In last week's article, we discussed the inability to change from an individual perspective.
This week, we will dive into the inability to change from the lens of an entire organization.
The same principles that apply to the individual also apply to an organization. The espoused values that the organization claims to have (ex. transparency, employee wellbeing, concern, and care for the local community) are often superseded by certain behaviors engrained in the collective group of people who make up the said organization. Where an individual may sense the underlying conflict in values, the organization will more likely have a wider spread of people who see the gap between what they say and what they do.
To illustrate this, let's use an example:
An insurance company with a good reputation with employees and customers alike has long had the espoused value of employee work-life balance.
The entire workforce has been working remotely since the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020. Post-pandemic company rhetoric has been highlighting their commitment to employee safety and well-being, as well as work-life balance benefits for working from home.
However, beginning in 2023, the C-suite executives of the company decided to call everyone back into the office. They claimed this would have no impact on the espoused values of work-life balance, and would enhance the company culture to pre-pandemic status. This decision was made with no employee input.
The majority of the insurance company's workforce was upset and outraged by this decision. The employees felt the company's espoused values of work-life balance had been betrayed. They also felt the company's claim of valuing employee wellbeing to be hypocritical, as the spread of germs and cold viruses happens more in the office setting.
In addition, other insurance companies were allowing employees to continue to work remotely once the pandemic was over. More and more insurance companies moved in this direction, but the company they worked for would not.
The espoused values of employee safety and well-being continue today, as well as the claim for valuing work-life balance. Behind closed doors, the C-suite's concern is about productivity. They fear that without employees in the office, productivity cannot be managed effectively - thus costing them millions in overpaid claims, legal & regulatory penalties, and high jury judgments for missed or sloppy work.
The CEO wants to uphold their word on the espoused values and continue to attract top talent to the company. However, she notices the executive team and herself always falling back on cost and productivity concerns. She is concerned that if they do not change, she will lose well-qualified candidates to other companies who offer remote work.
The company in this example has a problem with competing priorities. Their espoused values of employee well-being, employee safety, and work-life balance are being superseded by the competing (and unspoken) values of productivity and cost containment. Therefore, the company likely has difficulty changing to meet the job market's demand for remote work.
Like in last week's article, there is a tool that can help the CEO and her executive team identify the root cause of their inability to change. Given the example above, let's apply those facts and possible interpretations of the facts using the 4-part process tool:
Name the desired change:
The insurance company wants to value employee safety and well-being, as well as promote work-life balance.
State what they are doing (or not doing) instead:
The insurance company has required all employees to return to the office.
Instead of promoting action to back up their espoused values of safety and well-being, the company might be putting their employees at risk for future viruses and contagions by being in the office more
Instead of promoting action to back up their espoused value of work-life balance, the requirement to work in the office takes away all employee's opportunity to work from home.
Find the hidden competing priorities:
The insurance company is also committed to keeping productivity high and costs down.
Name the underlying assumptions behind their competing priorities:
The insurance company presumes that if they allow remote work, they will be unable to maintain control of employee productivity.
They also presume that by allowing employees to work remotely, they cannot prevent the costs of business from going up (ex. due to errors, missed deadlines, sloppy work, etc).
The key takeaway:
Organizations struggle with change in a similar way to individuals. We all have things we want to change about ourselves - but the underlying and often unspoken commitments to something else end up holding us back. The only difference I see between an organization and an individual is the amount of people needed to buy in for doing the hard work involved with the change desired.
Applying a similar diagnosis - such as the 4 part process of self-evaluation on change - is a great starting point. The work from there will be to find the competing priorities for all stakeholders (aka those with a say in the direction of the organization, and have clout with others to do so). The more perspectives you have, the more likely you are to make progress on an entrenched challenge such as the one in the example above.
Commentaires