Organizational Phrogs

Years ago, Jerry Harvey, professor of organization behavior at the George Washington University, wrote a piece in the OD Network newsletter discussing "Organizational Phrogs." Jerry is one my favorite authors. He is well known for the Abiline Paradox, Group Tyranny -- the Gunsmoke Phenomenon, and the Asoh Defense. Jerry's sense of humor has always made learning a lot of fun for me.

Now, what is the topic all about? Jerry chose the ph spelling on purpose. In his view, frogs do not like to be called frogs. They prefer to mask their identity and to blend in the landscape. They are masters of camouflage. They eat insects. Frogs usually come out at night and, although they cannot be seen, their mating calls can be heard. Some frogs come in very unusual colors -- they are few in number -- and use their unique coloring to warn predators that they are poisonous. As amphibians, frogs are equipped with a latex kind of skin to protect them from the water. On a full moon, the reflection can give away their camouflage. They live in ponds or by rivers. They are nocturnal.

I am taking some liberties with Jerry's work to illustrate what I have come to witness inside contemporary organizations.

Organizational phrogs do exist and thrive. As their counterparts in the wild, they like anonymity and they like to blend in the background. They feast on gossip and they augument the organizational chatter by spreading rumors, back biting, and badmouthing their colleagues. They can also be great brown-nosers by charming superiors with their professed loyalty, ideas, and "by-the-way" dialogue. On a bright night, their shiny skin might give them away and make them targets. A few of them can be outright venemous, evil in their intent. Their unique coloring warns others about their letal poison.

In my entire career, I have encountered less than half a dozen of this rare breed. But when I have witnessed them, I have discovered that they can do much damage.

Phrogs do have a place in the organizational ecosystem.

Their whisper fills the night's silence. Their mating call attracts others of the same kind and breaks the daily monotony. Together, they comprise a community of practice -- self serving, often injurious to others' careers. Unchecked, they can become a nuisance and a health hazzard. They feast on "bad" information, and they gain energy from one another's speculations. Containing rather than eliminating them is needed. Exposing them will dimish the harm they might inflict.

Have you seen any phrogs in your organization?
How would you chracterize them?
How do you deal with them?

A Few Comments About Change

Change is the norm in our lives. Economic, political, social, and/or personal factors drive it. One question I am repeatedly asked regarding organizational change is: Is all change good? I welcome your pondering about this question and to share your answers with me.

Now let me share my answer with you. Change is desirable whenever we are dissatisfied with the status quo or when our survival is at stake. In my view, change without improvement is pointless. To give change meaning, it has to improve performance (growth) and/or it has to ensure survival.

Now, change is not easy.

Organizations, just like human beings, prefer predictability and familiarity. Like human beings, organizations can fall into habits and patterns over time that can be hard to change. With change, things tend to become unpredictable and unusual. Scary, if you will. Change requires us, as Bill Bridges teaches us in his book on Transitions, to let go of the status quo (ending) before we can start a new beginning, and in between these two points we have to travel the uncomfortable zone called the "neutral" zone, neither here nor there, so to speak.

In Silicon Valley there is an expression that made quite an impact on me as young professional: To stay still is to fall behind. Meaning, your competitors might overtake you and leave you behind. So if an organization is stuck and unable to change and adapt, it risks the likelihood of losing its competitive edge. This principle applies to our career management process. If we stop growing technically and personally, we risk losing any marketable advantage we might have. Lifelong learning is not just a slogan but a strategy for career advancement.

Organizations also need to always live to fight another day. They need to have the opportunity to renew themselves, to become better. The landscape is full of carcasses where organizations were not able to do so and as a result had run out of time. Change indeed can provide organizations the ability to at least fight another day. It is sad to see the icons GM and Chrysler run out of time, possibly to be rescued by the Federal government.

In closing, my premise is that organizations who know how to manage change have a competitive advantage because they know how to do it well. A subject I will discuss in a future blog.

Let me hear from you.

Resizing the Workforce

In the July 1, 2002 issue of the Journal of Business Strategy, Barbara Davison wrote the article "The Difference between Rightsizing and Wrongsizing." She goes on to quote me: "Cutting staff is a common response during economic downturns, but if staffing plans are not linked to the business strategy, rightsizing can go badly wrong."

I had forgotten this interview. So here are some questions for you to ponder:

What are the best ways to right size an organization? Why are they best?
What are the worst ways to right size an organization? Why are they the worst?

During the current economic downturn, to stay financially viable, organizations will surely need to get on the treadmill. It is a time to shed the fat organizations accumulate during the glory years. It is a time to confront performance issues ignored for a long while. It is a time to optimize resources, to get the biggest bang for the money. Getting on the treadmill should improve the organization's cardio-vascular system. You get in shape. You get healthier, and you feel better. You also can run faster and for a longer period of time. You are not only leaner but also more agile.

So managers are told to review their headcount and make adjustments. Often managers have little or no experience in rightsizing. The focus on headcount rather than skills or dollars and cents does not help either. Instructions from upper management might be sketchy.

Righsizing involves redesigning the organization for a variety of reasons: (1) improving profit margins, (2) in anticipating lower demand, (3) capitalizing on technological innovations, (4) streamling operations, and/or (5) eliminating duplication or non-value added activities.

Redesign should start with the end in mind, and that end must be clearly and properly communicated throughout the hierarchy. Sound change management processes must be in place too.

Some indicators of poorly executed resizing:

• The little guy gets the ax ... the driver, the office assistant, the mail clerk, the person at the bottom of the totem pole.
• Personal scores are settled ... when managers release people with whom they might have "bad blood" or with whom they have unfinished business.
• Those with different views get "purged" or sent to the "gulag", e.g., given undesirable assignments intended to drive them out of the company.
• The "untouchables" stay, even though they are not performing. Favoritism. Nepotism. Nationalism. Racism. Outright discrimination.
• The dollars saved are miniscule. the cost of acting is greater than the cost of not acting.
• Firing on one end while hiring the same people on the other end.
• Lack of focus on the core skills needed to run the business successfully.
• No clear appeal system in place to ensure due (fair and consistent) process.
• Outsourcing to partners who cannot do it better and at a higher cost to boot.
• Empires seem to be protected.

What are some other indicators that possibly are more important than those listed above? Your experience with this process?

An Important HR Dilemma

The very first principle of HR that I was exposed to in my junior year at the university when I decided to major in human resources has been with me for over 47 years. I have never forgotten it. It has always accompanied me when pondering or deliberating HR policy choices. Good HR decisions must meet the test of consistency, fairness and competitiveness.

So here is one dilemma.

Is it more important to be consistent rather than fair? Or, is it more important to be fair even though you cannot be consistent?

What are the consequences of chosing one over the other, if you have to?

I speculate that most line managers, especially those trained in the physical sciences, will tend to choose consistency over fairness. To them, consistency rules. Others, especially those trained in social sciences, might go in the other direction. I think that I am one of them. Why?

We say and believe that no two human beings are alike. We do know that people differ in their needs. We all accept that. But for one reason or another, possibly administrative expediency, we have adopted policies over the years that ignore individual differences and try to fit everyone in the same box. The famous Dilbert cartoon series has made its author rich. His cartoons often depict the evil HR Director in less than positive light. An artistic distortion? Perhaps!

One pay system for everyone, a travel policy by job role, the same benefits for everyone. There are exceptions, of course. We have special pay schemes for sales people. We have cafeteria plans that permit employees to configure their own benefit plan. We have flexible hours to accommodate family needs. And so on. But when it comes to issues of employee relations, we often try to solve an individual problem with a common solution. One size fits all?

I advance the unorthodox notion that fairness should trump consistency in employee relations matters. Fairness originates in our heart, in our emotional side, it is part of our soul, while consistency comes from our rational side. This side has no feelings. It operates like a machine without a soul. What good does it do us if our actions are perceived to be unfair but consistent? What deficits do we accrue if we choose to be fair but not necessarily consistent? Are all situations the same? Does the same medicine cure all ills? Is the world black and white or are there shades of grey?

I welcome your thoughts on this subject.

What Is Wisdom?

My good friend Cris Hagen suggested that I start my blogs with some questions for the reader to ponder, to let the "thinking juices flow." I have taken his good and much appreciated advice.

So get ready, get set, and go.

What is wisdom to you? How do you recognize it and differentiate it from dime-store psychology or fortune cookie advice? How do you find it in your job or personal life? Where do you look? Why do you look there?

Enough questions! We want to have fun here, not get a headache.

I was born in a part of the world where experience is revered and where elders are respected and honored for their wisdom. We looked to the elders to teach us and to share with us their travails and their wisdom. I have lived most of my adult life in a country that encourages the elders to move to retirement villages and to join other elders in the sunset of their lives. I submit to you that the latter shortchanges the learning opportunities of the younger generations and perpetuates the cycle of mistakes made.

As it has been eloquently said and I paraphrase: those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

In my journey as a consultant and executive I have concluded that the most dangerous people to our companies and indeed our society at large are people who do not know what they do not know. They are blind to the obstacles in front of them and they have no ear for the lessons learned. I have seen them do much harm and little or no good comes from their actions. I learned later in life to avoid them, to stay clear of them, and to not bother trying to reason with them. Cynical view? You bet! Ernest Hemingway said it well: life breakes you and makes you stronger in the broken parts.

The Bible in Ecclesiastes 7:12 teaches us that "wisdom keeps you safe -- this is the advantage of knowledge". Later on in the same chapter, the Bible continues "wisdom does more for a person than ten rulers can do for a city (7:19)."

What a wonderful way to succinctly communicate such powerful thoughts!

I have nothing else to add that would illuminate the subject further. Let me hear from you.

Gaffes Executives Make

We all have been, directly or indirectly, touched by mergers or acquisitions. We all have our ideas and feelings about them. What makes them successful or not?

I would like to hear from you. Specifically, I would like you to share with me the answers to these two questions:

What have you heard executives say in communicating a merger or acquisition to employees, that in hindsight, you think, it was "stupid" or "ill advised"?

What dumb things or gaffes did you see very smart people make?

Over the years, I have coached and advised executives regarding communication with their employees following a merger/acquisition. As part of the advice, I have urged them not to say or do anything that they might later regret.

For some reason or another, executives will say and do the opposite of what I have just advised them to do.

Here are my favorite gaffes:

... Nothing is going to change...
... This is a merger of equals ...
... There is a job for everyone ...
... We will select the best practices ...
... One plus one equals three ...

I am sure you have favorites too. I would like to hear from you about them.

What? nothing is going to change? This must be by far the stupidiest one. A merger or acquisition without change is inconceivable to me.

What? a merger of equals? Next to the the first one, this makes the top list. I have never seen this. Has anybody else? Of course someone will emerge as more equal.

What? there is a job for everyone? For some it will be on the unemployment line, for some else there might be a bigger job but quite a few will surely have a smaller one.

What? select the best practices? Sure, we will talk about them, this is part of the dance routine, but ultimately, people will gravitate toward the familiar and tried. Consultants love this dance. It has many billable hours.

What? one plus one equals three? We talk about synergy, we know its importance, and we might search for it. But it is an elusive goal that requires neutering big egos, listening to quite voices of reason, and letting go of petty personal agendas and preconceived ideas.

It has been copiously written that most if not all mergers end in some form of failure, that they do not achieve the intended results. It has also been found that one of the major reasons for failure is that different cultures cannot be easily harmonized. This might all be true, but to me, it all boils down to not forgetting what drove management to do it in the first place. For some unexplained reason, people will abandon logic and common sense at the door of the integration process.

I hope your experience has been different. I would like to hear better stories. Surely there are some.

Just A Start

This is my very first blog. I was encouraged by my good friend and colleague Tom Sherby to publish it. I hope to share snippets from my long career and my personal adventures. I have had a lot fun, and I hope that in a small way I have made a difference.

I recently retired from Zan Group as its Chief Human Resources Officer. The company is a leading telecom provider in 24 markets in Africa and the Middle East. Zain employs over 16,000 employees with over 100 nationalities. It has been a tremendous journey. Zain has a fearless leader at the helm and it strives to achieve a culture that engages and motivates people. I feel blessed for having had this opportunity.

Over the years, I have also had the opportunity to work in many countries: in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East and South East Asia. I also have had the privilege of visiting over 60 countries. We live in a wonderful world ... full of mysteries and beauty. You can see our Creator's magic hand all around you, in the mountains, in the lakes, in the rivers, in the mighty oceans, and in the many hamlets, small towns and cities that dot our planet. And, of course, in the people you meet ... black, white, yellow, brown, red ... it does not matter! We are all God's creation.

Born in Italy, I emigrated to the US at the age of 18. After serving in the US Army, I attended the University of Connecticut where I met my bride to be, a beautiful young woman of Greek descent from Palo Alto, California. We married at the end of the freshman year. She was barely 19 and I had turned 21 seven months earlier. We transferred to San Jose State University after we got married.

As an immigrant, I had humble goals-- to provide adequately for my family and to engage in work that would provide me with a challenge and the opportunity to learn.

People now tell me that I have lived the American dream ... successful career, financial independence, and respect from my peers and colleagues. America is indeed the land of opportunity (a land of immigrants) but my expectations were meager, just a yearning for learning and advancement.

So I start this blog with the goal of sharing some of my thoughts, reflections, and a few pet peeves. The latter is a luxury that you earn with age as you "awake from the hypnosis of social conditioning" (Deepak Chopra, M.D.). Someone has said that wisdom is experience plus mistakes made. Well, I have lots of experience and I have made many mistakes. I hope to share some lessons learned along the way.

I encourage those who read my blog to make their own mistakes because that is the best way to learn but not to necessarily repeat those mistakes I have made.