Bringing Ethics into Your Leadership Strategy

In recent years ethics in business have been studied more closely. With what seems to be increasing opportunity to behave unethically in business, costing credibility of the company, its individuals, and innocent bystanders, what are the checks and balances to ensure moral behavior? 

The dynamic at play is of unique consequence; laws have been implemented to insist upon certain transparencies and practices, e.g., penalizing the act of bribery or inflation of revenues. Yet, according to the National Business Ethics survey, employees – or members of the organization – on whom society relies for whistleblowing, are consistently silenced for fear of employer’s retaliation. With this knowledge, researchers seek to understand what influences individuals to behave ethically.

In sorting through the data, I think the most helpful insights are as follows: individuals rely on their judgment about an ethical issue but place more importance on social expectations. Meaning, when social consensus is high (agreement that something is unethical) individuals more often than not follow suit – e.g., charitable behavior is “good.” This shared behavior can supersede the self-view, acting as a motivator to behave ethically. (If interested in the full study by Albert, Reynolds, and Turan, 2015, I will gladly make it available to you.)

The reason this matters: societies – and micro-societies (your office) can drive and influence behavior. Knowing this, I wanted to look for how. How can we make sure we are leveraging ethics as a culture-driver?

It’s two-fold. Companies have an opportunity to incorporate their values into decision-making. Further, the company values should align with ethical expectations. In fact, researchers emphasize the importance of trust and trustworthiness as a guiding principle. After additional research by Hoover and Pepper (2015), it was found the practice of sharing ethics statements, publicly, increased approval ratings both externally and internally.

Sure, anyone can conjure up an ethics statement, but it circles back around to the essentiality of using frameworks every day. The example I often return to is the importance of a vision statement. This isn’t merely a statement. It needs to be the leading force and the guiding light behind every employees’ behavior. From an ethical perspective, leaders have an opportunity to integrate a complementary ethics statement. (Just in case there is any uncertainty about how a person should behave!)

The goal is to enable each person to take responsibility for their decisions, irrespective of the existence of a formal organizational hierarchy. This ownership mentality – guiding employees to do the right thing – helps decrease the fear of retaliation for the expectations are ubiquitous. This, in turn, creates commonality among team members and social expectation which, as the research tells us, influences others through social consensus.

Changing "Me First," to You, First.

It’s a “me first” society. I’d even argue our self-centered approach is worsening; from entitlement, to straight up narcissism, the absence of humility and selflessness is becoming systemic. It’s finding ways into every corner of our lives, including the workplace.

Robert Greenleaf crafted the phenomenon of servant leadership over 40 years ago. Empirical research has since been completed to identify not only what servant leadership should ideally be, but what it looks like in practice.

I am a proponent of not only adopting the behavioral components of servant leadership but honestly believe the ripple effect of servant leadership is incomparable.

Servant leadership is about others. From attentive listening to empathizing and nurturing, servant leadership focuses on developing each person’s full potential. From my viewpoint, the most powerful part of servant leadership is the desire to put followers first, empowering them in the process.

I am not saying you should forget about your needs, but instead, understand the principles of servant leadership to grasp the associated benefit (for you and for others!). One of the critical elements of servant leadership is ethical and sustainable behavior. Meaning, servant leaders not only lead with ethics as the cornerstone of their decision-making, but make an exerted effort to be concerned for those with less fortune. Are there inequalities and injustices in the workplace? As a servant leader, your goal is to try to remove them; this transcends beyond daily leadership and into global influence.

The essential piece to servant leadership is the ability to empower. As a leader, you shift authority to those you are leading. Helping team members be self-sufficient and make decisions on their own builds followers’ confidence. Sharing control is monumental. How do leaders lose their way? Power. Control. Egocentrism. By providing freedom and encouragement to employees to handle difficult situations, they buy into the notion that their decisions affect others. As a result, he or she become motivated and accountable members of the organization.   

The focus here is on the leader’s behaviors; the north stars are empathy, placing followers’ needs first, helping followers succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating value for the community. Why is servant leadership worth investigating? Outcomes of servant leadership include an increase in follower performance and growth, improvement in organizational performance, and societal impact.

Having a deeper understanding of servant leadership allows you to determine if this approach is right for you. If you’re interested in testing your current servant leadership capabilities, send me a note.

Recruitment & Leadership Pairing: An Approach for Employee Retention

I recently conversed with the owners of Exploration People, Melinda Williams and Jennifer Gould. Their expertise in placing talent within the eCommerce vertical enabled our paths to cross quite naturally. Upon reflection of our conversation and the undeniable necessity of strong talent acquisition, it got me thinking: How do recruitment professionals and leadership consultants work together to help companies create an ideal workforce?

Management consulting and recruitment specialists are mutually exclusive; yet, we are in the business of people. These functions are more closely linked than what first meets the eye.

Both work streams are responsible for technical capability; where I am responsible in assessing leadership theory appropriately and using my rolodex of knowledge to prescribe the issue and, with it, implement programming to improve situations, recruiters are responsible for thoroughly understanding the scope of the position as well as the mechanical skill-sets the candidate must possess. Just as the technical components are essential, so too are the relationships that are built along the way. The ability to understand people – truly comprehend motivations, limitations, potential, and possible blind spots – is really where our work comes in.  As I said, we are in the business of people.

We sat down to discuss. I wanted to learn why candidates – from the lens of recruiters who have dedicated time to proper vetting – stay with companies. The results are unsurprising, and business owners will be served well to take note.

Value

Value is identified as one of the three components that must be taken into account for a retention strategy. Jennifer and Melinda are frequently asked by candidates how the companies for which they are interviewing value their people.

Value comes in different forms – from salary to other rewards, and of course, recognition. While wage needs to be commensurate with industry standards, I have found it’s often not about the salary alone. It’s about the culture within the company.

Take this example: person one (1) works for company ABC and earns 20% more than another person, person two (2), who works for DEF. Person 1 is never thanked, seldom recognized, and morale is low. Person 2, while earning less, is regularly recognized by their boss for a job well-done, is trusted to accomplish the work, and is appreciated for who they are and how they contribute to the company. Unsurprisingly, they are more motivated to come into work, and the 20% difference in pay is a moot point.

Companies need to be able to answer these questions in the interview process:

1. How is change handled and communicated?

2. What is the corporate culture? Not the marketing words associated with mission and vision, but what are the actual values of the people within?

3. What type of recognition and rewards can be expected?

Growth

In my climate assessments, a key piece of feedback received is about upward mobility. What is the path to further achievement and what potential is there for growth? Without these discussions being held regularly, professional paths are ambiguous. This leaves employees feeling bored or “stuck” and limits longevity.

Companies may have grand plans for an employee, but if they aren’t discussed, documented, and action-oriented, the employee may leave never knowing there was the positive intent.

Regular reviews must be a part of the business framework; not only to discuss performance but to discuss potential and professional development. Further, feedback doesn’t always need to be scheduled. Encourage managers to speak with team members about aspirations and performance regularly. This allows corrections to be more fluid and enables plans for the future to be actualized, not just discussed.

Autonomy and Flexibility
In saving the best for last, Melinda and Jennifer find independence and flexibility to be the most common theme that is discussed with candidates. A common mistake that managers make is to keep their grip too tight. Instead of empowering employees, they think their control will produce better results. (This micromanagement can, and should, be undone!)

A common fear that candidates possess is whether or not they will be trusted to do their jobs. This goes back to the cultural framework as well as the coaching and self-awareness that is needed for managers.  If the person is a top performer but is never allowed to work from home, and this is something that adds value to their life, employees will feel mistrusted, and this leads to an absence in motivation. Giving a good employee space and flexibility to do what they were hired to do speaks volumes.

A Strategic Combination
The recruiter’s new reality? A desire to place candidates in workplaces where cultures are encouraging, dynamic, and free of toxicity. To me, these means the necessity to invest in organizational development, and personal development has never been higher. The interconnectivity between recruiters and leadership consultants, too, is an apparent fit. How I support people within organizations to become the best versions of themselves contributes to the overarching retention strategy. If we can correct fundamental issues, such as the aforementioned top three, candidates will be eager to evolve with their company. The people companies seek, and Melinda and Jennifer look diligently to uncover, will be a very worthwhile investment.

As such, the power-packed approach of engaging the right talent – Melinda and Jennifer’s part – and enabling candidates’ success through organizational change and development – my part – is undoubtedly well-aligned.

Globalization: The Dimensions of Culture in Your Workday

Last week I said I would delve into some elements that contribute to workplace conflict. The root cause is more often than not an absence of communication.  Under that, though, there are cultural elements at play. This makes communication all the more challenging. Social norms and cues are not only interpreted differently, they have wholly different meanings.

To help your empathy levels increase (essential to creating a culture of respect) here are some cultural structures that will serve you well to understand. Keep in mind there will always be scales of these concepts. The more you learn about your team and work environment, the more you can adjust your ability to see there isn’t a “right” and a “wrong.” Sometimes, it’s as “simple” as the fact there are different perspectives of and around the world. Social psychologist Geert Hofstede studied these five cultural dimensions at length.

Individualism vs. Collectivism

Individualism focuses on one’s own interest. The priority lies with the singular person alone. Macro cultures of individualism include the U.S. and Canada. Collectivism, on the other hand, reflect feelings that the group or society should receive top priority. Some societies that follow this notion include Greece and Hong Kong.

Power Distance

Power distance reflect the extent to which members of social system accept the notion that members have varying levels of power. High-power (HP) distance suggests that leaders make decisions simply because they are leaders. HP examples include France, Japan, and Spain. Low-power (LP) distance suggests that social system members do not automatically acknowledge the power of a hierarchy. Examples of LP include Germany, Ireland, and the U.S.

Uncertainty Avoidance

Low uncertainty avoidance is reflected by people who accept the unknown and tolerate risk as well as unconventional behavior(s). Countries with low uncertainty avoidance include Canada, Australia, and U.S. Whereas high uncertainty avoidance is characterized by people who want predictable and certain futures e.g., Israel, Italy, and Japan.  

Masculinity – Femininity

A masculine culture emphasizes assertiveness and the acquisition of money or material objects. It’s also coupled by a de-emphasis on caring for others. Unsurprisingly, when compared to above cultural trends, Italy and Japan fall under the masculine identity. Femininity, however, places high importance upon personal relationships: from concern for others to high quality of life. (You guessed it! Some examples include Sweden, Denmark, and Norway.)

Time Orientation

There are two forms of time orientation: long-term and short-term. Long-term is characterized by a long perspective – you’re focused on the future. You value persistence, perseverance, saving, and being able to adapt. Conversely, short-term is when you are focused on the present or past and consider them more important than the future. Short-term is also characterized by seeing value in immediate gratification - yet importance in tradition and fulfilling social obligations.  

The examples included hereto are to demonstrate the stark differences from nation to nation. While a macro perspective, these nuances and variance among us can be just as distinct, even if two people grow up down the street from one another. Think of someone you work with whom you find yourself at odds with often. Now take these dimensions into account. What did you discover? Understanding how our counterparts view view the world is a just a piece of the communicative puzzle, but it’s a great place to start.

Concepts and terms gathered by Peter G. Northouse: Leadership Theory and Practice.