Communicating Strategic Change - A Check List

When an organization rolls out a major new business strategy internally, the leadership team and board of directors expect to achieve full and speedy implementation so that the desired impact of the new strategy will be seen on the company’s bottom line – sooner, rather than later. 
        However, the ultimate success of any new strategy is contingent on employees at all levels and locations achieving full understanding, followed by their buy-in and commitment to the strategy. Unfortunately, the process of realizing those ends is never quick or simple. 
        People, by nature, resist change. The imposition of a new strategic direction on any organization represents significant change and therefore is often met with skepticism, questions and, at best, a wait-and-see attitude. 

       Few people willingly charge ahead. Rather, they hang back to see who jumps on the bandwagon, how things develop, whether their jobs will be affected and, if so, how.
        That’s why effective employee communications as means to help people achieve understanding are so critical.
        In this regard, communications help people access relevant information on their own terms, making it meaningful for their jobs and responsibilities, as well as for their own personal goals and needs. 
        The CEO and his/her leadership team have a significant ownership role to play in making sure that the company’s internal communications are effective, driving the kind of information and engagement that will improve understanding. They must take a formal and committed approach to open communications in a number of areas. 

       The quickest route to failure is for the CEO and leadership team to turn over implementation and communication of the change to others, and disavow any involvement. Believe me, I've seen that.
       Instead, leadership must employ a more disciplined approach to communications starting by incorporating it into their management model, while establishing certain protocols for management communications and content generation. Following is a check list of the core components of an effective approach.
       

Adopt a Philosophy

• Communications are at the core of the company’s management model.
• An open environment for information exchange and feedback is the basis for discussion, debate and learning.
• While all employees are responsible for communicating effectively and openly, managers are the primary channels for information and relationship building to ensure alignment and consistent understanding.
• Communications are integrated within the leadership team as both a function and a philosophy – i.e., the head of Corporate Communications has a “seat at the table” and participates in making key decisions.
• Decisions, policies and directives emanating from the CEO’s team will be communicated quickly and completely throughout the organization, beginning with the managers.
• Core messaging (centralized content) will be developed by Corporate Communications and disseminated to officers and managers.
• Managers are required to “convey” information to their staffs in a timely manner, adding relevance to their business unit and/or location.

Make the Content Meaningful

• Bring in more in the way of answers to the common “Why I should care?” and “What’s in it for me” type questions – e.g., the rationale behind significant change, its impact on people and their roles in making it happen.
• Centralize responsibility for managing strategic communications under one person, with a “seat at the table” among the company’s leadership. That does not just mean attending senior leadership meetings, but having the CEO communicate about communications, thereby raising its importance in the organization.
• Encourage and support the development of more localized communications vehicles (for remote sites, functions, profit centers and business areas).

Establish a System

• Conduct monthly State-of-the-Business meetings with staff hosted by department/unit managers to keep everyone apprised of progress for full adoption of the new strategy and barriers to achieving that.
• Hold quarterly manager meetings, timed with results – hosted and owned by the CEO.
• Create intranet “pull” sites that reinforce key messages, strategy, etc. 

Make Feedback a Central Part of Communications

• Make sure employees know they are heard by playing back to them the suggestions and questions you are getting from them.
• Engage in active dialog between and among leadership, managers and employees in a range of venues and platforms, where ideas and insights can be easily exchanged.
• Avoid the conventional “suggestion box” approach.
• Explore and actively consider other means to collect and respond to employee ideas/insights, through such means as pulse surveys and employee focus groups.

Ensure a Discipline around Communications

• Check communications effectiveness regularly through random queries by managers as to people’s awareness and understanding.
• Sense what people understand/need to know and then respond, making adjustments when and where needed.
• Understanding will not be consistent across the organization. Pay special attention to business units/functions/locations where understanding and buy-in are lagging. Identify the barrier and fix it.
• Do not become wedded to systems and vehicles that outlive their usefulness.
• Uncover and replicate best practices in communications both within business units, locations or functions of the company and at other organizations, including competitors.

Ensure Accountability in Communications

• Build communications effectiveness into managers’ performance metrics. Institute regular 360-degree reviews.
• Test communications effectiveness with pulse surveys and biannual employee surveys.

No one ever said that activating a new strategic direction or business model is easy. But paying attention to your communications methodologies and following through on these kinds of steps will go far in ensuring that you get there sooner than you would have otherwise.

When CEOs “take full responsibility”

This summer we saw two serious corporate crises that resulted in significant monetary losses and consequent damage to the reputations of two major international companies. However, it’s likely one will recover more quickly than the other – if the other, in fact, recovers at all. The difference may lie in the responses of the respective CEOs.

          On August 10, if you were relying on Delta Airlines to get you from Point A to Point B, you probably did not make it on time. In fact, you probably didn’t even get there on the right day. Over the course of three days, Delta had to cancel 2,300 flights due to a massive computer failure at its central facility in Atlanta. Placement of Delta airliners was out of synch for more than a week, resulting in extended residual cancellations and delays.

          Initially, the company blamed it on a pre-dawn local power outage. But on closer examination, it turned out that power was uninterrupted. The problem proved to be faulty routing equipment that shut down their entire computer system.

          The airline handed out untold thousands of travel vouchers to inconvenienced (and likely angry) travelers. A month or so later, Delta assessed their total losses in the neighborhood of $150 million.

          Delta’s CEO, Ed Bastian, immediately took full responsibility for the failure while promising to fix the problem and make it up to his inconvenienced customers. There was no hesitancy in his response, per the headline in the Wall Street Journal two days after the outage:

Delta Air Lines CEO Takes Responsibility for Outage

Computer failure suggests past tech investments may not ‘have been in the right place’

Aug. 12, 2016

          Now, for a study in contrasts, consider what happened at Wells Fargo – in this case a very much self-inflicted wound. It came to light that at least since 2011, the bank had opened roughly 1.5 million bogus bank accounts and applied for 565,000 credit cards that appear not to have been authorized by its customers. Sometimes, customers’ signatures were forged.

          This blatantly unethical and illegal behavior was the result of performance metrics that incentivized the opening of new accounts by existing customers, a practice known in the business as “cross-selling.” A massive scam on this scale has not been seen in recent memory. Upon discovery by federal and state regulators, the bank was fined a total of $185 million. More than 5,300 bank employees have been fired.

          And how did Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf publicly react to the news? The headline in the Wall Street Journal says it all:

Wells Fargo CEO Defends Bank Culture,
Lays Blame With Bad Employees

Says that at the bank, ‘There was no incentive to do bad things’

Sept. 13, 2016

Think about the difference between the reactions of these two CEOs in the context of your notion of a CEO’s role.

          Compounding the bank’s transgressions, Stumpf appeared before the Senate Banking Committee on Sept. 20 for a grilling that yielded some stunning truths. In a nutshell, while 5,300 mostly lower-level employees were fired for their misdeeds, most of the senior level people are still in place, reaping the rewards of a rising stock price that increased with analysts’ praises of the bank’s allegedly successful “cross-selling.”

          Stumpf himself has realized a paper profit of some $200 million from his holdings of nearly 7 million shares. Carrie Tolstedt, the senior-most person in charge of retail banking where the scam occurred, “retired” in July and is expected to receive tens of millions of dollars in separation compensation, not including the company stock she holds.

Who’s Responsible?

While editorial columns across the country reacted indignantly toward the bank and its CEO the day after the hearing, I’d like to address one key point: senior executives’ responsibilities.

          During the Senate hearing, Stumpf backtracked from his initial blame placing and, reading from prepared remarks, said he took “full responsibility” for the illicit activities. But what exactly does that mean?

          A CEO taking responsibility for what goes on within his/her company – for both the good and the bad – is self-evident. It goes with the job. It’s why CEOs are well compensated. With high-level responsibilities come high-level rewards – seven-figure salaries, bonuses, stock options, private jets, etc.

          But all too often in business (as well as in government agencies), “taking responsibility” for organizational improprieties is a hollow feel-good phrase worn like a figurative hair shirt until the storm passes. Afterwards, the hair shirt comes off. The top people resume their normal activities and collect their inflated salaries.

          Rarely today does “taking responsibility” for an organization’s misdeeds result in falling on one’s sword – i.e., resigning in disgrace. When organization-wide malfeasance is uncovered and the senior-most person “takes responsibility,” it always seems done in an effort to end the conversation. In fact, that's what usually happens.

          During the Senate hearing, Sen. Elizabeth Warren repeatedly suggested that Stumpf resign – to no apparent effect. Stumpf just glared back at her and said that that would be up to the Wells Fargo board. Clearly, Stumpf does not feel compelled to step down of his own volition.

          I strongly suspect that, in a month or two, he will still be CEO of Wells Fargo, still collecting his seven-figure salary, bonuses and stock options. Alas.

           Plus ça change plus c'est la meme chose.

Engaging Your Remote Employees

The Internet and its evolving technologies and software have increasingly made it easier for people to work from home occasionally. While most companies today allow the sporadic WFH (working from home) days for everyone, an increasing proportion of today’s working population holds down jobs remotely full-time, working from home offices every business day of the year.
       A lot of people fantasize about doing just that, rid of arduous and frustrating daily commutes, and the need to maintain an expensive and varied wardrobe for the office. GlobalWorkplaceAnalytics.com reports that, as of January 2016, 2.8 percent of the American workforce works from home at least half the time. Compared to the client companies that I’ve worked with, I think that number is low.
        As pleasant as it may seem, working remotely for any organization can also be challenging on a number of levels. Perhaps the greatest challenge is trying to stay up-to-date with current workflow, company news, initiatives and timely work-related information. It can also be difficult to feel a part of the company and its unique culture.
        Being remote means a complete lack of opportunities for casual, unplanned encounters with peers and managers, and regular face-to-face interactions. As a result, it can be tough for remote employees to feel current and “plugged in” with regard to business-critical information and news.
        Limited to the phone and email for connecting with their managers, they often suffer through frustrating minutes and hours as communications go unanswered in the face of fast-approaching deadlines.
        The importance of keeping remote employees engaged can’t be overstated. The trouble is, most companies don’t consider it as a unique component of their employee engagement and communications practices. The percentage of at-home workers, though small now, will only continue to grow in the coming years, so the imperative for companies to make a concerted effort better to engage their remote employees will only increase.
        The core purpose of undertaking the effort is to make the most of the talent that is not present every day in the company’s physical spaces. The strategy to engage them, then, should seek to sustain, increase and broaden the frequency and variety of communications to and from remote employees to better connect them to the company and its mission, as well as with their colleagues across the organization.

Tactical approaches
There is any number of ways to achieve these ends, many of which should be unique to each given situation, since no two companies are alike. Variables include the total number of employees and the percentage of them working remotely, the nature of the business, and the number of offices scattered around the country and across the globe. But consider these ideas as a starting point for your own unique situation.

• Employee survey – Make a concerted effort to solicit responses in your annual employee survey from the remote employee cohort to raise their participation rate to more closely reflect the true percentage of the employee population they represent. Consider a contest where all remote employees who complete the survey are automatically entered into a drawing for a cash award or prizes. Ask questions directed only to remote employees to determine how engaged they really are, and their feelings about the timeliness and relevance of company communications. Solicit their ideas for improvement.
• News’ timeliness – Ensure that all remote employees are receiving information in a timely manner. Conduct random checks on whether particular items were received when intended. Make corrections to the distribution system as necessary to ensure timeliness.
• Raise their profile – Use your monthly newsletter or intranet to increase the organization’s awareness of remote employees. Launch the effort with a feature story about them. Tell their story, and include quotes from individuals about the experience. The feature can serve as the launch for a regular brief spotlight feature on individual remote employees: selfie photos of them at work along with thumbnail sketches of who they are, what they do for the company, and their hobbies, etc.
• Benefits programs – Ensure that all benefits programs, such as wellness programs, accommodate remote employees. Tailor the programs, as necessary, to make it easier for remote employee to participate. Follow up to encourage their on-going participation.
• CSR participation – Create and/or suggest ideas for them to contribute to the company’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs. Spotlight some of those activities in internal communications, including Town Halls and the newsletter or intranet.
• Recognition – Encourage managers, supervisors and peers to be proactive in recognizing remote employees in team meetings and other venues. Adjust performance metrics to accommodate remote employees and the vicissitudes of their situation.
• Internal social media – If you use internal social media like Facebook at Work, Yammer or Jive, set up an affinity group for remote employees where they can share their experiences, questions and concerns among themselves. Encourage senior leadership to engage with the group on the site as well.
• Home office visits – Invite three or four randomly selected remote employees to the headquarters offices to participate in key events, such as quarterly Town Halls. Afterwards, have them join the CEO or a member of the leadership team for lunch. Give them at least a full day to be in the office so they can spend time with their co-workers, especially those they regularly deal with over the phone. Also, make sure that each remote employee visits the nearest company office, or the one they work most closely with, as often as possible – at least once or twice a year.
• Technology upgrades – Lastly, always check the quality and reliability of electronic communications. Make sure that webcasts of Town Halls and other company-wide events work flawlessly. Run pre-checks with a small selection of remote employees. Similarly, ensure that teleconference technologies like WebEx and conference room speakerphones are fully functional so that remote employees can participate in team meetings without difficulty.

A Style Manual Doesn’t Guarantee Effective Communications

 A friend of mine, who works for a global manufacturing company, once shared with me his company’s internal communications “guidelines and protocol.” He thought I’d find it instructive. (Also, since he had helped put it together, I think he was fishing for a compliment.)

        Bound in a handsome three-ring binder, this 148-page, four-color guide covered everything imaginable. The company’s various internal media were included, each with its own tab and detailed descriptions of their distribution schedules, audience(s), typical content, requirements for submissions, and contact person.

        There were at least a dozen pages devoted to the company’s logo – the right and wrong ways to use it, where, when and how. Also included was exhaustive instructions on managing crises, the correct channels and timing for communicating with union leadership and local communities, and how to submit a story for the company’s intranet news page, etc.

        It was pretty impressive, and I did compliment him. It had every angle covered, and seemed to anticipate all contingencies.

        While the finished product deserved praise, people often confuse these guides with “communications.” A guide, yes. Communications, no. And because he was so caught up in its creation, my friend forgot that little truth.

"Notes on paper ain’t music"

It’s like sheet music. As one studio musician guitarist in the documentary “The Wrecking Crew” says, “Notes on paper ain’t music.” It takes a talented musician to bring sheet music alive, to give it passion, meaning and value.

        Similarly, with comprehensive communications policies and guidelines, you know how it’s supposed to work. You can see it’s complete and handsomely put together. But you haven’t communicated yet. In effect, you haven’t picked up your guitar and played the music from the printed sheet.

        The ability to play the “guitar” well, in this case, requires insights into and understanding of your audience, combined with language skills and business acumen. You may say you want to communicate to employees, but have you clearly defined them and their information needs, wants and level of understanding? And do they have a way to communicate back to you?

        Though you know your audience in a general way, in reality you probably don’t know exactly whom you’re talking to. How do they prefer to get important information? What do they want to know and what should they know and understand? And, most important, what do you want them to do with that information?

        It really doesn’t matter what communications channels you use, whether it’s the latest fad in social media, print media, telegraph, or smoke signals. It doesn’t matter that you’re communicating a new corporate strategy, quarterly results, or the company’s new benefits program. Whether you’re using the company’s logo correctly matters not a whit.

        If you don’t have a cohesive message that connects meaningfully with your employees, relevant to their world, through media they use, then the words you choose, the formatting of the document, and the means by which you use to reach out to them won’t matter at all.

Start at the beginning

To be successful at the craft, employee communications requires a philosophy of optimism, an attitude that believes in the basic goodness and value of each employee and that employee's desire to contribute positively to the larger whole, while providing for himself/herself and his/her family.

        The employee communications function’s chief role, then, is to maximize that innate dedication to the job by serving as a liaison between the management and the collective employee audience, helping them understand one another better while driving the employees to operate with behaviors and attitudes in synch with the needs, mission and vision of the organization.

        If the internal communications are not two-way, then they won’t succeed. It makes no sense to establish communications protocols, systems and media if management doesn’t use them to establish an ongoing conversation with the broad employee audience.

        A communications protocol should facilitate the engagement of employees and all they have to offer – including their personal desire to excel and contribute to the success of the larger organization. Everything else is just window dressing.

        The first task, then, is to gain deep understanding of the audience, the employees. Start with senior management to determine its primary vision and objectives. At base, that will form the texture, content and timing of all messaging aimed at employees. How that’s done is dependent on gaining a comprehensive understanding of and appreciation for the broad employee audience.

Understanding the employees

Many companies rely on annual employee surveys, which amount to taking the organization’s temperature regularly and comparing that year’s data to those from previous years. That’s fine and there’s nothing wrong with that – unless that’s the only way a company seeks to understand its internal audience.

        Such surveys must be augmented with parallel qualitative research by conducting real-time, face-to-face employee and manager/supervisor interviews through not-for-attribution group discussions, covering topics such as the following:

• What’s on their minds? What’s troubling them? What are they excited about?
• How do they perceive the company’s current state?
• How are they acting on the company’s mission and vision?
• Are they living the company’s values? Do they even understand them?
• How do they learn about company news and developments, and how would they prefer to do that?

Comparing the qualitative findings from in-person discussions to the quantitative data gleaned from surveys will provide an accurate portrait of the internal environment and employee attitudes. Doing so annually will ensure understanding through internal changes and normal attrition.

        In turn, it will give communicators a roadmap of how best to use their protocols and communications tools and vehicles to communicate to the internal audience: through which channels, with what kinds of messages, and at the appropriate cadence. And, in the end, it will flesh out the base intent of the communications protocol and make it worthwhile.

CEO lifestyles: “Excessive?” or “Mind your own business?”

 

Every Friday, the Wall Street Journal features a back-end section called “Mansions.” The slick editorial content that anchors and bolsters the numerous real estate ads generally features stories and glamorous photos of high-end estates of the rich and famous: movie stars and rock musicians, hedge fund manages and, yes, CEOs.

            Likewise, the ads feature more eight-figure offerings than I knew existed – entire islands on the Georgia seacoast, 1,000-acre Montana ranches, and hilltop Napa retreats (complete with working vineyard).

            One time a couple years ago, “Mansions” ran a story accompanied by many photos about the home offices of a few CEOs. Suffice to say, these lairs were large and pretty plush, complete with massive antique desks, dark wood paneling, Oriental carpets, and magnificent views.

            The piece got me thinking about the public face of high profile executives and the implications of that image inside their organizations. Certainly leaders of successful and growing corporations are entitled to the generous remuneration their hard work and leadership might bring them. No one, least of all me, is going to begrudge them their well-earned wealth.

            Unfortunately, it’s the exceptions to the rule that get the most attention, raise the public’s ire, give fodder to grand-standing politicians, and impugn other CEOs’ personal lives: e.g., Bernie Ebbers of Worldcom, and Jeffrey Skilling of Enron, to name but two. And then there are the Larry Ellison types who vulgarly wallow in their wealth publicly. Unfortunately, these bad apples cast aspersions on other CEOs.

Role models

Company leaders and their behaviors on the job serve as important role models for how people within the organization should operate and think of their companies. On the other hand, CEOs’ private lives (and behaviors) off the job are out of bounds and not a matter of concern inside the company  – that is, unless the multi-million-dollar birthday party he threw for his wife in Tuscany is featured in mass media (i.e., Dennis Kozlowski, ex-CEO of Tyco).

            In these kinds of cases, we’re in different territory and a CEO’s private life is public, as they apparently wished, and therefore open for critique.

            Jet set behavior, high profile public affairs and divorces, arm candy girlfriends, immense yachts, or palatial mansions featured in places like Mansion, Country Living, People, TMZ, Inside Edition, or the society pages of major newspapers present to all the world images of people of substantial means gleefully living life to its fullest.

            But that kind of public behavior also creates an image and effect inside the CEO’s company that may be less than ideal. It should also give pause to all corporate leaders and boards. For instance, imagine what life was like within Tyco for the other members of the leadership team working to build a sense of common mission among all employees, while their showboating CEO’s very public activities became the butt of late night comedy jokes and, ultimately, Congressional hearings, criminal investigations, trials and convictions.

            The typical hard-working employee, ardently striving to do his job well and meet or exceed his targets hopes for an occasional “thanks,” “atta boy,” or perhaps even a bump in pay, bonus, or promotion. What impact does a fast-living, high profile CEO have on his attitude about the company and how he operates going forward? Should he care? How does he feel about his modest 5% raise while his CEO is pulling down a $100 million salary, plus bonuses and stock options?

            One could argue that the life being led by a successful and highly visible CEO might serve as a model to which employees can aspire: hard work and dedication to helping the company succeed might ultimately pay off with such a life for themselves – after one dedicates years of hard work contributing to the company’s success, climbing the corporate ladder in the footsteps of the incumbent CEO.

The CEO’s burden

No one is kidding anyone: the CEO bears a massive responsibility for which he/she is handsomely rewarded. But, as already noted, the CEO needs to be ever mindful of how his/her external public image is being perceived inside. A CEO’s involvement in community organizations or charities is good, especially when such activities underline and reiterate the company’s own choices for community outreach and enhance its image in its markets.

            And there’s nothing wrong with enjoying the fruits of one’s success with one’s family in a large home in an upscale community, with the kids enrolled in private schools, and Aspen ski vacations – provided it’s done privately and not flaunted publicly.

            It’s the plush home office or the seaside summer estate paraded in mass media that creates a different and not altogether positive aura inside the organization that the CEO would be wise to avoid. And what’s worse is when that image is magnified and worsened internally by an attitude of aloofness and indifference toward employees within the CEO’s company.

            That kind of disconnect between a CEO and his company leads to disaffected employees. Eventually, the better ones begin to migrate away from the company to competitors, while the remainder toil away joylessly in the shadow of a showboating CEO. At the end of the day, that company will not thrive. In fact, it’s on a fast track to self-destruction. Ask yourself where Enron, Worldcom and Tyco are today.

Contagious Passion Fuels Success

 Entrepreneurs launch new companies on the foundation of their novel ideas. Yet no matter how groundbreaking that idea may be, it won’t succeed in the marketplace unless that person believes in it with a passion that evolves into an all-consuming dedication and commitment.
      But what exactly is “passion” in that context? If you’re an opera buff, you know how thrilling it is to hear a great aria. But why is it thrilling? The same is true with a great performance by a blues or jazz musician, which can be just as spine tingling as any opera.
      We get swept away by great music because of the passion it stirs within us – the passion written into the music by the composer and the passion of the performance that brings that music alive. If you witness great music in concert – be it jazz, opera, blues, rock, or classical – you can see how totally absorbed the performers are in the music, often with eyes closed. The music carries them away, and they carry you with them.
      It’s the passion.
 
Meet my friend, Mrs. Inches
When I visit the American Wing of Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts, I always look for John Singer Sargent’s 1887 portrait of Mrs. Charles E. Inches (Louise Pomeroy) on the third floor. The first time I saw the 34” x 24” portrait, it stopped me in my tracks. I felt that I knew this woman, even though I knew nothing about her beyond her name. With each subsequent visit, she is an appointment for me. Why am I so transported by this 129-year-old painting?
      I believe it’s because of the passion that Sargent was able to pour into the portrait, the passion in his understanding of and appreciation for Mrs. Inches, and his ability to accurately capture her mood, intelligence, and emotion. It’s all there on the canvas for us, generations later, to enjoy and ponder.
      Mrs. Inches was a beautiful woman and an ideal subject for Sargent. But to achieve a portrait of such beauty and insight, he also had to capture the inner woman – which I believe is most apparent in her eyes, in her modest, seemingly absent-minded gaze. Sargent’s talent was such that he was able to put his awareness and understanding of her onto the canvas. Despite all his skill, however, without his passion, it would not have been half the painting it is and would not evoke passion in viewers to this day.
      None of these great works of art – the opera performance, the jazz or blues concerts, or the oil portrait – is possible without that commitment and dedication to the art, that fervor for the art.

Passion in business
In the case of business, that passion will be immediately evident and practically contagious when the entrepreneur with the original idea meets with investors, and when recruiting talented people who will help bring the idea to life. If you’ve ever met, dealt with or worked for such people, you know what I’m talking about.
      They are often several steps ahead of everyone else. In their presence, you feel like you’ve jumped on a runaway train. Their activities seem those of a fanatic, a sometimes erratic one. Their sense of urgency is palpable. It seems they never sleep or take time off.
      Recall the founding story of Microsoft, how Bill Gates quit Harvard as an under-graduate to act on his idea of a computer operating system. He left without a bachelor’s degree because he feared he was too late and that someone else with the same idea would beat him. The ensuing months and years consumed him as he spent countless hours inventing and writing code, while seeking investors and talent to bring it to fruition. Ultimately, he and the team he built birthed MS-DOS, the basis for the up-until-then unheard-of PC industry.
      Whether entrepreneurs succeed in bringing their ideas to market is, to a large extent, contingent on their ability to transmit their passion to others, to make it contagious – like a virus. Employees, partners, investors and customers sense that passion. They understand, and then develop a yearning to be associated with it, in turn, spawning a similar passion and loyalty to an idea.
      Such organizations are rare, and few last beyond the tenure of their founder. As that company matures and the initiator moves on to other things, succeeding generations of leaders and managers must have the same founding passion for excellence and innovation that created the company. Their ability to keep the organization thriving and growing with more groundbreaking ideas, in turn, is contingent on their ability to invest employees with that same passion – ad infinitum.
      In some cases, the founder must come out of retirement, reassume the leadership mantle and revive their foundering companies. Two cases in point: Charles Schwab came back to his eponymous company, as did Howard Schultz to Starbucks, both to right those listing ships and re-inject their founding visions and passion.
      What traits do Schultz and Schwab share? I dare say they have the same talent, at base, as Sargent, Gates, et al: an uncanny ability and passion for one’s art to such a degree that it is contagious, that it tingles spines and instills enthusiasm in other people.
      Success in business, then, is ultimately contingent on keeping the passion of genesis alive, both within the founder, and the successor teams.

Dealing with Negative Glassdoor.com Reviews

With the advent of the Internet and explosion of social media, people now have a plethora of outlets to expound on all aspects of their lives. In some instances, they can do so behind the mask of anonymity. One area of increasing concern to many in the corporate world are websites like Glassdoor.com, which provide job seekers with insights into companies they may be considering for their next jobs.
      These insights are only possible because current and former employees can anonymously post their salaries and commentaries about what it’s like to work there.
      More often than not, those commentaries are negative, even for organizations that do well in “Best Places to Work” type surveys. Because websites like this enable individuals to vent their frustrations and disappointments incognito, it’s not surprising that the site tends to attract more negative commentary than positive.
      After all, on the flip side, people who are happy with their employer and their jobs have little reason to go out of their way to post a review saying so. Contributors to Glassdoor’s reviews are self-selecting in that way and, like online polls, the collective impression they leave cannot be considered a scientific sampling or an accurate reflection of the true internal state of the organization.
      Meanwhile, company leadership is often puzzled and frustrated to read negative commentary that runs contrary their own experiences, especially when they believe they are making the necessary investments in people and work environments to help ensure that theirs is a great place to work.

Considerations
That’s not to say that the criticisms should be ignored or belittled. But there are a number of factors in any given situation to consider before determining the most appropriate response:

• Calendar – Consider all the posts in the context of the calendar. Do the more negative comments occur around the same time? Does that coincide with internal turmoil and change? For instance, was there a leadership shake-up or mass layoff? Were your financials down and, as a result, expected bonuses and raises/promotions not forthcoming? If so, then consider the commentary a temporary anomaly. However, as the internal situation improves, make sure that the negative commentary dies down, too.
• Consistency – Look for consistencies (and inconsistencies) in the commentary. Do the same words and phrases recur? Are any of these words and phrases familiar to you? Have you heard them in office gossip or exit interviews? Do they seem accurate? Or are they just plain false? Nevertheless, if they are untrue and misleading but are repeated on the site, that in itself is noteworthy. Perhaps commenters are merely echoing what’s been said before, but maybe not. Consistency can also mean that something is amiss.
• Location – Weigh commentary from different locations and see whether they differ or are similar. Does one location seem to garner more negativity than all the rest? What’s going on there? Have there been any difficulties related to local management turnover or other local factors?
• Survey – Compare the commentary with what you’ve learned in any recent internal employee surveys, particularly verbatim comments, if your survey invited them. Does the Glassdoor.com commentary align with the commentary gleaned from the surveys? If you find consistency of criticism among the posts similar to the comments found in your survey, then your challenge is clear-cut, and your response should be too.

Refute the Falsehoods
Tempting as it may be, it would be unwise to engage in an online debate with the critics. Sure, you should respond to and refute outright falsehoods on the site, but focus most of your energies on engaging your internal audience directly. Start by making open discussions about these types of criticisms a regular part of leadership’s formal and informal encounters with employees.
      If you’re not doing it already, consider adding monthly or twice-monthly casual lunches or breakfasts with a dozen randomly selected employees with the CEO or other members of the leadership team. Use the opportunities to directly cite the criticisms mentioned on Glassdoor.com and/or employee surveys. Ask about employees’ personal experiences and whether they find the critiques fair.
      You may not get total openness initially, but keep at it. Even if no one in the room confesses to sharing those doubts, the fact that leaders are showing sincerity in asking about these issues will spread quickly and hearten employees who may have doubts about the organization. Meanwhile, your everyday internal communications should directly and indirectly address the issues being raised in the negative commentaries, and in so doing, indicate your awareness of the problems and your desire to do something about them.
      In a similar vein, if your Glassdoor.com reviews show a concentration of negativity at a single location, you’ve gained a new insight you may not have known about. Focus your energies there. Senior leadership needs to get a better understanding of the gaps at the site – whether it’s a matter of poor local management or other factors – and address them directly. It would also be helpful for senior leadership to be more visible at the location in the near term to help bring listening, communications and understanding to bear on the situation.
      If, on the other hand, you find the criticisms inconsistent and often out of left field, it’s probably safe to relax, no matter how negative they may seem. Remember that there are complainers in every crowd and you’ll never make everyone happy. Just be sure to continue monitoring the commentary while, at the same, investing time and energy in engaging your employees consistently, regularly and honestly.
      Lastly, don’t panic. Let’s remember that the purpose of Glassdoor.com is to help prospective employees get a better feel for the company they are considering joining. Most people who include Glassdoor’s services in their job hunt know how to read between the lines of negative commentary.