Category Archives: Culture

Commitment or Compliance

Leave a reply

“If people do their best work in a place where they feel safe, what is it that managers can do to create that space?” I asked.

“We always want to do,” Pablo started. “If managers would only do this, do that, things would be better. It is not so much a matter of what managers do, it is a matter of the relationship between the manager and the team member. Do we have relationships built on dominance, pressure and compliance, or relationships built on trust, cooperation and commitment? Organizational structure is the way we define the working relationships between people.”

“This sounds like culture,” I replied.

“Organizational structure defines the working relationships between people. Organizational structure is culture.”

—New, available soon, on Amazon.  Premeditated Culture, Consequences of What We Tolerate.

Connection

Leave a reply

“In evaluating the health of any team, I need to look for states of connection and disconnection?” I asked.

Pablo nodded. “When you see a team in disarray, you will find disconnection. The team doesn’t go there intentionally, it goes there without thinking. Facing any dilemma, the team wants to remove the discomfort. The four typical responses of any team under stress is to fight, flight, freeze or appease. When they do, the group panics and fractures.”

“And the leader?” I asked.

“The inexperienced leader follows. In a meeting, you have seen it. A project is behind schedule because someone dropped the ball. Everyone knows who dropped the ball, but no one wants to call it out. People get defensive, engage in blaming behavior or avoid the subject altogether. There is silence, eyes look down. Then someone looks at the leader, who becomes the target for all eyes around the table. The body language clearly communicates that it is the leader who must save the team.”

“You said inexperienced, how so?” I prompted.

“The leader is being seduced,” Pablo replied. “The seduction is subtle, for the team is looking to be saved by the leader, but needs the leader to be complicit in the saving. And, the leader cannot resist the opportunity to be the savior. It is the hero incarnate. I know it sounds religious, but the mythology is there to illustrate the principle.”

“So, how does the leader prevent the seduction?” I looked sideways at Pablo.

“The team is attempting to put the issue squarely on the shoulders of the leader. The leader must resist and put the issue back on the team.”

“But you already described that the team is in panic, a state of fracture and disconnection?” I said.

“The leader must simply outlast the panic. The issue that has the potential to blow the group apart, has the same potential to weld the group together. It’s all about connection and disconnection.”

Clarity of Accountability

Leave a reply

“You talked about managerial systems and organizational structure,” I started. “Those are well-worn labels, but the devil is always in the details.”

Pablo nodded. “Yes, the detail of structure is simply the way we define the working relationships between people. The success of any organizational structure rests on its effectiveness to define two things – in this working relationship, what is the accountability and what is the authority?”

“But, isn’t it second-nature, that especially in a hierarchy, the manager has the authority and the team member is accountable to carry out the decisions of the manager?”

“Not so fast,” Pablo said slowly. “Each has the authority to make decisions within an appropriate span of discretion. And it is the manager accountable for the output of the team member.”

“But, if the team member, within an appropriate span of discretion, makes the wrong decision, how can you hold the manager accountable?” I asked.

“Because the manager selected the team member, trained the team member, assessed the team member and then delegated the decision to the team member. If the team member makes the wrong decision, that outcome is the accountability of the manager.” Pablo stopped to let that sink in.

“When we are clear about accountability, behavior follows,” Pablo continued. “When we accurately define the accountability, people know what to expect and they behave accordingly. If the team member is held to account for a wrong decision or underperformance, there begins a mistrust about whether the manager was clear in their instruction, whether the training was adequate, the right tools available, the circumstance not anticipated. If the manager is held to account for the team member’s wrong decision or underperformance, there begins a supportive relationship to ensure the training was adequate, the working conditions conducive, the selected project appropriate, within the team member’s capability.

“You see,” Pablo said, “the manager cannot allow the team member to fail. In a punitive context, that is why the manager often snatches back the authority for the decision and simply assigns the task. In a trusting context, the manager has to make sure all the variables around the team member are adequate and conducive to success. And, that includes the manager’s selection of that team member in the first place. The success of the organization starts with being clear about managerial accountability.”

Exercise Best Judgement

Leave a reply

“All well and good,” I said. “If we want to build managerial systems based on something other than greed, status and power, where do we start?”

“All at once, and all over,” Pablo chuckled. “Look, the first place we start is by clearly defining the working relationships people have with each other. There are two types, vertical managerial relationships and horizontal cross-functional relationships. When we look at those two types of working relationships, we most often fail to define the accurate placement of accountability and exact scope of authority.”

“Accountability?” I prompted.

“All too often, we fix accountability one level of work too low in the organization, and it plays into the blame game,” Pablo explained. “Between the team member and the manager, it is the manager accountable for the output of the team member.”

“How so?”

“Simple,” Pablo said. “The manager selected the team member, trained the team member, provided the tools for the team member, selected the project for the team member, created the working environment for the team member. The manager controls all the variables around the team member, it is the manager accountable for the output of the team member.”

“But if the team member underperforms, doesn’t that point the finger at the team member?” I countered.

“See, you fell right into the blame game,” Pablo smiled. “The team member does have an accountability, and that is to show up to work each and every day, to bring their full potential, to exercise their best judgement, in short, to do their best. It is the manager accountable for the team member’s output. The first place to start is to fix clear accountability.”

Carrots and Sticks

Leave a reply

“People have a fair, intuitive sense of their own capability,” Pablo continued. “And, they yearn for opportunity to exercise their full potential. To do otherwise causes people to wilt. A great deal of a person’s self-esteem, even identity comes from the value they see in the work that they do.”

“So, the system in which they work has impact on how they behave?” I floated.

“It’s not just the system, it’s what people believe about the system. What we believe, our assumptions, the way we see the world is what drives our behavior. Look, the real question is, if we believe that people want to fully participate at their highest level of capability, spread their wings toward independence, that they do not need a carrot and stick to get on with their work, then what kind of managerial system would we create?”

“This sounds a bit idealistic, don’t you think?” I countered.

“Not at all,” Pablo replied. “This is about hard nosed work. Making decisions and solving problems, tough decisions and difficult problems.”

Self-Independence

Leave a reply

“I would assume most companies have real problems to solve, so what do you mean, if you want your team to feel high levels of job satisfaction, you give them a real problem?” I asked.

Pablo thought for a moment. “Sometimes, companies engage in contrived exercises. To build a team, they take a group to a local ropes course, or a game of tug-of-war over a mud pit. Those exercises provide only temporary relief, short-lived when the team returns to work. The work itself has to be satisfying.”

“What leads a company astray?” I wanted to know.

“Oh, that’s not so hard to understand,” Pablo replied. “First, I think we have misconceptions about why people work. And, then we base our managerial systems on those misconceptions. It’s a flywheel that eats itself.”

“Misconceptions?”

“Some companies think people work only because they have to, only in exchange for meager compensation to put food on their table. Or, more substantial compensation so they can buy a boat. They believe employees are simply self-centered and have no inherent need to work. That our labor system exists only as a commodity. It’s a scarcity mentality.”

“As opposed to?” I said.

“People have an inherent need to work. People have an inherent need to contribute, to their own self-independence, and also to the positive social systems in which we live. Look at the number of hours in a work week. It has been coming down over time, but in the US is currently settled at around 40 hours. People need a substantial, material amount of sustained work, where they can contribute their full capability to solving problems and making decisions. Managerial systems based on this understanding are much different than those based on greed.”

Hollow Acknowledgement

Leave a reply

“If you want to change the behavior, change the context,” Pablo repeated. “How do I want my team members to show up for work? As the CEO, I have to create the environment that encourages the behavior I want.”

“For example?” I asked.

“Personal accomplishment,” Pablo said. “Let’s just take that one.”

“Okay, are you suggesting we walk around and hand out attaboys so people get a sense of personal accomplishment?”

“Sure, people need acknowledgement, but hollow acknowledgement does nothing for the human psyche. If you want people to have a sense of personal accomplishment, give them something that challenges their capability, challenges their skill set, gets them out of their comfort zone. And, I am not talking about some contrived exercise. If you want people to feel a sense of personal accomplishment, give them a real problem to solve.”

Contribution and Culture

Leave a reply

“And, to promote the social good for the team employed by my company,” Pablo said, “I have to believe in the good inside each person. I have to create managerial systems that support that belief.”

“What you say is counter to many managerial practices,” I said. “In my travels, I see compensation systems, bonus and incentive programs that rely on greed and competition. I see team members with a narrow focus only on the next promotion, hidden agendas, backdoor politics, even backstabbing. I see a general mistrust of authority inside the company.”

“Yes, often that is what you see,” Pablo replied. “And, it is through no fault of employees. They engage in behavior to survive inside the system in which they live. If we create a system that relies on greed, we will get greedy behavior. If the only way we acknowledge contribution is by status, if the only thing that feeds a person’s self concept is a promotion, then you will get politics based on power. If you want to change the behavior, change the context in which they live.”

Assumptions and Blame

Leave a reply

“I’m done with the drama,” Ellie protested. “I try to promote a positive atmosphere around here, but all I get is bullying and backstabbing.”

“Oh, really?” I asked.

“Yes,” she replied. “Everyone seems to scatter for cover when something goes wrong, blaming other people, scooting out from under any accountability.”

“Are you sure this isn’t an isolated incident?” I wanted to know.

“No, this is more like a constant mental state of the team,” Ellie explained. “People position themselves so they always have an out, denying they have any responsibility. The air of blame is so thick you can cut it. You can feel it in the quiet whispers, the general tone of water-cooler talk.”

“I assume this is not organic evolution,” I smiled. “How did things get this way?”

“It started with our continuous improvement process. We were looking for things to improve on. We made a list, or rather I made a list. No one else could come up with anything.”

“Oh, so you’re the culprit,” my smile turned to a grin.

“Don’t lay this at my feet,” Ellie protested. “It’s the team that can’t get their act together.”

“And, you are their manager,” I nodded. “You describe the team as a group of incompetent players. And incompetence always seeks out blame. Competent people are in the game to get better. So, which do you have? Incompetence or competence?”

Ellie sat in silence before she finally spoke. “I knew you were going to pin this on me. You think my team’s behavior is influenced by the way I see them. As competent or incompetent.”

“Yes,” I agreed. “Our assumptions, the way we see the world drives behavior. If you see your team as incompetent, you will drive blaming behavior. If you see your team as competent, you will drive improvement. So, you better find out what they are good at.”

First Assumptions

Leave a reply

“What’s the quickest way to change your culture?” I asked.

“Great question,” Hudson replied. “Shifting culture usually takes time and intention.”

“But, there is a way,” I nodded.

“Is this a trick question?” Hudson wanted to know.

I continued to nod. “It’s not a trick, but it’s generally not where you look. The quickest way to change your culture, is to bring in new people. They bring a culture with them.”

Hudson smiled.

“Unfortunately,” I continued, “that culture they bring with them may be counter to the culture you intend. If, based on surveys, we find that most people are disengaged at work, then I assume most companies have cultures that are disengaging. In companies where people feel undervalued, underutilized, not challenged, team members will engage in coping behaviors that may be counterproductive. They quit, and get hired by you. Guess what assumptions they bring with them? And, that is where culture starts, with their assumptions, their beliefs, the way they see the world. Your initial employee orientation may be the most important time they spend to ensure they understand the new culture they will become a part of.”