Corporate culture is a big deal these days, often seen as the difference between success and failure.
Millions of words have been used by thousands of people to describe and explain culture, but it pretty much boils down to the following:
How the people relate to each other professionally and personally; their personalities and interpersonal communications.
The work environment/atmosphere/ethics/morale/people/style/etc.
The company’s identity.
Environment of interaction and judgment.
The primary reason people join/leave the company/manager.
The way things really are as opposed to how they’re described (the walk vs. the talk).
Money lures, but culture holds. Culture is why people join a company—and more importantly, why they stay. It is what motivates (or demotivates) them, and cultural changes are frequently why they leave. Additionally, people learn from experience and eventually will reflect the traits of the cultures in which they work; as with other relationships, people will continue to gravitate to the same situation they were in previously.
Cultural elements people want:
The opportunity to truly “make a difference.”
To be treated fairly.
Positive ethics and values.
To trust management and be trusted by them.
To embrace the idea that work can and should be fun.
Accurate prioritizing of company, team and individual goals while keeping them synergistic
A positive “can-do” attitude (aggressive, but realistic).
A conscious effort to stamp out “not invented here” syndrome (in all its varied forms), so as to not waste time reinventing the wheel.
Continuing development and quality improvement in people, product/services and processes.
Committing to employees, customers, and investors—and meeting those commitments.
An open, accurate, company-wide flow of information starting from the top.
An environment that encourages people to reach their full potential, professionally and personally.
What people don’t want:
Politics: personal, group, or senior management
Unfairness; favoritism; star mentality
Unnecessary bureaucracy; inflexible process or bureaucracy masquerading as process
Poor management practices such as: erratic management; micro-management; workaholism; intimidation; belittling or contemptuous treatment; no loyalty; poor scheduling; the attitude that “we don’t have the time to do it right but we have the time to do it over”
Any form of harassment whether overt or covert
A generally negative attitude, i.e., the glass is half empty
Arrogance or an elitist attitude
An unwillingness (at whatever level) to seek and implement the compromises necessary to meet organizational needs within the required timeframe
Obviously there are many more philosophies, attitudes, and actions that I could list, but most would fit the spirit, if not the specifics of the two lists.
In general culture comes from, or is enabled by, the top and rarely can be changed from below.
That said, every person in a management role from team leader up creates a subculture in their own organization.
If you are strong enough and believe deeply enough, you can become an umbrella to your organization and shield it from the toxic elements in the overall culture.
But don’t kid yourself; this is a difficult path to choose, so it is wise to make the choice consciously, instead of accidentally bucking your company’s culture.
Join me tomorrow when we look at how to create a culture—or sub-culture.
“What’s more important to you, being right or winning?”
That is what I asked a caller today.
“Frank” has been sequestered on jury duty for several weeks and when he returned to work he found that right after he left his team was assigned a new project and they were just finishing.
Frank said that the project had gone well, was on time and in budget, but he was upset that they had used a different approach from the one he preferred.
That’s when I asked, “What’s more important to you, being right or winning?”
You’d think that was an easy answer, but I was met first with silence and then with multiple reasons proving his approach was better.
He agreed that on time/in budget was a win, but still felt they should have done it his way.
So I ask you, “What’s more important, being right or winning?”
Do you wonder what’s happened to people over the last century and into this one?
Did something change or was it always this way?
When did fudging, dissembling, dissimulating, equivocating, falsifying, fibbing, inventing, misleading, misrepresenting, misstating, and prevaricating become business as usual?
Call it what you will, it is still lying.
Leaders, followers, parents, kids; religious or not; whether business or personal, everybody does it.
We lie to avoid confrontation; improve results; sidestep repercussions.
We lie to our friends, parents, kids, congregations, clergy people, bosses, workers, colleagues and service providers.
From why something/someone is late to income tax to stock option backdating and corporate results to campaign promises and disagreeing ideologies—the list is both endless and all encompassing.
Most of us don’t see ourselves as liars, usually because there are “valid reasons” for it.
But ‘reasons’ don’t change the bottom line and Plato’s words ring as true today as when he spoke them,
“False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.”
That infection has become a pandemic, spreading from one to another in both obvious and insidious ways.
It’s doubtful that there is any way to actually eradicate lying, but the next time you deviate from the truth think hard about your reasons; most of the time they won’t hold up.
A client called and during the conversation he complained about his receptionist. He said he was close to firing her, but would prefer a different outcome; he thought a third party could help resolve the problems.
When I asked “Jack” what the problem was he said that “Judy” was disrupting the culture and refused to do her work as expected. For example, she insisted on having two pencil cups on her desk; he preferred organizing his desk based on Feng Shui principles and that two cups were nothing but clutter. He had explained this to Judy to no avail.
This is an extreme example of the puppetmaster mentality, but not counting the micromanager who really believes her’s is the only way, I’m willing to bet you have been on the giving or receiving end of this attitude, if not both, at some point—most of us have.
Whether you consider yourself a leader, a manager or leadager, yours is not the only way—or even the best.
There are many ways to approach a task or goal. Some may seem more efficient, but, in fact, will lower productivity if they are counter-intuitive for a particular worker.
As long as the task is done or the goal achieved ethically, on time and in budget the route to accomplishment doesn’t matter.
Forcing your approach on your team forces them to become puppets.
Then, like Christopher below, they are dependent on you for all creativity, innovation and productivity—at least until they resign.
Great Place To Work just released their Best Places to Work rankings for large, medium and small companies in countries around the world. So out of the thousands of companies how are the best places to work chosen?
Our approach is based on the major findings of 20 years of research - that trust between managers and employees is the primary defining characteristic of the very best workplaces.
At the heart of our definition of a great place to work - a place where employees “trust the people they work for, have pride in what they do, and enjoy the people they work with” – is the idea that a great workplace is measured by the quality of the three, interconnected relationships that exist there:
The relationship between employees and management.
The relationship between employees and their jobs/company.
The relationship between employees and other employees.
In other words, it all comes down to trust and culture.
The funny thing about trust and culture is that the managers at all levels who strive to build trust and work create great, fun, inclusive cultures are reading this and nodding their heads, while those that don’t are clicking off to another site, because all the proof in the world won’t change their minds.
Imagine the level of idiocy required to blind people to studies such as this.
The North American winners in each category may surprise you—they certainly surprised me.
NetApp is the #1 large company;
Ultimate Software is the #1 medium company; and
Badger Mining Corporation is the #1 small company.
Ever wonder which companies are at the other end of the spectrum? The companies where the culture ranges from suspect to toxic and executive compensation outrages both employees and the rest of us?
It is reality that bloggers, coaches, academics, and other gurus write about how to engage the workforce, build cultures, develop leaders, motivate, and increase retention; companies pay substantial amounts to coaches and consultants to develop and implement programs; management agonizes on how to increase productivity through better use of its human resources.
It is reality that many companies are moving to “just in time” workforces; using temps and contractors at all levels with no health insurance, no vacation, no benefits—hire when you need them and dump when the project is done.
Business Week offers a comprehensive overview of this trend in a cover story entitled The Disposable Worker.
The forecast for the next five to 10 years: more of the same, with paltry pay gains, worsening working conditions, and little job security. Right on up to the C-suite, more jobs will be freelance and temporary, and even seemingly permanent positions will be at greater risk.
Obviously, there are people, especially at more senior levels, who have no problem with this approach; they relish the movement, change and challenge.
But they are the minority.
Everything described in the first paragraph is geared for companies that actually hire their workforce.
Typically, it’s a different set of experts who advise companies on outsourcing and temp workforces.
I ask you:
What will motivate workers to contribute at the level needed in today’s competitive global enviornment when they have nothing vested in the company?
Why should people who may not be there tomorrow put forth the initiative that underlays all leadership today?
How do you engage people when they have no idea how long they’ll be around?
In short, how do you get people to care when they know without a doubt that the company doesn’t care about them?
When you’ve coached or written a blog for years you can find yourself answering the same questions over and over, but that’s OK. I’d rather have you drop me a line or use the chat box in the right frame than search for something and become frustrated.
And that’s what happened last night about 10:30.
“Ken” pinged me and asked if I remembered a post that talked about compensation and used a stool as an analogy for the company. He said he’d read it a few years ago and wanted it as part of a presentation for his boss.
No Problem. I’ve used that analogy with clients for years and in posts three times. After I gave Ken the URL he said I should post it again.
I agreed, but added a bit to cover the current situation.
Success is like a 3-legged stool—
Customers / equity-holders / employees
If one leg becomes too long, the stool tips over!
Taking care of the first two is a given, whereas taking care of employees seems to be based on the labor market.
If the market is hot, people are showered with money and perks, as the market cools, so does employee care.
Yes, you can buy people and you can replace people, but it’s very expensive.
In the kind of tough economic times we’re going through people understand when there are no raises and even when their compensation is cut to avoid a layoff.
But if that treatment extends only to workers and lower management, while executive compensation and perks continue, you can count on a steady exodus as business improves.
When the market is tight and companies are throwing cash, stock and perks right and left it’s the wise manager who remembers that people who join for money/stock/perks will leave for more money/stock/perks.
Corporate culture is a big deal these days, often seen as the difference between success and failure.
“What’s more important to you, being right or winning?”
Do you wonder what’s happened to people over the last century and into this one?
It is reality that bloggers, coaches, academics, and other gurus write about how to engage the workforce, build cultures, develop leaders, motivate, and increase retention; companies pay substantial amounts to coaches and consultants to develop and implement programs; management agonizes on how to increase productivity through better use of its human resources.
When you’ve coached or written a blog for years you can find yourself answering the same questions over and over, but that’s OK. I’d rather have you drop me a line or use the chat box in the right frame than search for something and become frustrated.
Subscribe to MAPping Company Success 