It’s music to my ears. Something I have heard more than having the time to understand it or see it being practiced after being so profusely professed. But it wasn’t just me who never got to see it in practice, I’m sure the ones comforting themselves by their own portrayal of being righteous never actually meant it!

Maybe because for managements everything is easier said than done! Especially, when it comes to integrity and ethics, the typical management approach is to raise these as slogans, regressing their worth to be nothing more than mere rhetoric!

After all, it’s comforting to say and might as well believe, to hear that a lack of competence could be forgiven, but not a lack of integrity, the most standard manifestation of the competencies versus values debate, no one really intends to have, until it comes down to it. Everyone understands the feel-good worth of these words.

To managements, it almost immediately gives a sense of elation to a leadership level. Seldom do the managements understand unfortunately that leadership is not about raising slogans or practicing rhetoric. It’s about doing and exhibiting what they stand for through their actions rather than words.

But let’s first see why competencies have to be pitched up against values and why it feels hard to pursue both and opt for one? To answer these, let me fill in the management’s shoes!

• Competencies and values are mutually exclusive.
• Resource that’s competent and demonstrate values is hard to find.
• Sometimes only one of these is needed / both of these are not always needed.
• Competencies make up the passport for securing a position. These are the first ones to be encountered.
• Competencies can be assessed, but not values. Values are subjective.
• Who can identify if a resource practically demonstrates values?
• When it comes to values like integrity, ethical conduct, nothing else matters.
• Lack of competence is a lesser evil, you can’t do with lack of integrity.

You might think of more, when it comes down to being a matter of choice between both. And I have deliberately left out one management reason where values are prioritized over competence. Will reveal it in a while. But the real question is, are these all reasons enough for trading off one for the other?

Like I mentioned, I had to think about it through the management’s perspective. For managements, usually it is the performance that matters, for instance in a growth-oriented industry, it’s imperative that targets are always exceedingly accomplished. Alternately, their own performance targets can also have negative push, forcing them to focus on accomplishment by any and all means, fudging records and fake sales included!

Thus, in these scenarios, competence is always prioritized, over everything else. But then a few scenarios surprisingly suggest how values dominate competence. In my opinion however, unless it’s a purely missionary entity looking for resources, the idea of values dominating recruitment is abstract if not outright hoax!

One can easily substantiate this by experience. How many entities seek talent through advertisements laden with demands for specific values? Isn’t it always credentials coupled with relevant experiences? And that’s the reason why recruiters also focus on credentials, competencies, experiences and achievements. Moreover, when confronted with questions on values, candidates are also likely to glorify chance accomplishments or falsify experiences!

And now for the most important management reason reveal opting values over competencies; so that a given or an emerging situation, an unpleasant event, an undesirable incident, or an opportunity to be self-exalted could be “managed”. Indeed, values matter the most when they are only music to the ears! Afterall, its management’s job to manage!

Now let’s analyze the management reasons:

Thus, competencies and values are both equally pivotal for sourcing and retaining talent if an entity is to flourish. And how important are these for entities sourcing for auditors?

Extremely important! Someone has to hold the torch or be the light. At least auditors are expected to do that even if they are the only ones doing that. So, people tasked with recruiting Auditors need to look out for talent whose past exposure and experience reflects both demonstrable and substantiable examples of ethical conduct and competence.

Certainly, for that to happen, the resources tasked with such recruitment themselves need not just be competent in what they do, but also understand what ethical behavior is. The question is, can clients find such resources within their teams, or at least resources who might themselves have exhibited compromising behaviors in the past but can still distinguish between both?

When sourcing for audit talent, you will need best of both, sheer competence and unrelenting approach towards values. Not just because standards require us to have both, but because we can’t do without both!

Of course, this is a given unless auditors are being hired to perform as a sidekick of the management!

In that case you could be anything you like but the auditor!