Everyone wants to work at a quality company. Each of us wants to feel good about our place of employment and see our company's name on the "most admired" lists published each year. It's an admirable goal and the right thing for your employees. From a talent standpoint, it's critical. Attracting the best and brightest – those you can rely on for superior performance year after year – is not only a function of great recruiting on the part of the recruiter, but also a function of the company's reputation in the market place. Face it, it's easier to recruit for Google than for Countrywide Home Loans (voted wost company in America in 2008).
It's Not About the Big Stuff
When working with clients on ways to influence their employee behaviors and reinforce cultures, it seems that the first discussion is always about the "big" stuff – the program, the reward, the system. The client almost immediately wants to launch something with a splash and show the employees they mean business with their reward and recognition initiative.
I'm not against big launches, but what's really important is the little stuff – not the big stuff. I think we can take some direction from the "Broken Window Theory" (BWT). While still a bit controversial among social scientists and psychologists, I believe there is enough directional evidence that we should pay attention to it.
For those that are unfamiliar with the BWT – it probably got its best press during the Rudy Giuliani years…
Sweat the Small Stuff
When it comes to company culture and having a reputation that attracts and retains quality people, the small stuff is the important stuff. If the boss adds a little to the expense account, maybe the CFO adds a little to the balance sheet. If the person in the cube next to you treats a vendor poorly, then maybe that vendor adds a little extra to the invoice next time – or tells 100 people not to do business with you. In fact, in November, CBS on line had an article entitled "Bad Behavior Contagious, Study Finds" – highlighting some of the research on this phenomena. For me, steeped in social psychology and the impact of the social norms – it's a no-brainer. But most folks blow off the effects of small behaviors.
Keeping your eye on the small stuff is probably the single biggest thing a company can do to influence culture.
Some Comic Relief
When thinking about the Broken Window Theory for this post, it reminded me of a Demetri Martin bit… for your enjoyment…
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=c3220006-c1ec-4fc0-9fa3-71608bb69f87)
We have always counseled leaders that “you can’t escape the details” and have especially emphasized the point to senior leaders who are so easily tempted to let themselves get “above the fray” and rationalize their escape from details by saying they don’t want to be micro-managers. Nobody wants a micro-manager over his/her shoulder, but KNOWING about the details is quite different from micro-managing them like a tyrant. My best example of the rude awakening handed to such an “escaping leader” was the man who simply didn’t want to be concerned about OSHA implementations in his work areas, handed the task to a subordinate leader with sloppy habits, and then had to write a big check for a long list of fines after the inevitable failed inspection with employees refused to work in an unsafe environment.
While I don’t disagree with the overall sentiments of the article, one point to consider. The drop in crime rates in NYC (and elsewhere at that time in fact) according to the book Freakonomics had more to do with Abortion policy (Roe V Wade) than with cleaning up graffiti. I won’t go into the details of HOW, but suffice to say, the author had his reasons for stating this. Of course, the book is not the end all to the opinions of what exactly caused the drop in crime, but the point is that often what makes or breaks something (even windows) isn’t always known (it might be that weird neighborhood kid playing baseball again instead of afoiled robber). Anyway, to some degree the same it true with corporate culture. Most of our employees here have said they love it here, but most cannot put a finger on why. Eventually, they typically say it is the people they work with. So, is it the selection of the people that made a difference, or some other unknown (like the area of town we are in might have nicer people than other areas)? Or, is it the “culture” that management has put in place lets people act like themselves and others like that?
I don’t mean to say that we can’t influence culture, and focusing on some of the small things makes alot of sense. I’m saying, don’t assume you will be able to understand or even know ALL the factors that really influence your corporate culture.
GREAT BIT BY MARTIN, by the way…THANKS!
Great comments. Thanks.
Jim… you are spot-on. Having knowledge of the details – and letting employees know you have the knowledge and pay attention to it is critical to reinforcing culture. If the employees don’t think you know – then they assume you don’t.
Kim… I’ve been through the explanation on the crime statistics as presented by the authors of Freakonomics and you’re right – there are multiple things that affect those statistics. However, based on their explanation, crime statistics would only have gone down in those areas that had the problem initially, but crime went down city-wide – which would speak to both their explanation – and the fact that there was a new social norm at work – one that said we’re not putting up with any of this any more.
You’re own experience is that you have a great culture but can’t put your finger on it – it’s just the people. But I’d hazard a guess that if you asked the CEO she’d/he’d have an answer that was related to reinforcing the small contributions, never taking anything for granted and valuing the contribution of everyone. Just a guess.
The small stuff is critical!
One of those “small things” is employee selection. It continues to blow my mind to see organizations hire people who do not fit the job nor the organizational culture and then they attempt to rehabilitate them. Once rehabilitation is deemed to not work – they allow the employee to STAY and fester…
Hiring is NOT SMALL STUFF!
A “small thing” like a poorly executed hiring ecision leads to big consequences down the road… The gift that keeps on giving…
Regarding micro-management… To me, “micro-managing like a tyrant” is a symptom. That symptom is indicative of the wrong manager or the wrong employee.
On the other hand… As a manager… Micro-managing to ensure team members are living the mission/vision/guiding values consistently is called doing your job.
Your point would make sense, Kim, if the decline in crime rates in NYC matched the national decline, which is what Freakonomics discussed. In fact, the decline was far greater. And the credit should go to Bill Bratten and his predecessor Lee Brown as much if not more than to the mayor.
The so-called “little things” always matter. In fact, for most people in companies they are the stuff of everyday life. It’s also worth noting that the decline is the quality of life in neighborhoods and companies is often fairly slow, but turnarounds can be more rapid.
One manager friend of mine asked the people in the plant and office where he had taken over as manager what he could change that would make a difference. The answer turned out to be two things. Clean up the restrooms. And put up an awning outside so people could take breaks outside even if it was raining.
As Joel Wexler used to say, “Elephants don’t bite. It’s the little things that get you.”
Congratulations! This post was selected as one of the five best business blog posts of the week in my Three Star Leadership Midweek Review of the Business Blogs.
http://blog.threestarleadership.com/2009/01/07/1708-midweek-look-at-the-business-blogs.aspx
Wally Bock
Great post Paul! I’ve chosen your post as on of my Rainmaker ‘Fab Five’ blog picks of week (found here: http://www.maximizepossibility.com/employee_retention/2009/01/the-rainmaker-fab-five-blog-posts-of-the-week.html) to share your post with my readers.
Be well!