Creative Reaction

This provocative article in The Economist, Down with Fun, takes direct aim at empowerment, engagement and creativity, deriding them as “popular management fads of the moment”.

They write, “surveys show that only 20% of workers are “fully engaged with their job”. Even fewer are creative” with which few will argue.

They state that “as soon as fun becomes part of a corporate strategy it ceases to be fun and becomes its opposite—at best an empty shell and at worst a tiresome imposition”. Again, no argument with “compulsory ‘fun’”. It’s reminiscent of the “pieces of flair” scene in “Office Space“.

While The Economist is mostly correct, the danger lies in what is left out.

A glaring omission is that The Economist has removed “fun” from the context of corporate culture. Re-read the previous quote. They misunderstand culture as strategy.

In a purpose-based company with a strong corporate culture, the hiring, operations, markerting, customer service, and the “fun” environment are completely aligned, making the motivation intrinsic, not compulsory. This alignment leads to breakthrough products and breakthrough customer service, both of which lead to profits.

Clearly, there are “managers (who) hope that ‘fun’ will magically make workers more engaged and creative.”, but this is not proof that the premise of culture is wrong. While a Truth (capital “T”) is shown to be right by those who follow it, the converse, is untrue.

So what kind of “fun” does The Economist support?  Heavy drinking, chain smoking, and workplace promiscuity. Hyperbole, perhaps, but it panders to our base motives. This more extreme “fun” ranges from mere self-destruction to socially and morally irresponsible behavior, adversely affects the lives of entire circles of people, and is clearly counter-productive. Surely we’ve learned something from Mad Men.

So what kind of “fun” is our ideal?

When empowerment, engagement and creativity all spring naturally from a carefully cultivated corporate mission, happily espoused by everyone starting with the CEO, through the management, to the employees. That, my friends, is something magical. It appears The Economist has never witnessed that magic – and it’s a shame.

Owners and Mangers, if you aspire to motivate your teams; if you need them to commit to a vision or a greater purpose, read this Simon Sinek account of “servant leadership”.

Sinek witnessed first-hand an important, yet from a strictly personnel standpoint, costly Marine Corps policy, which exemplifies their culture. The lesson?

The strength of an organization is easily measured by the steps it takes to look after its own.  To what lengths does a company go to show its people that they matter?  An organization that shows commitment to its people can expect its people to show commitment to them.

If you are having morale, motivation and turnover issues within your organization, Sinek gives us plenty to chew on.

This really interesting article by CCL popped up in the newsreader today, explaining the hidden costs of companies which insist on over-managing their employees. These are the companies which feel they need to tell their employees (grown adults, mostly) exactly how their jobs should be performed. While “process” plays an important role in certain industries, not leveraging the experience of employees is shortsighted.

Anybody who does a job eight hours a day is going to see ways in which that job could be improved or simplified…

This is particularly true for Professional Knowledge Workers, where the costs are huge:

At best, it limits growth and innovation. At worse, it solidifies inefficiencies, undermines company goals and creates an environment where employees are unmotivated and disengaged.

So be sure to give some thought to employee engagement and motivation. It is far better for everyone to be working together toward the same vision. It could very well mean the difference between success and failure.

When leaders give people control over their work, stop telling them how to do their jobs and focus on the goals, the hidden costs are replaced with numerous benefits. Employee stress goes down, absenteeism decreases and engagement goes up. Productivity improves and innovation is possible.

Laughing Your Way to the Bank by HBR’s Rosabeth Moss Kanter caught my attention a few days ago, in which she explains the importance of a sense of humor and its role in leadership.

Aside from laughter’s healing properties, which alone can transform a business, humor can be used to unlock creativity, foster trust, and counteract the destructiveness of fear and worry.

So lighten up and be more successful!

Lean Startups follows up with a Part II to a great post from last Summer, How a foosball table can kill your startup.

At issue is motivating employees, but not in a way that hurts morale or adversely affects work. I agree with everything Apollo says. Focus on teamwork, health, having a life outside of work, and developing relationships with clients.

Every company has its own culture and needs. Maybe a foosball table or an espresso machine makes sense for you. The important thing is to choose what is best for your team members as individuals – people with mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual needs –  and in ways that allow them to be engaged in their work.

Much has been written about the transformation from an industrial/manufacturing economy to one of knowledge-based work, and yet many of our management practices cling to the past, especially in the way employees are motivated and compensated. In this TED Video, Daniel Pink discusses the “mismatch between what science knows and what business does”.

As it turns out, financial incentives are OK for mechanical and methodical tasks, but for for jobs where creativity and cognitive skills are required, such “extrinsic” motivators can actually dull creativity. For jobs where there are no clear methods and where every task requires a creative approach, the only worthwhile motivations are those that are intrinsic. Unless your employees understand their purpose, and work for a cause larger than themselves, it doesn’t matter how much money you pay for their talent; you won’t get their best.

(And boy did I grin when Pink mentioned “Results-Only Work Environments” and Google’s “20% Time”, both of which have been covered here at Creative Reaction.)

Managers and owners, your business’ survival depends upon you watching this 18:36 presentation. Schedule a time and a place to watch it. You’ll be glad you did.

There’s a great illustrated post over at the Times and if it didn’t hit the Internet over a week ago, I would have simply tweeted about it. It’s largely about inventors and it’s very inspirational. Just read it and smile. And then follow it’s advice, “Don’t mope in your room. Go invent something. That is the American message.”

Believe, and help others see why they should, too on the Management-Issues blog offers some excellent advice on creating a passionate, self-motivated team.

Quoting the article, “effective managers and leaders know what they believe and why they believe it”, though success lies beyond confidence and a positive attitude. The key is hiring the right people for the job, showing that you have confidence in them, and helping them find their own motivations to follow the leader’s vision. Good stuff.