Creating an Adaptive Organization for the Age of Uncertainty The Solutions: Part 1. The Trust Imperative

In my upcoming book (co-authored with Alberto Manzo , CEO, Impact Consulting, Qatar) we argue that to be fit-for-purpose in the Age of Uncertainty organizations must fundamentally overhaul many components of how we approach, think about, and do work. Nothing is off the table – Strategy Structure, Internal and Externa Working Relationships, the Technological Underpinnings must all fall under the microscope of change. And we must make better use of Advanced Data Analytics for decision-support purposes.

But where to start on this daunting journey?

Based on Trust

To simply get out of the starting gate we must, when thinking about manager/staff relationships, change our default mindsets from one based on mistrust to one based on trust.

Think about it. Our organizational structures are based on long-institutionalized command and control systems. The upper levels of the organizational hierarchy commands those below and monitors their work closely. The next level does the same to their reports, until an intricate spider’s web of command and control and careful monitoring is in place. Right and proper in a military setting, but not for typical organizations.

Frederick W. Taylor taught us over 100 years ago that workers cannot be trusted and lack the intelligence to make work-based decisions – and we took that to heart back then and it still shapes our workplace thinking (even if we are mostly not that conscious of the fact anymore or take into account that we have the most highly educated workforce in history – at the beginning of the era of mass production, most employees were poorly educated).

So, how well are workplace relationships working these days?

The Shocking Truth about Employee Engagement

Let’s start with employee engagement. Gallup defines employee engagement as the involvement and enthusiasm of employees in their work and workplace.

According to Gallup’s annual Employee Engagement survey, just 21% of employees globally are engaged at work. The figure is higher for Canada and the USA, at 33%, but 17% are actively disengaged. According to Gallup, “Actively disengaged employees aren’t just unhappy at work — they are resentful that their needs aren’t being met and are acting out their unhappiness. Every day, these workers potentially undermine what their engaged co-workers accomplish.” (1)

The figure of about one-third of US employees being engaged has remained largely unchanged since Gallup launched its survey in 2020. Not a glowing reference for the return on investment from the billions of dollars we pour into employee engagement programs annually.

A question to ponder, is how many people start a new job looking forward to being disengaged? Few I imagine. Most are excited, enthused, looking forward to a new challenge.

 So why do so many become disengaged and oftentimes fairly quickly?

Accepting the Truth - Conventional Approaches no Longer Work

To  answer that question, Executive Leadership Teams (ELTs) must first fully accept that how conventional work is structured and managed just ain’t working anymore and that something must change – and that tinkering around the edges with employee engagement programs is largely a pointless, and expensive, exercise.

This is much easier said than done. Many reach the summit of organizations because they are good at command and control and passionately believe that the careful monitoring of subordinates is a sign of strong and effective leadership. Changing that mindset will not be easy for many, and for some a bridge too far.

The Benefits of Remote Working

Interestingly, the Pandemic uncovered one intervention that helps raise employee engagement – remote working. The Gallup poll find that remote workers report a higher engagement score.

Yet, I seem many LinkedIn posts from managers decrying remote working because it will harm productivity and how can they be sure staff are working? As one manager stated, “how I can I be sure they are at the computer and not outside mowing the lawn?” Unbelievable, but true, and likely more common a thought than we think.

Note, therefore, that a June 2022 survey of over 8,000 remote-capable U.S. employees found that a mere 6% of employees want to work entirely on-site going forward. The authors Ben Wigert and Sangeeta Agrawal ask, “Doesn't it seem that traditional management and workplace practices are broken if more than 90% of 70 million employees say they don't want to come back to the office full time”. (2) Not sure why, but I don’t think it’s because they want to stay at home and mow the lawn.

As further evidence of discontent, a June 2021 survey by Ernst and Young found that “more than half (54%) of employees surveyed from around the world would consider leaving their job post-COVID-19 pandemic if they are not afforded some form of flexibility in where and when they work, (3)

Indeed post the pandemic many employees actually did decide simply not to return the workplace, preferring to leave the company. Job shortages have become an unintended consequence of the pandemic. People thought to themselves, “I just don’t want to put up with this anymore.”

Yes, flexible/hybrid work will help, and certainly makes sense for knowledge-based workers with the right technologies at their fingertips and who thrive in an environment in which they can do their best, without being micromanaged.

But that’s not the full story.

Adult-Adult Relationships

As well as trust-based we must realize that working relationships (workplace or remote) must be seen as adult-to-adult. Oftentimes it feels much more like parent-to-child. Managers (the parents) set the strict rules and impose disciplinary procedures if those rules are broken (the organizational naughty step). Mummy and Daddy then scratch their heads and wonder why the kids are still misbehaving and running away. So they call in the employee engagement consultants (corporate social workers, I would call them).

To be fair, good employee engagement consultants will stress the importance of building human-centric workplace relationships.

The Importance of Recognition

In their 2022 report, “Unleashing the Human Element at Work: Transforming Workplaces Through Recognition, Gallup/workhuman* stress the importance of recognition in building human-centric workplace relationships and so connecting staff to the organization.

As stated in the opening to the report:

“The importance of human capital has never been more evident, as the resilience of the workforce amid a global crisis has kept the world running. But recent trends, including declines in employee engagement and increased demands for workplace flexibility, coupled with the volatility of the job market itself are putting new pressure on organizations to be mindful of the "human" element at work. They cannot simply offer jobs; they must create an environment where employees want to work and can be their best. The future of work starts with showing employees that they are valued now.

Recognition is a simple way [by which] organizations can demonstrate their investment and commitment to their employees and inspire them to feel connected, confident and cared about — ensuring they leverage the full force of their human power at work.” (4)

Sadly, the research conducted to support the report makes for grim reading:

·      Eighty-one percent of leaders say recognition is not a major strategic priority for their organization.

·       Seventy-three percent of senior leaders say their organization does not offer managers or leaders best‑practices training for employee recognition.

·      Nearly two in three leaders say their organization does not have a budget allocated to recognition.

·      40% of employees report receiving recognition only a few times a year or less from a manager, supervisor, or other leader at their organization.

The lack of instilled systems for showing recognition in the workplace is an odd omission, as recognition is a basic human need and something just about all of us crave.

I think of it this way. I am a social animal. I love going to my local pub and socializing. I enjoy being accepted into a group, being listened to, and listening to others, entering interesting discussions (and many that are just fun!!), being recognized for my talents and my contribution to the group.

I also accept that being recognized within the group means that occasionally I will be on the sharp end of an honest (and typically deserved) rebuff for doing something the group finds unacceptable.

Being recognized is not just about being celebrated.

But we be careful that we don’t just view recognition as a simple management tool that can be cynically manipulated to gain an outcome. Gallup/WorkHuman* rightly point out that recognition must be:

·      Fulfilling

“Most employees want to be recognized at least a few times a month, but this should be regarded as the bare minimum. The data show there is no such thing as “too much” recognition — as long as it is genuine and appropriately given.”

·      Authentic

“Although giving the right amount and type of recognition is critical, empty words or gestures will not land. What makes recognition impactful is what it means to individuals — about themselves, their job, their teams, or workplace — and the organization. If recognition is not perceived to be authentic, it can undermine the experience.”

·      Equitable

“Although recognition should be targeted and personal, how much others receive matters. When employees see recognition that is out of balance…it triggers an alarm to their basic need for fairness and damages their overall employee experience.”

·      Embedded in the Culture

“Simply having a recognition program is not enough. A culture of recognition is one in which gratitude, praise and appreciation are freely given, regularly received and reach all corners of the organization. Where everyone feels empowered to take part in showing appreciation and commending achievements.”

·      Personalized

“Just as what constitutes the right amount may vary person-to-person, employees can have different preferences for how and where they receive recognition. While getting recognition “right” can seem like a moving target, there is a straightforward way to ensure a bullseye: just ask."

Fixing the Issues

So,  how do we start to fix the performance-sapping issues that." plague internal working relationships.

1.   Move the starting mindset form one based on distrust to one based on trust. “I trust people to contribute their best and will provide the environment in which they can thrive and grow.”

Yes, expect all staff members to perform to the best of their abilities and in return provide the best environment and opportunities for them to do so and thrive.

We are not naïve, there will be individuals who will try and exploit their newfound “freedoms.” So we need robust governance systems to identify and root out those that are not working in the interest of the group. But, speaking with CEOs that have enabled such trust-based working relationships (and having done this myself), there is often little need to actively manage this. Empowered, engaged and self-managing teams will do this themselves.

2.   Make the relationship adult-adult and not parent-child.

Employees are adults. They are treated as such outside the organization and expect the same in the workplace. It really is as simple as that.

Yes, have honest conversations and challenge others that do not perform as expected. Sometimes this means they need targeted support. Other times it might mean that are simply not trying. Adult-based relationships are not always about being nice to each other.

3.   Ensure recognition is a central part of the working life.

We all crave recognition; we all appreciate recognition. So recognize good work and effort. It makes people feel included, wanted, and acknowledged. Works everywhere in life.

Ditch the Dream of Employee Loyalty

Something else I would add is not to seek employee loyalty. I find metrics such as “Employee Retention” to be unhelpful. What does that tell us? Simply that staff are leaving or not. Kodak had a remarkably high retention rate (about 17 years, I believe, and look what happened to them), Google has a high turnover of staff – the average tenure of a Google employee is only 1.3 years, (this has not done them any harm and has nothing to do with disgruntled employees  - Google has a 4.5 – 5 rating on Glassdoor, an American website where current and former employees anonymously review companies).

Organizations should create the environment in which staff give their best in return for the opportunity to grow their market value. They might then decide to leave - for better, or different, opportunities. That should be managed in an adult way. It is valuable if the employee speaks in glowing terms of the organization post departure. Many people applying for jobs now use LinkedIn,  Glassdoor, etc., to seek out present or past employees to get insights into the organization. Tales of a toxic culture will not go down well.

Without question, I would also ditch the conventional and mind-blowingly dumb Performance Appraisal Systems - I post about this on a regular basis

Parting Words

As  a final comment. If we, by default, naturally distrust employees and do not view the relationship as adult-to-adult, this is even more evident in our relationships with suppliers and partners. It is equally imperative that we shift those relationships to trust-based and adult-adult, with the corresponding governance systems. Perhaps we then won’t need lots of signoffs to get an invoice paid.

Ends

References

1.   State of the Global Workforce, 2022 Report. Gallup.

2.   Returning to the Office: The Current, Preferred and Future State of Remote Work, Ben Wigert, Sangetta Agrawal, Workplace, August 31, 2022.

3.   Work Reimagined Employee Survey, Erns& Young, 2021.

4.   “Unleashing the Human Element at Work: Transforming Workplaces Through Recognition, Gallup/workhuman*, 2022.

James Creelman is the Strategy Management Practice Lead for Impact Consulting, Qatar, Director of the UK-based Cardinal Management Consulting, an Associate Director of Strategia Worldwide.

 He is available for advisory, training, or research support in develoing Adaptive Organizations, most specifically in Adaptive Strategy Management.

James can be contacted on +44 7933 575340 or James.creelman@gmail.com