The Water Cooler is Empty – Social Has Replaced It

I’m amazed at how arcane companies are when it comes to social media.  Most view it as a direct threat to their authority.  Have these executives forgotten about the “water cooler” talk that formed the undercurrent of organizational communication?  Social media is the new water cooler but with some added advantages for those companies willing to embrace it.

Before the advent of social media, employees used hallway talk and the “rumor mill” to discuss their issues, complaints, and opinions.  Most of that talk centered around how ‘incompetent’, ‘idiotic’, … management was.  These discussions formed the foundation of the authentic communication within an organization.  Most of this talk remained within the employee underground.  On occasion, management would get a whiff of something in the air, but could rarely pin it down let alone address it.  Whispers around the water cooler are where people got their “real” information.  Rumor was the communication currency of those not plugged into management.  And management was often perplexed by what they observed in their organization because pinning down its source was nearly impossible.  The “employee channel” was a closely guarded, subscription-only service that management was not qualified to receive.

Enter social media.  Initially used largely for people to connect with friends and stay in touch, it has quickly evolved into an outlet to voice frustrations, opinions, and observations regarding the organizations people work in.  This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone since we don’t easily separate our lives into “personal” and “work” compartments.  We all share these thoughts with family and friends, and social media is now simply another means of doing so.  Certainly, hallway talk continues, but this new outlet offers yet another means of giving it voice.  As younger generations of workers fill company desks, this trend will only accelerate.  Many of these employees grew up in a social media world and it’s natural that they would use those means to communicate with others.

Here’s where companies miss the boat.  You don’t have to research much to find examples of companies and organizations scouring through employee social media accounts to learn what they may be saying about the company.  So far - so good.  However, what often happens is that people are disciplined, chastised, even fired for what they post.  How is this really any different than the water cooler?  These discussions have been happening since the advent of teams, but social media somehow makes this different?  The only difference now is that there is a "record" of the conversation where in the past, people could simply deny they ever said anything.  Companies should welcome this instead of looking to squelch it or punish the “perpetrators”.  There is now a more direct means of pinpointing where issues exist.  Without social media, many of these issues could persist for long periods of time only surfacing much later when the consequences are high and the remedies more difficult.

Social media should be viewed as transformative in the way organizations handle employee communication.  For once, there is a means by which companies can get a window into the talk around the water cooler.  Knowing what the chatter is allows management to address it.  It raises the volume on the whispers in the hallway and helps to eliminate the guesswork.  Instead of lambasting an employee for a social media outburst about their manager, companies should use it as a means of spotlighting problem areas before they escalate.  Bad managers cost companies money, but complaints often surface too late in the world of hallway talk and rumor.  Social media can serve to accelerate the process of identifying the problems.

So instead of companies using social media monitoring as a battering ram, they should consider its value as a window into their organization.  Savvy companies could even go so far as to sponsor such a resource internally, giving employees an anonymous outlet to let off steam.  Regardless, companies need to realize that social media is not going away and will only evolve and proliferate further.  Ignore it at your peril.  The sooner it is embraced as a positive, creative, and supportive resource, the sooner it will begin benefiting the company.  Want to keep good employees?  Give them a voice.  That voice increasingly includes social media, so get with the program!

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.

Exposing the Uncertainty Shadow

In a recent article, I addressed the uncertainty companies face in the current market environment and National fiscal dilemma (see http://connect2action.blogspot.com/2013/01/all-in-navigating-turbulence.html).  Ellsberg’s Paradox is potentially useful in understanding why many are choosing to wait until the fog clears.  The human tendency to avoid ambiguity and uncertainty sometimes defies logic.  When executives succumb to Ellsberg’s Paradox, they close out options and constrain creative thinking in ways that may not be beneficial.

The Ellsberg Paradox is often demonstrated with the following illustration.  Placed before you are two opaque jars.  Jar #1 contains 10 white and 10 black marbles.  Jar #2 contains 20 marbles but the ratio of black and white is not known.  The marbles in each jar are assumed to be well distributed.  You are asked to draw a black marble from either jar and if successful, you will be given $100.  Which jar do you choose to draw from?  Most will choose Jar #1 believing their chances are better even though in actuality they aren’t.  Your odds are essentially the same with either jar.  But there is a tendency to select from the jar where the proportions are known because of what is known as ambiguity aversion.  Let's face it, most of us don't like situations where the alternatives aren't very clear. 

So what does Ellsberg have to do with the uncertainty executives and leaders face today?  The key has to do with discipline and critical thinking.  First, additional research using the Ellsberg Paradox points to higher levels of activity in the amygdala when subjects face ambiguity or uncertainty.  This is important because it is the amygdala which is the base instinct part of the brain – our fight or flight response.  Therefore, when faced with two or more options where you may have more information with one over the others, the natural tendency is to flee to the one you know more about without logically considering the others.  This is where discipline is important.  You have to train and restrain the brain from jumping to a course of action too quickly.  In other words, pause, take a deep breath, and think!

Once you’ve been able interrupt the tendency to flee, it’s important to apply critical thinking skills to carefully evaluate the alternatives.  One of my favorite tools is the Cynefin framework.  This allows you to dissect the situation, classify it then use basic problem solving techniques.  Another popular and useful approach is TRIZ.  In addition to these, brainstorming and other problem solving tools may be equally relevant and useful.  Whatever approach you select, it’s important that you take the time to carefully explore and potentially experiment with the options.  This process actually reduces uncertainty and ambiguity not only pertaining to that option, but the entire situation.  In the end, you will be better equipped to make a decision having explored the alternatives.

For executives and leaders staring into the fog of uncertainty where traditional scenario tools and predictive analysis have failed, a new approach is warranted.  Sitting on the sidelines waiting for the fog to lift is a decision – one most likely born as a victim of Ellsberg’s Paradox.  You can reason that choosing to wait represents a choice where the future may be 50% good or 50% bad.  No one can accurately predict if/when the fog will lift.  Even if it does, it most certainly will be replaced by yet another fogbank of ambiguity. 

While sitting on the shore, you will never know if an opportunity that could dramatically improve your situation lies just beyond.  Those willing to sail ahead may find the way clear and set course in due haste.  Those companies will have beat you to the next great opportunity.  It is possible they could land on the reef and sink and some most likely will.  What is certain is those that choose to wait may never reach their destination choosing instead to grow old and die as castaways protecting an island no one cares for anymore.

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.

All In – Navigating Turbulence

While Washington politicians continue to argue over the fiscal cliff and the Nation’s tenuous financial position, companies may feel left on the sidelines.  Many are caught up in the turbulence waiting to make investment decisions and struggling with how to adapt their strategies in an environment of uncertainty.  Some are taking a strategic pause waiting out decisions.  Unfortunately, they wait with no voice in the debate, a seemingly decreasing list of options, and a market that continues to churn on.

Standing on the sidelines searching for a way to navigate these waters is a recipe for decline.  Holding onto customers and programs while drawing down on backlog cannot deliver growth.  Executives may believe they can outlast the turmoil, conserve resources, and ultimately emerge relatively unharmed.  But, standing still is a recipe for disaster and demise.  Companies willing to turn their face into the wind and press forward are more likely to emerge stronger and better positioned.  Deciding to stay on the bench will lead to entropy and decline.

Companies should instead play all the cards in their deck while remaining mindful of their environment and the risks involved.  Great poker players often remain in the game despite the cards they’ve been dealt.  These players have learned to keep their options open.  You can’t win if you fold.  Going “all in” is sometimes a strategy to bluff and deceive opponents that your hand is stronger than it actually is.  Other times, you push your chips in because the odds are clearly in your favor.  Poker is a game of risk and while there are strategies that improve your chances to win, the turn of the deck still creates a wild card for which you may win or lose.

What does this mean for companies facing an uncertain future?  First, companies should recognize that choosing to wait for a better hand is like folding.  In the market, there is no such thing as holding your hand.  If you’re not moving forward, you’re headed backward.  While the next hand may offer a better chance to win, it may be equally bad or worse than the hand you have now.  You may be able to conserve your cash by choosing not to play, but someone will win and they will have an even greater reserve to draw from in the next round.  Companies should be in the game to win, not lose.  Despite the circumstances, there are always companies that find a way to capitalize.  This is where innovation comes in. 

Second, you can’t accurately anticipate what your competitors will do.  Staying in the game gives you more information to assess the hands of others at the table.  A bluff is often designed to get your competitor to show their hand first.  It also costs your competitor more to stay longer (as it does you).  This kind of hardball approach drains a competitor’s bank making it more difficult for them to play the next round.  To make this effective, you should have an exit plan knowing at what point you choose to walk from the hand.  Staying competitive allows your organization to remain sharp.  You learn more when you’re in the game, not watching from the sidelines.  By choosing to wait, your organization is losing its competitive muscle and will be weaker.  Keep your competitive edge by playing!

Lastly, when you know you’ve got a strong hand, play it well.  Many companies have great products or capabilities that can be readily adapted to the table they're playing.  Be careful not to overplay your hand and not go “all in” too soon.  Markets change rapidly and if you show your hand too soon, you give competitors an opportunity to play you deep and exhaust your resources.  Keep in mind that the same hardball approach could be played against you.

Dealing with uncertainty separates winners from losers.  Companies should keep all their options in play and remain agile enough to capitalize on emergent opportunities.  That should mean a balanced mix of:

• ·      Maintaining current business through superior customer service.
• ·      Constantly searching out and implementing efficiencies to drive out cost.
• ·      Innovating to create new products and capabilities or to open new markets.
• ·      Experimenting and pursuing new business models and adapting to market shifts.
• ·      Staying competitive by staying in the game.  Don’t let your competition muscles get soft.

Play all your cards and consider folding only when it’s clear your hand will lose.  You won’t win if you don’t step up to the table and play.

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.