Leadership and culture—two concepts intertwined. My organization is eighteen years old and has had a handful of directors. I’ve only known two of them and I met the previous one at the end of his tenure.
The last few years for my organization have been rough with budget cuts and staff reductions. As the new director settles into the position, we’re learning more about the problems of the last few years. While the new director is careful to keep things neutral, we’re finding out that there were problems with the budget and with the relationship to our client.
We were all very much aware of the relationship problems as nearly every staff meeting for the last two years has consisted of whining about our client. When the director began each staff meeting with a “sad sack” story and then continued the theme through the meeting, it helped produce a culture of uncertainty, negativity, and hopelessness. During the lay-off period, the director again showed poor leadership judgment by alienating all staff by sending emotionally detached emails to the organization.
We’ve had one staff meeting since our new director took over the reins of the organization and what an amazing transformation. Our meeting started off on a light note with informal remarks, jokes, and a supportive feeling. In addition, the director brought high-level guests to the meeting so that everyone at my organization could hear the fresh take on our client relationship and the foundations that have been rebuilt. It was a positive start that was carried throughout the meeting.
In the last few weeks, I haven’t heard nearly as much grousing about our situation. I’m sure that our culture hasn’t changed so quickly or completely but I do believe that we’re paying attention to the behavior exhibited by leadership and that we’re on our way to altering our recent culture of doom and gloom. This is something I’ll explore as I gather data for the cultural analysis.
I thought last night’s presentation went well. It felt like we were getting down to the nitty-gritty of the subject. While I was reading Block, I really appreciated the idea of discovery vs. diagnosis. I’d much rather be in a discovery mindset than feeling like I need to fix a problem. The ownership for fixing other people’s problems can really weigh you down. I’m the oldest child and I know what it’s like to want to fix people’s problems. It ultimately ends up being your problem and the problem-holder often abdicates responsibility. I think this idea can be translated from familial issues to workplace concerns.
It’s funny how folks tend to think of Research Methods in a bad way and yet we use some of the data collection methods we learned about in that class on a frequent basis. Last night it felt like we were able to draw on that class like we do for other courses we’ve taken. Score one tiny point for 660.
This week Mike and I are going to interview three people for our project. I talked to one of them briefly today and she wanted to know if she should lay it all out there when we officially talk. I told her she should absolutely feel free to tell us what’s on her mind and if she has any ideas on solutions to let us know. I hope we can not only practice authenticity but also engender it in the people we talk to over the course of this project.
Schein (2004) says:
culture is the nature of how reality, truth, and information are defined. Reality can exist at physical, group, and individual levels, and the test for what is real will differ according to the level-overt tests, social consensus, or individual experience (p. 149).
I’ve been thinking about how I’m going to approach the cultural analysis paper and one of the things I’ve been thinking a lot about is how I’m going to remove me from the equation. Certainly I’ll always be present in this analysis but I’m questioning how I will “dial back” my feelings, judgments and assumptions so that those things don’t get in the way of seeing the “truth”.
As I’ve indicated before, I feel like I’m a square peg in a round hole at work because I do not share the love for the subject matter like many of my co-workers. In fact, I’m finding it increasingly difficult to care about the subject matter and so I’ve been focusing more on the craft of designing courses, activities and transfer of learning.
It is especially difficult when I hear someone say they don’t care about or like training. I think what she meant was that the act of delivering training doesn’t thrill her anymore but when it comes down to it, I’m curious as to why she works where she does. She doesn’t often write courses and the thrill of training is lost to her. Is it inertia that keeps her there? Or is it something else? Is it the culture that keeps her in place? Are some of the things that drive me batty comforting to her? Are the physical and group levels acceptable to her but not to me?
I’m looking forward to our upcoming discussion of questions we should ask to uncover culture in the workplace. I know I need some help in formulating questions that will dig deeper and reveal truths.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
I’ve experienced two random acts of kindness today. One from Carol, who surprised me with a rather large favor, and one from a co-worker.
After lunch, I got back from lunch to find a hideous ceramic turkey salt (or pepper) shaker on my desk. I’m sure you’ve seen those turkey decorations at your grandmother’s house–quite ugly but one of those things that family members cherish because it reminds them of happy times.
I work with someone who graduated from the Adult Learner program just as it was switching over to the new format so she and I have spent quite a bit of time lately discussing Weisbord and Schein among others. She had been to an estate sale at lunch and bought me the turkey salt shaker. She told me her father used to say “Don’t let the turkeys get you down.”
See what I mean? Two really awesome things today and both tied to this program. Makes me proud and happy to be a member.
In the HRD course this summer we looked at journals and trade magazines that could be a source of research and good reading for HRD work. One of those trade magazines was T&D from ASTD. I think I made a comment about how sometimes T&D is one of the only things that I have as a life raft. OK, it probably wasn’t a comment filled with so much drama, but the sentiment is that sometimes T&D comes along with an article that I find to be especially helpful to me.
Today at lunch I decided to flip through the latest T&D (cover story-40 Best Learning Organizations of 2008) and in the Development column a particularly great and timely article can be found. T&D is letting more of its content be available for free. Click here to read the article about Energy Vampires.
In the last paragraphs of the article, the author encourages readers to share the article with others. I plan on making a couple of copies and handing them out to the folks I think are really trying to make a difference here at my place of employment. I’m not sure that making a copy for everyone makes sense but perhaps I’ll change my mind about that.
I received this exerpt in my email this morning from ASTD’s The Buzz newsletter. I thought those of you who were in the HRD class this summer would be interested since this is related to some of the concepts we talked about.
Toyota Keeps Idled Workers Busy Honing Their Skills
Wall Street Journal (10/13/08) Linebaugh, Kate
Toyota’s production line is taking a hit from the economic downturn and rising gas prices, but rather than lay off workers, the company is sending the idle ones into training courses to improve their skills and to find new and improved ways to make cars. Plants in Indiana and Texas stopped making pickup trucks in August; while about 2,000 workers are expected to start up again in November, another 2,000 will not be needed until April at the earliest. GM, Ford, and Chrysler are bound by union contracts to pay their workers even when they are idle. Toyota’s workers are non-union and the company has vowed to never lay off full-time employees, which is why it is using the down time for quality-control and productivity training.
Laying off employees for three months and then having to rehire and retrain new workers would be much more costly in the long run, the company says. Princeton plant manager Norm Bafunno says the training is already paying off, as one employee has designed a Teflon ring that prevents paint damage when electrical switches are installed on a car door. These kinds of improvements are what the company is hoping to gain from the training efforts, so that when production resumes, things will run even more smoothly.
I saw over on Janet’s blog an interactive Johari window. What a neat idea. So. I’m copying it. Please, as Janet says, play along by selecting the link below.
My interactive Johari Window
As an aside…could this be the first meme in the Adult Learner program?
I just read the follow-up piece to the Statler Group consulting article. I question if the John Rau and Charles Fombrun articles see the issue as a process consulting project. It seems like the advice these two experts are giving is for the Statler consultants to act as experts and they should go in telling Royce Kellogg what to do. Both suggested that research into mergers be conducted and those findings given to Kellogg. I think that’s certainly a good idea, as we discussed Kellogg seemed naive and clueless about the work that must occur during a merger, but Statler also clearly needs to re-contract. Both experts advocated for a re-contracting or a stepping away from the project. My interpretation of their advice seemed to be more of what we discussed early in the semester about how we see consultants–make decisions for clients, collect the fee, and leave before the work begins.
The Awesome! part of my title comes from what the experts wrote as advice to Kellogg. The advice very much seemed to me to be about teaching Kellogg to act as a process consultant with the Statler consultants. The Robert H. Schaffer piece started off with what Jay Barton told us last week…get the client to rethink the situation. This is, of course, what Schein and Block recommend as well. The client, Kellogg, must acknowledge his responsibility for the situation and hear the good and bad news. By learning about all sides of the merger process, Kellogg will be able to lead his combined company. As we found in our reenactment, Kellogg was out of touch and leadership seemed scattered with all levels of management uncertain as to their roles in the new organization.
The Schaffer and David H. Maister pieces highlighted collaboration, accessing ignorance, and finding a way for all parties to be authentic–Kellogg needs to be genuine with his managers; Statler needs to be authentic with what they can actually do to help Kellogg-Champion; and Kellogg and Statler need to work together to reach the ultimate goal of merging two securities companies. Although the two articles acknowledge this is not an easy project, I think if they follow the advice outlined where all parties are sharing responsibility there could be success in this consulting process.
In thinking about Vanessa’s story of her new work environment where people feel free to go barefoot and tell intimate details of their lives, I started thinking about some things at my place of employment that may seem odd to outside observers.
- We have people who kick their shoes off—there are always socks involved.
- We have a relaxed dress code—as you can tell by the way I’m dressed for class.
- We’re allowed and encouraged to spend a lot of time on the Internet—for research purposes, of course.
- We talk about politics.
- We don’t talk about religion.
- We keep personal revelations to a minimum—although, we do know quite a bit about each other.
- Often we take long lunches which may seem to outsiders as an abuse of our system but most of the time if there’s a long lunch involved it means we’re spending time talking about an issue for work and there just happen to be fries on the table instead of files.
I would qualify all of the above statements as artifacts. I’ve been making notes as I read Schein’s book to help me start identifying assumptions and espoused values. Some are obvious, certainly, but I’m really hoping to uncover some of the deeply embedded ideas that drive my organization’s culture. I think our upcoming cultural analysis project will be very enlightening for me—it will force me to look at each segment of our organization. To use the frog in the boiling pot of water analogy, it will help me see the pot and the steam coming off the water.
I’m so glad to be back on the blog. In an effort to “walk the talk”, I’m posting a copy of my paper on the site. I’ll be turning in a hard copy tomorrow.
I’m really looking forward to finishing the Enron movie tomorrow. The first part really made me think and it really made me ticked off. As we read more about leadership and culture, I’m sure I’ll be able to look at events like Enron with a more rational and learned mind than outrage about the behavior at the company. OK, maybe I’ll still be outraged but at least I’ll be able to move past that emotion and think more about how motivations, assumptions, leadership, and organizational climate could produce such an outcome.
Comments (2) 
Themocracy