Two points here stand out to me the most: the avoidance of conflict or discord and the collective cohesion of functions across the organizations.
Conflict always exists. It’s a matter of whether it exists in the open or in the back channels. One leads to productive debate (with guiding values and principles) and the other to inner turmoil.
In a dysfunctional organization, leaders often have to “protect” their teams, which leads to the each function for itself mentality. What’s unfortunate is that it’s likely that some of those leaders of functions are good leaders, but the lack of cohesion across the team degrades their ability to encourage change. Especially if the CEO allows or instigates this behavior.
I am observing this as well, situations where the CEO is allowing or even instigating the behavior that leads to cultural erosion, such as tolerating under-performance, dismissing feedback, and creating silos between teams. What can other team members do when they observe the dysfunction coming from the top?
That's an important question Mehdi. If in a leadership role, you might have a chance to influence the CEOs behavior. If not, there are still things you can do from your seat. If it were me, I'd think "local" rather than global -- focusing on your area rather than the whole company. In practical terms that means ensuring the team you're on has open communication, guidelines for how we operate, make decisions and handle disagreement. It won't change the company culture but will help create a better experience for you and your team.
I’ve seen that happen a lot in bigger teams - such as a department, or a company. A meeting where people ridicule the CEO in private slack conversations, and are very skeptic of everything presented, but don’t say anything.
I think the biggest contributor to this is brushing off or ignoring ‘complainers’. When you feel that issues you raise are not addressed, you’ll start to go to the back channels to talk about them.
Yep, agree -- it can happen in small teams but especially in larger teams. And it's so true that ignoring complainers contributes greatly to this. Another contributor is overlooking the really quiet people in the meeting.
I'm new to Substack and a new subscriber so I'm just coming up on this post. My background is 30+ years in congregational ministry. I really like the warning sign of "a group functions, not a first team." We often call that working in silos. The work from my chair has always been about building the "connective tissue" you propose as a remedy to being a group of functions. I love the terminology you use. My experience has been that when we break through the silos to become a team, our leadership as a whole gains credibility with the important impact of creating a healthy environment for the rest of the church--which then connects with your "one last thing" of leadership being communal and not individual. Thanks for the way you have brought these things together.
I would also add that sometimes in an organization, speaking up puts a target on you, and then your work gets scrutinized even when you’re just doing your job. So people keep their heads down, their mouths closed, and nod in agreement for survival.
This is a great point Bette. When this behavior goes unchecked, it spreads far beyond the leadership team and becomes part of the culture which is makes it much harder to change.
Two points here stand out to me the most: the avoidance of conflict or discord and the collective cohesion of functions across the organizations.
Conflict always exists. It’s a matter of whether it exists in the open or in the back channels. One leads to productive debate (with guiding values and principles) and the other to inner turmoil.
In a dysfunctional organization, leaders often have to “protect” their teams, which leads to the each function for itself mentality. What’s unfortunate is that it’s likely that some of those leaders of functions are good leaders, but the lack of cohesion across the team degrades their ability to encourage change. Especially if the CEO allows or instigates this behavior.
Well written!
Thanks for sharing what stood out to you and for the kind words -- I love what I do so it means a lot.
I am observing this as well, situations where the CEO is allowing or even instigating the behavior that leads to cultural erosion, such as tolerating under-performance, dismissing feedback, and creating silos between teams. What can other team members do when they observe the dysfunction coming from the top?
That's an important question Mehdi. If in a leadership role, you might have a chance to influence the CEOs behavior. If not, there are still things you can do from your seat. If it were me, I'd think "local" rather than global -- focusing on your area rather than the whole company. In practical terms that means ensuring the team you're on has open communication, guidelines for how we operate, make decisions and handle disagreement. It won't change the company culture but will help create a better experience for you and your team.
Such an interesting read. Toxic positivity and wearing masks are so exhausting and unproductive
I actually had Dr Paul Furey in my podcast a few episodes ago and he talked about openness on boards, specifically. Really aligns with what you say
Agreed. Pretending everything is ok is so exhausting and gets in the way of actually moving forward.
I’ve seen that happen a lot in bigger teams - such as a department, or a company. A meeting where people ridicule the CEO in private slack conversations, and are very skeptic of everything presented, but don’t say anything.
I think the biggest contributor to this is brushing off or ignoring ‘complainers’. When you feel that issues you raise are not addressed, you’ll start to go to the back channels to talk about them.
Yep, agree -- it can happen in small teams but especially in larger teams. And it's so true that ignoring complainers contributes greatly to this. Another contributor is overlooking the really quiet people in the meeting.
This really resonates with me. What advice would you have for the "complainers" who get ignored?
I'm new to Substack and a new subscriber so I'm just coming up on this post. My background is 30+ years in congregational ministry. I really like the warning sign of "a group functions, not a first team." We often call that working in silos. The work from my chair has always been about building the "connective tissue" you propose as a remedy to being a group of functions. I love the terminology you use. My experience has been that when we break through the silos to become a team, our leadership as a whole gains credibility with the important impact of creating a healthy environment for the rest of the church--which then connects with your "one last thing" of leadership being communal and not individual. Thanks for the way you have brought these things together.
I would also add that sometimes in an organization, speaking up puts a target on you, and then your work gets scrutinized even when you’re just doing your job. So people keep their heads down, their mouths closed, and nod in agreement for survival.
This is a great point Bette. When this behavior goes unchecked, it spreads far beyond the leadership team and becomes part of the culture which is makes it much harder to change.