We recently worked with a client who made extraordinary improvements to their workplace culture. It was driven from the top, its lead was an Executive and the subject become an agenda item on Executive weekly meetings for over 3 years. It took the subject very seriously. They didn’t treat it as a fad or a tick box exercise and in their external assessments, demonstrated an improvement in both morale and engagement year on year for that three year period. The organisation was highlighted as best practice within their sector with people recognising and experiencing the improvements. The had every reason to be proud of themselves.
Workplace culture was given its rightful place, not as a programme of work with a start and finish date but at the centre of the organisation that was the ‘corporate glue’ that held it together. They were building resilience and at the genesis of a journey to being able to adapt to whatever change came their way – which was always guaranteed to happen.
Then the leader in post changed and during the interim period of the old one leaving and new one starting, the politics of positioning began. The focus and approach to developing and improving their workplace culture was so successful that people who were not ‘leading on it’ saw the initiative as “this culture stuff is beginning to take over the world” – and during the interim period, moves were made to sideline those who had significant involvement and traction in culture development. The new leader then took over and they had not seen or experienced what had gone on before. At the same time, circumstances outside of their control began to seriously impact on resilience and morale and in a very short space of time it began to crumble. The most recent independent assessment highlighted the failing to drive what they had started forward and they were suffering the consequences of such inactivity. Unfortunately momentum had been lost and interest across the workforce had been decimated. The original challenge was that nobody takes this stuff seriously that was originally overcome was now raising its head again.
The focus on monitoring the health of the organisations culture had abruptly come to an end. The individuals and therefore the muscle memory had quickly been refocused before an effective handover had taken place and attention became more on process and transactional work and no longer on the ‘pink and fluffy’ stuff. Worst still, employees immediately assumed that ‘this culture’ stuff was not a priority and the journey they had begun was all a waste of time.
In over 20 plus years working in this field, I am both continually amazed and somewhat disheartened at the difference that exists in the relationship between leadership and the subject of workplace culture. Some get it, some don’t and some see it as something to support their wider personal ambitions by making a name for themselves. You are not necessarily invested in something just because you give it to someone else to do!
Those leaders around them play the game of being interested but appear wary of the amount of light being shone on others if workplace culture development is being successful.
The silly internal politics and point scoring is a cultural trait that has seriously negative implications, not lease the creating of highly negative unwritten rules that sit below the surface and influence behaviour and decision making.
Yet workplace culture is so much more. It literally underpins success or failure. It directly impacts on reputation, it helps with efforts to keep people happy during their working day or makes them thoroughly miserable and just wanting to tun up, do their job and get home. It is a well-researched and known fact that culture and leadership are intrinsically linked and that the behaviours leaders tolerate and display shape the culture. By overseeing a reduction in commitment to workplace culture they signal that they do not see it as important. Commitment is not the same as the amount of resource. Being true to your principles and values are not resource dependant. Commitment to wanting a workplace culture that maintains or improves individual morale should not be an item on the resourcing agenda but a leadership focus that becomes more than a project of work for the HR department.
Our approach to supporting the development of workplace culture is very much focused on sustainability for the organisations we work with. Ultimately it requires the organisation to continue on the journey we help them start. This should see the health of workplace culture regularly monitored at a variety of levels and continual engagement and dialogue across the workforce to tackle any looming or predicted issues early
If workplace culture has been a programme of work in your organisation, consider who lead it, why it was done and was it a quick fix that had a shelf life? More importantly, will the focus be or has been maintained or does that purely rely on personalities?
Does a focus on the health of your workplace culture and any positive activities to improve it sit at the core of what you do – regardless of whether individual leadership comes and go?
An organisations culture, and all it entails can potentially impact adversely for many years after they have gone.
Richie Maddock is a Founder and Managing Director of Lynchpin & Associates Ltd, a transformation and change consultancy that specialises in putting workplace culture at the heart of business success.
Operating for over 20 years supporting organisations from all sectors, Lynchpin have deployed their ‘Culture by DESIGN’ methodology with demonstrable and practical success when helping organisations with their agile aspirations. www.lynchpinsolutions.co.uk
