Category Archives: Culture

Built on a Dollar More?

“Now, you have me confused,” Max protested. “Yes, the bonus becomes an entitlement, so it loses its power to motivate.”

“Is it possible,” I asked, “that the bonus never had the power to motivate in the first place? Let’s talk about you. You said, that sometimes you enjoy work. Why do you work?”

“I told you. I get a sense of accomplishment. Some of the work, I actually enjoy.”

“Like what?”

“Sometimes, I get someone on the crew, it’s their first job. They become part of a team, working together and I can see a sense of pride on their face. As a manager, I enjoy that. I get my own sense of accomplishment.”

“And, their first paycheck?” I prompted.

“Yes, there is a smile on their face.”

“So, compensation is important, but if that is all there is, your team members will jump to another company for an extra dollar an hour. So, how do you build your system? How do you, as a manager, build your culture? Do you build your culture around a bonus, or do you build it around accomplishment? You only get what you focus on.”

Parlor Games at Best

Samuel Pierce felt it was his duty, as Chairman of the Board, to make sure the new CEO was grounded in reality. “Catherine, I just want to make sure that you are up to the challenges you face as the new CEO, and that you are not being too idealistic.”

Catherine Nibali was chosen as the successor CEO to a company in trouble.

“You will have the union to deal with,” Samuel warned. “I know it was here when you arrived, but it is here nonetheless.”

“That’s true,” Catherine agreed. “The existence of a union is only one indicator of the deeply ingrained misconceptions this company drifted into. The people systems were based on false assumptions of managerial leadership. It’s no wonder the union was able to take hold. But, Samuel, there is more. The union is only the tip of the iceberg.”

“With all due respect,” Samuel interrupted. “Your predecessor, Al Ripley, tried a number of things. He re-engineered many of the work processes, he allowed group dynamic exercises, ropes courses, results based incentives, group bonuses.”

It was Catherine’s turn to interrupt. “Exactly,” she stared directly at Samuel. “Parlor games. Parlor games that, at best, might create a small burst of productivity, but in the long run, laid the ground for the union and shaped a culture that provokes disruptive behavior. We stand for what we tolerate.”
______

This is the beginning of the next book, sequel to Outbound Air. Find out how Catherine got here.

Structure and Culture

Thinking out loud here.

During the past two days, I have laid out posts related to –

  • In spite of clear work instructions, does culture trump output?
  • In spite of personality inputs, does culture trump output?

If you learn anything about me, you know that I am a structure guy.

  • For those who think their organizational challenges revolve around personality, I tell you, it’s not a personality problem.
  • For those who think they have a communication problem, it’s not a communication problem, it’s a structure problem.

Structure is the defined accountability and authority in working relationships, both managerial relationships and cross-functional working relationships. Structure is the context, in which we work.

Culture is that set of beliefs that drive our required behaviors in the work that we do together. Culture is the context, in which we work.

So, I am beginning to wonder if organizational structure and culture are inextricably tied together. Does structure equal culture? Does culture equal structure? Do the warm and fuzzy concepts of culture have a science underneath defined by levels of work and structure?

I believe so.

Culture Trumps Personality

“Yes, my work instructions were very clear, but we still had re-work on the back end. Like the team didn’t listen to what I told them. Even after I had them repeat the instructions back to me. I am a new manager to this team, but they seemed to understand what I said,” Rory explained.

“Tell me about the team,” I wanted to know.

“Not much to tell. When I took over the role, I asked to see the employee files. Our company does a pretty good workup on personality profiles, even for technicians. The profiles were normal, what I would expect. The company even created a standard profile for a technician that they were hiring to. Each team member was pretty much the same. They each showed attention to detail, compliance to rules and standards, persistence to complete a project. I don’t understand what happened to them.”

“What do you think changed?” I asked.

“It’s like they were different people when they took the profile and when they were actually in the work environment. It’s like when they walked out onto the field of work, things changed,” Rory shook his head.

“What do you think changed?” I repeated.

“The work environment,” Rory was searching for an answer. “The environment they were working in did not demand the attention to detail, compliance or persistence they had all demonstrated on their profiles.”

“It was a different context?” I wondered. “It was a different context. So, the work environment, the context trumps personality?”
_______

For a more complete example of Culture Trumping Personality.

Culture Trumps Clarity

“But, I set the context for my team. We talked about the work we would receive from the process step before. We talked about how we would inspect our work before we handed it off to the next process step. I thought I was very clear,” Rory complained.

“So, what happened?” I asked.

“It’s like the team wasn’t listening,” he replied. “I even had them repeat the steps back to me, to make sure I was understood.”

“So, what happened?” I repeated. “Why did you feel the need to be so explicit? Why the need for clarity?”

“We’ve had quality problems out of this team, seems like, forever. They don’t seem to care. They come to work, go through the motions. End of day, they head home. That’s why I was called in to manage this team.”

“So, what was different, after you explained the sequence, described the context for their work?” I probed.

“Nothing changed. We had the same incidence of quality re-works. Almost like shoddy work is part of the team culture.”

“So, what you are telling me is that culture trumps clear work instructions?”
___
Interesting perspective from Gustavo Grodnitzky in Culture Trumps Everything.

Who Sets the Context of Work?

“But, you are still here. What’s in it for you? What keeps you here?” I asked.

Riley had to think. Turnover on his team was high. Morale was in the dumps. He described his team as lifeless. “I guess I just don’t feel the same way they do. I know the work is hard. I know we have to pay attention. I know the work doesn’t stop at 5 o’clock. But for some reason, for me, it’s important to be here.”

“Why do you think it’s important for you and not so important for your team? At the end of the day, you are all working on the same projects.”

“Well, my manager and I talk about the work,” he explained. “We talk about the results of the what we do, as a company. I feel that I make a contribution, as a manager. What I do is important. In spite of how hard it is, it’s important.”

“You feel that way, because you and your manager talk about the work, the importance of the work? Have you ever talked about the work with your team?” I asked.

“Yeah, but, it’s different with them. I mean, they don’t get the whole picture. They don’t seem to understand it the same way that I do. For them, it’s just a job.”

“So, the context of their work, is that it’s just a job? Who is accountable for creating that context?”

They Don’t Get Yelled At

“How long has your crew been together?” I asked.

“Humph,” Riley snorted. “A couple of people have been here over a year, but most, just a few months. Lots of turnover.”

“And what is the cost of that turnover?”

“Expensive. It’s not that the work we do is that complicated, but there are so many details to keep track of that it takes a while to get your arms around everything. And we don’t do much formal training, more like shadowing other people on the team who have been here. Seems like just when we get someone trained up, they quit.”

“So, what’s in it, the job, I mean, for someone who sticks with it, pays attention to detail, sniffs out problems before they mushroom?”

Riley was quiet. “They don’t get yelled at,” he replied.

The Reactor Doesn’t Melt Down and Nobody Dies

“I don’t know why my team is behaving this way,” Riley complained. “I know we drive our people hard, and I know we expect a lot from them, but they knew that when they signed up for the job. We are a very intense organization.”

“How are they behaving?” I wanted to know.

“You can see them dragging into a meeting. Smiles are few and far between. It’s like they need a vacation really bad. Bordering on burn-out. I know we expect them to be responsive on their smart-phones, even after hours, but we are in the service business. We don’t know when our customers are going to call, or some project is going to go sideways.”

“So, in addition to working a normal day-shift, they are on-call after hours?”

Riley nodded. “Yes, but they get on-call pay, even if nothing happens. And we rotate that, so it’s not like it’s every day.”

“So, what is causing the fatigue,” I asked.

“I don’t know. It’s just that we are intense. If we relax, details get missed. And, missed details can turn into real problems. We have to keep our guard up.”

“And, if you keep your guard up and no details are missed, what happens?”

Riley had to stop and think. “Nothing special. Things go smooth, no one panics, but it’s not like we win the Super Bowl.”

“When your team does a really good job, it’s nothing special. So, who appreciates it, when they do a really good job?”

“No one really,” Riley admitted. “A really good job just means that no one is upset, mostly the customer.”

“Kind of like running a nuclear power plant,” I said. “If we do our job well, everyone gets electricity, the reactor doesn’t melt down and nobody dies.”

Slow Way to Change the Culture

From the Ask Tom mailbag – on Quickest Way to Change the Culture.

Question:
Okay, I got what I wanted about hiring new people who are more into process than firefighting. But how do you change the current team, whose culture has been more about firefighting than process.

Response:
Changing culture is a long term journey. It requires patience, persistence and paying attention. Same scenario for maintaining the culture you want.

Behavior – it’s all about behavior. We can put teamwork posters on the wall, but that doesn’t mean a thing. Culture is about behavior, not posters. Culture is that set of unwritten rules that governs our required behavior in the work that we do together.

It starts in the debrief, the post-mortem, the project review. That’s why you have to pay attention. You have to pay attention to behavior IN alignment and behavior NOT IN alignment. When you see it, you have to call it.

I like to use a group setting after a project, because I want lots of people talking, not just me. In fact, I just want to ask questions. Let’s stick to process vs firefighting, here are my questions.

  • When we attack a problem, using a process (checklist, model, protocol, step sequence) what are the major benefits in the result? [Your group or team should be able to come up with a dozen or so benefits.]
  • If those are the major benefits, what stops us from using that process? [Your team should be able to come up with a dozen excuses not to use the process.]
  • So, let’s look at the process. [You do have a process, don’t you, because if you don’t have a process, you may have to go back to firefighting.]
  • In what way can we stick to the process next time to get the results we want? [Here is where I go back to the excuses to reveal them for the head-trash they are.]

And I use this de-brief often, just asking the questions. BTW, this is a simple gap analysis.

  • What do we want?
  • Where are we now?
  • What’s in the gap, keeping us from getting what we want?

Rinse, repeat. Often. Slowly, the group will turn. Patience, persistence and paying attention.

Quickest Way to Change the Culture

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
I am working in an environment where firefighting has been modus operandi for a number of years, and as a new manager in my area, I am hoping to define a new culture to break out of constant firefighting mode and into a more pro-active mode of operation. The organization is growing starting now and will continue to do so into Q2 of next year, so we are interviewing and hiring NOW.

Can you talk a little bit more about how to define an intentional culture in an organization, especially in one where an unintentional culture already exists and is deeply ingrained?

Response:
Your company is in typical go-go stage. There is adrenaline and excitement at every turn. Firefighting is the order of the day. The customer gets the product or service and is very happy, but as we look in the wake, we find body bags and other evidence of organizational friction. By the way, this is a normal and natural state in the lifecycle. And it’s fun, give me a high five.

We got the job done, but at what cost? This friction costs us efficiency and profitability. And at some point, in spite of our exuberance, we have to get down to business, we have to become efficient, we have to become profitable.

This is a natural move from S-II to S-III, from chaos to system. But you will fight it at every step because the culture is addicted to the juice of chaos. You want to move from reactive to proactive. You are correct, this will require a change in your culture. And the quickest way to change the culture is to change the people.

You are looking for someone to join your team with experience in process and systems. Here are some questions.

  • Tell me about a time when you worked on a project that seemed to be mired in chaos?
  • What was the project?
  • What was your role in the project?
  • What created the chaos?
  • How did you respond to the chaos?
  • How did your approach work?
  • What was the result on the project?

I am not looking for heroic responses. I am looking for calm, someone who took a step back, someone, who, in the midst of chaos, insisted on a plan. It might have been a quick plan, but a plan nonetheless.

Not what I want to hear –
I was working on the ABC project and the client was way behind schedule when we started. The client was about to lose their bank funding and we had to finish on time even if it meant that we had to take shortcuts. Or all would be lost. We took a risk. There were several steps in the process that we could omit. We sidestepped all the quality checks, hoping the project would hold together. We got lucky. Nothing broke. We finished the project on time. I call my team – the firefighters. Give us a firefight, we will win.

What I want to hear –
I was working on the ABC project and the client was way behind schedule when we started. The client was about to lose their bank funding and we had to finish on time even if it meant that we had to take shortcuts. I was the project leader. I had to put my foot down. There were several quality checks that slowed the project, but they were necessary. I put together a flow chart and a plan. I went with my client to their bank to present the plan. They gave us an extra 48 hours. We made it. The plan worked.