Simple Corporate Culture and Client Care Test

Consider the following two hypothetical scenarios.

You have a series of meetings with a Financial Adviser after which documents are received, explaination provided, forms are completed and funds are invested.

You feel comfortable with the strategy and are confident the products recommended are appropriate given the strategy.

All discussions have been open and honest and it is agreed the plan will be reviewed at least once a year.

Six weeks later, the Financial Adviser discovers an error. They recommended a product aimed at providing investment income when the strategy called for growth.

What would you expect them to do?

In the second scenario, your car is due for service and the transmission oil is due to be replaced. This is discussed and agreed when you drop it off at the workshop.

Later that day, you collect the car, pay the bill and drive away happily.

A week later, the mechanic discovers the wrong oil was used, one that will break down at a temperature lower than if the correct oil was used.

What would you expect them to do?

In both examples, what happens next directly reflects the culture of the organisation.

In the case of the Financial Adviser, there is a potential financial risk.

It is far more serious for the car workshop as a transmission failure could be a life or death situation.

It is hoped that in both cases, there is a clear basis for the error to be reported and for correcting action being initiated.

Further, it is hoped the individuals who may be responsible for an error, are celebrated for their action in reporting it and not criticised or punished.

There may be training, or refresher skills teaching, but not discipline.

An organisation that has a true belief in it’s people and a genuine care for customer outcomes will have a positive culture of “self-declaration” or “self-reporting”. All employees will understand and celebrate this as a core “value”; they will feel confident in the true client intent of their employer.

A simple culture test can be performed.

Do you feel able to self-report an error in the knowledge there will be no negative outcome?

Have a contemplative weekend.

"Idea" Your Way to Sustainability and Self Disruption

“We need a new strategy, or at least we need to review our strategy to ensure it remains relevant”.

How often have you heard this?

Have you ever known a change of Senior Leader not being followed by a new (so called) strategy?

I have often been amused to witness the overnight discrediting of the direction a business is heading on a change of Leader/Manager.

Equally, I have been an interested observer as the new Leader/Manager seeks to replicate much or all of the environment from where they came including recruiting former colleagues. 

A new Leader/Manager is the perfect opportunity for the introduction of new ideas. The problem is, all too often is ends up being a duplication or re-cycling of old ideas from another place.

In addition, the so called “New Strategy” is often no more than a re-shuffle of the organisation chart in order to deliver much the same or similar service or product in much the same way, just supervised differently.

It is a little harsh to call it all “smoke and mirrors”, but only a little.

Ideas are important as is the discussion, debate and testing of ideas. An idea is just as valuable when it is not taken up as it is when it is as long as it is debated and tested. I say this because without the “dismissed” idea, it is impossible to stress test the existing operation of strategy.

So much of our so called strategic discussions are taken up talking about events. These may be events that have occurred and we want to ensure never do again or they may be imaginary events that we seek to mitigate against. Operational or Strategic?

The second area where strategic thinking time is invested is discussing people, where they fit, what they have to offer and what we need to do in order to “fit them in” or “manage them out”.

Very little of Corporate Strategic Development time and energy is devoted to the discussion of ideas. Any talk about an idea is kept to a small group and all too often, a cohort of one.

Ideas are risky, valuable, important but often discouraged, easily dismissed or simply ignored.

A healthy, energetic, sustainably successful and engaged work environment will include a culture where ideas can be raised and discussed without fear of rejection, retaliation, jealousy or the the threat to fragile egos.

Ideas disrupt industries, businesses and business models. 

However, it must surely to better to "Self Disrupt" than have an outside force provide the disruption.

Consider the taxi industry. I am sure it would have rather had the means of review, idea generation, re-invention and self-disruption than be subjected to the force that is Uber.

In the words attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt:

Bullying

Yesterday I was witness to an in-depth debate about the increase in bullying behaviour.

The first thing confirmed is there is actually an increase, including places of work, education, arts, sports and in the home.

I make this point because it is often said there is no actual increase, it just appears to be the case because there are more avenues for reporting such behaviour.

Sadly, it appears the reasons bullying behaviours may have not been reported 50 or more years ago, are still in play today. Fears of discrimination, increased bullying and recrimination are still cited as reasons for not calling out bullies.

The debate conducted was reasoned, calm and respectful and several of the key issues put forward are articulated below:

1.       Our addiction to reality television

There are numerous programs highlighting conflict, abuse of others and it is not too much to suggest this is manipulated by casting and editing.

Millions of people plan their day around being available to witness the latest bullying behaviour be it while ruling the kitchen, between housewives from wherever or at a dinner party attended by  groups of “pretend” married couples.

We even have groups of Women living for weeks, months even all under the same roof competing for the affection of one Man where the ability to intimidate a competitor may mean the difference to winning or not. (and groups of Men seeking the affection of a sole Woman)

Many of these programs are watched as family events.

I watch none of them however I do see a promotion for one or more from time to time. Virtually every promotion shows clips of the worst, nastiest and most bullying behaviour.

Is our addiction to such programs re-programming what we consider to be acceptable behaviour?

Are we lowering the bar and becoming desensitised to what is and is not ok?

Is it ridiculous to think that our exposure to such behaviours will not carry over to the rest of our life activities and relationships?

2.       Our Politicians

I am old enough to remember when Parliamentary debate was just that, a debate about ideas and ideology.

I can recall when our Politicians promoted ideas and argued the legitimacy of their ideas and what they wanted to do.

Now they abuse, criticise, sectionalise, denigrate and threaten each other. This is all sides and corners of the political spectrum.

There are many hard working, effective and committed local members that do not receive the coverage and exposure they deserve. Their decency goes unrewarded in terms of publicity.

3.       Our Risk Adverse Work Places

I had never considered this as a factor until it was raised by one of the debate participants.

In all workplaces, there is an ever increasing emphasis on managing risk and compliance, over above just about all else. There are examples of terrible client/customer outcomes that are excused on the basis of a complying process being followed.

This culture shuts down innovation and the willingness to express new ideas and opinions.

This growing trend has allowed an increase in the Command and Control behaviours of supervisors who are themselves under Command and Control pressure from above to ensure compliance.

It is possible poor, or bullying behaviours are camouflaged under the banner of “risk management”, “mistake avoidance” and “compliance”.

Further, a key part of risk management is an increasing need to adhere strictly to pre-determined and ever-expanding policies and procedures. By definition, strict procedures stifle thought and creativity while providing a vehicle for Command and Control.

I have certainly been witness to increased process and perhaps restricting procedures. Further, I have played a part in their design and implementation.

Perhaps one difference between Management and Leadership is how process and procedure is implemented. A Manager may be inclined to Command adherence while a Leader will seek buy in following communication, explanation while providing an environment allowing for challenge and feedback.

Both approaches will work, but perhaps one has a more positive outcome.

4.       Social Media

Any discussion about bullying and behaviours will include Social Media and this was discussed at length, including the age children should have access to the various incarnations of Facebook, Twitter, Snap Chat etc etc.

I will refrain from re-cycling the varied and at time complex discussion about this topic and will instead express an alternative opinion.

The way we as a society behave on Social Media is a refection of our personal standards and of community standards. The influences we are consciously and sub-consciously exposed to will dictate our behaviours and our standards.

Rather than blaming the platforms themselves for poor or bullying behaviour, we should first address what is driving the belief such behaviours are acceptable.

For example, the behaviours exhibited by those portrayed in reality television, by our politicians and even our workplaces may be being replicated on Social Media, be it under a cloak of physical separation.

Food for thought

Good Leaders Lose Their Best People

Over the last 2 months, I have received multiple requests to act as a reference for friends and former colleagues seeking alternative roles.

My usual response is to talk about what it is I would most likely say and confirming they still want me as a referee. In one case I simply suggested they would be better off asking someone else.

Providing a reference is a considerable responsibility.

I have always taken the view that the information I provide to an employer about a prospective recruit will be as accurate and as honest as I would want to hear if I was the employer.

On a number of occasions, I have been contacted by a Recruiter and the questions asked had clearly been structured to solicit positive responses. I have even stopped half way through and asked if the reference I was providing was to meet a requirement of their contract with the employer as it appears they have already made up their mind.

I recall many years ago being subjected to such a set of questions. The final request was to suggest other roles the reference subject would be suitable for. I answered saying they would be great at collecting glasses at a nightclub. This was a person I had “let go” a year before and I was stunned they had included me as a referee.

The position they had applied for was with the Private Bank Division of one of the major banks and not surprisingly, the conversation with the recruiter went down another path.

Back to the requests I have received the last 2 months.

A question I always ask when someone requests I act as a referee for them is “why are you seeking the alternative role?”

As a Leader/Manager, I was always thrilled when a valued employee left to join another organisation, or to take up an opportunity within the same group, as long as they were doing so to further their objectives and not to simply get away.

To put it another way, as long as they were running to something and not away from what they have, I was always thrilled.

Many employers have turnover as a measure of engagement success however I wonder if this is a true reflection of Leadership?

As Leaders, if we understand the Goals and Objectives of our team members, it is a fundamental responsibility to support their development towards achieving their goals.

Where this becomes challenging is where their goals may be doing something different in an entirely un-related field.

I recall a colleague some years ago who had a desire to be a Florist. She was a successful Senior Corporate Accountant at the time.

More recently, I was aware of a successful Senior Professional who was studying Interior Decorating. They felt the need to be secretive about it and to manage the demands of family and a very busy professional life while studying part time. By becoming aware of this objective, I was able to be supportive and encouraging and in response, they became one of the most productive, consistent and reliable Team Members. Corporate and Team Member objectives were achieved even though I knew they would eventually leave. 

If you are a Leader, ask yourself if you truly know and understand the individual Goals and Objectives of each Team Member?

This means much more than the 6-monthly personal development conversation, the one where we may seek to say no more than what is expected of us.

Take the conversations to the next level, challenge the answers to confirm their authenticity and use examples. I have regularly relayed the story about the Accountant wanting to be a Florist as an example of how expansive our conversation can be.

However, there will always be the group of Team Members who genuinely want to keep doing what they are doing and that is totally acceptable, desirable and expected. It is important however to also challenge such answers in order to be sure of their authenticity. I always found a powerful question to be “what is the role doing for you?” It is then our Leadership responsibility to help them be the best version they can possibly be.

Finally, the cornerstone of meaningful personal development support is the creation of an environment where Team Members feel safe and feel they can trust and be trusted. If you are a Leader and development conversation result in benign responses, it is time to look inwardly.

Political Similarities 40 Years Apart

Imagine how silly it would be if there was a report of illegal or unacceptable activities conducted by election campaign staff and their candidate then went on to win the election.

What if there was a gradual build-up of pressure through the political processes and in the media leading to genuine concerns being raised by authorities who have the authority to investigate such things?

Further, what if it was claimed the victorious candidate placed pressure on the authority who would conduct such investigations encouraging they cease?

Next, imagine how ludicrous it would be if a senior official determined to conduct such investigations was dismissed.

How about if the Office at the centre of all this controversy was the President of the United States?

Moving on, when the investigation progresses and key people are brought in for interview, what would happen if there was a concentrated build up of stories, leaks and comments aimed at casting doubt on their character, motives and even their mental health?

While all this is happening, the President and all his Men (and Women) are articulating that reports by major news outlets and in particular the New York Times and Washington Post are lies, incorrect and devoid of any factual basis.

At every opportunity, those in power state there is nothing to investigate, there was no such illegal activity and it is all a conspiracy. They say repeatedly there is no wrong doing, nothing to investigate and it should stop.  

Finally, the President appeals to all and sundry to move on and cease the investigation as it is distracting everyone from the important business of running the country citing in particular, growing concerns in the Middle East and on the Korean Peninsula.

I am not summarising what has played out in America these last 12 or so months.

I have provided a simple overview of the events leading up to the impeachment proceedings of President Nixon. He resigned on 9 August 1974 and was pardoned by his successor.

Nixon, a Republican, won a second term in 1972 and did so with a record margin,

It came to light there had been a break in at the Democratic Convention and a subsequent cover up that included involvement by the President.

As well as being formally investigated by the authorities including the appointment of a Special Prosecutor, reporters from the Washington Post worked long and hard to gather information and verify facts before reporting to the wider world. Their reporting was criticised as being incorrect. (fake news by another name)

Everything that was reported by the Washington Post was proven to be true.

I am not suggesting the investigation in to the current administration will be found to be true.

What I do find both interesting and distressing is the similarity in tactics, behaviours and actions to those displayed by the Nixon administration.

Of parallel interest is the similarity between the rusted-on supporters of both Nixon and Trump and their policies of growing manufacturing and mining.

Time will tell, as it always does.


If you are interested in learning more about Watergate, this is an excellent 8 part podcast. Slow Burn - A Podcast about Watergate

Curiosity Rewarded

Lenie Gwyther was born and raised in the Victorian town of Leongatha.

His was a farming family and as was common in the 1930’s. he learned to ride at a young age and was given a horse on turning 2. The horse was named Ginger Mick.

Lennie signed up to serve in the Second World War on turning 18 and was active in the pacific theatre in the final period of the war.

We went on to become and engineer and lived a quiet and productive life until his passing in 1992.

His interest in engineering was inspired by the wonder that was the construction of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. At the time of its construction, the Bridge was the largest engineering project in the world, ever.

The Bridge was opened in 1932 and the same year, Lennie had effectively taken control of the harvest when his Father was injured and confined to hospital in Melbourne. Lennie was 9 years old.

His grateful Father was keen to reward his efforts and Lennie wanted to travel to Sydney to see the opening of the Sydney Harbour Bridge.

Keen to grant his inquisitive Son his wish, options were investigated for travel to Sydney.

Lennie had learned about the construction of the bridge by way or newspaper reports and radio programmes. He had never ventured further than the township of Leongatha.

It was a different time. Interstate travel was not common and options were generally by train or ship.

His parents agreed to him travelling to Sydney and his departure from Leongatha was an event in itself including being waived off by the Mayor.

Proof it was a different time is best illustrated by 9 year old Lennie travelling by himself to Sydney.

Further, he travelled on the back of his horse, Ginger Mick. It took 33 days and he slept in barns and stables, having first knocked on farmhouse doors seeking permission from the owner.

His trip became well known to the extent he met the Prime Minister while travelling through Canberra. It was widely reported and there was a crowd on hand o welcome him to Sydney.

Not only did he attend the Bridge opening, he was a part of the official party, as was Ginger Megs.

As I said, it was a different time. We would not allow our 9 year old children to embark on such a journey today. Further, the “authorities” would not allow it.

Lennie was not a seeker of adventure as much as a possessor of an extreme curiosity.

With all our easy access to information and the introduction of all things tech to our Children, I wonder of we provide an environment where curiosity prospers as it did in a by gone era.

Our Children are bombarded with so any options, perhaps their genuine interests and natural talents are passed over in favour of the next big thing?

To wrap up, it is worth mentioning that Lennie had his 10^th birthday when returning home from Sydney.

He convinced his Father who had travelled to Sydney to accompany him home by ship that he had so much fun riding to Sydney, he would like to “ride home the other way” via Melbourne.

Again, it was a solo trip by an understated 9 year old, turning 10.

Hypocrisy in a Filing Cabinet

Once I shut down my little laugh at the news a filing cabinet or two containing highly secretive Cabinet Papers had found it’s way to a second-hand furniture sale then to a citizen, I came to consider the broader picture.

Fortunately, the confidential documents covered periods when both sides of our political spectrum were in Government and we were spared the point scoring pettiness that has become a feature of our political debate.

However, there has been no lack in the usual hypocrisy surrounding this discovery.

Imagine the political uproar if instead of being Government confidential documents, it was Bank, Insurance, Financial Advice or Pharmaceutical documents found in the filing cabinet at the “garage sale”.

Our Politicians would be crawling over each other calling for the Heads to roll of the CEO’s or Chairpersons as a sign of responsibility and accountability.

There would be a brutal contest to see who could be the toughest and calls for a Royal Commission, Senate Enquiry, Police Investigation and who knows what else would be filling our airwaves.

Our Executive Government deals with all subjects effecting our Country.

Matters Economic, Social, Health, Defence and Diplomatic are discussed openly and frankly. By their nature, these are sensitive and their disclosure can have a huge impact domestically and internationally.

Confidentiality for Bank and other documents is of critical importance but I suspect not nearly as important as the documents of Government.

I would like to think there would be some accountability from the Political Classes but I guess it is no surprise there is not.

I suppose we can g=be grateful there is no attempt to dismiss it as “fake News”, at least for now anyway.