Culture and the New Leader

It is commonly acknowledged that success (or even survival) in a new role depends on a Leader's ability to understand and successfully navigate the operational culture. Edgar Schein, a recognized authority in the field of organizational culture, has said, “The bottom line for leaders is if they do not become conscious of the cultures in which they are embedded, those cultures will manage them.”

In our experience an accurate understanding of the culture is one of the most important aspects of Leader transition, but it comes with significant challenges:

• How is the culture described?
• Is it the same for top leaders as it is for others deeper in the organization?
• Did the organization "tell the truth" about the culture to the New Leader, or describe how it hopes to function someday?
• What about the discrepancies between how the culture is broadly described by its inhabitants and how its subcultures really function?

There seem to be as many definitions of culture as there are people observing these transitions -- and without a common understanding, it becomes impossible to provide a consistent approach to successful culture navigation. 

What is Culture?

Organizational culture has been described as:

• “The way we do things around here.”
• “Lessons learned that are important to pass on to the next generation of employees.”
• “What we do when no one is looking.”

Of course, those are the ways people describe the culture of an organization from their own unique perspectives -- sort of an anthropological view. Many experts on culture, including Dan Denison (Chairman of Denison Consulting), agree that some things about culture are visible, including the behaviors and norms. Some other aspects of culture are talked about and less visible -- like values and attitudes. Finally, there are those components of culture that are part of the organization’s subconscious, and therefore rarely discussed or questioned. 

Importantly, all aspects/levels of culture inform and impact the performance of an organization. Research performed by Denison Consulting clearly demonstrates that organizational culture drives financial (and other measures of) performance. For our purposes, “culture” is defined as the performance climate of an operation -- measured on four key traits:

• Mission -- the organization's direction, and means of accomplishing it.
• Adaptability -- the extent to which the operation can respond to the need to change.
• Involvement -- how the people connect with the work and each other.
• Consistency -- the ability to predictably work together to deliver results.

 
Culture is at the root of many of the paradoxes for those onboarding into new roles (see our January 2013 post). New Leaders are hired to make changes, fix broken things, “take us to the next level,” have early impact, etc., and they must act in the context of the organizational culture in order to accomplish those imperatives. In addition, not only is there a corporate culture that New Leaders must navigate, but there is also a culture in their own operations that New Leaders have to “get.”

  

Navigating the Corporate Culture 

To navigate the corporate culture, New Leaders must figure out both “the way we do things around here” and “the way we don’t do things around here.” While Leaders are hired to lead their operations, the organization will (directly and indirectly) signal to the New Leader what they can and can’t do to drive success. Leaders who take the time to observe and ask questions about the best ways to operate, and then follow that advice, are ultimately more successful.

Leaders also have diagnostic tools such as Culture Snapshot available to them that give them an early view into the performance climate of their own operations -- the culture that will make or break their results.

  

"Getting" the Operational Culture

In order to figure out the culture of the operations they lead, New Leaders must step back during their first months on the job and focus on learning rather than working to change things and make an immediate impact. New Leaders sometimes mistakenly assume that “because people downstream report to me, they will follow my direction.” They then move forward with in a manner that runs counter to their operation’s culture/performance climate. The outcomes can range from lack of communication, to frustration and complete failure. New Leaders who work with their Hiring Managers to construct deliverables that:

• Facilitate learning about the corporate and operational culture,
• Demonstrate that they have incorporated that knowledge, and
• Start moving the New Leader’s operation toward desired goals and performance levels will ultimately be more successful in both the short- and long-term.

Working with (and within) the operational culture that existed before New Leaders came on board will help smooth their transitions, balance the paradoxical nature of onboarding, and deliver results.

The Myth of the Flawless Outsider

Why is it that so many companies exhibit a strong preference for recruiting external hires to fill key leadership roles? Are these rational, data-based decisions, or are the decision-makers falling prey to hidden biases that could prevent them from placing the right person in the role? If so, then at what cost?

Much has been written about the challenge and complexity facing today's leaders. Emerging technologies, aggressive competition, rapid change and escalation of consumer expectations all combine to make leadership a riskier proposition than ever before. The pressure on leaders to drive results can be extreme, and it is magnified when those leaders are stepping into new roles.

Filling these roles can present a daunting challenge, as circumstances demand breadth of leadership capabilities, depth of technical skills, and the wisdom required for successful navigation of an entirely new landscape. As companies explore the pool of candidates for these crucial roles, they often make the mistake of overlooking the internal talent they have cultivated.

We call this oversight "the myth of the flawless outsider," and it has several components:

1. There is a natural tendency to cast a tough role with a heroic figure -- someone who can be placed on a pedestal by the organization.
2. This focus on the need for significant talent and thought leadership can make us overlook the strengths of those already familiar to us and concentrate on their relative weaknesses.
3. All other things being equal, a lack of familiarity with candidates means their resumes tend to look "rosier" than the facts known to us about existing colleagues. We are very familiar with the career ups and downs (and personal idiosyncrasies) of our colleagues -- information that we may not gain about external candidates until well after their start date.
4. Finally, we tend to devalue available information and fail to dig deeper in the interview process. Why do so many companies perform pre-hire assessments, only to disregard (or significantly under weigh) the data gained? A number of Hiring Managers have told us how much they have come to regret ignoring pre-hire assessment reports as those hires eventually stumble in their roles.

How do we create a more balanced approach, so that we don't overlook the talent right under our noses?

1. First, develop a rigorous, feedback-rich talent-management process that truly prepares your internal leaders for big roles.
2. Next, use a multivariate/multi-faceted approach to selection, with rigorous and structured interviewing and assessment for all candidates --whether external or internal to the company.
3. Strive to select humans over superheroes. Remember that brilliant interview skills do not equal leadership effectiveness (and may conceal flaws and lack of experience that will ultimately lead to their failure).
4. Do something that most companies don't: Use pre-hire assessment and interview data to get New Leaders on the right developmental paths as they enter their roles (instead of waiting until their development needs become obvious to all).
5. Finally, work to establish realistic expectations for New Leaders so they don't fall into the heroism trap ("I'm here to change the culture," for example). Humans, not heroes, deliver sustainable results. And they don't have as far to fall as those perched atop inappropriate pedestals.

If, as do many humans, we prefer the new and shiny over the old and reliable, we need to follow the steps above to avoid falling into the trap set by the myth of the flawless outsider. It may be less exciting, but will be better for us and our companies in the long run.

 

The Myth of New Leader "Fit"

We often hear clients talk about how they want Newly-placed Leaders to "fit" their organizational culture. And if New Leaders derail, it is often attributed to a "poor fit." Rather than have "fit" be a throwaway explanation for derailment, doesn't it make sense for us to have a better understanding of what is happening and why?

This is an important conversation to facilitate for a variety of reasons:

1. "Fit" could mean "be just like us." And for most companies who want to perform better, that could be a mistake. Too many similar people = too many people who think the same way. Too many people who think the same way = under-representation of new ideas or a failure to challenge existing ideas. It also implies something unpleasant for those of us who are somehow different -- that as people with different work styles, genders, sexual orientations, experience bases, ethnicity or skin color, our contributions could be marginalized or completely ignored.

2. Perhaps "fit" is more about New Leaders behaving in ways that are acceptable to their new peers and colleagues. If the Leaders respect their colleagues and their ways of doing things, perhaps they will be allowed to be more accepted by others, voice opinions sooner, or be more influential. That suggests a more dynamic, situational way of thinking about leader transition.

3. Or, you could adopt our perspective (in addition to #2 above) and believe that it's also the job of the organization to engineer the "fit" of the Newly-placed Leader. If you accept the notion that companies do a pretty good job of hiring people with the "potential to fit," why wouldn't employers want to seal the deal by ensuring their new hires are truly set up for success?

If we can make the failure to fit be seen as what we really believe it to be -- a failure to cause the fit of the New Leader, wouldn't everyone win? Companies retain valued leaders. New Leaders not only keep their jobs, but also ramp up faster and less painfully. Employees have more effective bosses. And HR people get to attend to what they most want to do: develop and retain talent to cause the organization to be more successful.

The Paradox of Leader OnBoarding

The major books on leader transition (Right from the Start, The First 90 Days) have lots of great content in them, but tend to ignore the paradox(es) faced by Newly-placed Leaders. In our work with clients, we have found it essential to identify and balance each paradox as it is encountered.

Some New Leader Paradoxes:

1. Make changes, but don't change anything -- what the organization most often wants is changed outcomes without having to increase investment or implement, and adhere to, new processes.

2. Fix broken things, but do so without causing pain, discomfort or disruption -- a corollary to #1, above. By definition, when something is broken, it means that something is not working. And there is a reason for that. And if you tackle the reason, you are likely to be tackling a person. Exercise caution and respect.

3."Take us to the next level" without devaluing existing employees and practices -- best practice in leader transition is for the new leader to honor the team for its accomplishments, and then quickly focus the team on signals from the world around them that suggest the need for developing "what's next." Worst practice is wiping out the New Leader's team and supplanting them with people brought from the leader's former employer.

4. Be heroic, but just like the rest of us -- companies often bring in outsiders to accomplish outcomes they have failed to achieve through previous internal attempts. As you listen to how you and your role are described be sensitive to, and dispel, any notion that you are there to "save the day." If the day truly needs to be saved, it first needs to be understood, and then turned into a team effort to be merely facilitated by the New Leader. This approach will lead to the broader acceptance and support required for New Leader success (and longevity).

5. Have early impact, but don't do anything until you completely understand us -- many New Leaders make the mistake of having a one-way dialogue with their team and colleagues. In fact, the best way to "prove yourself" is by demonstrating your understanding of the organization and context you are entering. And that is best done by asking good questions, and then truly listening and learning. That interpersonal due process is what will later cause others to allow you to take action with their support.

6. Beware if low-hanging fruit -- they are tempting, but are hanging there unharvested for a reason. If you spot an obvious issue, it is likely that others are already well aware of it (and for some reason have chosen not to take action). Let them tell you why it hasn't been solved already, whether it is important to address, what has been tried in the past, and their thoughts about when and how (and if) to take it on. And understand which key people in the organization have a vested interest in keeping things as they are (or not having their mistakes exposed).

7. We like you because you worked at (Company XYZ) and we admire them -- just don't tell us what you did, or how you did things, while you worked there -- a corollary of #5 above. While the books on onboarding focus on demonstrating early impact, they may fail to recognize that doing so can alienate others and short-circuit change initiatives. We always suggest a search for best practices that begins inside the new company, and extends broadly (and generically) to other companies. If you had a winning practice in your old role, perhaps you could tee it up by saying something like "Am not sure if this could work here, but I am familiar with an approach that has seemed to work well in other industries..." We also suggest resisting explicit invitations to share best practices from your last organization, at least until you've been in role long enough to be seen as understanding and valuing your new employer and team.

8. When we ask you what you think about us, we don't really mean it and/or want to know only the good things -- this can be a classic trap for New Leaders. People want to be liked, and often feel anxious when New Leaders arrive. New Leaders want to be seen as "getting it" and moving quickly. Sharing the things you like and appreciate -- about the company, your team, the way you have been welcomed, your excitement about future possibilities - is a great strategy. Additionally, allowing your team members to share their best work with you will increase their comfort and trust -- especially if you can find the good in their work. It goes without saying that asking for others' perspective on the organization helps here as well -- so when you may be in a position to pass some form of judgment, you will be seen as having done a fair and thorough search for information.

Again, the popular onboarding books can be very helpful -- as long as you remain aware of what they don't tell you.