When Leaders’ Words and Actions are Out of Synch

The higher on the corporate ladder managers are, the more likely it is that people will listen to and heed what they say. Not surprisingly, then, when CEOs and other business leaders say one thing but do another, the effect may not be to their liking.

      I’ve seen this first-hand more than once, the best example being a client company from a few years ago.

      We first met at an industry conference. He was head of employee communications for a mid-sized global professional services firm, and was sitting next me during a presentation on employee loyalty. I could see during the presentation that he was absorbed, but also looked troubled.

      At the coffee break afterwards, we introduced ourselves and traded business cards. Our small talk about the presentation we’d just heard provided a natural segue for him to tell me that his company was enduring an untenable attrition rate and poor loyalty among employees – both consultants and support personnel. His CEO was not happy about it and placed the blame on employee communications.

      When I offered my off-the-cuff ideas on the challenge, he listened and nodded thoughtfully. We then went our separate ways, to different presentations.

      I next heard from him about a month later when he called to ask me to meet with him and his communications team to discuss in greater depth the problems he’d mentioned to me at the conference. He thought an outsider’s perspective would be valuable.

Low Loyalty Scores

In addition to the unacceptably high attrition rates among the firm’s consultants, internal surveys indicated low loyalty scores as well as poor understanding of the firm’s mission. After an hour-long discussion where we offered some preliminary insights, the client engaged us to do some digging, and to prescribe a solution.

      Our investigation began the following week, and involved interviews with the CEO and his leadership team, managers, and the consultants who comprised the firm’s front-line team and chief earning power, as well as the various internal support people.

      After spending three intense and exhaustive days in interviews, we reviewed our findings and began working up prescriptive changes and recommendations.

      Though there were a number of potential issues, we readily discerned that the primary problem was that employees were hearing one thing from leadership but experiencing something else entirely different.

      In particular, a recurring theme heard from the CEO was his frequent comment, both verbally and in writing: “We can’t be afraid to step on toes. We must be able to criticize ourselves if we are going to improve.” But, in actual practice, employees told us that the opposite was true.

      In one example after another, we heard about people that had been honest about issues within the company and how they’d offered ideas to address them. But instead of praise from their managers, they had been punished or ostracized by managers and/or leadership.

      More than once, we were told about layoffs that often included people that had offered constructive criticism. It had happened too often to be a coincidence, many people said. In other words, leadership said it wanted self-criticism, but really didn't. They believed their own press and didn’t want to hear otherwise.

      In reaction, people initially began to clam up and keep their observations and ideas to themselves. But when that happened, a second result set in: the atmosphere became poisoned. Problems festered because “people were reluctant to step forward to point them or offer solutions for fear of being singled out as trouble-makers or complainers,” as one young man told me.

Stale Culture

The final effect was that the internal culture of the organization began to go stale. The better, more talented consultants started looking elsewhere for employment, hence the high attrition rates that were troubling the CEO. He knew he was losing good people, but didn’t realize he and his team were the cause.

      In short, our diagnosis said that the stumbling block was not an employee communications problem but rather one of leadership’s words and actions not being in synch. Our prescription, then, was not what the CEO was expecting.

      We requested and got a private meeting with him to tell him what we’d learned, playing back for him some of the comments his consultants had made. He was dumbfounded, and admitted that he didn’t realize he and his team were encouraging criticism while at the same time discouraging it.

      Fortunately for the firm, he responded assertively, immediately setting about personally taking responsibility for changing things. In the ensuing months, we worked with him, his leadership team, and the employee communications unit to re-establish an atmosphere of trust.

      The effort started small, with the CEO meeting with small groups of employees where he owned up to his inconsistencies, promising to open lines of communication and provide means to address the organization’s shortcomings.

      His out-reach efforts were underlined in internal media that spotlighted internal problems and detailed the solutions. Additionally, the media subsequently provided periodic progress updates, saluting the employees that had stepped forward with solutions.

      Over time, the CEO did improve internal trust. But it was time-consuming. Nevertheless, to his credit, he realized how critical it was to the future health and well being of the company, so he made it a priority and, by example, made sure his leadership team did too.

      Checking back with my client a couple years later, he told me he was pleased to report that attrition rates had leveled off and employee loyalty scores were rising. We later got a note from the CEO thanking me for our work, acknowledging the positive effect his change in attitude and approach had had.