14: Problem - Talent Turnaround
(EN: This is one of four chapters that the author means to provide practical advice for a common problem via an extended case study. Her case studies throughout the rest of the book have seemed rather melodramatic and contrived, so I will likely preserve some of the key points while leaving out much of the detail.)
In a toxic culture, employees become despondent and disengaged and do not contribute in a way that will drive the performance of the organization. However, narcissistic leaders see low morale as a cause of poor performance rather than a symptom of a toxic culture - when the root of the problem is their environment and their leadership.
Unless the source of the issue is addressed, the people will not become engaged and motivated. Replace your demoralized employees with fresh, energetic new blood, and the new ones will become demoralized in a very short time.
A particular problem is that there is often a schism between those who develop a strategy and those who are responsible for executing it. This never turns out well, because the strategy developers are removed from the work and have no inkling what it takes to get things done - and so, their strategies are unrealistic. Those who are responsible for executing on it are then handed an unworkable plan and are hectored for not being able to do the unrealistic things the designers assumed could be done easily.
Crushed Culture
A crushed culture is one in which employees are thoroughly discouraged and have become apathetic - these are emotional terms. While the source of the problem may be functional, the symptom is emotional and must be addressed as such.
(EN: This seems a bit odd, as the author is decidedly against chasing after symptoms as opposed to addressing the cause - but I expect it is necessary because, in the case of morale, the symptom contributes to the problem. If people are demoralized and lack faith in their leadership, they will not trust the functional solution and will not support its implementation.)
She briefly mentions that, in the age of the Internet and social media, the disease spreads quickly. Customers tell other customers about their experience with companies, and a bad reputation in social media will make it difficult for a company to find new victims that are ignorant of its shortcomings. Workers talk about their jobs publicly, and if your present or former employees are making valid complaints, it will then make it difficult for your firm to attract new workers who are ignorant of your problems. With employees, there is cross-pollination, as customers dislike giving their business to firms that treat their employees poorly.
She speaks of four warning signs of a crushed culture:
- Employees no longer care about the customers. When a customer identifies a problem, the employee refuses to acknowledge it or take any action outside of their routine duties to solve it.
- Maintenance is poor. There is basic and obvious neglect in the physical environment: peeling wallpaper, a thick coat of dust, dirty or broken furniture. All of this seems superficial, but is significant as a symptom.
- Commitments are not made or honored. The company's basic promises to customers are not being kept. Customers are stalled or brushed off in hopes they will go away and simply accept that their expectations will not be met.
- Employees show no initiative and merely follow orders. Rather than going above and beyond the call of duty to ensure customer satisfaction, employees take a not-my-job attitude and do nothing to address the problems they see.
Each of these are immediately visible to customers, and many of them exasperate or disgust them. (EN: And at this point arises the problem of customer apathy - where customers accept the problem but continue to do business with the firm because they do not wish to invest time in finding a new vendor. The firm believes that all is well, while the customers are on the verge of leaving.)
When the level of service falls to such a poor level, this creates a golden opportunity for competition to move in and take away customers simply by doing the basic things that your firm should have been doing all along.
Employee Engagement
According to the Fall 2011 Gallup Poll on Employee Engagement, 71% of American workers are not engaged or are actively disengaged from their work, meaning they are emotionally disconnected from their workplaces and are likely to be less productive. This statistic has been stable over the past few years and is not expected to change.
It's not merely a problem of workers being unhappy, but it also saps organizational performance. When leaders complain that their plans are not executed, that their firm is not nimble, and that those whom they wish to follow them will not fall into line and show enthusiastic support, these are all the results of a disengaged workforce.
(EN: I also sense that referring to this as being a problem "of the workers" ignores that disengagement also applies to management. Particularly on the front lines, managers are disempowered as well - such that when there is a morale issue with an entire crew and not just one person, the problem is higher in the organization. Managers on any level who are seeking to cope with their limitations rather than exercise their abilities are disengaged and so will be the managers and workers in their department.)
Good People with Bad Attitudes
It's well established that the people who compose a company are far more important than the equipment and real estate in driving performance, and that many issues that prevent companies from succeeding are related to human resource management.
Unfortunately, HR is often seen as a humdrum maintenance function rather than a strategic asset (which it is). A good sign that talent management is neglected is when the top person in the HR department is not included in the C-suite team.
Human Resources management isn't merely about getting people with the right skills into the company, but keeping them engaged and productive. This is not just the HR department's job, but the job of anyone who manages staff, or manages staff managers.
A company may have great talent, but has managed them badly. It's not that they are bad people - they have the skills to drive the organization forward. Instead, they are good people with bad attitudes - and per the earlier point, their attitude is not their fault: it is their reaction to the way they are managed and the environment in which they work.
Case Study
(EN: Another contrived and idiosyncratic story follows, and I'm preserving only key points that germane to morale and engagement.)
- Cost-cutting and efficiency improvements are often causes of employee disengagement. New ideas are discouraged and the firm is simply attempting to do the things it currently does for less money, and this often involves withholding rewards from staff or placing more work upon them with no financial (or other) incentives except to keep their jobs, which puts them into a fearful and defensive state.
- Another significant symptom of an apathetic culture are plans that do not get executed. A plan may be changed when management gives up on its original goals, or it may be abandoned in favor of a different plan because they lost interest in the original one. Or worse yet, plans are not communicated - they are formulated, but then kept in filing cabinets and desk drawers and never shared because there is so little faith in their feasibility.
- Musical chairs in the C-suite is also a serious problem. When leaders come and go, there is no sense of safety or stability. Each new leader has his own vision and shows contempt for the previous leader's plans, to which employees had felt commitment. A smooth transition rather than a sharp change is necessary, but seldom made as new leaders want to be aggressive and jump right in as soon as they take a chair.
- When goals and proclamations are not supported by an action plan, or when the plans are plainly unrealistic, they become a sarcastic joke and a point of mockery. This is especially problematic when key documents such as mission and vision are regarded as promotional materials that don't reflect the true nature of the organization.
- Policies and procedures that prevent people from doing what is efficient and effective are also morale-killers. Employees must feel empowered and supported to go the extra mile, rather than being locked in a cage and told what they cannot do to solve problems. There must be incentives (not merely monetary) to take action and no punishment or discouragement from going outside one's job description to get things done.
- Directives without accountability provide no incentive for a specific person to take a specific action. Everyone expects someone else will do it. This is not as bad as directives that hold people accountable without providing them the authority and support to accomplish the goals for which they will be held responsible.
- She speaks highly of "innovation" programs that allow anyone within the firm to submit their ideas, with rewards and recognition for innovative ideas. They can be anything from minor efficiency improvements to revolutionary changes. (EN: These are often badly implemented and only serve to demonstrate how opposed a firm is to innovation, so proceed with extreme caution.)