When did policies become a thing to be broken?  

When were policies ever communicated that they were only guiding principles, or for that matter, suggestions to be broken?  

 Why do we laugh at the phrase, "It is better to say you are sorry than to ask permission?

 According to Terry Carter, Carter's Professional Association, "Board members should be aware that they could be exposed to personal liability if they permit their organization to work with children or other vulnerable persons where the board has failed to implement an appropriate abuse prevention policy that has been customized to reflect the specifics of their organization. Failure to follow the protocol set out in the abuse prevention policy could also lead to liability, so it's important that an organization that has the foresight to implement a policy also makes sure the policy is strictly followed."   

I am a bit stymied by a change I have observed over the last decade that challenges the rights of Board members, leaders, and employers to hold individuals accountable for their actions when there is a contract, Code of Conduct, and policies in place. I have heard stories from many leaders who say they are experiencing increased anxiety, spending an inordinate amount of their time reminding personnel of policies and procedures that have been willfully broken. 

Churches, charities, and organizations can be held vicariously liable for the actions of their workers. The best line of defence against vicarious liability is to screen and train your workers and to hold individuals accountable for their actions.  

The church, charity, not-for-profit or workplace has a duty to care for their employees and volunteers. An organization demonstrates its duty of care by screening its workers and putting policies and procedures to ensure consistency and equality for all. There should also be open communication and accessible tools to complete the task given. When the need arises, leaders should be willing to provide reasonable accommodations to meet personal and family needs. Reasonable accommodations (requires a balance between an employee's rights and the right of an employer to operate a productive workplace), so long as it is not a hardship on the organization. 

Whether in the workplace or within your place of volunteerism, personnel have a duty to care for the organization. That duty includes but is not limited to the adherence to the organization's policies and procedures and submitting requests in writing for modifications to their schedule and contract. Workers should lookout for the best interests of the organization. 

As an employer and Board member, I hire for and expect three things from my employees and volunteers: 1) Competence: Can the worker do the task they were hired to do? 2) Chemistry: Do they work well within the culture of the organization and the team we have? 3) Character: Do they strive for excellence and model integrity, and do they demonstrate they care for the organization and our mission by following the policies, procedures and lifestyle stated by the leadership?

There will always be times individuals will disappoint you, and there will be times when the leader responds in a manner that is not noble. However, this should not be the norm, nor should we allow or tolerate insubordination and consistent breaches of policies. 

One of the most challenging tasks of a leader is to confront a team member when there has been a breach of policies and procedures. Having to administer progressive steps of discipline often causes anxiety and unnecessary angst. However, we are not truly leaders until we lead by example and hold people accountable for their actions.  

Creating a culture of goodness requires both the leader and the employee/volunteer to demonstrate care for each other.