BNET Story On How Tough Financial Times Create Crummy Workplaces

Lindsey Blakely interviewed me a few weeks ago for a BNET article on  “Five Signs That You Have a Crummy Job.”  She identifies five ways that downturns can make life worse even for people in organizations who have survived layoffs. Blakely marches through unpleasant changes such as reduced innovation, severed emotional ties, a climate of fear, and the one I talked about — that the bureaucrats sometimes seize power. The classic effect is that the rest of the organization shrinks, while the number of people who deal with money and enforcing rules increases, leaving fewer people to do the actual work of the organization. And those that remain are subjected to more and more red tape that is instituted in the name of saving money.  So the people doing the real work get less and less efficient, and the rule mongers keep reproducing themselves, and thus write and enforce more rules.

BUT I think that it is important to point out that tough times don’t always lead to these and other dysfunctions.  Some of the most effective leaders use financial troubles and other crises as an opportunity to make changes that can strengthen the organization. For example, check out this post at Harvard Business Online on Alan Meyer’s classic study that compares the different reactions of hospitals to a crisis.  Those leaders that labeled the crisis as an opportunity– rather than a threat — were able to make some impressive changes in their organizations.  Here is the advice I gave in that post last year based on Meyer’s study and other research, and I think it holds pretty well for leaders in a variety of settings:

 If you want to make the best out of a good situation, focus on what is going wrong and can go wrong.

If you want to make the best out of a bad situation, focus on what is going right and could go right.

Thanks, and let me know what you think of the crummy job article, including any other crummy things that happen and — especially — how to stop crummy things from happening to organizations when the going gets tough.

Comments

4 responses to “BNET Story On How Tough Financial Times Create Crummy Workplaces”

  1. almostgotit Avatar

    Why oh why oh WHY is it that everyone is always talking about the need for job candidates to be increasingly fabulous, when hardly anyone is telling employers to be? In an economic downturn, after all, *everyone* has to be more competitive. Crappy recruiters will recruit crappy employees. And crappy employers will be the ones who retain them.
    I’ve been posting myself this week about employers who are increasingly *requiring* job applicants to produce things upfront that are a real turn-off: salary histories, for instance. And references. Yesterday I ragged on employers who don’t seem to get the whole concept of attracting good employees… and yes, I threw in some words against bloggers who don’t seem to get it, either. The post I’ve written for tomorrow asks: “Blind Box Ads: Bad-Ass or Just Bad?”

  2. Kevin Rutkowski Avatar
    Kevin Rutkowski

    At my previous employer, I noticed that as long as layoffs are hanging over employees, they have trouble being motivated to work on long term projects. This particular employer announced layoffs over a year ago. It took 5 months for the first layoffs in my department, and there have been several rounds of layoffs since then.
    My team did better than most teams at staying motivated up to the first round of layoffs. However, when “key” people on “mission critical” projects are released from the company, it is difficult for anyone to really believe that any people or projects are really that important to the company. When this happens several times without any end in sight, it is difficult for people to get excited about any long term project.
    I think that layoffs would have less of a demotivating effect if a company can honestly say, “In order to remain competitive, we made a careful decision to cut our staff. We have chosen to cut once and cut deeply. This will be difficult for everyone, but after this one cut, we can go forward and build a stronger company together.”
    I think this would support the concept of “If you want to make the best out of a bad situation, focus on what is going right and could go right.”

  3. dblwyo Avatar

    I have to start by agreeing wholeheartedly with the two prior comments. Back in my IBM days in the mid-90s when reality and the CFO (that’s J. York btw) were breathing down everybody’s neck with hot breath the politicians and bureaucrats got out of the way. As we recovered they dusted off the old procedures until we were doing QA reviews designed for multi-$B outsourcing deals on $500K consulting bids. Lou laments in his book that he discovered this dysfunctional DNA too late in his tenure to eradicate it. I left in ’99, 65% of the people are turnover since then and my spies tell me it’s as bad or worse. With the addition of a take no prisoners culture on weekly sales goals. Downturns are a great opportunity to motivate change and invest in the future…OR NOT.

  4. Jay Godse Avatar

    The “high-tech” recession we suffered in the telecommunications equipment and software industries from 2001 until 2004 was a tough time indeed. I saw my friends in big companies getting increasingly depressed and anxious about keeping their jobs.
    It was a great time in other ways. Because investment capital was scarce (especially in Ottawa, Canada), many startups were forced to use open-source software or to incorporate it into their products. This turned out to be a tremendous bit of R&D leverage that could not have happened during the boom when everything had to run on a Oracle database, with a high-priced Unix server. The bust was precisely when inexpensive open-source technologies such as Linux, Apache, MySQL, SQLite, Perl, Python, Ruby, PHP, OpenOffice, Subversion, CVS, Firefox, and others grew the most, and delivered great results at a very low price. When better economic times returned in 2005, these technologies enabled many companies to grow easily because the companies were not hobbled by license and tool payments to the big software companies.
    It was also a time when inefficient implementations of practices such as Six Sigma (as opposed to Lean Six Sigma), ISO-9000, etc were abandoned because many companies could not afford the business costs (without benefits) of conformance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *