The Responsibility Project^®. Exploring what it means to do the right thing

21 Comments

What do you think? Leave a comment

• August 29, 2008 by Chris Anthony

  I think some problems are just too big to handle by yourself, so in those cases, you should definitely seek help. The key here is to know when to ask for help and when not to ask. If I was part of a sales team preparing a big presentation for an important client, and I had a problem with my portion of the presentation that I couldn't solve on my own, it would be irresponsible of me NOT to ask for help from someone else. In a different scenario, if I somehow accidentally emailed sensitive company information to a competitor, trying to resolve that by myself would not only be irresponsible, it would be unethical. However, if it is a trivial problem, like replacing a broken office chair, and I have a way to solve the problem on my own without involving others needlessly, I have a responsibility to do that. It's all a matter of using your best judgment and following the company rules (if applicable).

  Reply

  • September 8, 2009 by REGINA

    IT IS GREAT SO TRUE

    Reply

• October 6, 2008 by Andrea Lodi Recabarren

  What easy it seems..how hard it is to make it!

  Reply

• October 11, 2008 by someone

  I must say I'm a little surprised at this video coming from a bank, especially since a good amount of what is going on right now can be blamed on all the banks following each other like lemmings. Now they can't fix their own problems and look for help. Somehow an office chair and ohhhh lets say 700 BILLION dollars can't be put on the same level of responsibility. Sorry if I have to tell this to a bank, but a lot of people aren't that smart and will sign paperwork without hardly even glancing at it, let alone reading the fine print. It was your money you lent out (but probably not yours) so maybe you should have taken responsibility and said "HEY you cant afford this!" So now here's 700 billion to help you out minus the 140K AIG used on SPA's for themselves... so with the money I pay in taxes I say to you "take responsibility with what we all gave"

  Reply

• October 15, 2008 by ELois Poole-Clayton

  I don't believe in going along with any office, half cocked ideas about who to take orders after. I don't agree that a person should be forced to play the game or be fired. I do believe that the individuals, who are involved in such rhetoric, should not be allowed to blame others and jeopardize their job positions. I've had monies stolen from my bank account by Premiere, Capitol One and WaMu. Even as we speak, I don't do business with banks because I'm skeptical of who I can trust, but I still give the next company a chance to prove themselves for one thing for sure, they only get by, they won't get away and when they are caught, there's no use in them e-mailing I ANY offers, for I will expose them with the quickness! I will not be used to promote ANY of their attempts to lure others!

  Reply

• October 15, 2008 by Theodore Harrington

  Just to get something out of the way first, to reply to the anonymous ranter before me: I believe your comment about Liberty Mutual's irresponsibility is misinformed. Liberty Mutual is not a bank, it's an insurance company. Companies like Lehman Brothers were investment banks. Nevertheless, the present economic situation is an interesting backdrop for discussion. Mentally replacing the bunnies with actual companies and the broken office chair with the economic crisis or an element thereof, there's a somewhat different message to be gleaned from the film. As several have said before, some problems that fall into one's lap are hardly the kind that can be kept confidential and personal. Sometimes, it takes help, coordination, and working together to solve those problems and ensure that one burdening a single person (or company) does not spread and get out of control, as with the office chair war in the film. Above all else, though, I agree with Chris Anthony's initial comments on the issue, when viewed from the scale of a single person and the kinds of problems one would face.

  Reply

• October 15, 2008 by craig hirst

  We should let them fall. We should never have gotten used to living on borrowed money.

  Reply

• October 15, 2008 by craig hirst

  They should be left there own demise at no expense to us. They have insurance, don't they?

  Reply

  • October 20, 2008 by Christine

    This is their fault not ours. Who told them to take such big salaries? If they would have done this, then perhaps we would not have this problem now. Why should we pay for something that we did not cause?

    Reply

• November 7, 2008 by Megan Murphy

  This film was adorable. That's all the good I have to say about it. It was about office people trying to foist a broken chair on one another. Then, one person martyrs himself to the group and takes the broken chair back. Then, the most interesting part happens. The conversation starter question is presented: "We all have personal problems. How responsible are we to make sure they stay that way?" This is what intelligent people call specious logic and manipulation. The idea is, we're not even supposed to question that this is a personal problem. Clearly, it's not. We're supposed to sit around and argue about what should have been done right, and how that guy was a hero or not, etc. Some angry ranting, some calls for moderation, etc. And then a voice would come in with a tone of higher authority. And with eloquence and disregard for name-calling or pettiness, they would say something wise-sounding, like, "It's all about personal management. One needs to take responsibility for their own environment, etc." Which would be absolutely true. Heads would nod, everyone would agree, we need to be responsible for our own troubles in this world, etc. The fact of the matter is that the average worker is underpaid, gets less benefits every year, and is forced very often to toe some company line that causes them daily stress and confrontation with their co-workers and often the very customers they're supposed to be helping or supporting. The fact of the matter is, in the corporate landscape this cute video portrays, a bean-counter decides that replacing chairs once every two years saves the company X thousands of dollars. So, the office manager gets told this is how it's going to be. And he likes doing his job well, so he can get out of it, because it sucks telling people they can't have a new chair. So, he tells people whose chairs break that he ordered one, but it hasn't come in yet, or that they have to talk to the department head, who sends the person with the broken chair off to someone else or back to the office manager. This kind of stuff goes on until it finally dawns on the worker that he's stuck with the broken chair and begins the process of foisting it on his co-worker. The story goes on from there. This is not a personal problem. This is a problem with corporate culture. Plain and simple. It's broken. It makes our lives awful. It takes the life out of its employees and customers every day. And if companies would just stop spending so much money on trying to change the way people think, maybe they'd put that money to good use, by say, maybe helping their employees work in environments where their person is respected just as much as the personhood of the CEO. Crazy stuff, like offices, personal space, good lighting, chairs people can actually sit in. I'm all for personal responsibility. I would take that chair to the office manager rather than give it to someone else. But that's not what this is about. This is about a lot of spent money on behalf of a corporation in an effort to change the way people think. And to the person who can't wait to say, "Lighten up. It's bunnies! In an office!" I say, no it's clearly not.

  Reply

• November 15, 2008 by Chris Carlson

  How much money did it cost to make this cartoon? I am sure a lot. Another waste.

  Reply

• November 29, 2008 by David Poe

  This is the kind of responsible media that can have an immense ripple effect. Hot Seat, Lighthouse and some of the other films posted here represent exactly what societies count on artists to do: illustrate and evoke our better selves. The fact that Liberty Mutual has opted for patronage of excellent artists is not only a triumph of strategic marketing, it benefits us all. It is particularly cool that the lack of dialogue allows the lesson o these animated shorts to be perceived by people all over the world. Thanks to all involved; great contribution! That some here view it as a manipulation of or pass for indolent corporate culture reads a little too much into a cartoon (unless LM turns out to be Enron or a recipient of bailout monies, in which case this entire project will be ironic indeed.) But this approach is much more interesting and creative than State Farm's "Now What" campaign ... and the quality of the work will resonate, regardless of the entity that paid to foment it.

  Reply

• December 18, 2008 by Joe Valentino

  Megan , I couldn't have said it in a more concise manner. It's nice to see that there are some critical thinkers out there that are ready to call the corporate behavior model on what it is and what it does to the people who are forced to interact with it. The world around us demonstrates this fact. Now that we are getting conscious about what this kind of organization does to people, we can take the next logical step and create a more productive outline utilizing all we've learned to manifest a saner model that actually validates the life affirming instead of the ladder climbing. My question is whether or not enough people are ready to make that conscious choice and create the new paradigm. The next evolution: to organize human beings in a humane fashion because that’s how it's done in the real world. Now that's a paradigm shift worth celebrating and the work to be done starting now. That's my thought.... for what it's worth.

  Reply

• January 9, 2009 by

  YEAH, that's it!

  Reply

Tell us what you think.