Fourth Step of the Cooplexity Model: Management by Values

Fourth Step of the Cooplexity Model: Management by Values

The fourth step of the Cooplexity model addresses how to manage by values, creating a genuine organisational culture based on values.

Article Content

The Case of ENDESA Brazil

Surely you remember someone for their human consistency, for their values. Someone who, in difficult moments, acted not according to what was easy or even their own interests, but in harmony with a higher objective. In my case, that person is Marcelo Llévenes Rebolledo.

In August 2012, I had the opportunity to meet Marcelo, who had a huge impact on me in the business realm.

He had recently been appointed president of the Enersis board of directors. He had been the general manager of Endesa Brazil (now Enel Brazil) since 2002. Under his leadership, the company overcame the severe hydroelectric crisis of 2001, marked by a lack of rainfall, the devaluation of the real, and power rationing. Endesa Brazil offset the 39% drop in results caused by the drought and devaluation through aggressive cost cuts, organisational rationalisation, and a focus on generation and distribution. He turned the situation around, achieving net revenues of R$7.485 billion (+14%), EBITDA of R$2.353 billion (+5%), and net profit of R$1.471 billion (+22%), driven by higher hydroelectric generation, distribution sales (+7%), and asset adjustments. That's what you can read in the archives.

What wasn't published and left me stunned was how he did it. Here are some examples of his peculiar management style:

• He called himself "Responsible," not "Manager." Everyone wore an ID with their name and photo, but no position. Roles weren't important; what mattered was what they were responsible for.
• He installed a high table without chairs in his office. On it was a 10-minute hourglass. Anyone in the company could enter without an appointment to explain whatever they wanted, as long as it didn't exceed the marked time.
• If someone arrived late to a meeting, they deposited a coin in a large jar. When full, it was donated to social causes. In his words, "It's not that Brazilians are naturally unpunctual; it's that it costs them very little."
• At the entrance, there was a box where people could deposit the daily newspaper or any paper or cardboard scraps. They accumulated, were sold, and the proceeds went to social work.
• Periodically, volunteers gathered to paint a community school or carry out some local impact work.
• Next to the elevators were posters inviting people to take the stairs for cardiorespiratory exercise.

And so on, countless small demonstrations that peppered daily life with a strong focus on shared responsibility at personal, business, and social levels. What Marcelo did was not management by objectives or process control, but rather the creation of a genuine organisational culture based on values. It was management by values: creating visible rituals that reminded everyone of the shared purpose every day. The hourglass didn't measure time; it measured respect. The coin jar didn't collect money; it built culture.

Values

According to Schwartz (1992), values are affectively charged beliefs that motivate individuals and guide their behaviour. They are not limited to circumstantial opinions or preferences but act as deep references that consistently influence how people interpret reality and make decisions.

From a social perspective, values represent shared cultural ideals: conceptions of what a community considers good or bad, desirable or undesirable. These ideals underlie social norms, practices, and institutions and help define which behaviours are perceived as legitimate or illegitimate, acceptable or unacceptable, and which are encouraged or discouraged in each context. Thus, values not only guide individual action but also enable social coordination by generating shared expectations.

On the individual psychological level, values function as motivational goals that guide people's lives. They do not operate neutrally: they are closely linked to emotions. When a core value is threatened, intense emotional reactions are activated; when it can be freely exercised, it generates well-being and satisfaction. Thus, a person for whom independence is a priority value will experience frustration or anxiety before any attempt to limit it and well-being when they can fully exercise it.

A fundamental characteristic of values is that they transcend specific situations. They remain relatively stable over time and activate in diverse contexts, defining for each individual what is right or wrong, justified or not, and worth defending. Moreover, values are organised hierarchically: not all have the same weight, and decisions often involve prioritising some over others—for example, success versus justice. It is this hierarchy that ultimately guides attitude and action, especially in situations of uncertainty or conflict.

From Project to Purpose

In the previous step, the common project functioned as a framework of agreements: a space to balance legitimately different interests through compensations and reciprocity. It was sufficient to maintain cohesion but not to sustain it over time or inspire deep commitment.

When values come into play, the project transforms into purpose. It's no longer just about what we do together, but why we do it. Purpose does not replace the project; it elevates it. It gives it meaning, direction, and permanence beyond circumstances.

A team that shares a project can coordinate. A team that shares purpose can self-coordinate. This is the essential difference: purpose acts as a decision criterion when no one is watching, when there's no time to consult, when the situation is ambiguous. It is the internal code that allows coherent action without instructions.

The level of cohesion can be summed up in one phrase: "We want to do it." In step 3, that "want" comes from agreement. In step 4, it comes from meaning.

Trust and Commitment

The Dimensions

On the horizontal axis, it identifies the actors involved in the interaction:

• Individuals = actors who maintain their independent decision space. The action is individual, even if there are multiple actors.
• Teams = multiple actors whose actions aggregate and become collective. It is a set that acts as a unit.

On the vertical axis, we identify the criterion guiding the action:

• Interests are understood as activities or topics that capture our attention and motivate us to act.
• Values are understood as deep principles or ideals that guide our goals.

Both axes—actors and action criterion—should be understood more as dynamics than states.

From this perspective, depending on how trust and commitment are managed, the system can evolve toward more mature forms of collaboration or, conversely, slide back into logics of mere coalition or even competition. The graph does not describe fixed positions but possible movements in an evolutionary process of collective action.

The Quadrants

Coalitions are formal agreements and independent efforts with shared benefits, like convenience partnerships. They represent the first and simplest approximation to higher levels of cooperation and collaboration. Coalitions are fragile: they are reviewed or adjusted frequently as interests change. This sometimes shortens their lifespan, in which case we would speak of mere temporary alliances.

Cooperation is associated with direct reciprocity and parallel interests that compensate each other. It is defined as parallel or independent work oriented toward a common goal, with direct reciprocity, clear roles, and compensation as the key to aligning interests without mutual harm. It is linear, concrete, and goal-oriented. In cooperative work, tasks are subdivided among members, and each works separately. Coordination is important regarding who does what, how, and when.

Collaboration involves multiple actors with complex, voluntary, and spontaneous interactions that, from their collective actions, generate unpredictable outcomes. It requires deep interaction, shared decision-making, and collective creativity. It demands greater commitment and continuous interaction, leading to innovative solutions that balance individual and common interests. That commitment, accompanied by the sense of equity resulting from interest balance, is supported by shared values that serve as decision criteria. It is a creation process between two or more people with complementary skills who interact to generate a common understanding that none of them had previously possessed or could have achieved alone. It is a process of creation in which the result is an emergent product of interaction.

The Evolution

In the evolution of collaboration, collective relationships do not change abruptly but shift progressively in response to two key variables: the criterion guiding the action (interests or values) and the level of commitment of the actors involved.

When individuals interact based on their personal interests, they generate distrust and preventive reactions that easily degenerate into competition. Here, zero-sum logic and distrust hinder sustained collective action. Coordination weakens because each actor prioritises immediate benefit, even at the system's expense.

When these interests coincide among several individuals or groups with common interests, but commitment remains limited, the bond tends to materialise as a coalition. At this stage, actors cooperate at a very basic level and always because their interests temporarily align, but maintain an essentially instrumental logic. The relationship is functional and useful, though fragile: without commitment, the coalition can dissolve if conditions change.

The decisive step occurs when the action-guiding criterion ceases to be exclusively interest and becomes value. At that moment, sharing values generates trust, as it makes others' behaviour more predictable and increases the sense of security and reciprocity. In this context, cooperation emerges: parallel work with clear roles and direct reciprocity, oriented toward a common goal. Cooperation enables efficient progress while maintaining limited interdependence; each actor retains their decision-making and responsibility space.

Finally, when shared values combine with a high level of commitment, the system enters the realm of collaboration. Here, teams no longer just apply pre-existing values but generate and reinforce them through their own collective action. Interactions deepen, decisions are shared, and outcomes emerge nonlinearly and unpredictably. Collaboration does not eliminate individual interests but integrates them into a common framework that sustains collective action in complex environments.

Practical Tools

Indicators

There are signals to identify which quadrant a team is in:

• Competition: unilateral decisions, information as power, blame.
• Coalition: transactional meetings, "what do I gain?", frequent agreement reviews.
• Cooperation: clear roles, expected reciprocity, efficient coordination.
• Collaboration: emerging ideas, shared decisions, "we" as subject.
  
  

Taking the First Step

Once an alarm signal from an indicator appears, the shift toward values-based management must be built through practice, in gestures, in daily decisions. It doesn't happen just through formal agreements or corporate declarations in presentations. Leaders must take the first step.

"The only way to generate trust is to give the system a reason to trust."

And that first step is always a generous decision. It's not naivety but systemic intelligence: showing the environment that it can be trusted. And that opens the door for others to act from values as well.

The Systemic Perspective: Interdependence

When we understand that our actions impact the rest and that the group's well-being determines our own, the system changes logic:

• It's no longer about winning.
• It's about sustaining a common space where we can all develop.

Here, the systemic vision is not theory: it's progress. In this context, values are the language that makes interdependence virtuous.

Practical Keys

• Make values visible in action: It's not enough to state them; show them in real decisions, identify situations and examples, and make them public.
• Celebrate coherent behaviours: Reward not only results but also attempts, attitudes, and approaches.
• Model from leadership: Those in reference positions must be coherent with values, even if it implies sacrifice.

Just like Marcelo Llévenes did, each of his practices—the hourglass, donations, volunteering—was a concrete manifestation of values in action. They were not corporate policies; they were rituals that made a shared purpose visible.

Conclusion

When organisations align with their mission and values, commitment increases, and with it, innovation and synergy, which multiply productivity.

From an individual perspective, sharing values improves communication, collaboration, and team identity, generating a cohesive culture where people feel recognised and valued.

When members and the organisation share values, coordination, mutual understanding, and team effectiveness are reinforced, creating a context conducive to collaborative behaviours.

Mutual trust between collaborators and the organisation translates into prosocial behaviours, i.e., interactions that foster collaboration.

"Managing by values is leading with coherence, generating culture, and creating a system that takes care of itself."

Next step in the model

Management by values already delivers a very high level of added value to the team and organisation. An organisation cohesive around a purpose can begin to perform excellently by leveraging the ability of collaborators who interact to identify opportunities or face challenges. Leveraging all individualities that, with respect and acceptance, can complement and align around the common strategy will be the focus of change management, the fifth step of the Cooplexity model.

Innovation, change, and transformation require aligned wills that, thanks to trust, overcome the perception of risk and avoid resistance.

References

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
The Pennsylvania State University

Zamora, R. (2020). Cooperation in complexity: Cooplexity, a model for collaboration in complexity in times of uncertainty and change. Ricardo Zamora.
ResearchGate