Executive - Culture Fit

This is quite an interesting article, "Culture Club" taken from BusinessWeek, having to do with matching the culture of the company with executives to be hired.

The best executive for the job will have an impressive résumé, but should also possess the right skills to best maneuver the organization's culture

by Joseph Daniel McCool

Cultural Matchmaking

One reason for a poor fit is that too often executives are hired based on where they're coming from without enough thought given to where they are going. A candidate who impresses the board or the boss with his or her credentials might get the nod because on paper he or she appears to have the right range of experience from a respected, market-leading company. Yet an impressive résumé doesn't guarantee an individual will be able to elevate a company's performance in a new environment and/or a new role.

Click to see the article in full: Culture Club

Read more!

The Gang of X

The other day I met a friend of mine who is a bona-fide change agent in her company.

It reminded me of my first change effort as an employee of AT&T Bells Labs. A group of us decided to stop complaining that things should change and do something about it.

We started the "Gang of X" and started meeting, discussing the new Division we wanted to create. It was all quite exciting, and got even more so when we published something like a manifesto for change, outlining the change we wanted to see.

At the time it seemed quite risky, but we were wrong. It really wasn't.

In time, all the changes we outlined came to pass but not before I left the company to start my own firm. In time, the organization was dissolved when AT&T split into Lucent and AT&T, and the division's staff was scattered in to the wind.

But the Gang of X was a life-changing event that I don't regret, even after I got pissed when the changes weren't happening fast enough.

It helped to lead my to the profession I now have, in which I get to work with change agents of all kinds who share one thing in common -- a desire to make a difference.

Read more!

New Podcast from the Archives

This interview on the Breakfast Club with Paul Thomas, former CEO of Lascelles Division of Lascelles de Mercado, done in 2000, speaks to some of the results he realized in a major culture change programme.

Read more!

Honey, sweetheart, darling, babes

Coming back to work in the Caribbean has meant getting used to using words of endearment that professionals in developed countries have long eschewed, including "honey", "sweetheart", "darling" and "babes", and even male versions such as "boy" and "man."

As a professional working in the U.S., I learned long ago that such words are to be completely and entirely avoided. The professional women who took me under their wings when I was a fledgling employee made sure that I learned my lesson in this regard (thank you Mary, Beverly, Kandi, Celeste, Janice...).

I also learned the importance of the firm handshake as a form of generic greeting in the workplace. The rules were dicey back then about how male to be, as I remember a colleague of mine pointing out that I needn't hold open the door for her, as she certainly was not interested in being treated any differently from the men around me.

Working in the Caribbean is quite different. Warmth and friendship is felt in the embrace of a boss, friendship in a familiar greeting and respect in how we introduce each other to friends and colleagues.

This all takes some getting used to, as these behaviours are exactly the ones I learned to avoid in my early days working at AT&T in New Jersey.

While I do not want to offend, I don't miss for one minute that cautious feeling I knew in the U.S. workplace, darkened by threats of sexual harassment, racial prejudice and politically incorrect behaviour. My hope is that we in the Caribbean can learn to be sensitive to others preferences, without having to become fearful and paralysed by the threat of a lawsuit.

Read more!

Treating Suppliers and Vendors -- an Indicator of a Culture

I recall doing business with a company that refused to honour a signed contract.

The CEO let me know in no uncertain terms that the signature of the Chairman held no water because "he didn't know what he was doing," and that "I should know that." It was an ugly situation, and I have done no business with that company since then, but their advertising that is filled with messages about how great their company culture is still reminds me of the disparity.

I have always remembered this event, and it's led me to conclude something about companies: that they are good as how they treat their vendors.

Why so?

Mahatma Gandhi said: "The best test of a civilised society is the way in which it treats its most vulnerable and weakest members."

I say that the corporate corollary is "the best test of a well-developed corporate culture is the way in which it treats its vendors."

Not shareholders, employees or customers... but vendors: suppliers, contractors and consultants.

The same company I mentioned above had a habit of beating down every price that I ever presented to it. I sometimes felt like a thief trying to get away with something, rather than a business partner.

They were proud of the fact that they put their customers first, and would very quickly interrupt a meeting with a vendor to meet with a customer who had a problem of some kind. After all, they put customers first.

However, I think they missed the point of the customer revolution, as do many companies. The point is not that customers come first, but it is that the company can treat every human being that it engages in business with respect, dignity and care. The revolution was meant to show companies that focusing on themselves only resulted in poor performance in the mid to long term.

In this sense, vendors are no less important than customers.

And, in a way, vendors are among the weakest members of a company's stakeholders as they must wait for payment from companies that lose invoices, have inefficient bureaucracies, force cuts in prices to make greater profits, and treat suppliers like thieves.

The joke is that I am also reluctant to do business with the same company as a customer, and would think twice before recommending them to a friend. I have heard other vendors express the same sentiment about the treatment they received from the company, and I imagine that they, too, would feel the same way.

I imagine that if they understood that we are all connected, and that here in the Caribbean the small size of our economies means that we cannot hide from each other, our corporations would act very differently towards its suppliers.

Read more!

Culture Change Gone Bad

While a culture change is very hard to do well, it is very easy to do badly.

In this article from CNN, entitled "No storybook ending after tycoon dolls up vilage," a millionaire adopted a US town, and attempted to give it a makeover.

As could be predicted, she ran into resistance, as the towns-people gradually developed a hostile resistance to her ideas and interventions.

I think she misunderstood her challenge -- it was not to change the physical environment, but instead to cause a shift in the culture of the people in the town.

This is a mistake that CEOs often make - believing that money can buy just about anything.
Sometimes it can buy hearts and minds, but when it does the kind of people who end up being bought are usually not the strongest characters, and they are not likely to stay bought for long.

This approach just does not work, as this tale amply demonstrates.

Read more!

Heedless Self-Interest

In an article from the New York Times, I found the following quote:

“We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals,” said F.D.R. “We know now that it is bad economics.” These words apply perfectly to climate change. It’s in the interest of most people (and especially their descendants) that somebody do something to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, but each individual would like that somebody to be somebody else. Leave it up to the free market, and in a few generations Florida will be underwater.

In a prior post, I wrote about the importance of appealing to people's self-interest as a way to change the culture of a company. With more information, I argued, people naturally do what's best for them and others, once they can see the apparent interconnection of all that is.

The Course in Miracles says that the fact that we are all connected means that attack is impossible, as it rests on the idea that we are somehow separate.

Read more!

Creating a Signature Experience

I recently read an article in the Harvard Business Review that spoke to the idea of "Creating a Signature Experience" for employees.

The idea is simple -- what do employees experience as they work within the company?

I have worked as a consultant to several, and can think of a few examples of companies that left me with strong impressions. A few were so "strong" I have vowed never to do business with them again -- this as a paid contractor.

For employees, some companies create the experience of chaos. Others are stingy. Some are challenging, with high standards. In others, anything goes.

I don't think that any one experience is necessarily better than another, but I do get the impression that few companies actually give much thought to the experience they are creating for their employees.

This is too bad, as a good reputation leads to good people being hired, and vice versa. Also, some business results are better achieved by certain corporate cultures than others. For example, a culture of accountability is always a good thing -- never bad.

Companies need to define the experience and its various drivers if they are serious about the destination they are headed in.

Read more!

Creating a Bad Culture pt 2

Here is a continuation of the list of things I would do to create a really bad corporate culture, if I were the CEO.

6. Create a Culture of Fear
   I would fire people at will and without warning, showing people who is in charge. I'd do my best to humiliate others wherever possible so that even the smallest challenges to my leadership are quashed. The "Art of War" would be my friend.
   
   
7. Make it Clear Personal Money is Paramount
   I would casually mention in conversation that my main priority is my retirement, and how I plan to fund it. People would hear from me they they should be doing the same, if they know what is good for them.
   
   
8. Blame the Customer
   I'd make the message plain -- if customers don't want to do business with us, then they should go elsewhere, as it is their "right." They'd need to know they are wrong for asking more than we are prepared to give them.
   
   
9. Focus on the Short Term
   I would waste no time on developing fancy vision statements and the like. After all, no-one can predict what will happen with much accuracy in the future. Instead, I'd gear people to short-term results and meeting the goals that will make me look good to the board. My job would be to motivate people using money and personal gain wherever possible, forcing them to compete with each other
   
   
10. Keep Around Non-Performers
    While I would fire at will, I'd make sure to keep around some employees who are mediocre - after all, we can't ALL be stars, can we? I'd move them from job to job, to keep them and everyone else happy in the short term. Making employees happy and comfortable on a day-to-day basis, without any sense of sacrifice, would be critical to getting them to like me.

---------------------------------------------------------
It's interesting, but I was surprised when I made this list how easy it was to create. Changing culture is easy to do badly, or inadvertently. My clients are often surprised at the degree
of fallout they experience when they do something dumb (i.e. against their self interests.)

It is much harder to do everything right, and unfortunately, building a great culture requires a leadership performance that is not perfect, but sets the limit of the change by the weakest area visible to others.

For example, a manager might be a good leader in most respects, but a bad listener. Guess which characteristic will have the greatest impact?

Managers and executives need to be working on themselves all the time, as the bar is constantly being raised by those around them. Success only breeds higher expectations and greater challenges.

Read more!

Creating a Bad Culture pt 1

People talk about how hard it is to change a corporation's culture, but I have started to think that they are wrong, in part. I think it's easy to change corporate culture if one wants to make it worse.

Let us imagine a newly appointed CEO, who is really intent on screwing up the culture. Where would he start?

1. Complain about everything
   If I were that CEO, I would start by complaining to anyone who will listen about anything that I think needs to change. If I were skillful, I would make sure that no-one could see what I was doing.
   
   I would complain about things that can't change, like things in the past, or taxes. I would make sure that I pointed the finger at other people, blaming them for anything that didn't go right.
   
   I would conceal how much I enjoy complaining, and pretend that I really wanted things to change.
   
   
2. Listen to Complainers
   I would also encourage others to complain to me. They would be able to commiserate as much as they want, and I would listen and add my two cents worth. I know they would be blaming others, and I would agree with them all.
   
   I would promote the people who are the really big complainers, and support them in passing on responsibility to others. I would have no problem as they justify their poor performance.
   
   After work, I'd support long sessions over drinks while we all spend some more time wishing that things are different.
   
   
3. Break Promises
   I'd make public promises and simply never bring them up again if they are never met. It would be a case of selective amnesia.
   
   
4. Communicates Infrequently and Irrelevantly
   I would rarely speak to groups of employees. I would also never encourage a Q&A and use a script wherever possible. I'd avoid speaking about the issues that people care about the most, unless I have really good news.
   
   
5. Never Let Them See you Sweat
   I'd be sure to communicate confidence and capability at ALL times. No matter what uncertainties or doubts I may have, I'd never show them, and learn to hide my true feelings (the better to build trust in my leadership.)

To be continued...

Read more!

Research: Creating a Culture

In recent research conducted by Accenture, the following factors were given as the most important when it comes to the all-important task of building a corporate culture. These are given in rank order of importance.

1. Behaviour modelled by management
2. What leaders pay attention to, model and control
3. Performance and promotion systems
4. Criteria used for selection, retention and termination
5. Leaders' reactions to critical incidents and crises that threaten survival and test the values of the organization
6. The organization's formal and informal design and structure
7. Systems, policies and procedures that determine how work is done
8. Stories and legends about key people that are told throughout the organization
9. Ceremonies (company celebrations, awards, rites of passage or advancement)
10. Formal statements of philosophy, principles and values

There is a lot in this list that is very interesting, and the research is based on interviews with 65 companies.

I'd be willing to bet that all of those companies are based in developed countries, and that no more than one or two are run by people of colour. It leads me to think that the survey instruments they have devised are less than useful for Caribbean companies, and would need to be modified before use.

Read the complete report entitled "Creating a Corporate Culture that Drives Greater Financial Returns and High Performance".

Read more!

HR Trends #1a -- Diversity

(Also posted on the CaribHRForum discussion list)

Imagine the setting of a corporate meeting room, and a critical point in the meeting when a CEO turns to the VP HR, looks them dead in the eye and says:

CEO Question:
We need a diverse corporate culture. How do we go about building one?

VP HR: I'll have a plan to discuss with you in a couple of days.

In the plan presented, the VP HR (who hopefully has been thinking about this for some time,) has laid out the following:

1. Based on the strategy we are following, what are our 10-20 year goals?
   If we don't have any, then diversity is a moot point because it's a capability that cannot be built today, but only years in the future.
   
   
2. In what way does it need to be diverse?
   Does it need to be more diverse than our society at large? If so, in what ways? Here are some examples: ethnicity, age, gender, education, sexual orientation, religious background, native language, class, etc.
   
   If we are looking to sell religious icons to people from different faiths, we had better hire people who understand those faiths.
   
   If we are looking to have a very creative workforce, we had better pay attention to those studies that say that tolerance and creativity go hand in hand. Our hiring must be flexible enough to attract people of all backgrounds.
   
   We will need to define the new target population that we want to have in our workforce, and compare it to what we have today.
   
   
3. How do we get there?
   There are a few levers that we have to play with.
   
   • One is that we change the way that we hire. We can specifically tune our outreach efforts to bring in more people with different backgrounds. This is relatively easy to do.
   • The second lever to use is a change in the corporate culture. This is particularly hard to do.
   • There are several angles to take at the same time when creating a cultural intervention:
   • -- authentic leadership by example
   • -- performance management
   • -- public events
   • -- large group seminars
   • -- personal coaching
     

We can design a culture that will help us to attract the right kinds of people, giving us whatever kind of diversity we want.

Read more!

Forward-Thinking Cultures

An interesting article in the Jul-Aug Harvard Business Review describes how countries that are more "forward-thinking" have achieved better results in measures such as GDP per capita and levels of innovativeness, happiness, confidence, and competitiveness.

In the article, "forward-thinking" is defined as the extent to which a culture encourages and rewards such behavior as delaying gratification, planning, and investing in the future.

While the study was confined to countries, I can imagine that it also applies to companies.

In the Framework approach to strategic planning, we use a method of scenario-generation that looks 20-30 years out into the future. This approach is described in the August issue of FirstCuts in more detail -- Issue 14.0 which is available at the Framework Consulting website.

Essentially I think this article is backing the idea of taking a very long view of things, which we endorse.

Read more!

C&W CEO Announcement

In an announcement that comes as a shock to most, Cable and Wireless is replacing its Jamaica CEO, Rodney Davis.

The new CEO, an Australian, has once again emphasized that customer service is going to be the major point of focus.

After so many tries, and so many failures at improving customer service in the company, I wonder what he thinks he'll do differently?

Read more!

The Advantage of Being in Jamaica

One of the advantages I have of living in Jamaica is that it has helped me to see what is often accepted as a normal business practice in North America from a very different perspective.

One simple example is a question that we used to ask each other in the U.S. workplace -- "Are you keeping busy?"

Now, from a Jamaican perspective, this question looks like a strange one. Why should someone's goal be to keep busy? What is the purpose?

Will we all be happier when we are busy all the time?

Is the whole point of work... to find more stuff to work on?

Read more!

Volunteering and Standards

I once "worked" as a volunteer for an organization that had 200 employees and 3000 volunteers. What was remarkable was that this company was a for-profit company.

There are a few companies that I have volunteered for that I consider to provide the kind of experience that made the time well worth it, and many that I think could learn a thing or two.

There were three lessons that I learned from my volunteer experiences.

Savvy organizations realize that volunteers give of their time for every reason that employees do, only without the prospect of material compensation. They seek to learn and grow themselves, to make a real difference and to be acknowledged for their contribution.

Savvy employees know that they need to make it easy for their volunteers to gain the benefits they seek.

Many of the best practices used to manage employees still apply.

Best Practice #1 - Insist on Providing Value
Managers of volunteers know that they need to sit down at the beginning of a volunteer assignment and talk about what the volunteer would like to gain from the experience. They talk about their goals, and what they would like to learn while they are on the assignment.

Some go even further, and explicitly insist that a condition of their engagement as a volunteer is that they gain value that exceeds the cost to them in time, money and energy. In other words, the onus is on them to gain the benefit.

Here at Framework, this is a part of our own volunteer agreement.

Best Practice #2 -- Make the Agreement Explicit
A written agreement works better than one that is spoken. It covers the necessary basics that relate to any contract employee, minus a section on remuneration. 'nuff said.

Best Practice #3 -- Maintain High Standards
In the best organizations, volunteers are part and parcel of the high standards the organization aims to deliver to its customers or constituents.

The question I ask myself most of all when engaging volunteers and employees alike, is whether or not they have what it takes to raise the standard of work done in the company, or whether or not they will have to be managed carefully so that they don't lower it. With volunteers, the key is to create that expectation from the very beginning, and to be very clear with them that they are part of delivering it.

If they are treated as if they can deliver great things, they are much more likely to do so.

On the other hand, if little or nothing is expected of them, then it is likely that they will live down to that expectation also.

The bottom line is that the volunteer to company relationship is not very different than an employee to employer relationship.

Read more!

Caribbean Employees are Exceptionally Sensitive

This is a problem I haven't solved, but I think that by stating it clearly, it might help me to understand how to think about a solution.

Do Caribbean managers have only one of two choices?

Should they be nice (in which case employees run all over them) or should they be harsh (and thereby lose the trust and loyalty of those from whom they most need it)?

Is the set of choices available really as limited as this suggests?

Read more!

JobSmart - Migrating to the US and Culture Shock

Upcoming article on JobSmart on some of the issues that professionals should think through as they consider migrating to the US from Jamaica.

The article is entitled: Migrating to the US and Culture Shock.

JobSmart visitors -- feel free to add your comments below.

Read more!

Surviving an Acquisition

In the news these past few weeks there have been some significant announcements related to acquisitions across the Caribbean region.

One major acquisition that was announced for the first time was that of Neal and Massy's takeover of BS&T -- Barbados' biggest company.

Also in the news is the announcement that the principals of DB&G (which was acquired by Scotiabank) are leaving the company at the end of June.

Although the LIAT/Caribbean Star merger has not been in the news of late, the sale has still not been completed, although it has been scheduled to happen on June 15th.

The common factor between all three actions is that they were all announced as "mergers of equals."

The result?

They are actually turning out to be acquisitions, and not mergers.

Lest anyone think that this is a strange occurrence, history is littered with examples of announced mergers that turned out to actually be acquisitions, including AOL-TimeWarner, Daimler-Chrysler, HewlettPackard/Compaq and Sports Authority/Gart.

The fact is that executives almost always start out using merger language in public, unless the takeover is hostile. In fact, they are undergoing acquisitions, especially with respect to the corporate cultures.

It is not too hard to tell who the cultural winner is -- the executives of the company being acquired usually don't last very long.

In a Framework article entitled "Merger of Equals? Equal Shmequal!" by Amie Devero, she argued that a merger is not possible, in cultural terms. (The article can be downloaded by sending email to fwc-equals@aweber.com.) Also, the recent April 2007 Harvard Business Review article entitled Human Due Diligence makes the point that companies often fail to recognize the "cultural acquirer" when undertaking these activities, to their detriment.

While these questions are certainly of issue to shareholders, it is the employees that bear the brunt of initial miscommunication.

They hear talk of "a merger of equals" "nothing will change," "no layoffs, " "business as usual" and "the same management will continue." Given the public track record of mergers to date, they have every reason to be concerned.

Why?

When senior management insists that a merger of equals is underway it may be good for shareholders to hear and believe that the executives between the two companies are planning to harmoniously co-exist in some way. However, it is often a misleading statement for employees.

History shows that employees are much safer believing that a merger actually means that

• each and every job function will be examined for possible overlaps, and that it is likely that at least some jobs will disappear
• one company will be culturally dominant over the other
• one set of executives will remain, while the other will depart
• there will be major changes and new order will make itself known over time (after all, isn't that the point of the exercise?)

This is not to say that these are bad outcomes -- often they are the best things that can happen to the new, combined company. In the free market of management styles and approaches, let the best company and management team prevail.

However, the problem stems from the fact that most executives in both companies start out by mis-leading their people.

In the very way they announce the "merger" their own people can detect the lie.

It's a little like a bad version of the Brady Bunch -- each parent tell their children that a marriage is about to happen to join two families together, and... "by the way... in case you kids were wondering... nothing will change."

Executives the world over leading acquisitions persist in painting an ultra-rosy picture of the future for their employees. Their inauthenticity is palpable.

It seems that often, they buy into their own "story," an even in the colossal failures like AOL-TimeWarner and Daimler-Chrysler, they seem to be able to maintain a scary insistence that all is well, even when everyone in the real world knows that it is not.

What can executives do differently?

In a prior blog I wrote about what I called "High Tone Managers." These managers focus on being relentlessly positive, to the point that their employees come to distrust everything they say because they are the ones saying it.

An executive leading an acquisition would do much better by being authentic and saying some version of the following, if true:

• we are about to undergo a very difficult change
• this is a friendly acquisition (if it is)
• the odds are against us being successful
• we think the risk is worth it
• the culture that we intend to create will hopefully take the best of both companies
• some jobs will be retrenched, but we are hoping that no people will be forced to leave the company
• the reasons we are doing this is ....
• it will take all of us working together to pull it off

The point here is that an acquisition is a shock, and that people will go through the changes they need to go through in order to adapt to it. It is not unlike the 5 phases of grief a survivor journeys through upon the death of a loved one, as defined by Elizabeth Kubler-Ross: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance.

Employees need to be helped to go through these stages as quickly as possible, en masse. Their feelings at each point must be validated, acknowledged and given room to live, if even for an instant.

If executives do their job well, employees can be like soldiers rallying to a cause that is greater than themselves.

However, if the job is done poorly, as it usually is, the result is that employees feel like victims who need to protect themselves from something terrible, that their own parents are inflicting upon them for their own benefit.

In Caribbean companies, the employee mood doesn't get much worse than this.

Read more!

Taking the Hard Road

Managers (and parents) have the very difficult job of leading others, but are often amazed when others do not take their advice.

The obvious and most frequent response is to blame those who refuse to take the coaching for their attitude, laziness and lack of discipline.

Yet, it is the rare manager who takes Gandhi seriously: "If you want to change the world, become the first change."

In a culture change initiative, for example, mangers come up with a list of new "values" that they continually exhort their employees to follow. They repeat them in speeches, create colorful posters and pass out lists of values to be displayed prominently in each cubicle.

When the lackadaisical results are realized, it is the brave manager who is willing to discover what was wrong in their approach, rather than to seek fault in others.

The good news is that the brave manager who sincerely asks these questions and shares the process they are engaged in openly with their employees is demonstrating some powerful behaviours.

1. They are showing the importance of being willing to struggle openly in living the values
2. They are teaching the process of living the values, rather than the process of "talking about" the values
3. They are demonstrating courage by showing their weaknesses, rather than demonstrating arrogance by showing their "strength" in living the values.

If authenticity is the currency used to build trust, then the managers who demonstrate these behaviours are more likely to be followed by their employees, and are more likely to engage in the challenge of living by a new set of values. This is a powerful place to start, albeit infrequently observed.

Read more!