An organization’s culture – its commonly shared values and beliefs – is both highly complex and interrelated. As such, no one cultural artifact should be used in isolation to describe an organization’s culture and each artifact contributes differently to the painting of the overall culture picture. Objectively viewing the collection of cultural artifacts and identifying their individual contribution significance is critically important to developing an accurate understanding of the organization’s culture.
Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.
Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library
Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually).
Nathan Ives is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.
Your department just made a catastrophic blunder that cost your company money and reputational equity. How do you recover?
By the time two of my direct reports walked into my office one evening everyone else had gone home, which was just what the pair had in mind.
The news they carried was so bad, they didn’t want anyone to witness my reaction. And the reaction they expected was so bad they had spent hours in one of the manager’s office too afraid to break the news to me.
At the time I was director of an organization responsible for processing applications for energy efficiency programs. One such program had high public visibility and it was heavily regulated by the state.
We had only recently assumed responsibility for the program from another work group. During a routine (for us) internal audit of the program, one of the managers discovered substantial errors in the program’s enrollment process, errors that were not only embarrassing to the company but costly.
My reaction? A series of briefly worded questions asked in a calm demeanor. Do we know what caused the errors? Can they be fixed? Do you have a plan to fix them?
Yes and yes and yes were the responses.
Well, let’s put together an implementation plan for the fixes and take it to the boss for his approval.
Their relief at my reaction was so great they burst into laughter. “What? No emotional outburst? No recriminations? No blame? No panic? You don’t want us to go with you to see the boss?”
My reaction was heavily influenced by what a former boss modeled when I was party to a huge, high-profile faux pas. She took the blame for work that had been performed by others, including me.
I never forgot what she did; it taught me the importance of being supportive, not only for the people involved but also for the well-being of the organization. Moving forward, I was motivated to do my best work not cover my butt.
Now it was my turn to be supportive and in the weeks ahead the two managers not only fixed the problem that caused the errors, they created better tracking mechanisms and new procedures that improved the overall process.
Here are some important lessons I have learned as a leader when bouncing back from an organizational catastrophe:
Face the catastrophe head on… and promptly: Bad news does not get better because it’s older. Denial only delays the inevitable need to face the problem and adds nothing to solving the problem. Bringing the problem to light promptly means we can begin to develop potential solutions sooner rather than later.
I let my boss know immediately about the errors right after my meeting with the managers. I promised to bring him the expected fixes soon so that we could review them together. And because I was calm, he was calm.
Choose accountability: Accepting accountability means fessin’ up when others discover our mistakes and bring them to our attention; choosing accountability is telling others about our mistakes. When we choose accountability we seize control of what happens next, we are proactive participants in problem solving rather than victims of circumstances and the recipients of blame.
When my peers found out about the mistake, they were supportive. The director who led the organization in which the program previously resided offered to share the financial costs of the errors. We politely declined. Sharing the financial burden seemed like we were shifting, or at least sharing, the blame; nope, we weren’t going to do that.
Support the people: When errors occur, do not throw people under the bus, especially those who will help in the recovery. It’s one thing to hold people accountable, it’s another to blame and shame them.
By focusing on fixes not fault my managers went from people who were uncertain about their future to leaders who took pride in creating new ways of working that enhanced the process.
Remain confident: Despite the embarrassing nature of errors, do not shrink back into the shadows. Errors can erode confidence in our organization and what we do, hanging our heads only contributes to such an erosion.
Instead, we added the program’s performance metrics to our widely distributed performance dashboard. We knew we wouldn’t have anything to brag about for a few months while the fixes took hold but we weren’t going to live in the aftermath of a catastrophe. We were going to live in the land of solutions, because we were confident our senior leaders, our peers, and most importantly, our internal clients were confident.
No one wants to deal with the aftermath of a catastrophe but if we respond well, we can cope with catastrophe rather than be victimized by it.
About the Author
Author, change agent and leadership trainer, Greg Wallace is CEO of The Wallace Group which consults organizations and leaders to implement change and transformation which produce results that meet the leader’s definition of success. Learn more about developing a personal model of leadership in his second book, “Transformation: the Power of Leading from Identity”.
Improving your business day to day and over the long-term can be expensive and involved. But there’s an easier way to make work life better for your employees immediately and without huge cost: light.
The light in your office has a direct impact on mood and energy, as well as physical ailments such as eye strain and headaches. Most offices have too much artificial light, which makes it difficult for employees to respond to various tasks with the necessary illumination.
The solutions to this work light problem might surprise you. For one, more sources that are controllable enables employees to adjust the light as needed. Glare-reduction strategies can help, too, as can swapping in halogen bulbs for other types. Use this graphic to learn more about this impactful way to change your employees work day.
Click the image to see the whole infographic by Quill.com.
About the Author
Eugene Feygin is a Program Manager at Quill.com. While he is not working, he enjoys traveling, taking photographs and using Instagram.
https://www.strategydriven.com/wp-content/uploads/EugeneFeygin.jpg260208StrategyDrivenhttps://www.strategydriven.com/wp-content/uploads/SDELogo5-300x70-300x70.pngStrategyDriven2016-08-25 08:00:192016-09-06 17:44:22Impact of Office Lighting on Employee Productivity
Marketing and sales are one of the most important components of a business’s survival in the market. While both are dependent on each other many people confuse marketing with sales and vice-versa which is a big mistake. Marketing involves designing a product according to the needs of the market and customers, promoting the product through advertising etc. and setting up a competitive price for the product. Marketing is a platform which drives sales. While on the other hand the sales process is what you do to successfully sell a product and fetch a contract. Sales and marketing together is a part of selling and one cannot do without the other. They can also be called activities. The success of a business is critical to the success of these two important activities.
Marketing is the backbone of a company’s future and launching pad for the sales. While the marketing process encompasses the design of the product, advertising etc. the sales process is the execution of all the efforts which involves direct interaction with client either by in-person meeting or cold calls or by networking. But there is always an ongoing rivalry between the two, one claiming dominancy over other. The marketing people say they have an upper hand because they think it is they who designs the products, lays down the strategy and also develops tools essential for sales. They say sales are the outcome of marketing and thus should follow its directions. The sales people might not agree to this view and may be completely opposite in their opinion. They think that it is the sales people who actually sells a product and bring money to the business.
But many experts believe that marketing should play a pivotal role among the two. A successful marketing campaign makes sales easy and makes people believe that it is actually the sales people who are the dominant leaders. The most important role of marketing department is to create opportunities for the sales department. Marketing drives sales and sales drives a company’s success. Marketing is like a life support for sales, one who is constantly backing up the sales department and enabling them to successfully deliver the end product. There shouldn’t be a race to gain supremacy over another department but a race to win the market and customers working together.
Many businesses combine sales and marketing together but in reality they have different targets. While the sales department is interested in fulfilling the requirements of what the customer asked for, the marketing department is actually busy studying what the market demands. The goal of the marketing department is to foresee how the market will shape up in future. They should envision their product catering to the needs of the market for next few years and be ready to make design changes in their product accordingly.
It is very important that a company integrates their sales and marketing department in a well fashioned manner. It is the correct integration of these two important entities that fuels the growth of a company. The sale people should not be merely treated as the cash collectors. Each department has its own role and should go hand in hand in selling the product of the company and should be the foremost important criteria.
About the Author
John Montana has been a successful salesman since 1990. He currently lives with his wife and travels between Chicago and Los Angeles. He created his site – ABMSNOW to offer tips and ideas on how to become better at selling… no matter what your product is.
https://www.strategydriven.com/wp-content/uploads/JohnMontana.jpg361450StrategyDrivenhttps://www.strategydriven.com/wp-content/uploads/SDELogo5-300x70-300x70.pngStrategyDriven2016-08-25 08:00:142016-07-10 11:12:09The Difference Between Marketing and Sales
Any discussion about leadership effectiveness would have to include the idea of emotional intelligence (EI). The research is consistent and clear: leaders with high EI are more effective and leaders with low EI get stuck or even derail. I think of emotional intelligence occurring in 3 dimensions: Power (height), Heart (width) and Knowing or Mindfulness (depth). And you have to be good in all three at the same time or you are not good at all. An EI leader moves naturally in the Power dimension. They are confident; they set sound boundaries and expectations; they influence and motivate others. They are not afraid to confront or tell (their) truth. While at the same time an EI leaders move in the Heart dimension. They are compassionate and passionate; they are employee-focused and client-focused. They deeply value others and their input. They are not afraid to ask for help; and they are strangely humble. While at the same time, EI leaders are Mindful. They are measured, peaceful, self-controlled. They are present and knowing–even wise. They feel feelings deeply but do not “leak.” When a leader positively flows in all three dimensions they naturally find their relational “sweet spot” – like a tennis or golf pro.
Lower EI occurs when out of “habit of personality” or reactivity to stress, the leader fails to move positively in any one (or two or three) of the dimensions. For example, a leader who is unsure of being vulnerable thinking it weak (Heart), will either detach and remove himself in time of need (negative Knowing) or become overly critical, defensive or arrogant (negative Power). I worked with a CEO who had notable difficulty with Mindfulness and because of this he would keep inappropriate boundaries with staff (negative Heart) and have temper tantrums (negative Power) when he did not get his way. He had no even keel (Mindfulness).
The bad news is that these reactivity patterns are burnt into our limbic system (the emotional brain). So these patterns are often “set” in place and automatic. The good news is that the brain is “elastic” –i.e., we can change the brain and thus develop emotional intelligence. But it takes focus and work. Using a technique called “Working the Triangle” leaders can identify specific positive behaviors to focus on and practice at any given time. And when they do, they can get back into balance, finding their emotional sweet spot and leadership effectiveness (and joy).
https://www.strategydriven.com/wp-content/uploads/SamAlibrando.jpg19461494StrategyDrivenhttps://www.strategydriven.com/wp-content/uploads/SDELogo5-300x70-300x70.pngStrategyDriven2016-08-24 10:00:072016-08-20 18:33:17The Three Dimensions of Emotionally Intelligent Leaders: Finding the Balance of Power, Heart & Mindfulness
A VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS | Call or text now for a FREE consultation: +1 (770) 765-3692 | 
An organization’s culture – its commonly shared values and beliefs – is both highly complex and interrelated. As such, no one cultural artifact should be used in isolation to describe an organization’s culture and each artifact contributes differently to the painting of the overall culture picture. Objectively viewing the collection of cultural artifacts and identifying their individual contribution significance is critically important to developing an accurate understanding of the organization’s culture.
Nathan Ives is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.
Author, change agent and leadership trainer, Greg Wallace is CEO of The Wallace Group which consults organizations and leaders to implement change and transformation which produce results that meet the leader’s definition of success. Learn more about developing a personal model of leadership in his second book, “Transformation: the Power of Leading from Identity”.
Eugene Feygin is a Program Manager at 
John Montana has been a successful salesman since 1990. He currently lives with his wife and travels between Chicago and Los Angeles. He created his site – 
Sam Alibrando, PhD, is an organizational consultant, psychotherapist, author, teacher, workshop facilitator, collaborative mediator, and executive coach. His is the author of 
(New Page Books, July 2016) He has worked on the three-dimensional model for nearly 35 years and has taught it to thousands of people.
Business Programs