Tag:

Culture

BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement: Summary

by Ron Potter

Empowerment, Team Orientation, and Capability Development.  These are the three areas that make up the Involvement Quadrant.

For the most part, each of these three areas requires the right attitude or maybe attitude adjustment by the team leader.

Only the leader can provide the Empowerment (Delegation) required for individuals to take responsibility and accountability for their particular area.

While team members can create a great Team Orientation, the leader has the opportunity to destroy or hinder those efforts with a single spoken word or email response.

Capability Development can only be provided by the leader but more importantly, the team leader must know the “future potential self” of each member to get the most out of that development.

Great Cultures require Great Leadership

Isn’t it interesting that so much of the Involvement Quadrant requires great leadership?  While the overall emphasis here is about corporate culture, it just doesn’t happen without great leadership.

Maybe that’s why Culture is one of the three elements of my Team Leadership Culture company name.  Making it last on the list doesn’t diminish its value.  In fact, building a great culture should be the goal of every leader and team in the company.  Great Corporate Cultures are not less important than Team and Leadership, it’s the goal of Teams and Leaders!  Without a great culture, the corporation never lives up to its potential.

Customers Know

Poor cultures are immediately spotted by customers.  Have you noticed walking into a retail establishment you seem to immediately sense good and bad cultures?

In one experience I was being helped by a person who was dressed like they just came from a skateboard park.  Nothing against skateboard parks, I have grandchildren who enjoy them and are good skaters.  But it sends the wrong message to customers in a retail store.

When I inquired about a particular product the person could only say “I think its waterproof.  Sam at our other store knows more about this.”  When I asked if he could call Sam in the other store his response was “I don’t have the number for the other store.”  End of conversation.  And end of my ever again entering that store.  They obviously had a culture that was not customer-focused.

Customers know!

Let’s Explore

After looking at the unique combination of the Involvement and Adaptability quadrants, the next few blog posts will explore each part of the Consistency quadrant.  Join me.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement: Capability Development

by Ron Potter

When I see low scores in the area of Capability Development, they seem to be driven by a couple of issues:

Leadership View

The leader and corporation almost always feel like they’re providing a great deal of training, education, and skill development opportunities and therefore don’t understand why the employees give them low scores in this area.

Employee View

Yes, the corporation gives lots of “training” but always where the corporation wants them to develop, not in the area where they want to grow.

Corporations often:

  • bring in trainers for the day
  • provide seminars
  • even provide opportunities to go off-site to one of these training sessions, seminars, or continuing education.

BUT, all of this capability development happens in the area where the company wants the employee to improve.  And it’s directed at improving the employee in the area where the corporation has them positioned.

One person said to me “I’m grateful to the company for providing me education and skills that have moved me to the top of the accounting department.  It provides me a great salary.  BUT, even though that’s an area where I have skills, that’s not the area where I have a passion.  I would much rather learn about and have an opportunity in the marketing area”.

I worked with Dr. Cloraire Rapaille for a few years.  He wrote a great book titled The Culture Code.  One of the Corporate Studies that Dr. Rapaille did for several major corporations was to help answer the question of what motivates people in the corporate world.  I believe it was in that corporate study where Dr. Rapaille coined the team “Future Potential Self.”  He discovered that people are not motivated by money, public recognition, or other forms of corporate motivational efforts.  People are motivated by what helps them get to what they see as their future potential self.

In my story above, the person’s “future potential self” was in marketing, not accounting.

Future Potential Self

So what does it take to provide training for a person’s Future Potential Self?

As a leader, you need to know what the Future Potential Self of your team members!  It requires that the leader get to know their team members on a human level.  Not just knowing their skill level.  Not just knowing their competencies.  But knowing who they are as a person.

One of my clients told me a story about putting in some long-hard hours on a particular project and yet felt very rewarded by their boss when the project was over.  When I asked what made them feel that way, they told me that their boss bought them the exact guitar they had been dreaming about.

Was it expensive?  It was very nice quality, but it was not considered a really expensive high-end guitar.

So what made it so special for them?

  • My boss knew that I loved playing in the church praise band.
  • My boss knew that any extra money we had right now went to caring for our new baby.
  • My boss was listening enough to know exactly which guitar I was desiring.

In short, their boss knew them as a human being!

That’s capability development.  Yes, they provided training courses to help them get better at their job.  Yes, they were offered off-site education to help improve their skills.  But, when added to the fact that their boss knew what they were desiring personally, that’s what improved the scores in Capability Development.

Know your people!  It makes everything else more valuable.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement: Team Orientation

by Ron Potter

The Team Orientation of Involvement contains several wonderful elements.

  • Cooperation is Encouraged
  • People are not isolated pieces
  • Teamwork is used over Hierarchy
  • People see the relationship between their work and the work of the team (teams)

Problem Solving

I think one of the first things that get in the way team orientation is that corporate leaders and members are problem solvers.  Don’t get me wrong, problem-solving is a wonderful skill and is the reason why most people get promoted in organizations.  But it can also be the first thing that gets in the way of good team orientation.

Email Overload

As a consultant, I was often asked how to reduce the amount of email that was a burden to everyone.  I always looked at three things:

  1. Why was the email sent?
  2. What was the response?
  3. Who was cc:d on the email?
Why was the email sent?

The answer to this question was always something like:

I gave this person an assignment and they were looking for an answer or a solution.

What was the response?

The answer to this question was almost always – I sent them the answer or solution.

Who was cc:d?

The answer to this one always seemed a little more cynical.  It would go something like – Everybody and their brother

Immediately eliminate 40% of email

The solution to almost all overload email is accountability.  This incorporates questions one and two.

I would suggest to the leader that they stop reading email with the intent to respond.  And start asking themselves the question “Why am I receiving this email?”

Because corporate leaders are good problem solvers, their immediate (non-thinking) response is to figure out the problem and send the answer.  However, if they look at every email with the first question being, “Why am I receiving this email?”  their response becomes different than providing a solution.

Why am I receiving this email?

Some of the responses I’ve heard from the Leader:

  • I don’t have the right expertise on the team
  • The person sending the email doesn’t like the answer their getting from the team
  • The person doesn’t want to be held accountable for the solution.  Now they have an email to prove that I gave the solution, not them.

This last answer is hardly ever seen by the leader (they’re problem solvers.  They feel good about themselves for giving answers).  But it’s the reason many emails are generated.  It’s an easy way to get the monkey off their back and onto the back of the leader.  And the leader seldom notices.

Answer with a different response

I suggest that the leader answer the email with a simple question, “Why are you sending me this email?”

40% of email will cease!

This response sends the message “I’m not accepting the monkey”.  Figure it out.  It’s why I gave you the job.  Come to me with solutions, not questions.

Notice that this one response touches three and maybe all four of the Team Oriented Culture elements.

  1. Cooperation is Encouraged – It encourages the individual to work with their peers.  Cooperate.  Engage!
  2. People are not isolated pieces – It’s not just one person solving a problem (or their boss solving it for them).  Again, they need to engage with the team and peers.
  3. Teamwork is used over Hierarchy – I’m starting to sound like a broken record here but it’s not a top-down solution.
  4. People see the relationship between their work and the work of the team – Decisions are not made in isolation.  It’s not just the boss who sees the big picture.  The individual must understand it as well to provide a workable solution.

I used the example of email but it can be any electronic media.  In fact, texting adds a sense of urgency that makes the leader feel they must give a solution rapidly.

But, it can also apply to one-on-one meetings and even happen in team meetings.

Solution or Team Orientation

This idea that the leader should also be the problem solver is at the heart of most of these team orientation issues.  It’s a tough habit to break.  Don’t just solve the problem,

  • Encouraged cooperation
  • Make sure everyone functions as part of the whole, not just individual pieces
  • Don’t perpetuate the hierarchy, build the team
  • Make sure everyone understands how their actions and solutions impact the team

Create a team orientation, you’ll get better involvement.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement: Empowerment vs Delegation

by Ron Potter

Empowerment vs. Delegation

Last week my blog post spoke of Empowerment in great cultures.  I need to take a short side trip here to talk about the differences between the words empowerment and delegation.  I’m not going to suggest that the words need to be used differently than they are today, that would be too large of a task.  But I believe it’s crucial that we understand the difference and also understand why one is required before you can accomplish the other.

These two words have become confused and misused in today’s language.  We currently view empowerment as a good thing and delegation as a bad thing.  I believe you need to empower before you delegate, and delegation is the higher form of the two words.

Let’s go back to the original definition of the two words and understand what they mean.

Empowerment

The dictionary says “To promote the self-actualization or influence of – make more confident – give someone a greater sense of confidence or self-esteem (Italics are mine)

Empowerment helps a person increase confidence, self-actualization, and self-esteem.  Empower is facilitated by allowing you to influence me on decisions and directions.  In other words, if I’ve Empowered you to run a portion of an organization, I will allow you to:

  • make all of your plans
  • run them by me to influence decisions to be made.

However, it’s still clear that the decisions are mine.

Advantages of Empowerment

There are a few advantages of using empowerment over a period of time:

  1. The individual grows and gets better as you question and learn the reasons for their planning and decision making
  2. You, the one granting empowerment, begin to learn how this particular person thinks and approaches issues.  It may be very different than you, but that doesn’t make it wrong.
  3. You may learn something along the way (see comments below about hiring experts)
  4. You gain a comfort level that the person is capable of tackling projects
Hiring the Expert

We often hire a person who is an expert in a particular area.  But, you must be very careful about how you grow and nurture that person.  If you start asking questions about how or why they reach a certain decision, their reaction might be:

  • Why am I being questioned?  I’m the expert.
  • Does this person trust me?
  • I can’t stand the “micromanagement” much more.  I may have made a mistake in taking this job.

When you hire an expert or someone with considerably more experience in an area than you possess, make sure you explain the reason for empowerment and when you expect to move up to Delegation.

Empowerment needs to take place in this situation for a couple of reasons:

  1. You need to learn and grow in this area.  This is the reason you hired an experienced expert.
  2. You need to know the key indicators of the job or project.  Is it going well?  Are we in trouble?  How will I know as soon as possible?  When do I need to explain a bigger picture or other influences where this person may not have an awareness?

If you let your “expert” know all of this ahead of time, they’ll be better equipped and more willing to answer your questions.

Delegate

The dictionary says, “Give a responsibility or task to somebody else – Assign responsibility or authority – Commit or entrust another.”

Delegation carries a much higher level of responsibility than empowerment.

In U.S. Embassies, the Ambassador is our official representative.  The Ambassador is our delegate.

I believe delegation is the higher state of the empowerment-delegation pair.  Delegation means you have been entrusted with a piece of the business to run as you see fit.  However, like a US Ambassador, regular check-ins are expected.  That is why we empower first so that key indicators can be understood and approved before the assignment is delegated.

Do they know the difference?

I’ve often asked leaders if they can tell me which direct reports are empowered and which they’ve delegated.  After understanding the definitions, they will tell me who they’ve delegated and who is still empowered.

My next question is, “Do your direct reports know if they’re empowered or delegated?”  The answer is usually no.  This causes confusion.  Each person is wondering why they are treated differently from another person.  One of the positive things I’ve seen happen when an explanation is made, the empowered quickly ask, “What do I need to do to have that delegated to me?”  This is the perfect question.

Misunderstood and timing

Because the original meaning of these words has been lost, I’ve seen managers and leaders assume that if they are going to empower someone, they should look the other way and let them do their thing.  That’s an abdication of leadership.  Leadership is still required in both empowerment and delegation.  Don’t sacrifice your role at the alter of empowerment.

The other issue is timing.  If you like having your direct reports continually in an empowered state, that is an indication that you’re letting your ego get in the way.  Delegation can be scary but is required for a healthy organization.  On the other hand, if you’re pretty good at getting people delegated (they’ll think of you as one of the best bosses they’ll ever have) and you still have someone in an empowered state even after a year of attempting delegation, you probably need to help that employee move elsewhere.  If they’re not willing or capable of accepting delegation, they may not be the right person for your organization.

Be Aware

Again, I’m not trying to change how language is used, but I do believe it’s important that you understand the differences to be effective.

The Denison Culture Survey (and almost everyone else) is using the word empowering.  The concept is correct.  Having people engaged, empowered, and taking responsibility for their work will have a positive impact on your organization.  Make it happen.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement: Empowerment

by Ron Potter

Organizations with highly empowered employees have a couple of things in common:

Processes Pushed Downward

The first common point is that processes are pushed down the hierarchy to the lowest possible level.  When I say processes, the survey measures explicitly Information, planning, and decisions.

This point starts with the genuine belief that the information needed for good planning and decision making resides with the people closest to the action.  I used the words “genuine belief” because I’ve seen too many leaders and leadership teams proclaim that the needed information resides and is better understood at levels below them but their ego and position keep them from letting go of their own beliefs and assumptions.  They also believe they are the leaders of the organization because they are smarter and know better what to do then those who have not yet reached their level in the company.  If you’re a member of a high-level team, be very, very careful that you don’t let that ego prevent you from hearing and understanding the information from the people who are closer to the action.

During my blog series on being a Leader, I talked about the Sweet Rewards of Humility.  You can follow the link below if you have more interest.

My point is, you must be a humble leader in order to empower your people and organization.

Positive Impact and Involved

The second thing that organizations with highly empowered people have in common: Employees believe they can have a positive impact and are therefore highly involved in their individual work and the work of their team.  They are good at integrating their work with that of their team.

Integrating Work with Others

The key to positive impact and involvement? Integrating with others.  It takes good teamwork.  We’ll look at the elements of a Team Orientation in a future blog.  But for now, let’s remind ourselves of the aspects of building a good team:

  • Truth: Being able to speak the reality of a situation.  This ability must reside both in peer-to-peer relationships as well as a top-down, bottom-up relationship.
  • Respect:  We must respect the opinions and observations of everyone.  When people feel respected, they are willing to share and integrate their work with others.
  • Elegance: Good integration of work means reducing the friction caused naturally between different parts of an organization.
  • Commitment:  Integration means that sometimes, other parts of the organization must benefit.  It is possible to improve each part of the organization but not to maximize each part of the organization.  A good team requires a commitment to the best for the overall company, not just a particular part of the organization.
Empowerment is required for good involvement.
Good involvement is a requirement of a great culture.

 

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement

by Ron Potter

We’ve looked at Mission and Adaptability.  Individually they’re each required to create a great culture.  But, we also looked at them as a pair.  The top of the chart says “External Focus” meaning that these two quadrants look to the outside world.  They are not focused on things internal to the organization but are focused on the future with Mission and on the customer and industry needs and changes with Adaptability.

Today we’ll begin focusing on the third quadrant, Involvement.  As a preview of things to come, you’ll notice that the left side of the chart is labeled “Flexible”.  This means that the two quadrants on the left side of the chart, Adaptability and Involvement help create very flexible organizations.  We’ll talk more about that when we look at Involvement in summary.

Like all of the other quadrants, Involvement has three subsections:

  • Empowerment
  • Team Orientation
  • Capability Development

There seems to be an abundance of “Engagement” surveys in the market place today.  I believe the root of these was based on the research of the Gallop Organization.  Their premise is that the more employees are “engaged” the more productive they are; leading to a more successful organization.  I agree with their premise.

I also agree that the Denison organization’s focus on empowerment, team orientation, and capability development direct the company and it’s employees to specific areas of engagement that have the greatest impact.  It’s not just engagement for engagement’s sake but focused engagement by empowering people, equipping them with the right capabilities and helping them work as united teams.

There is a lot to learn in this quadrant and as with the others, it’s easy to declare but difficult to implement.  Doing so will help you create a great corporate culture.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – People Quit Organizational Cultures!

by Ron Potter

I read a recent blog by Christie Lindor.  The title of that post was

“People do not quit companies, managers, or leaders – they quit organizational cultures.  Here’s why.”

In her post, Christie wrote, “I had always believed that people quit leaders, not companies.”

I also believed that statement and observed it as well.  Christie then goes on to say

But then I realized that there is probably another way to look at it.  It is more than just leaders.  Organizational culture, in its simplest form, is an ecosystemic mashup of values, beliefs, underlying assumptions, symbols, rituals, attitudes, and behaviors shared by a group of employees and driven by leadership.” (Italics are mine)

While I don’t disagree with Christie, I think there are important distinctions.

Beliefs and Assumptions

In the Denison Culture Survey chart, there is a center circle labeled “Beliefs and Assumptions”.  While that little center circle is often overlooked, Dr. Denison is making it clear that it’s a set of corporate beliefs and assumptions that drives the culture.

In my Culture Introduction blog post I stated:

What is Culture?

A dictionary definition says, “the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an organization.”

We hear a lot about a corporate culture being toxic or exciting or silo-ed or productive.  But in my mind, many of those conditions have more to do with Teams and Leadership than they do with Culture.

    • If there is a toxic environment, that’s usually caused by poor leadership that is ego-driven rather than humbly driven.
    • Exciting environments come from leaders and teams developing people to face difficulties and obstacles in innovative thoughtful ways that utilize the skills and experiences present.
    • Silo-ed environments happen when teams are unable to work through their difference and reach a committed direction or approach.
    • Productive environments exist when teams learn how to elegantly use the resources they have to get the most out of an organization in a simple way.

Focusing on “culture” doesn’t cure any of the identified difficulties.  Building better teams and leadership improves those issues.

I believe Christie and I are saying the same thing.  However, I believe it’s important to distinguish between Team, Leadership, and Culture.  It’s difficult to correct issues of “Culture” without acknowledging that its Leadership and Teams that cause the Culture issues.

 

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Adaptability: Summary

by Ron Potter

It’s easy to see but often challenging to implement an adaptable organization.

It takes

Humility is required because it forces you to suspend your belief about what is the right direction to learn, listen, and change.

It also requires respect.  I’ve talked about Jordan Peterson and his 12 Rules for Life.  One of my favorite rules is number nine, which states “Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don’t.”  Live by that rule alone, and you’ll experience change and growth.

But, now that we’ve looked at the first two quadrants, Mission and Adaptability, I would like to think about them as a pair.

Mission and Adaptability are at the top of the Denison Culture Survey.  If you look at the very top of the circle, you’ll see

the words “External Focus.”  External Focus means that the quadrants of Mission and Adaptability look “outside.”  They are not focused on what goes on internal to the organization, but what is going on beyond the walls of the organization.

Organizations who have high scores in these quadrants at the top of the chart tend to be focused on and achieve growth and market share.

What I find interesting is the research behind these two quadrants.

Research indicates that during down times when market share and growth shrink, companies who have high scores in these two quadrants seem to be less impacted by the negative situation.

If growth and market share is your goal, make sure the people of your company score you highly in these two quadrants.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Adaptability: Creating Change

by Ron Potter

One of the more impactful aspects of this Creating Change sections is summed up in the statement:

“We respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment.”

One of my first experiences with the Denison Culture Survey was with a company that had been the undisputed leader of their industry for over 100 years.  However, over the last few years, they had been losing market share to new start-ups in their industry.  By the time they needed outside help, things had fallen to critical points, and their profitability had all but disappeared.

First Culture Survey

When we saw the results of their first survey, it was immediately obvious from a consulting point of view.  They scored highest in the Consistency quadrant.  Meaning they had been doing things in a very consistent way for over 100 years (we’ll look at the Consistency quadrant in more detail in future posts).

They scored lowest in the Creating Change section of Adaptability.

And on the statement “We respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment,” they scored in the bottom 10% of all companies.  They did NOT respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment.

Why had they not responded?

After gathering the results of the survey, we displayed the overall graph of their results.  The leadership team went silent after reviewing the results.  It was not because they were in shock.  It was because the results revealed what they suspected was the problem all along.   They had continued to function just as they had done for over a century in spite of knowing that the market place was rapidly changing around them.

But, this visual representation of their situation allowed them to open up and be honest with each other for the first time.

We’ve always done it this way

Their first response was to admit they knew they were in trouble over three years ago when they first experienced a loss of market share and a drop in their profits.  At their annual leadership retreat, they decided that the drop would be overcome if they just buckled down and did a better job.  After all, they had been successful for over 100 years.  If they just did a better job of doing what they did well, they would pull out of this tailspin.

We don’t have a better solution

At their leadership retreat two years ago the results had continued to drop but they decided it must be a temporary issue and if they just continued to stay focused and work harder, this would be overcome like many dips throughout their history.  They didn’t have a better answer.

Now we see the problem

While they were stunned with the results of their culture survey, you could almost detect a sense of relief on many of their faces.  They were all exhausted from working hard and long.  They had sacrificed their personal lives including family and health just because they didn’t have a better answer.  Now they could see the issue more clearly which allowed them to talk about and work toward a more feasible solution.

Coherent Change

Other areas of the Creating Change section referred to issues such as:

  • Flexibility
  • Improved processes
  • New ways of doing things
  • Lower the resistance to change
  • Get the entire organization pulling together in the new direction

These things they could begin to plan around.  The Culture Survey had added a new vitality to the leadership team.  You could feel the energy rising in the room as they began to talk about and plan for change and a new way of doing things.

Improvement

While they never fully recovered the overwhelming market share they once held, they did become a much more competitive force in the market place.  They were suddenly fighting for and scrapping for every inch of growth in the market place, and the “new” competitors were fighting a new approach from an old competitor.  They were now forcing changes in the industry, and the “new” competitors had to respond.

Blockbuster

If I tried to list all of the companies that were once a force in the industry but no longer existed, there would be too many to include in a blog.

I read the other day that Blockbuster (the DVD company with thousands of retail stores) had a chance to purchase Netflix for a very reasonable amount.  They passed.  It would have eaten into their retail store, walk-in business.

Today, Netflix is one of the hottest companies in the market place.  Blockbuster doesn’t exist.

Change or Die

We’ve used this adage many times in the last several blog posts.  But it’s true.  If you’re not changing and adapting, you will soon be nothing more than an empty store in a strip mall with a faded outline of your logo and former glory.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Adaptability: Customer Focus

by Ron Potter

Customer focus is an interesting topic to me.  Henry Ford is quoted as saying “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”  He was inventing the car.  People didn’t know they needed a car.

Entirely new Product or Service

“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.”  Thomas Watson, president of IBM.  This was the quote from Tom Watson Sr.  It was Tom Watson Jr. that turned the punch card company toward computers of the future.

I believe Customer Focus must be driven by the Mission quadrant.  If our mission is to create something the world has never see or doesn’t know they need yet, then Customer Focus must be very selective.

I’m involved with a wonderful team attempting to create something that doesn’t exist yet.  We’re trying to take years of consulting experience from myself and a couple of other consultants and boil down the essence of building teams, being great leaders and developing great cultures into an app.  We’ve titled it GPS4Leaders.  Even though we have a great concept on how the app will work, our goal right now is to put the app in the hands of customers and let them tell us how it should look, feel and react to their use.  We’re trying to listen to the customer.

Existing Product or Service

But,

  • once the car has deeply penetrated society
  • everyone is working with computers daily (sometimes it even resides on your wrist)
  • giving you access to your Team, Leadership, and Culture progress instantly on whatever device is available at the moment

how should you then listen to your customer?

Listen to the customer from the companies position, not just your job

I recently received notice from my insurance company that my policy would be discontinued if I didn’t submit a payment immediately.  However, that particular policy is set up for automatic withdrawal, and it is the insurance company that initiates payment.  I called the company, brought the payments up to date and then asked, “Why didn’t you (the insurance company) make the automatic withdrawal?”  The answer was “I don’t know, but I’ll have someone contact you.”  I was never contacted!  The person I was talking with did their job of receiving payment and didn’t care if it happened again or not.

Listen before the customer asks

In another example, I received a regular shipment, but the shipment was short two critical pieces.  After waiting a week I called the company.  The person I talked with immediately corrected the problem and sent me the missing parts.  Did that person listen to the customer?  Sort of!

In correcting the improper shipment, the person said: “Yes, we had several shipments with this same issue, I’ll correct that for you.”

Wait a minute!  You knew you had this problem.  If fact you have several examples of it, and yet you didn’t correct my issue until I called you to see why there was a problem!

Companies that are good at listening to their customers make corrections before the customer calls them.

Listening may be unique, but it requires focus

Each company may have unique issues around listening to its customers.  An emergency room will have very different issues from a vitamin company.  A parts supply company will have different issues than a new car dealership.  You will likely need to customize your listening skills to your particular situation.  Just make sure this is a leadership issue, it’s everybody’s job; it is not the domain of a customer service department!

2 comments
1 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Adaptability: Organizational Learning

by Ron Potter

Organizational learning requires much more than a procedure, a checklist, or even a department.  Organizational learning needs to be deeply embedded in the organization.  It must be a deeply held belief, part of everyday processes, and highly rewarded.

Reward Failure

Does your boss (or you as a boss) look for and reward those moments when learning takes place?  People learn more from failures then they do from success.  Let those two concepts sink in for a minute.  We reward learning.  Learning is the greatest from failure.  Therefore (if I still remember my algebra) we reward failure!

How many organizations will survive is they reward failure?  Not many, you might say.  But if you remember our last blog, if we don’t change we die.  You must figure out how to fail successfully to change and grow.

I remember one CEO in particular that seemed to have a good knack for successful failure.  At his leadership meetings, his direct reports began to understand that if they brought an idea forward on how to do something differently, he would “reward” them with great attention and questions.  For a moment they would get the center ring.  When someone proposed a new idea, he would ask all of the “mission” questions from the first quadrant of the Culture Survey to make sure they were headed in the right direction.  If so, he would grant permission to go ahead but with frequent updates, progress reports, and budget projections.

Noticed that he didn’t just turn them loose with no guide rails.  The idea needed to further the mission, and he also set parameters in place that would assure quick small failures before things got too out of hand if the idea didn’t work.

But the ideas were rewarded, and the person who brought the idea forward was rewarded with a “job well done” and went on to the next topic with a nice grin on their face.

Innovation and Creativity are not the same

I hear many top executives proclaim that they want more creativity from their people.  However, when people propose true, pie-in-the-sky, out-of-the-blue creative ideas are brought forward, they are often shot down for all the standard reasons.

Innovations are usually small, easily executable, quick ideas that help the organization change and adapt rapidly to a changing marketplace.  Innovation often falls in the category of rewarding failure.  Top executives love innovation (or at least they should).  It doesn’t have the risk of creativity, and it’s easier to make sure it fits with the guard rails described above.  Even if they call for creativity, corporate leaders are asking for innovation.  Respond accordingly.

Generational Differences

One final note is probably worth mentioning.  I grew up in the older generation.  Our generation that would ask “Why am I taking calculus?  Will I ever need it?”  The only answer I ever received was “You’ll better understand how things work.”

The younger generation grew up with electronics and access to more information than we’ll ever use or need.  They don’t need calculus; they Google it.  (Interesting how Google has now become a verb.)  Learning to them is very different from the learning process we went through.

How do we develop a culture of organizational learning in today’s environment?  My answer to that question is to ask.

  • Ask your employees about what they need to learn.
  • Ask them what they want to learn.
  • Ask them how they learn.
  • Ask what you can do to help them learn.

How do we learn?  Ask, don’t tell!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Culture: Adaptability

by Ron Potter

The next quadrant of the Denison Culture Survey we’re going to explore is Adaptability.

Photo credit: Denison Consulting

This quadrant is divided into the three sections of:

  • Organizational Learning
  • Customer Focus
  • Creating Change

You can easily see how an attitude of learning, customer focus and one of creating change will certainly make an organization adaptable.

What are some signs that we are NOT an adaptable organization?  I’m sure you can come up with a lot more examples than I could ever possibly list but here are a few that I’ve seen through the years.

  • There’s a belief in the organization that we’ve been successful for 100 years.  If we just keep doing things the same way, we’re sure we’ll pull out of this slump.
  • The industry is producing products that make our product look old.  But, we’ve gone through an extensive competitive bidding program and the cheapest supplier we’ve chosen is not capable of providing the new look.
  • Our customer feedback has dried up because we never seem to respond to the customer stated needs.  It’s just too expensive for us to manufacture it that way.
  • Everyone is doing a great job but the feedback from the customer never makes it out of the customer service department.
  • We tried to make a change but were punished for “making a mistake.”  We’ll never try that again.
  • The leadership team seemed to be focused on that issue, they just neglected to inform the rest of us.

As I said, you can probably come up with many more reasons for not being adaptable.  Those are just a few of the many that I’ve experienced with my consulting clients through the years.

It’s easy to say we’re adaptable.  We might even make an attempt at being adaptable.  But do our actions support change and innovation?  Or do people feel like they get punished or labeled for being a trouble maker if they try to make changes?  Adaptability requires organization and cultural support.

I believe it was Alan Deutschman who coined the phrase, change or die.  When the environment is changing faster than we can blink (my grandkids don’t remember a world without an iPad) that saying was never truer.  Just ask the people who ran and worked for many of the largest corporations in the world that are now nothing be memories.

The average life-span of Fortune 500 companies in the 1950s was over 60 years.  The average life-span of the companies on that list today is less than 20 years.

Change or die!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts