360DigitalInfluence

Two recent posts, both in Fast Company, are a great reminder that when it comes to cultivating a company culture, sometimes it’s the little things that matter most.

In “It Isn’t Just a Myth: A Little Thanks Goes A Long Way,” Robert I. Sutton quotes an academic study that provides evidence for the value of a simple thank you:

“The simple act of having a boss come by and offer a public thanks to one group, and but not the other, really packed a wallop. These fundraisers were paid a fixed salary, so Grant and Gino compared the number of phone calls made be each fundraiser before and after the “thank you” intervention. The results were pretty impressive, as while there was no change in the average number of calls made by the group that was not offered thanks, the folks who heard a warm two sentence thank you from a boss made an average of about 50% more calls during the subsequent week.”

In “Chip Conley Took the Maslow Pyramid, Made It an Employee Pyramid and Saved His Company,” Kermit Patterson interviews the founder of the Joie de Vivre hotel chain, who’s just published a new book called Peak: How Great Companies Get Their Mojo from Maslow. Conley says, “What really is meaningful to people is genuine appreciation shown in real time. My basic belief is that life and business is all about where you pay your attention. Let’s pay some attention in our management and leadership to the idea of recognition. It’s not just platitude.”

What is the best way to make “thank you” a consistent part of a company’s culture?

A new study from the venerable Pew Research Center provides interesting insights on how the ongoing recession is affecting hopes, dreams, and fears in the U.S.

The study goes beyond the markers we typically look at (unemployment, for example) to try to gauge the overall impact of the recession, and the results are striking. For example, more than half - 55% - of adults in the labor force say they’ve felt some effect, from layoffs to wage or hour cuts, far more than the number captured by the official unemployment rate. Almost the same number, 54%, say the country is still in a recession. Two thirds have cut back on their spending, and a third say they’ll continue this new frugality even after the recession ends.

The surge in long-term unemployment and the meltdown in household wealth are the two things that make this recession different from other twentieth-century recessions, and both will have long term effects.

Why is this important? I believe those of us who spend time thinking about how to engage employees need to understand the larger forces that shape their hopes and expectations. “A Balance Sheet at 30 Months: How the Great Recession has Changed Life in America” is a thought-provoking starting point.

A new study out of North Carolina State University looks at the U.S. workplace over the past 80 years and concludes that things have changed - and not necessarily for the better, according to U.S. News & World Report.

Employers have implemented a variety of changes that have increased productivity and profits - but often those have come at the expense of employee comfort, the study asserts. Consequences include:

• Stress caused by a “brutal work pace”
• A “greater sense of chaos” caused by frequent change
• An increase in fear/distrust of management connected with layoffs

As a result, the researchers say, professionals are more focused on protecting their own jobs and less likely to help co-workers than they once were, and less likely to be loyal to their employers.

While it’s sometimes tempting to yearn for a simpler time, stress and chaos are most likely here to stay. Given that, what’s the best way to create loyalty and engagement?

I spotted a fascinating piece of news today about the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) reversing a social media policy shortly after issuing it. The original policy, issued Friday before the holiday weekend, notified employees that TSA would block certain categories of websites. Blocking certain websites is common, and so were most of the blocked categories, which included extreme violence, criminal activity, and gruesome content. One blocked category, however - sites that contained “controversial opinions” - raised a number of eyebrows.

At about 5:30 this evening, according to CBS News, TSA reversed itself on that particular category, assuring its employees that it does in fact want them to think for themselves (my interpretation).

For communicators, I think there are a couple of lessons here. One, of course, is a simple reminder that “internal communications” no longer exists as a category, if in fact it ever did - companies should operate on the assumption that any information provided to employees will go public, sooner rather than later. A second is that it’s hard to regulate the consumption of information in a way that makes sense in the borderless world of the internet. Most people would - I think - agree that companies have the right to prevent employees from using company provided equipment to access pornography and violence during working hours, but even the definitions of those categories can be problematic  (in reference to the TSA policy, for example, what exactly is “extreme violence” - and does that mean “normal violence” is acceptable?). And it only becomes more complicated, as TSA’s experience shows us.

In an earlier post, I cited Jay Shepherd’s Tweetable Twitter policy as an example of a thoughtful, smart social media policy - any other policies you’d recommend?

A provocative Harvard Business Review blog post says trust is dead. Well, not completely. But in her recent post Tammy Erickson offers a new equation to replace the old (dead) “You be loyal, we’ll take care of you” contract between employers and employees. She suggests:

“The organization will provide interesting and challenging work. The individual will invest discretionary effort in the task and produce relevant results. When one or both sides of this equation are no longer possible (for whatever reasons) the relationship will end. So if the organization no longer has interesting or challenging work for the individual to do, or if the individual is no longer willing or able to engage in the work — to invest the levels of discretionary effort required for excellent results — it is in everyone’s best interest to part ways.”

Read the whole post here - it’s worth a few minutes.

Very interesting Detroit Free Press article on how companies are dealing with social media. What is your company doing? What are the best (and worst) policies and practices you’ve seen? I still think the best Twitter policy ever is Jay Shepherd’s 140 character policy but if you have a fave, I’d love to know about it.

How much does communication cost your company? One of my clients just shared an equation she picked up at a conference - try it; it will blow your mind.

• Take the average monthly salary at your company
• Multiply by two (to cover overhead, benefits, etc.)
• Divide by 20 (working days in a month)
• Divide by 8 (hours per day)
• Divide by 60 (minutes per hour)
• Multiply by number of employees at your company

This gives you the cost per minute of having all your employees do something - like read a memo.

Multiply by number of minutes - let’s say by 5 minutes to read and digest a 1-plus page memo. That gives you the cost of communicating. Now let’s see it in action.

• Average monthly salary = $5,000
• Times 2 = $10,000
• Divided by 20 = 500
• Divided by 8 = 62.5
• Divided by 60 = 1.04, or about a buck a minute.

Multiply that by 5 minutes and you get $5.21. Now here’s where it gets really good. Multiply by 5,000 employees and the cost of having all your employees read a memo is $26,050. If you have 100,000 employees that cost goes to $521,000 - and that’s for a SHORT memo. Bring all your employees into a one-hour all employee meeting and the numbers are really amazing. For a 5,000 person company, the cost is $312,000.

I’m a big fan of communication, obviously - but the equation above provides a compelling reminder of the need to think carefully about how and how much we communicate to make sure we’re getting the most bang for the buck.

The Conference Board’s quarterly survey of CEO ConfidenceTM is down slightly for the first quarter, reversing direction from Q4’09. What does that mean? Possibly not much – it’s a drop of only two points, and only time will tell if it’s an exception or a trend. But if you want to read something into it, I’d say it indicates a slow, uneven recovery with the potential for a one-step-forward-two-steps-back twist. And that means communication with employees and other stakeholders will be challenging, and more important than ever.

Think about it. When things are really good, there’s a lot to talk about. Success breeds confidence and confidence breeds communication. CEOs love to tell investors they are making money and employees that they will get bonuses. Bad news, believe it or not, functions similarly, because there’s no choice. Companies are legally obligated to disclose material news to stakeholders, negative as well as positive. CEOs may not enjoy announcing layoffs, but it has to be done. It’s when things are uncertain that executives tend to want to crawl in a cave and wait to see which way the wind is blowing. That’s a mistake.

Yes, things are iffy. Hiring may pick up, but it may not. Consumer spending may increase, but it may not (after decreasing in February, the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence index increased slightly in March – go figure). There’s no need to go out on a limb predicting the future, and someone will just cut it off anyway if they get the chance. But in times of uncertainty it’s really important to communicate regularly with employees. Don’t know what to say? Here are some ideas:

• I know there’s a lot of uncertainty out there
• Here’s what I can tell you
• We have a strategy: it is XXX
• We know how to tell if that strategy is working: we monitor YYY carefully
• We are taking steps to meet the challenges we face
• We will keep you informed about how the company is doing
• We are grateful for your hard work and commitment
• We appreciate all your ideas on how to do this better

What else should executives be communicating in this age of uncertainty? How often should they communicate?

Fortune’s annual list of best companies to work for is out again, and it’s as informative – and envy-inducing – as ever. As always, Google’s legendary food service gets kudos, as do perks like onsite child care, fitness centers, and medical clinics. Companies that did not have layoffs got a boost this year, and salaries and benefits remain important. But if economic concerns make it hard for your company to go toe-to-toe with these top dogs on infrastructure, don’t despair: a new feature published with this year’s study featuring profiles of employees at the top ten companies provides insight into the importance of company culture in creating a “best place to work.” What’s important? Good communication. Flexibility. Autonomy. Treating people like individuals. Fun. All important, and all cheap to implement.

• Michelle Dockery, SAS: The people here are the best. All really highly educated people and they’re all very supportive. It feels like a family — almost like an extension of home.
• Darcy Beeman, Edward Jones: The things that I love about it are that you are designing what you want your practice to be like, you pick your location, you hire your staff, you decide what’s right for your clients. Everything is unique. The other thing that’s great is that the hours are really what you want them to be.
• Chris DePumpo, Wegmans: The company is family owned and there’s access to the senior executives. I can speak to the senior VP or the president if I have any questions. The opportunity for development and growth draws you in and it’s fun.
• Ken Norton, Google: The flexibility is accommodating for having a life outside the office. You get the sense that the people running things care about you and your life.
• John Sullivan, Nugget Markets: The nice thing about this company is all the associates are empowered to do what it takes to make their guests happy and meet their needs. It makes me excited to come to work everyday.
• Jami O’Toole, Boston Consulting Group: If you get your work done you have the flexibility to work from home, and also flexibility around the hours.

Am I the only person who feels ill every time I hear the word “passion” at work?

This doesn’t mean I am not committed or do sloppy work. I am a classic Type A overachiever. But to me, passion is personal. It’s what I feel for my husband, for the old schoolhouse we’re restoring, for the sweet peas I’m sprouting, for world peace, and – okay, just a little – for Bruce Springsteen and Barack Obama. It is NOT what I feel about work.

I feel a lot of things about work – interested, challenged, even excited – but the best word is probably committed. I am fortunate that I have been paid fairly and given opportunities to do interesting, creative things in my career. I have very high standards for anything that goes through my shop – so much so that veterans on my team warn newbies who join up. I am super dedicated and I really enjoy my job. But I am not passionate about it. To me, that’s a word for a different time and place. 

I think small business owners are different. Most of those I have met ARE passionate about the businesses they’ve started. But for those of us who work for someone else, it doesn’t feel like the right word. At work, I don’t want passion – I want intelligence, creativity, dedication, stamina, and, yes, PLEASE, the ability to proofread. In fact if someone told me in a job interview that their job was their passion, I would question their truthfulness, not to mention their sanity. 

Am I crazy? Am I merely splitting semantic hairs? Or is passion at work overrated?