Toxic Places of Work & the Road to Redemption

Photo by Beth Jnr on Unsplash

There is no magic wand to miraculously wave away workplace toxicity, but there are actionable steps that can be taken to correct the course. 2020 has offered up challenges for employers and employees alike. From financial concerns to illness and future-state ambiguities, there were only one of two ways for toxic tendencies within workplaces to go. Toxicity was either brought to the surface, where the sunlight brilliantly exposed wrongdoing and dysfunction, or it was filtered out and left behind. The societal wake-up call(s) we’ve faced in the past six months -- one may even say a metanoia-like experience -- reshaped how organizational leaders chose to move forward. Many quickly got back on track without consequence (the “filter”), they knew time was up to be on the right side of history, taking into account equity, diversity, and overarching priorities. 

But not all are so lucky. 

There were organizations that exposed toxic behaviors and practices by happenstance, and yet proceeded in normal course and missed an opportunity. This spring there was a monumental moment in time to consider the current landscape, make changes, and proceed with a new North Star (crises can be good for that sort of thing). But perhaps these companies are now considering reworkings. They have lost too many valuable clients and employees, and are flailing in the water. What can these companies do? 

Acknowledge Deficiencies.

Workplaces with toxicity tend to have repeat offenses. If you are a leader, do the work: Why are people leaving? What is the consistent feedback loop? Why is there concern? This is the launchpad. Use this to admit to and recognize inadequacies. Shed light on areas of improvement as well as on the process for resolution.  

Re-engage: Actively Communicate & Revitalize. 

Effective communication is critical to the survival and success of any organization, regardless of location and size. Actively communicating goals, shortcomings, and progress around failures, demonstrates a commitment to change. Almost 75% of employees feel they do not receive consistent company communication from the organization for which they work. With a global pandemic, the necessity for companies to be even more communicative is at an all-time high. [I’m not suggesting you write daily books to employees - remember adults’ attention spans… A helpful tip: Employees are two times as likely to watch a video than read text.] 

Revisit the company vision and company values. Rework communication to incorporate these standards into the messaging. Keeping employees engaged during a period of correcting course makes them feel like a part of the process. Lean on this and dedicate the time to listening. Also, be cognizant of who is communicating these messages. Does the individual stand behind and embody the changes?

Universal Standard Setting 

If a company has admitted to shortcomings and is taking steps to improve the culture, it’s essential to set standards of excellence, especially for leaders. Revisit the code of conduct and make changes to it if necessary. Letting one incident slide turns into a slippery slope. All employees must be held accountable, regardless of seniority. Not addressing incidents is how toxic cultures fester. Some guidelines to ensure consistency include a) accountability, b) known consequences no matter how senior, c) offering employees a safe way to share their observations or concerns.  

First published on LinkedIn.

Flat Structures: Why They Work… Until They Don’t.

Flat structures have a special lure. “Come work for us, we have a flat organization.” It’s almost as if those words insinuate no explanation is needed! It’s a flat org! Get excited, people.  

In retrospect, the organizations I worked for that claimed they were flat, were in need of some serious direction, structure, and unit empowerment.

Structural options have less to do with the classification, and more to do with how companies interpret the benefits. Further, it has to do with how the organization wants teams to behave within their cohorts.

Let’s start with the types of organizational structure. The most often defined is a traditional hierarchy. This stems from the “modernized” working age that occurred in the industrial revolution. Even before that, though, the government emphasized the chain of command. The order was clear, and often age was associated with relevant experience. For a constantly changing global workplace, a one-size fits all approach is no longer good enough. New structures were considered for the evolving workplace. Flat organizations came to be, then flatter organizations, and then holacratic frameworks (to name the primaries).

The traditional hierarchy:

The traditional hierarchy maintain the bureaucracy many of us have learned to despise. The red tape of checks and balances remove the ability to get work done. Traditional hierarchies mute critical thinkers and, regretfully, empowerment suffers. In the process of minimizing productivity – coinciding with the speed to communicating – companies become less competitive. The ability to pivot becomes a memory of the past.

Some company owners fall into the traditional hierarchy without meaning to. And, as the company scales, no one stops to reconsider if the structure is supporting company goals. The first check and balance: Each year, look at the reporting lines and consider other frameworks. Is there another that better aligns with the goals of your organization?  

The Flat Structure:

I alluded to this – the flat structure has previously been seen as sexy. Here’s the thing: a true flat structure means there are no job titles, no seniority, no reporting formalities, no executives. Come one, come all, we are equal. So, if you’re reading this thinking, hmm, my company is “flat” but there are indeed seniors, executives, and clear titles, word to the wise: your org isn’t flat.

Some companies are able to make flat organizations work splendidly; if an employee wants to start their own project, then they are responsible for securing funding and building their team. In a way, they are part owners (without the equity). This takes ample trust. If you’re comfortable with this construct, proceed!

Most typically, flat organizations are doable with a young and small company. Think of it this way, when you start your company, you may be able to have everyone report to you. However, when there are 15-20 people on board (and still growing) there simply aren’t enough hours in the day for everyone to report to you. Your time will not be used efficiently, and you will end up working twice as long in the workday.

Holacratic:

The primary goal here is to empower and enable decision making. This term is best known thanks to our friends at Zappos. Holacracy has with it its own rules and guidelines; if you’re interested in a deeper look, check out this resource. The way I see holacratic structures is like this: reporting structures are in place, but rather than everyone rolling up, teams roll laterally or diagonally. Leaders are empowered to approve decisions in their respected areas, and every decision does not need to go up the ladder.

The truth is, any hierarchy that ensures empowerment will function very differently than bureaucracies as we know them. Structure helps maintain order and minimizes ambiguity. But, as conveyed, too much structure leads to a stifled and slow-moving work environment. If we look at structures as a tool for leadership development, we can reinvent how hierarchies are defined. Note: I find flatter organizations and holacratic structures have some some overlap. My preference? Take parts from each that work best for you.

At the root of all of this is people management, not organizational line management. If you want your workplace to be collaborative and dare to encourage creativity, as well as question the status quo, enforce a structure that promotes collaboration (flatter or holacratic structures) but doesn’t require only one, or few, people’s omnipresence (flat).  

Vision + Structure: For the Directionally Challenged

When you are driving to a place you’ve never been, you make sure you have directions. For most of us that means we are using our phone’s GPS, myself included. [I was raised to use and read a map, but learned quickly motion sickness ensues. Thank goodness I have this little technological wizard telling me where to go!] And that’s the point: we need to know where we are going. Without direction, we get lost, arrive late to our destination, or miss the opportunity all together.

Similarly, we need to know where we are going when it relates to our business and be aware of how we guide those who work within.  

Creating a vision.
A vision is a mental model of an ideal future state. Do you want your team to be functional and the depiction of strength? Or do you want a disjointed group of people running in oppositional directions?  

A vision plays a central role in many of the common theories of leadership. It’s the glue to an organization and its culture. A vision can be conveyed in a number of ways: through a picture, a significant change, value structures, a map with noted goals, or a defined challenge with correlated steps to conquer the feat!

How is a vision articulated and implemented?

• Adapt the vision to the audience.

  • Have the framework and know what you want – but portray it in a way your team(s) can hear you.

• Highlight the values of the vision.

  • Values drive us – they’re the intrinsic motivators that guide us to behave a certain way.

• Choose the right language (words) and symbols that are motivating and inspiring.

  • Remember, we all learn differently! Get creative.

• Walk the walk.

  • Do what you say and say what you do.

• Set expectations.

  • We keep coming back to this (it’s important). If your vision is the driving force behind your company – as it often begins, but your intent is to keep it that way – make sure your new hires embody the values you’ve put forth. Maintaining and reinforcing expectations will keep you on track for the output you desire.

Along with vision, comes setting the tone.  

Tone.
In order to do this, provide structure to your team members – almost like providing a blueprint. It gives meaning and a sense of security or direction. (Examples include a code of conduct or a company manual.)

Next, clarify norms and build cohesiveness.

Clarify Norms.
Norms are the rules of behavior that are established and shared by group members (e.g., starting meetings on time and staying on task). Sometimes we think norms are common sense – but they’re not! They need to be defined and articulated.

Once norms are defined, cohesiveness can prevail. It’s the “we-ness” of a group. It’s associated with consistency and is linked to increased participation, as well as better interaction. Better interactions yield higher innovation and encourage uninhibited creativity.

When we look at the journey of the vision as an overarching theme – with achievement at the end of the spectrum – we realize how essential all facets of this process are to an organization. Once the vision is firm and norms are defined, cohesion is underway but there’s still room for expressed and implied standards of excellence. In fact, there are six key factors essential for members to function effectively. These include:

• Skills

• Initiative

• Expectation of treatment

• Deadlines

• Goals

• Consequences  

If your team is struggling, assess whether you’ve reiterated the vision, the norms, and the expectations. Then look at the aforementioned list. What can you do to improve their contributions? Odds are there are multiple steps you can take (many included here!) to help lead your teams in a helpful, purposeful, direction.