Special thanks this month to Steve Jagler, executive editor of Small Business Times, who surveyed several SBT readers about future topics for this column.
One reader mentioned a topic I’d like to address this month. It’s a touchy one.
Here’s the scenario: Senior- and middle-level managers feel there are opportunities for significant improvements in the way the company operates. However, they’re reluctant to raise issues with top management, maybe the CEO in particular, because they think it would make top management feel threatened, or be the subject of unwarranted criticism.
Here’s the question: Simply put, what can be done to right the boat? And what are the consequences?
Anybody ever been in a sinking boat? I have, during a stint many years ago at GM, and I can tell you that the experience was terrible. I was in the same position as this reader, and I didn’t take action when I should have. I lost my job as a result. So I have strong feelings on this subject.
What’s wrong at the top?
Here’s a short list of what most TEC members I know have embraced as a way of relating to their employees:
1. Listening. A pilot flying along can hear the slightest irregularity in his flying machine and be prepared to respond to what may come next. An effective CEO “listens” to his company and can “hear” irregularities and respond accordingly.
2. Questioning. An effective CEO is constantly seeking feedback from employees about what is working and what isn’t working. The CEO takes action on the “not-working” responses.
3. Example. An effective CEO sets an example for key reports. They will mimic the CEO’s behavior. If they don’t, they will probably have a short life in the business.
4. Leadership. An effective CEO understands what it means to be an effective leader and uses input from subordinates to gauge his or her leadership performance.
Now, you’ll have to admit, this is a pretty short list. But if there are major problems at the top, trust me. One of those, or all of them, will be responsible.
The other side of the equation
We all know it’s easy to place blame in the workplace. “They” or “them” are perhaps the two most popular words used by disgruntled employees. For a moment, let’s talk about some equally troubling issues involving CEO direct reports that exacerbate the underlying problem I’m addressing.
1. Performance. Individuals know their performance is sub-par, for whatever reason, and are quick to place the blame on others, including the CEO.
2. Peer pressure. Others in the employee’s work group are complaining by pointing to the top. The employee acquiesces.
3. Subordinate pressure. Employees complain to their supervisor about their dissatisfaction with the company, their employment conditions and so on. Rather than take action, the supervisor acknowledges and authenticates the subordinate’s complaints.
4. Fear. The bottom line is that if a direct report steps up to the plate and says “time out,” there is a natural fear that there will be repercussions such as a firing. So the natural response is to lay low.
Think about this for a moment. If your company fits the pattern described above, then I would conclude that it’s dysfunctional, and it will show in terms of your competitive performance.
The bigger issue is how to move forward to a functional cultural environment. Once again, it will take two to tango. And it will take some guts. This is not a risk-free proposition by any means.
Years ago, I went through this with a TEC member’s company in northeastern Wisconsin. It led to the resignation of the vice president of manufacturing. And it led to the president hiring a chief operating officer to offset the admitted weaknesses he had as president. But it worked.
The process
There is no magic to this. So the process I’m going to lay out has to fit each company’s individual circumstance. Here goes:
As a key report, you cannot tackle this yourself. And you can’t “gang up” on the CEO or the key management group. You need the help of an outside professional, and there are many available. Call the TEC office for some recommendations. This person is what I would call a consultant-facilitator. They come in and listen to both sides and offer a course of action.
The CEO needs to be brought into the process – and this is the risk component. Someone has to step forward using the word “we” and suggest outside intervention to the CEO, and explain why. This should be done in private, not at a staff meeting.
The CEO will naturally challenge. This is to be expected. What’s important is to not cave in. All that needs to be said is that there are serious concerns about the way members of senior management relate to each other and that an outsider can help clarify this for everyone’s benefit.
The exchange should conclude by reinforcing your commitment to the company and its future. If the CEO asks if others feel this way, you should name names, with their permission.
Let’s face it. In the situation I described at the beginning of this article, some people are just going to go away at best, or the company will begin to fail at least. At GM, when I went through this, I was just a young neophyte who knew nothing. I learned from my peers: don’t ruffle feathers, just hide. Maybe they won’t even see you.
That might be fine for a big organization. But it doesn’t fit the profile of CEOs and their employees who read Small Business Times.
Until next month, I hope this helps any of you who have just put on the dysfunctional company shoe and found that it fits!
