Leadership and Culture
Transcript from Season 1, Episode 2 of the Hardly Working Podcast
In the last episode, we spoke about how the company culture lives in the relationship between employers and employees. This week, let’s take a look at the first side of that equation.
Maulik:
Leaders set the tone for organizations. They define the directions for the company, the goals and the targets. Their behaviors within the organization also set the example. And while leaders might have a certain vision for the culture of the company, they can also affect culture in ways they might not be aware of.
This week on Hardly Working, we take a look at employers, leadership and their effect on company culture.
Nishanth:
So, all too often, you hear these stories of new CEOs or MDs coming in to a company, and attempting to make massive changes in the existing culture. And more often than not, it ends up doing more harm than good. Massive layoffs, selling of assets, occasionally even bankruptcy.
And even in regular day to day scenarios, we see instances where leaders have a certain vision for the company, but the actual culture on the ground might be very different from what we hear in a press release If leaders are so responsible for the culture of a company, then why do they find it so hard to actually affect the culture within the company?
Maulik:
Well as we discussed last time, culture lives within the relationship between the employee and the employer. That’s always a two way street, and just trying to impose a certain style of culture or certain values is a one way communication. Leaders need to see the response, how the communications are being received and accepted, and then make changes or correct course accordingly.
There’s also a need for continuity and a gradual change if at all, it needs to be affected. When there’s a new leader from the outside, he or she often fails to understand the existing systems and values that have built up over time within the organization. In many cases, they don’t even know what the teams do, or how they function.
Nishanth:
So true. That’s one of the most important characteristics of a good leader, empathy.
Empathy for their teams, empathy for what they do, and how they do it.
Maulik:
Yeah. Good leaders approach any transition or change with a good deal of empathy. They need to be receptive of the existing culture, as that culture has built up over years, and become ingrained in an organization. Any successful turnaround almost always starts with going through the organization, looking at the teams, and understanding the existing culture. It may not be in line with expectations but understanding how and why that culture developed is always the first step.
Nishanth:
Which kind of aligns with this idea of a turnaround artist firing large numbers of workers when their attempts to change culture don’t take effect. The culture is so ingrained in the company, that the only way to change it is to essentially replace anyone who was involved in the culture.
Maulik:
Exactly. Existing employees don’t see the need to change their culture, as they view this new leader as an outsider, who is only trying to impose his or her view on the company. That is the root of a toxic culture, where the employees have little respect for management.
It is difficult to see the signs of a toxic culture emerging. Those tend to become visible only later on after it has become difficult to create any further change or retract any wrong step. Performance issues tend to be more apparent and visible before the cultural signs.
Nishanth:
So, last time, we spoke about Giver and Taker cultures, and how Taker cultures can be unproductive, as employees aren’t looking out for the larger goals of the organization. That’s where many performance issues can arise. Granted, there could be external factors at play here. Market forces, global issues, even things like natural disasters or pandemics can play a part in business performance. But often the company’s culture is the cause.
Maulik:
This is hitting the nail on the head. Now it’s impossible for leaders to directly assess the kind of culture within their organization. They can’t just pop their head of an office and ask someone. Which is one reason why it is important to show that they are open to talk and discuss teams and issues.
Nishanth:
We often hear about companies talk about their transparent work environments; leaders need to be the first ones to live those behaviors. If they have their literal doors closed, and their metaphorical walls up, then any amount of talk about transparency and openness will be dismissed, as employees will never feel they can communicate their issues with leadership. Great leaders will go out of their way to open the channels of communication, to ask for opinions, to spend time with their employees, as this is how they can ascertain the actual, on the ground culture. It will help them, help employees, and help the company in the long run.
Maulik:
Now, how leadership reacts to dips in performance is a really important litmus test. A lot of times we see leaders double down. They try to push the teams harder, try to get more work done, and churned out, with shorter timelines and fewer resources. They literally try to work through tough periods. But they rarely examine the underlying causes.
Nishanth:
This is where I feel some of the traditional leaders of the past coped well. As many times they came from a technical background, rather than a pure leadership fast-track, or an external business track, they were able to roll up their sleeves and pick up the slack.
Maulik:
In fact, I think it’s important to discuss goals. So much of the employee-employer relationship is based around targets and goals. And these performance issues also seem to center around setting and meeting goals. When people think of bosses you almost immediately have this vision of the evil boss, who’s setting impossible targets, and always works his team to their breaking point. It might not be true of all bosses, but that stereotype has come from somewhere.
Nishanth:
It seems like if a boss doesn’t even know what his team does, or how they work, it’s difficult for him to set reasonable goals. That’s when employees start to feel overworked and dissatisfied. That also seems like the point where culture starts to turn toxic or weak.
Maulik:
Yeah, employees start to feel that things are impossible. If targets are impossible to achieve, then it doesn’t matter how much overtime you put in, so why bother anyway.
Nishanth:
There’s also the propensity to assign blame. It can be very easy to point fingers and blame people during times of crisis. Or even for a small missed target. It is much harder to examine and understand the underlying factors behind those missed targets. It’s even harder to accept responsibility for those missed targets.
Maulik:
I think what’s important is for leaders to look at the bigger picture. How do those targets fit into the larger, longer-term goal for the company? It can be easy to make a big deal out a single missed month or quarter. But if a team is on track to meet the larger goals, then there’s no longer a need for course correction.
Nishanth:
Yeah. The moment they lose sight, they play into the other stereotype of bosses: the micromanager. They can get too hands-on, too involved in small, often inconsequential details of projects, and not allow their teams to actually get work done. It might seem like a good idea, but it often leaves employees feeling dissatisfied. They can feel like their every move is being judged, and their pay depends on it. And most importantly they’ve lost their sense of autonomy
Maulik:
Autonomy is one of the largest factors of feeling fulfilled in today’s work environment. It also allows employees to develop their own systems and workflows to maximize their productivity. It also helps employees feel like they’re contributing to the larger cause. It’s also taking the load off of leadership, keeps employees fresh and thinking on their feet, and is training them for the future.
However, again it’s one thing to talk about autonomy — but leadership needs to give employees the tools to be able to perform their tasks and be flexible enough to accommodate changes in process.
Nishanth:
I think that’s where empathy needs to play up. Leadership’s empathy not only for their staff’s work issues but also for their larger life goals becomes a crucial point.
We no longer live in a world where people expect to spend their entire lives at one company, they have some larger personal goals in mind. And it’s important for leaders to understand that, and understand what those larger goals are, and how they can help. This is where relationships are strengthened, and culture is also strengthened. Employees are far more likely to be loyal or stay at a company if they feel it’s helping them with their larger life goals.
Maulik:
I also see a leader thus being able to actually enact a culture change when they see the need for one. But they should only be making changes if the productivity of the company, or of a specific process is in a long term decline.
Nishanth:
In that situation, the leader must show employees the benefits of that change. Show how it will improve productivity, and employees will be far more likely to adopt it. After all, any change that can improve productivity will benefit the employees as well. If a leader is clearly able to demonstrate and articulate those changes, then the culture can change and evolve. Of course, as we’ve mentioned, the leader also needs to follow those changes, and live those behaviors before he can expect his employees to follow.
Maulik:
In summary:
Great leaders are able to ensure that teams focus on their work, focus on the task at hand, and able to provide the best possible output. This combined with a transparent environment, a strong sense of empathy, a focus on the longer term goals for a company ensure that a leader can positively shape company culture, and not have to completely replace it.
Nishanth:
In the next episode, we’re going to look at one very specific way leaders direct cultures. We look at Mission, Vision and Purpose and their importance in defining the culture of a company.
We’re going to be putting out a new episode very week, so get subscribed. You can find the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or anywhere else you get your podcasts.
Further Reading:
This Forbes interview with Roger Dean Duncan
This HBR article on how leaders shape company culture through their behaviours.
That’s it from us, and I think it’s time to get back to work.
