Has Your Boss Become Your Blocker? What To Do When Your Manager Is Legacy.
In global organizations today, every current event becomes a potential business issue. Whether a geopolitical conflict is impacting supply chains, or a sociospolitical movement means customers expect an official response, leaders today can feel that they are in constant crisis management. And many of these issues have very strong supporters on both sides, which means employees may be dissatisfied on a company’s stance. Add to that the “normal” pressures on an organisation: profitability, internal business politics, conflicting ideas on strategy or goals. Keeping a strong corporate culture amidst a huge range of challenges can mean, among other things, being very careful about consistent messaging—consistent in terms of substance, form, and tone.
There is also the aspect of how much you report out to the organisation and the general public—call it the communications transparency continuum. At the one extreme, there is so-called corporate speak, including official statements to the public, which is usually heavily vetted and scripted and edited. Then there’s the other extreme, including reluctance to say anything at all, to the point of risking the appearance of obfuscation. That’s rarely intentional: it can either bely a lack of agreement at the top about what to say, or handwringing about committing publicly (and thus permanently, in the era of the internet) to whatever decision was arrived upon. But the cost of such poor communication can be more problematic than the decision itself: one survey found that 60 percent of North American employees didn’t know the company’s vision and couldn’t articulate the mission or cultural values. This might not be lack of articulation of core values: it might be that communication (or lack thereof) wasn’t consistent with those values.
Even when you are avoiding those extremes, you will operate along that continuum: it’s just unavoidable. That said, people will always read between the lines, and that is when trust becomes a huge issue. For leaders of public companies, what is said officially will be held to another set of official statements: all the legally required disclosures that public companies make to the government. Remember that employees of public companies are very savvy about acquiring additional context. And the requirements of companies listed on the London Stock Exchange or New York Stock Exchange mean those organisations regularly disclose compensation for leadership team members or key business decisions. What you say in your official statements, on social media, even comments by leaders picked up by the press all feed into the narrative.
What you say is permanent because of the internet. And thanks to social media, it will spread—an active living statement, not a static communication. It may even make its way to sites like The Vault and layoff.com because current and potential employees rely more and more heavily on these kinds of sources to get information—and importantly, form an opinion—about a future employer based on them. The point is that how you communicate will impact climate and culture long after any particular executive leaves, and it will always be a public record of how honestly and respectfully the company communicates difficult decisions.
The communication you make will last much longer than the decision.
In the digital era, corporate communications can be interpreted as a value judgement about how you treat people. If the organisation says very little about a departing executive, for example, it may be because the leadership doesn’t want to hurt their reputation, either out of mere politeness or because they might become a competitor or client. On the other hand, if the departure was associated with public-facing issues (they were high profile and there were unfortunate circumstances attached to them), then the decision to be quiet can be interpreted as a very different tactic. In fact, the worse the underlying circumstances, the more dangerous the decision to try to say as little as possible. If you sacked lots of people, admit it—people will be panicking anyway. If it was one person, with no extraneous issues, then perhaps you can say the company policy is to not discuss details because we respect everyone, current employees and former, and wish them well. Leaders today must understand the power and permanency of communications today and that style, tone and transparency are all part of the corporate culture and the public record. Be careful what you say but say something and say it well.
In terms of my background and expertise, I have spent my entire career working as a trusted advisor to senior leaders wanting to improve the effectiveness of themselves, their teams and their companies. Prior to starting my own consulting firm, I led the global executive assessment and development team for Cisco. Earlier in my career I held leadership roles with RHR International, PepsiCo, Ashridge Executive Education, Hult International Business School and the Central European University, Budapest, Hungary.
Dr Robert Kovach
PSYCHOLOGY. LEADERS & TEAMS.
Related posts
