 |
|
 |
|
|
The Point e-newsletter
april 2008
ScandalousBy RON CROSSLAND
“Who else was involved in this?” The dull silence became dead silence. I thought the teacher was nuts for asking, but I was also feeling that discomfort of wondering what I would do if I had been one of the perpetrators. After a short pause, an extraordinary thing happened. Chris’s hand shot up. It didn’t slowly arise. It went up as straight and confident as any kid who knew the answer to a tough problem. Chris then actually spoke, saying, “I was doing it too.” I was totally impressed by his honesty and even in the third grade wondered if I would be so courageous. In retrospect I also wonder how the fourth kid felt, when he did not follow Chris’s example and let his friends take the punishment alone. What would you have done in the same circumstances? More to the point of this article, what do you do when you act out of bounds or see someone acting out of bounds in your organization? According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, only about one in five of you blow the whistle. And worse yet, when you blow the whistle, more often than not you are penalized through being ostracized by fellow employees, being demoted, or pressured to quit. In their paper, Who Blows the Whistle on Corporate Fraud?, Dyck, Morse, and Zingales found that 82% of whistle-blowers are treated as outcasts, pariahs, and snitches. The authors declare, “In no case is the tension between access to information and lack of incentives to reveal fraud more intense than for employees. Employees clearly have access to information; few, if any, frauds can be committed without involving some interaction among the people within a firm. However, the career incentives against revealing the fraud are stronger for employees than for any other group. Even according to an advocate for whistleblowing, consequences to being the whistleblower include distancing and retaliation from fellow workers and friends, personal attacks on one’s character during the course of a protracted dispute, and the need to change one’s career.” In some cases the workers moved five times over the course of ten years in a continuing job search. In at least one case the whistleblower publicly said, “If I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t.” In another case the high-ranking employee said, “I’ll never get a job in corporate America again.” Jack and Suzy Welch’s February 18, 2008 column in BusinessWeek responded to the behavior and consequences of Jérôme Kerviel, the Société Général trader involved in secret dealings that cost the institution $7 billion. Their article suggests even when safeguards are in place to protect employees who report dubious or bad behavior, that many employees wait in “silent hoping” that someone above them will detect the deceit. Silent hoping is understandable given the consequences people face when they blow the whistle. What astounds me is how we treat people after they defend the very corporate values we all demand our companies possess. One of the things that gets a company on the Most Admired list is a strongly felt set of values. Evidently, these values are great only as long as they are felt, not tested. This leads me to a great leadership challenge I offer to corporate leaders – especially those of you who love the praise and position your hard-earned career has granted. Start praising and rewarding whistleblowers. Exalt those who are as courageous as my former schoolmate, who will defy the social pressure of the moment to actually do the right thing. Maybe, over time, this will help burst the understandable bubble of silent hoping. Ron Crossland is Chairman of Bluepoint Leadership Development, and can be reached by email. He is also the Co- author of The Leader’s Voice, and The Leadership Experience. Where, Oh Where, Is Your Talent?By VALARIE WILLIS
It is 8:00 a.m. -- Do you know where your talent is? Sure, you say, “They’re at their desks, commuting in, with a client, or in a meeting.” Maybe I should pose the question as, “Do you know where your missing talent is?” How many of you are thinking that the head count number seems to be right for the organization, yet something is terribly wrong with the talent pool? Many organizations continue to face a talent shortage even when the headcount is right. There are enough people, but not enough of the right talent mix. Great talent comes into the organization and a few years later, if not properly developed and trained, that talent will be out the door. Not a lot of discussion about it, they will just leave and take their skills to an organization that cares about who they are and how they can develop their talent. According to the Wall Street Journal (1/28/08), “Companies haven’t been grooming talent and training enough employees for promotions and now have a mismatch of talent.” It is like the organization is wearing mismatched socks, right colors, wrong pattern. When I was in IT a few years ago, when technology and software were rapidly changing, we had a lot of talented people--if you wanted old generation software support. We were in desperate need of talent that could quickly grasp the new software languages, and we needed some of the talent that could maintain current systems. It was a difficult balance to strike, but we had to make the decision to get some existing talent upgraded and hire in talent with the needed skill set. New people coming into the organization wanted to continue to update their skill sets and learn new things, even though they were not necessarily in for the long haul. The mystery to me was why some of the existing talent did not want to move on to the new technology. They didn’t want to leave their comfort zone, or perhaps I, as a leader, didn’t paint a compelling vision to motivate them to reach for greater places. Retaining talent, motivating talent and developing talent is the job of a leader. It is a two-way street in that the talent is responsible for seeking out new interests, dialoguing with their leaders, and developing their talent. Organizations have been warned for years that the new generation of workers are not going to stay forever, and that they need new, exciting and challenging experiences to stay engaged. Yet, knowing this, many organizations are not preparing future leaders, giving stretch assignments, or even identifying the key talent. Great talent will stay on the move, and that means that organizations have to put plans in place to have a continuous flow of talent through the pipeline, either through training and development or hiring. Ultimately it is the role of leadership in the organization to become “Connoisseurs of Talent” as Tom Peters would say. The focus needs to be on the future needs of the organization compared to the current capabilities of the talent. Leaders need to evaluate on a consistent basis and put plans in place to upgrade the current skills of talent. The talent in the organization should also be forward-looking to see what skills they need to obtain in order to stay marketable. Ten Talent Tips
There is plenty of talent in the market--the question is, “Is it the right talent?” Take a look at your organization and ask yourself, “What skills are we missing that will help to take us to the next level?” And then, do something about it. Send me your comments about how your organization is keeping and attracting the right talent. Valarie Willis is a Senior Facilitator at Bluepoint Leadership Development. She can be reached by email. |
|
Everyone experiences events that impact a person’s point of view both at the time and over time. One of mine occurred in the third grade. A buddy of mine, Chris, and three of his classmates were breaking one of the third grade class social rules. I don’t remember what they were up to--it wasn’t particularly evil--but everyone knew it was out of bounds. A teacher discovered two of the culprits and called them on their behavior in front of everyone. There was that dull silence while all the kids in the class, me included, waited to see what the teacher was going to do about this social infraction. The teacher asked something that seems very ordinary to me as an adult, but extraordinary to me as a child.
|