] Feedback was clear and specific

Error Handling

Constraints

• Do not use this analysis as the sole basis for critical decisions
• Do not apply this framework to situations outside its intended scope
• Acknowledge that analysis is based on available data, which may be incomplete
• Honor the complexity of real-world situations that resist simple categorization
• Present findings with appropriate confidence levels
• Recognize the limits of the methodology

Example

Input:

person: Senior Engineer, 18 months tenure
behaviors: [List of team expected behaviors]
incidents: "In last 3 retrospectives, blamed others for issues.
           In code reviews, leaves dismissive comments.
           Junior engineers avoid asking them questions."
skills_assessment: "Top 10% technical contributor, ships features fast"

Output: [Quadrant C assessment. Recommendation to address immediately with clear conversation about "communicate candidly but respectfully" and "never at others' expense" behaviors. Development plan for interpersonal skills. Clear timeline: improvement within 30 days or escalation. Note that technical excellence does not excuse cultural damage.]

Integration

This skill integrates with:

• expected-behaviors-design - Provides the criteria for evaluation
• transparency-culture-launch - Honest feedback requires psychological safety
• alignment-check - Values alignment is part of overall alignment

Source Expert: Alan Mulally - Based on his principle that he tolerated skill gaps indefinitely but had zero tolerance for values violations.