The importance of building a company's morale

So, it has been a while since my last post. And, as life will often do, with the passage of time has come a number of curve balls: some good, but most still leaving me a bit dubious. Many of these dubious occurrences have, yes, you guessed it, taken place in the workplace.

As middle-middle-middle management (our corporate structures have changed again, so that there really is only the upper management and the plebeians - except that some plebeians have more privileges to serve the upper management than others, which makes them middle management. And on down the line...) we are faced with constant challenges to our belief structure and moral and ethical convictions as we daily determine whether or not to report this, or say anything about the other situation.

Slowly and over time we begin to rationalize that just as in the case of expression of one's religious faith, there should be a separation of what is moral and consistent with our belief system and what is considered just the high and often brutal cost of doing business. Indeed, there have been moments when one accepts that one promotion for political reasons is appropriate, even though the units to be affected will surely suffer cruel indignities - all "legal" mind you, however, since one cannot find [on the books] "a law against being a jerk."  After all, isn't the Golden Rule ("Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"), the one which we, as Americans, have grown up cherishing and holding so dear, deemed to be too "religious" to be upheld in the work setting? I shudder to think what would happen if regular folks actually took to heart the idea that it was really okay to treat each other poorly - other than "jerks" and criminals, who already operate in this manner!

Despite the challenges, however, it is important for advocates for change in the corporate (and not-for-profit) arena to continue to foster the development of a work environment that calls for accountability even in the areas of fair treatment of individuals. Your work environment should not be verbally and emotionally abusive - it's not tolerated in domestic environments, we don't like to hear about it in the instances of political environments and our past Industrial Era reforms speak to the fact that we know it has no place in the work environment, either (even though we focused on the physical attack, we have grown savvier and now understand the damage that can be done without so much as raising a finger against someone...). As middle management we understand the difference between the company that is able to continue to exist, even if in a different form or under a different name, and the one that seals its own fate - eventual failure or bankruptcy - is the type of culture that is fostered within the workplace.

I used to think that morale building was the key to a company's success. I now understand that I was close to the truth. The true key to a company's success, in retrospect, is actually building a healthy company culture. If the culture is healthy and supportive, even keeled and fair in its dealings, people will automatically engage in activities that are moral, ethical and life-promoting for the company, as a whole. So keep holding up the standard, so that when your day comes to move into upper management, your people will know what kind of rule they are in for.

If you want longevity, treat people right. This is a good rule of thumb in business and in life, in general. I think it's also found in the Bible.

Innovation vs. Adaptability in the Workplace

The ability to innovate is an interesting concept. Not to be confused with adaptability. Many individuals who come from a background in research have difficulty in reconciling the difference between the two. Most persons interviewing for your average job do so with the expectation that they are entering an environment where there is an already established set of expectations, fully conceived vision and a well-communicated plan to get there. The expectation is that each employee will do certain things that will aid in the movement towards the accomplishment of that goal. If widgets are our business, we want you to be the best widget builder you can be. Or we want you to be the best widget counter you can be. Or we want you to be the best widget sales and marketing or customer service rep that you can. The underlying assumption is that we have a plan that you are to use to get you from point A to point B without much messing around with the formula to do so.

The exception to such an environment would be someplace like Google or Apple – where the ability to innovate clearly IS the point of the business. In these cases, it is not merely acceptable to maintain the status quo in most positions – otherwise their position is in manufacturing or customer service or working the line within the warehouse. The challenge within the workplace manifests itself when personalities who do not embrace this key difference are in leadership positions. It is like letting loose the computer geeks usually relegated to the dungeon where they can freely exist in their own world onto the rest of population. Usually the problem is that their poor socialization skills brings about offense and insensitivity and creates a hotbed of controversy as they continuously force unreasonable expectations on their “subjects.” And a primary way in which they do this is by establishing an expectation of true innovation. But most folks in the business of innovating are entrepreneurs. And not everyone is an entrepreneur.

In most instances, because of the nature of the majority of humankind, and the inherent tendancy to be creatures of comfort, we do our best (and often worst) work only after we have developed a proficiency that only comes as we perform a task or do a particular job repetitively. This is how we become "expert" in a specific task or area. It is out of this development of expertise that innovation may come - but more often than not, change occurs in a more gradual, natural manner. The risk involved in an organization's adaptation to changing business and social landscapes is markedly different than that of an environment that makes risk their business.

 

Until the human resources enterprise is equipped and able to successfully identify the conflicts that result, the organization will always be in danger of being hardwired to cannibalize itself – thereby leading to its own demise and ultimately, failure.