The drive for teamwork in business organizations that started in (or before) the 1980’s was based in the recognition that people are more productive and do better quality work when they feel like part of a team with shared over-arching goals.  Teamwork relies on a sense of trust.   Unfortunately, many people are not trusting by nature, and, even more unfortunately, some of them are managers.I am now working in a place where the office area is on surveillance camera all the time, with the company security officer watching via large plasma screens on his office wall.  When the cameras were first installed one of my colleagues waved to one of them, and within seconds the phone rang on the desk of the person he was conversing with.  She answered it and turned to my colleague to say “Bob (the security officer) says ‘Hi Joe.’”  Perhaps Bob was doing that as a joke, or perhaps to underline the fact that he is watching us, and that we are being recorded on video all the time, but the word got around, and the effect was chilling in a subtle way.  We now occasionally joke about it, and wonder whether we are also being monitored and recorded by hidden microphones, though we haven’t been able to identify any.  I keep daydreaming of ways I would obstruct the view of the camera that watches me so many hours of the day.

Needless to say, this situation gives us a strong sense that we aren’t trusted, not a feeling that promotes teamwork, commitment, and high quality work.  I am sure that some manager somewhere feels that the company is better off, or will impress customers with its high security, but … we’re not a bunch of children or convicted criminals, and we’re not handling gold bars or loose diamonds.

The effects (loss to the organization) of having this surveillance system would be nearly impossible to quantify, but intuitively must be significant.  Productivity is extremely important to every business, everywhere, and every element of the business environment, systems, relationships, and culture has direct impact.  As a manager, would you want to promote anything that would decrease productivity by even one percent?  It would be easy to implement a variety of measures that would each detract from the average worker’s effectiveness.  Business is more competitive than ever in the 21st century.  Can you afford for your people to be even 5% less efficient than your competition?  Are you savvy enough to consider such things?  If you are, then you may have an automatic advantage over clueless competitors.

The manager with the better understanding of human nature and psychology always has an invisible advantage, and will tend to get more and better quality work from their people.  This knowledge doesn’t work well when used against people, however, as I have seen in some places.  It works when used to build a team of trusted individuals who can identify with their work, their colleagues, and their employer, and who take personal ownership of every aspect of personal and organizational development and success.  I have worked in situations where people enjoyed their work and pursuing the goals of the company so much that they raced to see who could be the first to open the door in the morning and had to be chased out of the building at the end of the day.  That culture would not have developed if they all felt spied upon.  It just makes sense: you will have difficulty building or maintaining a high performing team when they know you are watching their every move.

As always, I welcome your comments.  – Tim

Bad corporate culture arises naturally from human nature, lack of management savvy, and bad or clueless management behavior. Corporate culture is built from the combined experiences of the members of the organization, the quality of their interactions with each other and outsiders, the results of the organization’s efforts, and the psychological tone set by top management and every level of management beneath it. All of these factors are expressed in, and some are caused by, management behavior, and poor management behavior will always affect the culture negatively. The good news is that you can work to correct and improve the culture at your own level.

Understanding the fundamentals of human nature and the psychological origins of poor management behavior is key to being a truly “savvy” manager. One key factor working against being a good manager is the natural difficulty of keeping one’s perspective in a sustained group. While the classical groupthink phenomenon is one possible outcome, another is loss of personal perspective, often acquired through bad experiences. This problem comes from bad experiences with others, especially those we perceive to have power over us (managers).

Pain can make a person lose their perspective. Once one has been abused or injured, psychologically or otherwise, by another person, the remembered pain makes the incident loom large in one’s memory, and restoring proper perspective takes understanding and introspection. The perspective that is lost that most negatively affects managers is the knowledge that, at the most basic levels of motivation, everyone wants to feel good about themselves and wants to feel they are making a positive difference in their job. Keeping this fact foremost in our thinking is key to being an effective manager and getting the most from one’s subordinates. It also helps one delegate more effectively and manage one’s time more efficiently.

Psychological pain can come from common sources. All it takes, for example, is one boss treating you like you don’t know anything, making you do meaningless work, responding to their own insecurities by giving you punitive assignments because they feel threatened by something you said, or actually taking out their own past bad experiences and psychological issues on you, and the pain (frustration, feeling of being devalued, etc.) you experience will amplify the memory of the experience in your mind. It is human nature to recall much more vividly our painful past experiences, as it is a natural survival trait that helps us avoid recurrences, but it can also cause us to lose the perspective that the good experiences outweigh the bad by a huge proportion.

Painful experiences make people wary long after the original incidents. Once abused, most people will tend to be overly watchful for similar circumstances, even after the original incident is forgotten. They can become conditioned to expect similar treatment from other bosses even though they only experienced the abuse from one of many, and, worse yet, they may wind up emulating the bad behavior (forcing, for example) because it is their most memorable reference to how bosses act. In essence, they lose perspective and begin overgeneralizing (another aspect of human nature) and thinking that most or all bosses act badly, or that this is the way to manage others. It can happen to almost anyone, but the knowledge that it doesn’t have to is the starting point for being a better manager.

Common bad management behaviors reveal the prevalence of loss of perspective and an all-too-common poor understanding of human nature. The forceful, “Do it because I said so” management style is a good example. While management research has repeatedly shown that “forcing” and “command-and-control” style management are only appropriate in relatively rare circumstances, many people retain the mistaken opinion that it makes up a large part of the management function. Even the U.S. Army has found that command-style management is only of value in certain circumstances, as when one is leading a squad of inexperienced 18-year-olds into enemy fire, and is much less effective in other circumstances. The savvy commander knows a squad is far more effective with every member contributing their knowledge, perception, and creativity, among other assets, to accomplishing the mission. They also know that they need to engage their subordinates in a positive way to get the benefit of those assets. They often achieve this by maintaining a culture of teamwork, collaboration, and mutual respect in their organization.

A savvy manager understands that conditioning, a form of unconscious learning, can happen to anyone including them, and can be countered. It is easy to become conditioned to expect abuse or just poor quality management behavior from one’s superiors, and, in the absence of better knowledge and understanding, it is easy to model such behaviors in one’s management of others. I believe this accounts for the seemingly large number of bad experiences most of us acquire working in large bureaucracies. We can, however, counter our conditioning once we understand what is happening to us, and consciously replace it with real knowledge.

Changing or countering one’s conditioning is possible. Some of the best managers have undoubtedly taken the time and exercised the introspection to think through their beliefs about management, trace them back to past experiences and learning, and establish better ways of thinking, in effect reconditioning themselves to be better managers. A person may do this once in their life, or many times, but it is always an extremely productive (though not necessarily easy) undertaking.

Culture originates in the behavior of individuals. Organizational culture is built on the behaviors of the members of the culture, and poor management behavior at any level naturally affects the levels subordinate to it – “crap rolls down hill”, as they say. An abusive or clueless top or middle manager can create a culture of negativism and poor performance that extends beneath them all the way to the bottom of the organizational pyramid, and even to supplier organizations. Anyone who has worked in more than a couple of bureaucracies has most likely experienced or witnessed this syndrome.

Culture can be changed for the better. A savvy, positive thinking manager can create a constructive culture of productivity, creativity, and even fun among their subordinates, and achieve superior results, even amidst an otherwise negative culture. It is far easier, however, if the overall culture is at least tolerant, if not actually supportive, or if the manager setting the cultural tone and making the change is isolated from the rest of the organization in significant ways.

Changing culture in a positive direction is rarely easy. As W. Edwards Deming said, however, “quality can be no better than the intent at the top.” A good manager can move the culture of the organization beneath her or him in positive and more productive directions, but if a negative cultural tone is persistently coming from above, he or she will have to fight constantly to maintain that more positive cultural beneath them, and may be criticized and even undermined by their less savvy peers, who may feel threatened by their improved results. For this reason, an organizational culture will rarely be better overall than is determined by the behavior of the topmost management. Middle managers who buck a strongly negative culture often eventually burn out and leave the organization, are unrecognized and fail to be promoted, or give up their management role. While they “stick to their guns”, however, their results will tend to be superior, their employees happier and more productive, and their jobs more satisfying.

Bad corporate culture happens, but it can be corrected. In summary, while it is natural for bad organizational culture to develop, this tendency can be countered and a more positive and productive organizational culture can be produced, though it requires savvy and introspective management. It is within the power of each of us to do the introspective work and be more savvy, as managers or rank and file employees, and I highly recommend it. I also recommend, as you do this important work, to record your thoughts and experiences in a journal for later review. In doing so you will improve yourself, and give yourself increased capacity to influence your organizational culture in in more positive directions.

Personal note – My wife wanted me to include more of the personal anecdotes that have led me to these conclusions (which are by no means comprehensive), but I don’t want to write an entire book here. (perhaps at a later time – I’ve many times considered pursuing a Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior …)

As always, I welcome your comments and questions, as I always learn from them.

]]> http://oneffectivemanagement.wordpress.com/2008/08/19/where-does-bad-corporate-culture-come-from-and-can-it-be-corrected/feed/ 6 Tim Prosser, Mandolin Maniac http://oneffectivemanagement.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/some-problems-with-command-and-control-management/ http://oneffectivemanagement.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/some-problems-with-command-and-control-management/#comments Sat, 01 Mar 2008 16:38:42 +0000 timprosser http://oneffectivemanagement.wordpress.com/?p=4 ]]>

What is “command and control” management? Many good articles have been written on this by smart folks like Joel Spolsky and Bruce Nussbaum. A good description is included in the Traditional Management Model page of www.1000ventures.com in the section (near the bottom of the page) labeled “25 Lessons from Jack Welch“. Much has been written decrying “command and control” management, but what makes it a bad thing?

A manager-employee relationship is always a two way street. I believe when a manager takes an unnecessarily-authoritative or commanding position with a subordinate, the employee feels less respected, and will have a decreased desire to contribute. As a result, information flow up to the manager will be diminished. This will only reduce the manager’s ability to make good decisions, even to the appoint of reducing their apparent competence.

People work harder when they feel they are making a positive difference, an intrinsic motivation. The command and control management style works through extrinsic motivators such as threats, authority, and even monetary incentives, all of which prevent or even replace employees’ natural intrinsic motivation. A management style that gives people ownership of their methods, tools, and results, and in which people can feel good about collaborating with and helping those around them (coworkers, customers, and suppliers) provides intrinsic motivation, and people work hard because they like the way it makes them feel, and feel important and appreciated — the “psychological pay” principle. Everyone wants to feel good about themselves, but command and control takes that feeling away from them.

People work harder for someone they respect, and preferably like. A manager who understands that the workers in the trenches usually see the organization’s challenges and problems better than he or she can, can gain their input and support their efforts more effectively than a “commander” who assumes he or she knows, or is expected to know, more than their subordinates. This attitude only alienates subordinates and loses their loyalty, respect, and input. It may even move them to undermine the organization’s performance in subtle ways in an effort, possibly never acknowledged, and probably in a form that can’t be identified, that is based in nothing so much as a desire for revenge.

People work harder when they’re not doing it under threat. Some command and control-styled managers use subtle threats to do their job, and may unwittingly put employees in a situation where they can’t see a way to succeed. The results can be disastrous as far as morale and work performance, not only for the employee placed in that position, but for their coworkers who will see what is going on and fear being put in such a position themselves.

An example of that is a supervisor I once had. I had only been at the company for a few months, working as a lowly engineer, and one day my supervisor came in and asked me to fill out a performance review. He was having the other employees write theirs, and it was easier for him to just do everyone’s at once. I was instructed to write my own performance review and provided a standard form. Then, as he was about to leave, he turned back at the door and revealed that he had had nothing to do the previous weekend, and had written a performance review for me. I (brightly) asked if that meant that I didn’t have to write my own after all, and he said that, no, the company policy was that I would write my own. Perplexed, I asked him what it would mean if his evaluation and mine didn’t agree, and he said “Well, then … WE … have a problem.” and walked out. I’m sure he felt very powerful, secure, and in control. I, however, instantly saw I was in a no-win situation in which he was “power-tripping” me with his clear threat, and was taken aback. Not only did I lose respect for him as a boss, I also lost respect for him as a person. After that I was never again comfortable working for him, or even the company to some extent, and I was actually relieved when I was caught in the next down-sizing less than a year later.

People will passively or actively undermine a manager they think doesn’t respect them or is abusing them. Although it was said in jest, there were times in my past assignments when a particularly repressive manager would be discussed in his absence, and people would joke about having someone with a cold or flu be sure to sneeze on the next report they were to put on the manager’s desk. That is an extreme, but, once employees’ feel they are disrespected or abused, their productivity will decrease. Worse yet, the best and most marketable employees will find better employment, further damaging the organization.

Inevitably, once a manager has achieved a negative image it can take much longer to reverse that impression, even with superlative performance and efforts. In general, a manager must remember that it is possible to do damage to oneself in a minute that could take years to repair, and disrespect expressed towards an employee, even in confidence, is a huge risk.

This matter goes back to something my relatives taught me when I was a child: never say anything about someone who is absent that you wouldn’t be comfortable saying to their face. This is a hard thing for most of us, as we are all emotional and opinionated beings, each with our own flaws and preferences, but we must strive to remember this and be careful of what thoughts we express to others. I can’t claim perfection in this area either, but awareness is the first step to real personal integrity, which is essential to a good manager.

The risk of acquiring a negative image is higher for those of us with management responsibilities because our subordinates depend on us, and they need to be able to trust us to do a good job. We, similarly, are dependent on them to do a good job, and must therefore be careful to make the relationship as mutually positive and beneficial as possible. As I said at the beginning, the manage-subordinate relationship is a two-way street, and the manager who operates in a “command-and-control” mode will only diminish the performance of subordinates and the organization as a whole.

Interestingly, one of the sources linked in the first paragraph pointed out that there IS a place for command and control, but it’s when one must make 18-year-old soldiers charge, firing their weapons, across a mine field. I know of no business that operates in circumstances even remotely analogous to this.

I look forward to any comments or experiences you’d like to share. Thanks in advance – Tim