Actual case by personal experience. The quotes are pretty close to being accurate, but I can't say it is word for word.
One day, CEO decides to hire a consulting firm to review department A. This is a first for the employer's long history of operations.
Consultant: " We interviewed every employee in department A, and their biggest complaint about the work environment is that it is a good old boy culture. Is that true?"
HR Director: [Note: This is a loaded question. If you lie to the consultant and disagree with the employees' assessment, than you are considered 'out-of-tune' with the rank and file. If you tell the truth and state the employees are right, than that information goes immediately up to the CEO, and the consultant states "your HR Director is not a team member or part of the management team.
So, I stated the truth: "Yes, to a certain degree, I can see the employees point. There is a culture that favors males over females." [Note: When the current CEO use to dress-up in a cheerleaders outfit (blond wig, pronounced brazzier, skirt and poms poms) and dances around the office and outside company events, than you got example of a frat house mentality].
Consultant: "If it is a good old boy culture, what have YOU done to stop it?"
HR Director: " Change of culture is not initiated by HR manager, but by the senior executives. HR implements the new culture. I, as any other HR manager, advises execs of possible problems or a work environment that promotes a negative or worse, hostile work environment."
Consultant: "That sounds like you did not make much effort to change the perception of employees about the company."
HR Director: [Can now see he is not going to win this debate]. "It's not a perception, but a culture that has been established long before my arrival. I just advise on singular issues, that's about all I'm allowed to do. And it is not liked by my execs."
Consultant: "What are you going to do about the culture?"
HR Director: "Maybe I will wait for your recommendations. Have you told the execs on what the employees in this department stated about the work environment?"
Consultant: "Yes we did."
HR Director: "What was the response?"
Consultant: "The CEO did not agree with it. He stated 'how can we have a good old boy network? My brother-in-law was fired'.
HR Director: "Well, I guess that addresses that matter"
And so it goes. So after four months of "training" by consultants, who love to use buzz words, or as I call it, consultant speak, interrogated our department. We get a series a recommendations that are to be discussed with myself and senior execs. After attempts to set up a meeting, I get called up and asked to resign with absolutely no explanation, no reason given. Two weeks later, CEO fires consultant. But out of all that, the employer does change the logo and puts signs around the building reminding employees who are the customers (middle men, not actual purchases of our produts). There. Mission accomplished. The culture has been changed.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Consultants. What you should fear
Consultants can help any business improve its operations and bottom line, but one must remember, just like any other profession, they are in the business to make money. Not for their client, but for their own firm. And if a consultant should land a client that has senior executives who, for the most part, are hardly able to run a cost center much less a company, than the consultant has just found the proverbial gold mine.
Consultants will come in under a specific request by a client for a specific job or assignment. If an employer is not use to working with consultants, than some will take advantage and "expand" their domain or assignment into more aspects of the company than originally planned. Consultants, like attorneys, are kept on board by THEIR firm based on billable hours. If they get a client who has little experience with certain consultants, bingo, the proverbial vein of gold has just been struck.
Yes, I experienced consultants with prior employers. Have both good and bad histories with these firms. Yet if you have not had this kind of experience, as one of my employers did, than the gold mine opens up and money is thrown out the door. As one executive once said: "If we spent all this money for a consultant to tell us how we should improve an area of our business, than we might as well go ahead and try it their way." That is good notion. In other instances, I've seen consultants come in, provide recommendations after several months of work, and basically management ignores the recommendations, or at best, makes cosmetic changes just to say they got their money's worth.
Yes, it is best when hiring a consultant to make sure both sides understand the clear level of the assignment, make it specific, and made damn sure that any deviation from that assignment has sound basis to move forward with the additional cost. And once the consultant provides recommendations, make sure the executives read it and implement what is necessary. If not, the employer has not only wasted the dollars, but has admitted to the employees, who have gone through months of uncertainty and tepid fear of the potential changes, that the company really was not serious in making the necessary changes to their organization. If it was important to make the investment, than expect to make the needed changes to move the company in a more positive direction. Would you buy a new car and just keep it in the garage?
Same with recommendations. But changing one's logo or putting posters up are hardly worth the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent. Believe me, I've seen it happen.
Part 2 on how consultants can be a terrorists within your company.
Consultants will come in under a specific request by a client for a specific job or assignment. If an employer is not use to working with consultants, than some will take advantage and "expand" their domain or assignment into more aspects of the company than originally planned. Consultants, like attorneys, are kept on board by THEIR firm based on billable hours. If they get a client who has little experience with certain consultants, bingo, the proverbial vein of gold has just been struck.
Yes, I experienced consultants with prior employers. Have both good and bad histories with these firms. Yet if you have not had this kind of experience, as one of my employers did, than the gold mine opens up and money is thrown out the door. As one executive once said: "If we spent all this money for a consultant to tell us how we should improve an area of our business, than we might as well go ahead and try it their way." That is good notion. In other instances, I've seen consultants come in, provide recommendations after several months of work, and basically management ignores the recommendations, or at best, makes cosmetic changes just to say they got their money's worth.
Yes, it is best when hiring a consultant to make sure both sides understand the clear level of the assignment, make it specific, and made damn sure that any deviation from that assignment has sound basis to move forward with the additional cost. And once the consultant provides recommendations, make sure the executives read it and implement what is necessary. If not, the employer has not only wasted the dollars, but has admitted to the employees, who have gone through months of uncertainty and tepid fear of the potential changes, that the company really was not serious in making the necessary changes to their organization. If it was important to make the investment, than expect to make the needed changes to move the company in a more positive direction. Would you buy a new car and just keep it in the garage?
Same with recommendations. But changing one's logo or putting posters up are hardly worth the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent. Believe me, I've seen it happen.
Part 2 on how consultants can be a terrorists within your company.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Standard Ethics 101
"Don't promise anything to any employee unless you will honor it".
Simple huh. Yet, with one employer, I was promised twice by two separate executives that I would be promoted to an officer level (VP) position. Instead, I was let go provided no reason whatsoever. If I was suppose to implement programs that the executive's hired consultant wanted me to do, than decided he was not going to implement such changes under my command, that means eating his words and admit to wasting a lot of time and dollars in the process. Far be it to admit a mistake.
Well, life is not fair. And it hasn't been to me in a professional sense. I tend to work for employers that have little knowledge of business management, or skills to deal honestly with employees. In other words, I have yet to find an employer that at least will accept different point of views, than choose the option and let us implement the plan. This is not rocket science, but some employers are so reluctant to listen to new ideas, much less take risks to grow a business, they are way over their heads and become more insecure in their leadership ability. Thus, they take it out on their employees (blame them for not working hard enough or complaining about petty stuff).
I may not know how to run a business, but I do know how NOT to run a business when it comes to developing and listening to people. No CEO is the Wizard of Oz with all the answers, but must utilize the talent to help them in their decision making process. Don't listen to what you want to hear, but what you need to hear, and if you're wrong, admit it. No one made you God, so don't pretend that you are one. The employees know that, and so should a CEO.
Egos can be a wonderful aspect to have to drive oneself towards success, but if abused just like anything else, it can implode a company or organization.
Simple huh. Yet, with one employer, I was promised twice by two separate executives that I would be promoted to an officer level (VP) position. Instead, I was let go provided no reason whatsoever. If I was suppose to implement programs that the executive's hired consultant wanted me to do, than decided he was not going to implement such changes under my command, that means eating his words and admit to wasting a lot of time and dollars in the process. Far be it to admit a mistake.
Well, life is not fair. And it hasn't been to me in a professional sense. I tend to work for employers that have little knowledge of business management, or skills to deal honestly with employees. In other words, I have yet to find an employer that at least will accept different point of views, than choose the option and let us implement the plan. This is not rocket science, but some employers are so reluctant to listen to new ideas, much less take risks to grow a business, they are way over their heads and become more insecure in their leadership ability. Thus, they take it out on their employees (blame them for not working hard enough or complaining about petty stuff).
I may not know how to run a business, but I do know how NOT to run a business when it comes to developing and listening to people. No CEO is the Wizard of Oz with all the answers, but must utilize the talent to help them in their decision making process. Don't listen to what you want to hear, but what you need to hear, and if you're wrong, admit it. No one made you God, so don't pretend that you are one. The employees know that, and so should a CEO.
Egos can be a wonderful aspect to have to drive oneself towards success, but if abused just like anything else, it can implode a company or organization.
Ethics in the Workplace Part 2
In my career, I have worked primarily in small companies, and unfortunately, they tend to be small minded when it comes to innovation and creative thought. Now, that does not mean these employers were bad to work for necessarily, but if you were someone like me who desires to better the organization and to think "outside the proverbial box", it does not mean you were going to be the golden boy of the organization.
Small businesses tend to be old school. For example, if you have an employee in a professional role working 80 hours per week, the employer believes that employee is deemed for greatness and has so much loyalty to the company. What they do not ask is WHY is that guy or gal working 80 hours a week? Are they working smart? Are they capable of delegating duties to others in their sphere of influence? In other words, if this person is in management, should their #1 priority be developing future leaders? Are they either incapable of leading, or worse, too insecure and not trusting of people to have their office run more effectively, thus saving the employer money?
So what does this have to do with ethics? Well, to me, it is not ethical if a manager insists of "hoarding" his/her responsibilities and not developing future leaders. This will come back to haunt the employer in the future, even losing quality employees to their competitors. How I know this? I worked for such employers who were in this frame of mind. Even some department heads elevated to that position after their predecessor retired, were at a lost for several weeks or months trying to learn what they needed to do in their role. No succession planning killed the department, or at least slowed it down, hurting business operations, if not morale within the department, which in turn, affects other departments.
Ethics is not just a morality method of dealing with people directly, but to be a leader by example, to use coaching and mentoring methods to ID quality personnel, and prepare them to take charge when that time comes. And it will. Problem is, businesses are still in that "machine mentality" that if it keeps running smoothly, why change the motor?
Small businesses tend to be old school. For example, if you have an employee in a professional role working 80 hours per week, the employer believes that employee is deemed for greatness and has so much loyalty to the company. What they do not ask is WHY is that guy or gal working 80 hours a week? Are they working smart? Are they capable of delegating duties to others in their sphere of influence? In other words, if this person is in management, should their #1 priority be developing future leaders? Are they either incapable of leading, or worse, too insecure and not trusting of people to have their office run more effectively, thus saving the employer money?
So what does this have to do with ethics? Well, to me, it is not ethical if a manager insists of "hoarding" his/her responsibilities and not developing future leaders. This will come back to haunt the employer in the future, even losing quality employees to their competitors. How I know this? I worked for such employers who were in this frame of mind. Even some department heads elevated to that position after their predecessor retired, were at a lost for several weeks or months trying to learn what they needed to do in their role. No succession planning killed the department, or at least slowed it down, hurting business operations, if not morale within the department, which in turn, affects other departments.
Ethics is not just a morality method of dealing with people directly, but to be a leader by example, to use coaching and mentoring methods to ID quality personnel, and prepare them to take charge when that time comes. And it will. Problem is, businesses are still in that "machine mentality" that if it keeps running smoothly, why change the motor?
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Business in the 21st century
In a difficult economy, adaptation to new ways to operate a department, division, or entire company is critical towards growth and success. Once adaptation takes place, you can bet that change will, and must come around to meet, if not beat your competition.
There are so many keys to a business success, that many books have been written on the subject. The core value for any successful business is simply ethics. Trust your employees and your customers. Be forthright and keep a constant line of communications open. Business success is not a one-way street. Diverse ideas are essential for the organization to develop its full potential. In my professional experience, I have rarely worked in that culture. Mostly small business remain small and just merely exist due to the fact of lacking a sense of a commitment to excellence that begins with a strong culture of ethics. Always communicating to one group of individuals but ignoring others is a method towards disaster, or at the minimum, loss production and pride within the employer. When new ideas or approaches to operations are mocked or marginalized by management, the trust, what little there may have been, will further diminish. People will simply "show-up" to work, punch in, assemble their widgets, and run home at the end of the work. No "fire in the belly" among those employees who are seen as a cost of doing business, instead of an investment.
Look at the success of major companies, whether the are small, mid-size, or large global empires. The solid core of these companies is the ethics instilled among the employees who feel a sense of ownership, thus a feeling of pride in what they do.
The fire in the belly exists because they "own" their work, their success, and recognition of such to further the entire team organization to profitability. Ethical behavior be stills a culture of trust and support that only fuels not only dollar growth, but something that money can't buy: Love of their work and pride in their jobs! It's simple, but so difficult for organizations understand or implement.
Going beyond the capabilities of the individual takes dual trust, an openness to accept new ideas and constructive criticism for one purpose. The team comes first.
The business comes first, and most of all, the customer who pays the bills and salaries are the essential boss.
There are so many keys to a business success, that many books have been written on the subject. The core value for any successful business is simply ethics. Trust your employees and your customers. Be forthright and keep a constant line of communications open. Business success is not a one-way street. Diverse ideas are essential for the organization to develop its full potential. In my professional experience, I have rarely worked in that culture. Mostly small business remain small and just merely exist due to the fact of lacking a sense of a commitment to excellence that begins with a strong culture of ethics. Always communicating to one group of individuals but ignoring others is a method towards disaster, or at the minimum, loss production and pride within the employer. When new ideas or approaches to operations are mocked or marginalized by management, the trust, what little there may have been, will further diminish. People will simply "show-up" to work, punch in, assemble their widgets, and run home at the end of the work. No "fire in the belly" among those employees who are seen as a cost of doing business, instead of an investment.
Look at the success of major companies, whether the are small, mid-size, or large global empires. The solid core of these companies is the ethics instilled among the employees who feel a sense of ownership, thus a feeling of pride in what they do.
The fire in the belly exists because they "own" their work, their success, and recognition of such to further the entire team organization to profitability. Ethical behavior be stills a culture of trust and support that only fuels not only dollar growth, but something that money can't buy: Love of their work and pride in their jobs! It's simple, but so difficult for organizations understand or implement.
Going beyond the capabilities of the individual takes dual trust, an openness to accept new ideas and constructive criticism for one purpose. The team comes first.
The business comes first, and most of all, the customer who pays the bills and salaries are the essential boss.
Ten rules of fear in the workplace
The link below is a good article about a work culture of fear and being non-productive. Just the quote below says it all:
"Talk to my boss?" my friend exclaimed. "Are you nuts? I tell my boss exactly what he wants to hear. People who tell my boss what he doesn't want to hear are people who get laid off at the end of the quarter."
Been there, done that.
From prior experiences in work cultures (careful now....someone may be monitoring these posts...), these comments are so true. Unbelievable when you have unqualified people who only learn from their other incompentent predecessors become top dogs. In-breeding in business is so common, and in most instances, bad for the employees and customers. Read the link below (copy and paste in the URL) and see if you are one of the "lucky" ones to work in such an environment.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38206989/ns/business-bloomberg_businessweek/
"Talk to my boss?" my friend exclaimed. "Are you nuts? I tell my boss exactly what he wants to hear. People who tell my boss what he doesn't want to hear are people who get laid off at the end of the quarter."
Been there, done that.
From prior experiences in work cultures (careful now....someone may be monitoring these posts...), these comments are so true. Unbelievable when you have unqualified people who only learn from their other incompentent predecessors become top dogs. In-breeding in business is so common, and in most instances, bad for the employees and customers. Read the link below (copy and paste in the URL) and see if you are one of the "lucky" ones to work in such an environment.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38206989/ns/business-bloomberg_businessweek/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)