This blog is about 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.
Trust
“Be honest”
When people say ‘be honest’ in an organizational setting I think they really mean ‘tell the truth’. As an individual telling the ‘truth’ is easy.
You know what you know. You know what you don’t know.
You know how you feel. You know how you don’t feel.
You know what you’re going to do. You know what you’re not going to do.
Institutionally, it’s a lot harder. As an institution you may or may not know. I’m not saying impossible to know. I’m saying it’s harder.
Understanding and being mindful of the difference is key to great institutional communications.
Random Posts:
“Enthusing, encouraging and enabling”
Gary Hamel has started a movement over the summer designed to rethink management.
The other day, he and Veneet Nayar, CEO at HCL spoke about a cultural transformation that has been going on at HCL over the past 5 years. It was very thought provoking. [for more including a link to the webinar]
HCL began their journey with one assumption – “Employees first. Customers second.” And, that got my attention.
His logic is that the value in the business is created at the interface between employees and customers. And, according to Nayar the main way to maximize organizational value is to “enthuse, encourage and enable employees”. And what they realized very early on was that they had delegated that role to the Human Resources function.
For management to add value they were going to have to change their focus on control to a focus on actively supporting employees. Of course, there would still need to be control. But, whereas in the past it focused one way, the accountability would now be shared between management and employees.
Now this is where it gets really interesting. They didn’t just invert their hierarchy and redraw their organization chart. They didn’t just say the words and leave it to the organization to figure out what it meant. They started experimenting with different ways to build a culture focused on employees first.
It has not been an easy or short journey. According to Nayar they’ve made “some big mistakes”. But over the past 5 years they’ve achieved significant growth, seen double digit improvement in employee and customer satisfaction and learned how to better support and engage employees.
As I mentioned in my last post, I think Hamel and Nayar explore many of the themes that have been preoccupying us and bring something new.
Much to learn and think about here. What do you think?
Random Posts:
Something’s in the air
There’s something in the air and it’s not just that crisp smell of a Canadian fall. I’m noticing more than the usual reflection on what’s not working in organizations and how to fix it. And, there’s not just more reflection, it seems deeper and maybe even profound.
Many of the themes are very familiar for those of you who follow this blog and/or my friends at CommScrum:
- Think and act from the inside-out.
- Take a system rather than a functional or professional view
- Stop thinking that communications is about crafting and pushing messages
- Get out of your cubicle, off the executive floor and learn from employees and others outside your function/profession
- Empathize. Bring a deep human understanding to your profession.
Have I missed any?
Today I followed a talk that brings many of these ideas together and takes us someplace new. Standby.
Random Posts:
It’s got to be a two-way street
My last post made me think about the way that trust, loyalty and pride work. We act as if they flow one-way. But they simply don’t. If trust, loyalty and pride aren’t reciprocated, it’s pretty hard to imagine how they can even exist.
Does your organization trust employees? If it does, how is that trust expressed?
Is your organization loyal to employees? Is it proud of employees and the work they do? If it is how is that loyalty and pride expressed?
Do your managers trust employees? If they do, how is that trust expressed?
Are your managers loyal to employees? Are they proud of employees and the work they do? If they are how do they express their loyalty and pride?
If not, how can we possibly expect employees to trust our organizations or management? How can we expect employees to be loyal to our organizations or management? How can we expect employees to be proud of the organizations and the people they work for?
So, where does that leave us? If we want employee trust, loyalty and pride then we’re going to have to change.
Random Posts:
A dirty little secret
I watched a talk by Diane E. Ragsdale, who was then at the Andrew Mellon Foundation. She was talking about Surviving Culture Change in the Arts. Somewhere about half way through this great talk she referred to the ‘depth of loyalty and the quality of engagement’. Now she was talking about external stakeholders. But it got me thinking.
It’s an interesting thing, but we don’t hear very much about employee loyalty. We hear about building trust, employee engagement. And very occasionally about encouraging employee pride: pride in their work and their organizations.
When it comes to loyalty, the focus tends to be on customers. Why is that? Is it because we think that since we pay the employee that they are loyal? Or that since the job market is tight employees are loyal.
I find it a funny thing. Loyalty is something so tied to trust and pride and engagement and it’s virtually absent from the general discussion.
I think it may reveal something that makes me pretty uncomfortable. And that is that even with all the talk of humanizing organizations and the workplace there’s a dirty little secret. Underneath all this nice talk about building relationships there’s an assumption about employees. And that is that it’s really all about the transaction. We can buy loyalty. Or we get “loyalty” because employees have limited choices.
Is your organization’s employee experience “cultivating true fans” and advocates? Is designed to build employee loyalty? And, if it’s not, is it because after all they get a pay cheque. Are all our good intentions built on this assumption: in the end the employee ‘relationship’ is ‘short-term’ and contractual? Not a relationship at all.
Random Posts:
How not to do internal communications
It’s been one of those days where it just hits you over the head. There’s a lot of bad communications going on in organizations.
It started when a friend sent me this note that had arrived in his in-basket this morning:
Dear colleagues,
This is to inform you that the payments for all professors this term has been delayed due to delays related with the reserve courses. The Associate Dean of Academic Relations signed and gave all the necessary paperwork to XXXX in late August. However, he had to keep all contracts (extra teaching and reserve) until all issues related to the union were resolved, which is now the case.
XXXX is verifying that all contracts are now on the system. If they are, you should be paid in the upcoming pay run. My sincere apologies for any inconvenience and thank you for your patience.
All the best,
A few issues just haven’t been dealt with in this communication:
1: Why is this the first time you’re hearing about it? It’s already a few weeks into the term. My friend has been working since mid-August.
2: If you’re contract isn’t in the system, then what? Wait until another pay run? Wait until hell freezes over?
3: What are they doing to make sure this never happens again? Well no sign of anyone thinking about that here.
Sorry, sincere apologies just don’t cut it.
This is the kind of communication that leaves everyone feeling cheated. The person who wrote had to write the letter and who ends up defending the boss who did “all the necessary paper work”. The boss who looks completely ineffectual. XXX who sounds like they are hopelessly caught in an unrelenting bureaucracy. The union whose fault it clearly is [?]. And, my friend [and all the other profs] who have mortgages to pay and no pay in the bank.
“All the best”? For who?
And here’s the kicker. I just heard that this whole issue is actually only about 4 or 5 profs. Wouldn’t a phone call have been a bit more human?
The second happened at a very high end retail outlet here – Holt Renfrew. Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I wasn’t there to buy something swish, just lipstick. The business section this morning had another article about their new president. He’s focused on making the place more friendly – hot pink name badges and greeters in pink tartan suits are part of the plan. And he’s increased sales 15% in women’s wear, so something is working, but for how long?
I happened to be there over lunch. The person that was serving me seemed to be the only one working after one sales clerk after another drifted off for lunch – all with a friendly wave goodbye and mumbled reasons why they couldn’t wait.
Now, I’ve run retail operations before and lunch is a pretty busy time. And this is a high end shop where service is key. The woman that was serving me – proudly wearing her new bright pink badge – Magali told me in frustration that this issue comes up again and again at their weekly meetings. “And, nothing changes. Same girls every time.” And no consequences I said. “No consequences.” She confirmed. All the communications in the world and no consequences for bad behaviour aren’t going to add up to much.
The focus on new pink badges and a greeter aren’t bad in and of themselves, but if the same energy and money were focused on fundamental service issues, well then you have lift off. It’s hard to be friendly [or familiar] when you’re not there.
Magali you deserve a star! And I’m just glad that I arrived when you could serve me. The line was growing as I left.
How ’bout you? Have you got any ‘how not to do internal communications” from this week that you can share?
Random Posts:
The challenge – Change the profession!
We’ve heard it all before. The traditional approach to corporate communications – tightly “scripted messages delivered by the chief executive, first to investors, then to other opinion-formers, and only later to the mass audiences of employees and consumers“ has got to go.
And it needs to be replaced by vibrant “peer-to-peer and horizontal discussion across stakeholders. [Where] the employee is the new credible source for information about a company, giving insight from the front lines. [And], the consumer has become a co-creator, demanding transparency on decisions from sourcing to new-product positioning.” [Ref for these quotes]
And yet, even as Web and Intranet 2.0 are about to become 3.0 we’re still working through 1.0 [ok maybe 1.5]. And if you have any doubt, just pop into CommScrum to check out the animated discussion going on there over what and how our main professional association IABC is or isn’t serving the needs of our profession in this new world.
As early as 2007, Arthur W Pages’ publication, the Authentic Enterprise in 2007, presented recommendations for transforming “our profession, open[ing] up new and meaningful kinds of responsibility and learning, and creat[ing] exciting new career paths for communications professionals. If you haven’t read it, it’s a great starting point for thinking about the revolution of our profession.
And, in June, after months of online consultation, The Stockholm Accords were published. Their aim “… is to articulate and establish the role of public relations in the “communicative organization” within a fast-evolving digital and value-network society.” [I think the authors would do well to refer back to the Authentic Enterprise].
We know what we need to do, so what’s stopping us?
Random Posts:
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:
Great idea #1 – Mayo Clinic’s roving video reporter
An occasional post on a really great idea for internal communications – simple and high impact.
The Mayo Clinic is not only a globally recognized medical institution but it turns out they’re pretty accomplished communicators too.
They’ve created the Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media “to improve health globally by accelerating effective application of social media tools throughout Mayo Clinic and spurring broader and deeper engagement in social media by hospitals, medical professionals and patients.” Now that is a great idea!
And, one of the best internal communication ideas I’ve seen in a long time takes the old idea of a reporter at large and refreshes it creating a video reporter at large.
A member of the Mayo Clinic’s internal communication team [i.e. an employee] roams the halls and interviews staff and patients with a videographer in tow. The reporter happens to be fun and charismatic. The choices of topics interesting and aligned to their overall brand positioning. Scripted and unscripted. And the pacing just right. And, bonus, they post it on YouTube and link it on their website, getting both internal and external impact. It really works.
The Mayo Clinic’s approach is a real contrast to the usual talking heads and static interview style of most internal videos. A simple idea. Executed well. It’s great. Take a look.
Now, this production is pretty snazzy. So for those of you who are thinking – yes, but… here are a couple of things to think about.
1: Hand held cameras create videos people really trust, so, maybe the production values in most other contexts would actually work against it in some way.
2: You can produce professional looking video at very low cost today. What it takes is a little imagination. My 15 year old nephew Matthew is making great video productions using a 3 year old JVC camera and using editing software he got online. He doesn’t even use an external mike.
The potential’s incredible. So, grab your teenager’s video camera and editing software. Find yourself the right stories and the right employee reporter and go. Have some fun!
Sign up for mailing list
Recent Posts
- Grey zones are costing your organization big time
- Saying goodbye to jargon
- Don’t leave them laughing
- A master class with Ed Sullivan
- Innovation & collaboration: Strategic priorities or not?
- The truth about the number 1 fear
- Want to know the secret to writing a great speech?
- Connecting for big business benefits
Authors
Recent posts
- Grey zones are costing your organization big time
- Saying goodbye to jargon
- Don’t leave them laughing
- A master class with Ed Sullivan
- Innovation & collaboration: Strategic priorities or not?
- The truth about the number 1 fear
- Want to know the secret to writing a great speech?
- Connecting for big business benefits
- Staying in touch with reality
- “Just hire a Dalek”
Categories
Archives
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010