How do you modernize without upsetting your employees?

Leni is a newly assigned production manager in a manufacturing organization. During the first week of her assumption of office she noticed the need to upgrade and computerize the manufacturing department’s equipment and machines. But she was in a dilemma because the upgrade and computerization would require the displacement of half of the current manufacturing employees. She was asking herself: “How would I go about this?”

Leni’s dilemma is not her own only. In this age of modernization and hi-technological advancement. Many organizational leaders and managers are also in the same boat as Leni. How would they modernize without antagonizing their employees?     

Organizational modernization is like a force of nature that no one of us can avoid. If an organization wants to survive its journey toward the 21^st century it must embrace modernization otherwise it would be left behind. But the sad part of modernization is the need for organizations to shed a sizeable number of its employees.   

The Catch-22 filled question now is, how would a leader/manager go about it without upsetting the employees? Since the need to modernize is inevitable, the leader/manager must not do it abruptly so as not to antagonize its employees.

Why? For the simple reason that the leader/manager is inviting trouble to come in when she/he antagonize the employees.  Therefore, a good and effective leader/manager must do it in such a way that modernization should proceed as smooth as possible.

This smooth transition to modernity should be done slowly but surely. Therefore, employees should not be kept in the dark regarding this matter. This transition should be done with utmost transparency and openness. And the employees who would be affected by the modernization shall be properly informed and compensated.

In hindsight, this should also the method that ought to be followed. When a certain organizational department/division decides to embrace change to enter the door of modernization. It should transition slowly but surely so as not to immediately upset the current organizational set-up of its employees.   

As the saying goes, haste make waste. Same goes when an organization decides to hastily enter the door of modernization. Therefore, organizational leaders and managers must carefully balance the pros and cons of their decision. Vis-a-vis the most important resource of an organization which is its employees or human resource. – Marino J. Dasmarinas

On sustaining the gains of an off-site team building

A few months ago I assisted in the conduct of a two days team building session. Seeing the organization break the barriers of communication and alienation was very fulfilling to say the least. Before we ended the top executives of the organization imparted their views on how they appreciate the improved functional and cross-functional relationships among them.

They said that, the invisible walls which formerly isolated individuals and departments were broken. And they now have a one team one vision mentality.  However, as I was listening to them, I asked myself this question: “Would they be able to sustain the gains of the team building session and who will lead it?”

Who will lead the program and how will she/he keep the fire of the team spirit burning? The driver of course is the CEO/Manager. He should see to it that the gains of the team building session is sustained to the hilt. Until the next off-site team building session comes along.

To be able to sustain the team spirit gained in the off-site team building session managers/leaders may want take a look at these two guidelines:

       1. Encourage communication and openness in the organization – What makes an off-site team building exercise/game successful? It’s communication the team that communicates effectively is the team that wins the activity/game. The team that does not effectively communicates doesn’t win. Therefore, managers should see to it that this culture of effective communication is brought and harnessed inside the organization. Communication is like an oil being poured into a rusted bicycle chain. It eliminates rust which creates cranking sound, it strengthens the chain and it exposes the weak links in the chain so that can be replaced or repaired. This is also what communications does to an organization.    

         2. Make the hierarchical organizational structure invisible as the need arises – One of the effects of organizational hierarchy is it creates unintended division. Notice during lunch breaks, who normally are present on a table for lunch? It’s the employees who are in the level of the same organizational hierarchy. For example, lower level managers cluster themselves on a table during lunch time. Same case with the middle level, top level managers and the ordinary employees. They create their own clusters which is divisive and sometimes elitist.

It’s very rare to see lunch tables with cluster of employees from different hierarchies. But truth be told, its during this instance that the organizational hierarchy should be made invisible. Why?  To continue to promote cross-functional team spirit and openness inside the organization.

What do you think? – Marino J. Dasmarinas 

The silo mindset in your organization and how to cure it

During the cold war era (1947-1991) between the United States of America (USA) and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The united states built many missiles armed with nuclear warheads. They individually hid these missiles inside underground silos to conceal it from detection by the USSR. These missile silos were independent from each other and it can launch a nuclear armed missile by itself.

Many organizations today have a literal silo existence among its departments. For example, the four functional areas of an organization: human resource, accounting, marketing and manufacturing departments. These four functional areas/departments function independently from each other. Inside these four major organizational departments are layers of many more  departments with the same behavior.

These departments if not carefully watched could imbibe a silo mindset. This means that there is a possibility that they could function independently from each other. Which obviously is counter productive in the life of an organization.

So, how do we cure this silo mindset? And how can we transform this independent departments to become interdependent departments? How can we break the attitude of competition and selfishness among these departments?

The person that will lead the curing of the silo mentality is the top gun of the organization. It’s the CEO or company president for big corporations and the managers for small organizations. What they have to do is to organize a permanent grouping of employees who will represent the different departments.

Their extra task is to see to it that the department where they belong is still in harmony with the overall objective of the organization. The moment these members observe that their department is slowly veering away from the objective of the organization. It is their responsibility to re-align again the department which they represent to the overall organizational objective. 

Together with the organization’s top gun, these members will serve as the catalyst in curing this dangerous silo mindset. How would they do it? 

The following are my humble suggestions: 1. Emphasize the need to align with the overall organizational Vision/Mission 2. Use face to face communication once in a while rather than always using electronic communication 3. Encourage unity instead of diversity 4. Break existing behavioral arrogance, closemindedness and egotism then replace it with humility, openness and the willingness to listen. – Marino J. Dasmarinas   

The folly of shock and awe mentality

Jonathan, a newly retired general was invited by his friend to become the Chief Executive Officer of his business conglomerate. John accepted the offer with the thought in mind that he will use the shock and awe strategy in running the organization. So that he could immediately dominate his subordinates and impose his will upon them.

He therefore immediately buckled down to work. His first act was to call for a meeting among the managers of the business conglomerate. During the meeting John immediately emphasized his authority by dominating the meeting. And not allowing the anyone to question his pronouncements. The meeting ended with the managers feeling threatened and paralyzed by their new Chief Executive Officer.     

Shock and awe strategy is useful as a military tactic when you want to immediately conquer and decimate your enemy. This require rapid and swift dominance by the attacking force to immediately destroy the will to fight and morale of the enemy.

However, in a civilian/private organizational setting this shock and awe mindset will never work. Why?  Because in a private organizational setting there’s no human enemy to conquer. What is to be conquered is the flawed behaviors of the human resource. The flawed system and processes of the organization. And no C.E.O can conquer a flawed behavior, system and processes by using this shock and awe strategy.  

A leader/manager who would use this shock and awe strategy is an egocentric and autocratic leader/manager. And this kind of manager/leader has no place in our modern and technologically driven organizations today.

Organizations today thrive in dialogue, communication and democracy. The same with our leaders and managers today. They also are successful when they are open to dialogue, communication and democracy. – Marino J. Dasmarinas  

Social media and your millennial employees

Darla is a nineteen years old effective supervisor in a call company. She complained to her manager about their organization’s denial of social media access whenever they are already inside their organization’s premises. Her manager told her to simply focus on her work and not complain about access on social media. After a month, citing their organziation’s restrictive social media access darla resigned.

How are you managing a millennial employee such as darla? A millennial or generation Y employee is someone who was born between 1980-2000. They have a strong desire for work life balance which means that it’s not all work when an employee is already within the organization’s premises. While official work time is not yet starting employees such as darla should be given some leeway on matters of access to social media.

 Organizations today can effectively motivate and manage their millennial employees if they would allow them social media access.  Given the modernity of our time right now it’s very wise for employers to allow social media access for its employees. Why? For the simple reason that social media access is already part and parcel of employees need for work-life balance. Therefore, it would be more prudent for organizations to give their millennial employees free access to social media subject to limitations of course.

Majority if not all millennial employees are extroverted by social media. They wish to be connected with as many people as possible because this is already part of the millennial work life culture right now.

In fact, the desire to be connected and to have social media access is not only limited to the millennials. Social media access is also very much desired by generation X employees or the baby boomers they are those who were born in the early 1960s up to the late 1970s.

The poet John Donne said: “No man is an island.” This means that nobody is self-sufficient, we need each other to survive and thrive in this world. This quote from John Donne still rings true today in the social media driven organizational life of an employee.

In order for millennial employees to have work life balance. And for them to be more motivated in their work they certainly need fast and accessible social media access.  This access is of course subject to the discipline of the organization. – Marino J. Dasmarinas  

Do you trust your subordinates?

A dying man said to his eldest son, “I trust you to take care of your younger siblings, be their guiding light and don’t be afraid to discipline them whenever you see fit.” The words of the dying man created a deep sense of responsibility to his son. It also served as his motivation to take good care of his siblings. So, when the man died his eldest son tried his very best to properly raise his younger siblings.

Trust is also very important in a manager subordinate relationship. When a manager gives his trust to his subordinates, he is actually motivating them to work smarter than the usual. The manager is silently telling his subordinate, “I am trusting you with a bigger responsibility you therefore have to measure up to this trust by working harder and smarter.”

Why will a subordinate who was trusted with a bigger responsibility would work hard? Because this is human nature. An employee who is trusted with a heavier responsibility would normally try to do his best to meet or even exceed the given responsibility.

Trust gives confidence and a deep sense of meaning to a worker or an employee. Moreover, trust also creates a positive vibe in the workplace environment. Trust enables the manager to accomplish more in his workplace. For the simple reason that he would be able to spread himself wider than the usual.

However, there is a caveat before you trust your subordinates, trust only the subordinate who is competent. Don’t give trust to an incompetent subordinate even if he/she is close to you. Otherwise, it would defeat the objective of the given trust or responsibility.  – Marino J. Dasmarinas

The hidden problems of autocratic leadership

Do you practice autocratic leadership in your organization? Many leaders and managers are tempted to use this kind of leadership style. Because this facilitates obedience, fear and stifling of complaints among subordinates.

In hindsight, why is it that many leaders and managers favor autocracy? They favor autocracy because it highlights absolute power which nobody can question. An abusive leader/manager can easily tap this kind of leadership style to solidify his hold on his position. They do this because they are deluded to think that nobody would go against them. Their mindset is they could simply push their ideas no matter how distasteful, lousy and bad it is.

However, it has been proven time and again that this kind of leadership style is counter productive to an organization or even to a sovereign nation. Why? Because when there is absolute power there is no check and balance. And when the presence of check and balance in an organization is absent abuse of power would be present.

Autocratic leaders/managers are always oriented towards their authority. They will always put forward their authority and they will relentlessly exercise it. They obviously expect their subordinates to obey without question. And if ever there would be those who would question them. They will not mind it, they will instead simply ram it to advance their objective. 

Autocratic style is very tempting to use or engage for a short-sighted leader/manager or for a leader/manager with a tunnel vision. Why? Because it will create a semblance of order and achievement of objectives. However, this would not last for long, sooner subordinates will resent this leadership style.

Thus, there would be disorder, minimum work performance or it may even lead to disruption of work. So, a wisdom filled leader must not entertain any thoughts of using an autocratic style of leadership. – Marino J. Dasmarinas