This blog is about improving the relationship between organizations and the people who work for them. And, it’s dedicated to the millions of people around the world who go to work every day wanting to do a great job.
Culture change
On being authentic
The first time I ever heard the term authentic used in an organizational setting was only a few years ago and it might have been the last time it made any sense.
I was doing a small project for Nike’s Marketing team at their head office in Portland, Oregon. They often referred to authentic Nike. At first I thought it was some meaningless corporate jargon [there’s generally a lot of that going around at HQs wherever they are]. It took me a while, but I finally realized that for them a product was authentic Nike only if it had been designed with a world class athlete to improve their personal performance. Now, that’s authentic.
Three years ago, The Authentic Enterprise concluded that “…authenticity will be the coin of the realm for successful corporations and for those who lead them.” And, that “Communicators are uniquely positioned to become experts on the new art and science of organizational trust.” Now, I need to say up front that I generally find this whitepaper interesting and compelling. And not surprisingly I’m pretty keen about their conclusions for communicators.
The problem I have is that this paper and the discussion that has followed is based on two flawed assumptions:
- Institutions can be other than authentic
- Being authentic is always going to be good.
I don’t believe either of these assumptions are true.
First, how could an institution be anything other than authentic. They are what they are. They do what they do. Their behaviours and actions, the decisions they take or don’t take reflect their underlying beliefs and values. And, whether you like them or not they are a totally authentic.
Second, authenticity has lost its meaning. For Nike it was real and good. The challenge for many institutions today is that what is authentic is not that good. What’s real is not good. Think of British Petroleum or the Vatican. Their behaviours and actions tells us much about their authentic institution and it’s not good.
Importantly, though authentic and transparent are often talked about in the same breath, you don’t have to be transparent for anyone to get who you really are and what you stand for. Here’s an example:
A young friend of mine, a recent MBA grad, got a job offer from a fortune 100 global high-tech company early this summer. He was told that his candidacy had to go through the CEO. He stopped his job search – he’d received and accepted a formal offer [reflects his values]. It’s been weeks and still no word. This one act tells us a lot about this organization. And, perhaps more than my young friend would like to know. First, even though one of their 5 values is respect they have put a young debt-ridden new grad in this position. Second I believe my friend can be confident that control will be one of the most important underlying values – not innovation or accountability. Two other values that are listed on their site.
On being authentic. That’s easy. Now how to make institutions authentic and forces for good?
Random Posts:
Random Posts:
What can we learn from Chef Gordon Ramsay?
It has food. It has wine. It has crazy characters. It has drama. So it had to happen. Michael and I are now completely addicted to the original “Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares”. We stopped watching television months ago. Now we’re watching streaming video online. And thanks to The Food Network we’re hooked on Chef Gordon Ramsay’s show.
Who knew how complicated running a restaurant could be?
And who knew that beside the food [Ramsay’s an advocate for fresh local ingredients and simple plates – a higher purpose for the customer], communication seems to be the most important ingredient for success. And, perhaps surprisingly, I don’t mean marketing communication or PR. I mean internal communication.
We’ve now watched about 8 episodes. And with one exception – a brigade of experienced French chefs and service staff from Michelin starred restaurants who clearly knew what they were doing – the mantra of every show has been ‘Communicate!”
Ramsay’s challenge; get communication going between:
Once you get past his foul language, the man is masterful. He starts by raising their awareness of, and gets them focused on, the customer experience. A reality check.
Then, he facilitates often profound change – he encourages, he cajoles, he demonstrates, he brings new and sometimes jarring perspective and insight, he’s rational, he’s emotional and slowly but surely most teams get it.
No crafting of messages. No pushing them out. He just gets them speaking to each other. He helps them get the right conversations/communications going in the right way and at the right time to ensure the best customer experience. Remarkably completely dysfunctional teams start working well together and end up delivering outstanding experience for their customer and each other.
So, should we be spending more time as facilitator and less time as message pushers? I’d love to hear what you think?
Random Posts:
Creating extreme competitive advantage
Meeting people who really get communication is rare. So, I was pleasantly surprised to meet with Bob Weiler, founding partner of Brimstone Consulting Group last week.
It was a meeting that proved to be both interesting and provocative. Early in the conversation Bob suggested I change my business card to read Hinton : Communication strategies for extreme competitive advantage. Boy did he have my attention?
He pushed on. Reminding me of what, as an air force brat, I once knew, which is that the first thing you do when you go to war is take out or try to take out your enemy’s communications. Once you’ve got your enemy in the “dark” and unable to communicate with HQ or each other they start to think very dark thoughts. They will imagine the worst things possible about what’s going on. And this gives you a very critical strategic advantage. So the very first thing you go after is communications.
I felt like a light bulb went back on. Somewhere 100 conversations ago and in the constant fight for limited resources and budget my clients and I’d lost touch with reality. The reality that communications is not nice to have. It’s critical to have. And, great companies aren’t just OK at it. They are great at it. Individual, team and organizational mastery of communications is a top business priority. And, for the super great it is used as a weapon.
Bob suggested I go back to Kotter’s 8 steps of change model [it's a classic]. As a reminder they are: 1. Create urgency, 2. Form a Powerful Coalition, 3. Create a Vision for Change, 4. Communicate the Vision, 5. Remove Obstacles, 6. Create Short-term Wins, 7. Build on the Change, 8. Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture. Every one of these steps requires not just good communication, but great communication at the individual, the team and the organizational level.
And since Kotter’s change model isn’t the only way think about change I pulled out some notes I had on a newer favourorite of mine – Viral ChangeTM . As Dr Leandro Herrero describes it, this approach takes “a small set of behaviours spread by a small number of people through their networks of influence to create massive behavioural tipping points, translated into new routines and ‘cultures’ (new ideas established, new ways of working, new process adoption, new culture).” What will it take? Great communications.
So, I went back and pulled out some other classics:
Remember the 5 elements of management from business school? What managers need to do to get things done through their people: Planning, organizing, staffing, leading, and controlling. What will it take? Great communication.
Or the 5 P’s of marketing, those things that marketing managers use to control marketing mix: product, people, place, promotion, price. What will they take? Great communication.
Or Jim Collins description of how to move an organization from “From Good to Great”. Remember: Develop level 5 leadership, decide first who and then what, confront the basic facts, use the hedge hog concept [know what you’re deeply passionate about, what drives your economic engine, what you can be the best in the world at], build a culture of discipline, be a technology accelerator, use the flywheel effect. What will each of these need? Great communication.
Or what makes for really engaged employees [this still rankles with me, but since it’s so loved by so many] – job clarity, materials and equipment, matching strengths to the job, recognition and praise, caring about the people you work with, mentoring, valuing employee opinions, connecting to a noble cause, one for all and all for one, creating the conditions so that people can have a best friend at work, regular conversations about individual progress, creating opportunities to learn and grow [based on Gallup G12 questions]. What will that take? Yep. Great communication.
So, why is it that so few organizations make mastery of individual, team and organizational communications an essential business priority? Seems like a no brainer. What do you think?
And thanks Bob for reigniting the flame.
Random Posts:
“Where everybody knows your name”
There are very few of us who would associate the place we work with the Cheers theme song.
In fact that was the point of the song. Cheers is the place where we can escape our worries. A place where we’re understood and appreciated.
You’d think that a place where we spend 50% to 60% of our waking hours getting to and working in would be a place “where everybody knows your name”. But it’s generally not. Instead, it’s a place where:
- An EVPs executive assistant for over 5 years told me that her boss didn’t know she had children until she had to stay home one day with a sick child.
- A manager reported that he’d never met his Director face-to-face even though he’d been working for him for over a year.
- [fill in the blank]
What is it about organizations? After all we’re all there working toward the same organizational mission, vision and values.
What is it about these places that:
- Isolate rather than integrate?
- Create internal competition rather than collaboration?
- Dehumanize rather than humanize?
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think that colleagues at work need to be your best friend. Or that a weekly beer with people you don’t really even like is a solution? I’m not really a fan of the drive for employee engagement [what's really being measured?, implication that employees need to give more?, etc]. But, I do think that organizations can be places that encourage courtesy and respect. And it starts by knowing some basic things about the people you work with. Who are they? What matters to them?
Is your organization doing anything to humanize the work environment? Is there anything you can do in your corner of the workplace?
“Making your way in the world today takes everything you’ve got.
Taking a break from all your worries, sure would help a lot.
Wouldn’t you like to get away?
Sometimes you want to go
Where everybody knows your name,
and they’re always glad you came.
You wanna be where you can see,
our troubles are all the same
You wanna be where everybody knows
Your name.”
With thanks to Gary Portnoy and Judy Hart Angelo
Random Posts:
From the inside looking out
Earlier in my career I worked for one of the most admired brands in Canada. It’s the kind of thing that makes you proud. You walk into any situation and people are all over you about how great it must be. Except it wasn’t. The buzz and hype had created an external brand that didn’t match the internal reality.
What brings this to mind is that two more of the world’s most powerful and valued brands have taken big hits to their reputations in the past few weeks. And both of them for misleading customers.
DELL is accused of hiding significant and potentially dangerous technical issues from their business customers. Recently unsealed lawsuit documents reveal cover-up and purposeful deception that may have gone on for years.
Apple’s iphone customers have complained of dropped calls since the first iphone hit the market. They were told it was a network problem. A small problem of design which meant you just had to hold it a certain way. Then a software problem. Now, according to consumer reports the phone’s hardware is flawed. And it looks like Apple may have known about this problem for some time.
The thing is when we say DELL and Apple knew and have been misleading customers, we mean DELL and Apple employees knew and have been misleading customers. Certainly not all employees new. But, most certainly some of them did. And, no doubt many of them suspected the truth.
What’s it like to be on the inside of brands like these? To know that the customer’s brand experience is build in whole or in part on a myth. To know that if anyone really took a look behind the curtain they’d find behaviours that were questionable if not unethical or illegal. To know that your boss or your colleague is misleading you?
Rising employee cynicism and plummeting trust in leadership tell the tale. So the next time you’re asked how communications can help reverse these trends don’t start drafting new and better messages to push. Stop yourself from building a inspiring internal campaign or refreshing the intranet. Do start thinking about how you can help set the conditions for getting the right conversations going with the right people around where and how the employee experience is not aligned with the brand and discovering what needs to change.
Some additional reading
I went to see if I could find the values statements for DELL and Apple. Read in the context of what is in the news now, they are pretty interesting.
- Check out Dell’s official ‘Soul of Dell’
- Apples doesn’t publish its values statement on the web, but I did find a pdf post that looks pretty credible. If the actual values statement “customer empathy” is especially chilling.
And, I’ve been following the animated discussion on the smoke and mirrors of employer branding with Sean Trainor at CIPR Inside that adds another dimension to this post.
Random Posts:
Innovation culture & internal communications
There’s been a lot of talk about the need for organizations to innovate. But, since organizations don’t innovate, people do, there’s also been a lot of talk about building “innovation cultures”. My friends at CommScrum have taken the discussion further and begun a conversation about innovation and what the drive to an “innovation culture” means for Internal Communications. Here’s how I’m thinking about it. I’d love to hear your thoughts.
“Innovation culture” seems to me a lot like the next generation “leadership culture”. Then everyone had to be a leader. [how that was possible I have no idea.] Now everyone has to be an innovator? [makes about as much sense as everyone’s a leader.]
So, the challenge for Internal Communicators is not to get caught up in the organizational hype and feel pressured into delivering on demand tools and tactics [sound familiar]. Instead, we need get the answers to these fundamental questions.
What needs to be innovated? Products? Services? Systems? Decision taking? Codes of Conduct? Accounting procedures? Pay policies? You get my point. Some things really benefit from continuous innovation. And some things just don’t. In fact getting too innovative would be detrimental and perhaps even illegal.
Why? To improve our employee experience? To improve our customer experience? To make it easier for the CEO to brag on the golf course? To get a headline? Understanding what’s motivating the drive for innovation will tell us how important it really is to the organization’s strategy.
Who will be most impacted? And what will the implications be for what they do and how they do it? No matter how wide or deep the drive for innovation goes, not all employees [I include execs in here too] will be affected equally [see What? above]. As communicators if we assume anything different we may find ourselves creators or amplifiers of mixed messages.
What? When? and How? It’s important to get an adequate take on what’s already being planned/done to create an “innovation culture”? And to understand how those changes will support employee innovation. New processes? New reward systems? Training? Supporting tools and tactics? For an interesting take on what needs to change, check out Jon Katzenbach and Zia Khan’s book, “Leading outside the lines”, p.177. This should give us a clear idea of how seriously the leadership is taking the change and where their priorities are. It should also help us discover where, when and how we can be most helpful.
What do you think? Will the drive for ‘innovative cultures’ change the role of Internal Communications? And, if so, how?
Random Posts:
Getting grassroots
This week I’ve spent a lot of time with people who are part of grassroots movements of one sort or another. And, I started to think about whether there was anything we can learn from grassroots movements like these that are making important and fundamental societal and environmental change?
It started last Friday with a fabulous evening – the Equitas host family dinner – spent with 3 of the 130 Human Rights educators who are here in Montreal for the International Human Rights Training Program. A Cambodian working on a peace and reconciliation program in a world where some citizens fear reprisals in the wake of Khmer Rouge convictions. A Brazilian Human Rights lawyer who devotes time to an NGO working on local Human Rights issues. And a children’s rights activist from The Gambia. Each of them committed to changing their society from the bottom-up. They come here to learn. They will go home to share and act. And they will change their world one action, one person at a time.
Then, because I have a crazy idea of building a rooftop garden – my field of dreams – on our Church hall, I’ve started meeting local people in the community who are working on related projects. They are working on food security, urban farming, creating a sustainable university campus and greening the downtown. They are students at Concordia who are piloting a sustainable business growing herbal tea to supply a student run and operated tea shop at the Loyola campus. They are professionals working with local action groups to green some of the most debilitated parts of the downtown. There’s one young man who went to jail for an action he took to change a regulation in The Plateau. And guess what they did. And, they are profs and grad students working on urban farming projects. It’s amazing. They are changing our urban landscape one planter at a time. It is amazing what’s going on just outside our door.
What do these movements have in common?
- They are “natural and spontaneous” movements
- They are driven by passion for the ‘cause’.
- They operate outside of “traditional power structures”
- They use “traditional power structures” to raise awareness and funds.
- They rely on informal networks to share information and resources.
- Their projects start small and local but with the clear intention of leading to big and sustainable change.
- They pilot and learn and share and pilot again.
- They build pride in the work and the community.
What do you think? Is there anything we can learn from grassroots movements that we can apply to institutional change initiatives?
Random Posts:
Your washroom. Your culture.
In an all but forgotten corner of every office is the washroom. And, in the places I’ve worked they have been the most sterile, cold and soulless places in the office. And that’s saying something given some of the spaces I’ve worked in.
Kate Rutter believes ‘office bathrooms are key indicators of team culture’ because they should “…signal what’s important to the team…” On May 8th DNTO’s Tori Allen took this insight to CBCs workplace washrooms. The episode is fun.
Years ago one of my brothers-in-law, Richard, who at the time owned a gas station in Toronto, replied when I complained about the state of station toilets – “A dirty station is a busy station”. Enough said.
And it got me thinking. If workplace washrooms are key indicators of culture then they must be a key lever of change. And, maybe washrooms are something we should be paying more attention to.
I’m serious. It doesn’t need to take much. In the DNTO episode they added a plant [a cactus to be exact], some 3-ply toilet paper, tic tacs, gum, dental floss and post it notes. These small changes humanized the space and created an almost immediate uplifting affect within the team.
While we’re busy trying to create collaborative and innovative cultures how much effort is being put into designing spaces [including washrooms] that humanize the workplace and encourage employees to interact, share ideas, and create together.
Funny since our work spaces are the most visible reflection of our organizations with employees and other key stakeholders. You’d think it would be the first we’d place to start.
What do you think? Should we start in the workplace washroom?
Random Posts:
Lessons from the newsroom
The need for news is and always has been a fundamental human need. What we get and how we get it certainly has changed fundamentally thanks in part to Web 2.0 and social media. And, it’s changing the newsroom forever. If it hasn’t already, it will change our Corporate Communications function and our profession forever too.
So, my interest peaked when I heard Tom Rosenstiel, Director Pew Research Centres Project for Excellence in Journalism, interviewed the other day on CBCs The Current. Here’s the change he described:
| From | To |
| Journalists and their editors decided what was important for us to know and when [basically from 6am to 10 pm] | We decide what we want to read, listen to and watch and when [any time] |
| Editors decide what’s of interest to us based on instinct [surveys are expensive] | We can find out what’s of interest to our ‘readers’ immediately |
| Traditional media are trusted | Traditional media are distrusted and they are most distrusted by those of us who are the biggest consumers of news |
| Large news rooms and good budgets with the ability to follow many stories | Shrinking news rooms and limited budgets means following only a few stories |
| Social consensus – we all knew basically the same things at the same time | No social consensus – we may or may not know the same things at the same time. We may be more informed [ie: go deeper on a story] or completely uninformed [doesn’t interest us so we go elsewhere] |
| Story telling was everything | Story telling is only part of the story. News media need to provide:
|
| Product | Service |
What do you think? Are there lessons here for us:
- As professional communicators?
- In terms of our function? What we do? How we do it? When we do it? What skills and experience we need and how we’ll get them?
- In terms of our professional associations?