« March 2005 | Main | May 2005 »

April 21, 2005

C’mon, everybody, change right now!

In the rush of enthusiasm for a new change effort, leaders often want everyone to join in right away. This is a natural human response—you find it in people who have found God, or discovered love, or are fervently giving up an addiction—but it’s problematic when it comes to organizational change.

Here’s why: Although a percentage of employees might be inclined to change, it’s highly unlikely that they can just go ahead and do so, all on their own.

Let’s say the change is about improving efficiency. The goal is to do things smarter and faster. Senior leaders want to say, “Don’t wait for us to tell you how; go ahead and think about ways you can streamline your work.” Does that mean an employee can stop filling out those annoying, useless forms? Well, no, we need those for tracking. What if an employee unilaterally decides not to work on that superfluous ego-driven project that adds no value? Well, that’s career suicide, since the project was initiated by a senior VP, who will surely notice if it doesn’t happen.

See how it works? Employees aren’t really empowered to make meaningful change—the systems, processes and people that make up the organization are all conspiring against them. What’s left is the minor stuff that may or may not be on target. They can save money by not buying that box of paper clips. They can improve efficiency by holding shorter meetings. They can improve customer service by acting nicer. They can enhance quality by proofreading.

It all adds up to a big unintended consequence: Rather than making people feel empowered, encouraging everyone to change right now makes employees feel disenfranchised and small. And that’s not even counting that deadly hypocrisy effect: “You tell me you want me to change, but the system (or my boss) makes that impossible.”

What can you do? Counsel leaders that while it’s a great concept to ask employees to participate, it’s essential to find a realistic way to do so. That may mean creating mechanisms for asking questions, or making suggestions, or participating on a team. But it doesn’t mean telling people to “just do it.”

Posted by Alison Davis at 06:34 PM

April 07, 2005

Exhibit A of how not to communicate

A letter arrived yesterday in my home mailbox that’s such a great example of how not to communicate that I had to share it with you. This is not a company communication—in fact, it’s a mailing from my son’s high school principal—but it has all the delicious attributes of really bad “official” communication: authoritative tone, “corporate speak” (or its academic equivalent), and a rules-based, off-putting style.

I have included the entire letter, and provided my commentary in italics.

Dear Parents of Students attending the Senior Prom: (so far, so good—that’s me)

It has come to the high school administration’s attention that some of our students who are planning to attend the senior prom on Friday, April 8th are also planning not to attend school on Monday, April 11th. It is my responsibility to inform you that Monday is a regular school day. Students not in attendance will be counted as truant. It’s too easy to address the issues of poor writing (for example, an administration isn’t a person, so can’t have attention), so I’ll keep going.

For the second time this year I have heard students and parents discussing the non-existent tradition of senior cut day. Please note that there has not been a senior cut day since my arrival at the high school four years ago. This is classic leader hubris—if he says something, it must be true—despite the fact that everyone else has a different reality. In fact, the school does have a longstanding tradition of senior cut days. But the principal is trying to stop the tradition.

Personally I take the mandate of the Board of Education seriously to protect all of our students. Discussions with my fellow high school administrators and our faculty council has brought forward the conclusion that students who choose to violate the attendance policy on Monday should lose senior privileges and not be included in upcoming senior activities. They are also subject to high school attendance consequences and removal from participation from sports programs on Monday and Tuesday. I would hope students’ parents would strongly consider making the appropriate decisions concerning school attendance. I apologize for including the whole painful paragraph but if I took anything out, you wouldn’t get the full flavor of the communication style: We’re Going To Hit You Over The Head Repeatedly Until You Get The Point. Bam! Bam! Bam! Ready to give up yet?

And once again, I am amused by how poor the writing is. Think there’s anybody over at school who understands word usage or grammar? Neither do I.

On Friday April 8th at 11:30 I will be meeting with all prom participants to review the areas I have discussed above. Further, I will be speaking about another potentially dangerous and harmful tradition “the keg race”. I truly believe that if we allow this tradition to continue we are just a short time away from a potential tragedy. Notice he doesn’t tell us what “the keg race” is. I guess he assumes that we know? I didn’t, so naturally I went right to my son to ask him. It turns out the “keg race” is another senior tradition (“No, it’s not,” the principal would say.) where seniors attempt to drink the equivalent of 105 kegs of beer between January and graduation, so they can beat last year’s total of 104 kegs. I don’t know much, but as issues go, this one seems a little more problematic than cutting school for a day. And maybe this is, in fact, the real issue, but you can’t tell from this letter.

With all of this in mind, I invite senior parents and parents attending the senior prom to attend our meeting on April 8th (along with all prom participants) to review the areas I have discussed above. We will be meeting in the auditorium at 11:30. I believe your attendance will go far to influence our children to follow school policy and be safe. Boy, am I tempted—but I’ve got a root canal appointment that will probably be a lot less painful.

Sincerely,
(Name deleted for obvious reasons),
Principal

Maybe I’m a bad parent (or person), but this letter doesn’t make me feel responsible—it makes me feel subversive. My son (who’s a very good writer) and I made fun of it. We had a good laugh. It was a bonding experience. I guess I should thank the principal for bringing the family closer.

Posted by Alison Davis at 12:16 PM | Comments (1)

April 01, 2005

When the CEO won’t listen, sell your stock

If a CEO or other senior leader creates a culture where people can’t ask questions, raise issues, or engage in real communication (not the kind that’s just for show), run away as fast as you can—the company’s in trouble.

You can read the front page of today’s Wall Street Journal for the latest example: the recently departed CEO of American International Group (AIG), “Hank” Greenberg. Among other charming tales of Mr. Greenberg’s operating style, the article recounts that employees and directors “rarely challenged” Mr. Greenberg. “At board meetings, directors often refrained from asking questions because they didn’t want to appear ignorant or to challenge Mr. Greenberg’s authority,” according to people familiar with the meetings.

Think Hank’s the only senior executive who kept a lid on communication? Talk to a Hewlett-Packard (or Lucent) employee who worked with Carly Fiorina. Read the accounts of how Ken Lay (Enron) or Bernie Ebbers (WorldCom) operated. Recall the way former Mattel CEO Jill Barad ran the company.

And I’m sure you have your own experiences with less high-profile leaders who are really bad listeners. Like the division president who tried to shoot the messenger (me) when employees in a focus group made suggestions on how he could improve communication. Or the senior leadership team that has a reputation for roasting employees when they come to present their ideas. Or the CEO who responded to an employee question at a town hall meeting by saying, “I’ve already answered that” in a bored, dismissive tone.

CEOs get their jobs because they’re smart, driven and decisive. But they keep their jobs by being smart enough to realize that they don’t know everything. Problems are festering every day—and great ideas are fermenting. This may sound blindingly obvious, but unless a CEO is open to hear both bad news and good news, he can’t help solve problems or take advantage of promising opportunities.

If your CEO has a habit of cutting people off, shutting people down and otherwise acting like the only voice worth hearing is his own, find another job. Sell your stock. Get out quick.

Posted by Alison Davis at 01:05 PM