Humans can disassociate. It is a powerful psychological mechanism that can help or hinder the human condition depending on the circumstances. One of the troubling trends in our society is that many leaders are dissociating from the consequences of their decisions on employees and society?
It is helping drive businesses to look at short term gain and not the long term. People fall by the way side. It is not the whole story; however, it is part of the story that needs to be understood.
Let me explain by way of analogy.
I always remember a tale that was told to me about Bessie the cow.
Bessie was a little calf that had lost her mother. She was brought up in the families’ back yard and had been hand fed by the farmer and his family.
When Bessie got too large for the backyard, she went out into the field with the rest of the herd. No one would consider ever killing Bessie.
Then one day the farm was sold and a new owner arrived.
Bessie no longer had a name. She was just a cow in the herd …classified as a return on investment (ROI.) How easy was it now for the new farmer to kill Bessie?
How different is this to many corporate workplaces?
The ongoing dehumanization of the workforce makes it easier to remove people from the business equation. The less emotional investment, the less we consider the consequences of those being affected.
I was discussing with a senior executive about what plans his organization had made to manage the workforce, considering many jobs were being automated. It was explained to me as a part of the conversation that the key was to treat all those who were made redundant, with dignity and respect. A cliché many people use with good intent. I said from my experience, it’s not treating people with dignity and respect as they exit the door, particularly in today’s environment; rather it is helping people maintain or recreate employment opportunities. I highlighted that in 2016 out of a working population of somewhere between 11 and 12 million:
250,000 people in Australia were made redundant.
1.1 million were underemployed.
740,000 were unemployed
Like many people who have not yet been exposed to the lack of employment opportunities, making people redundant just becomes a dissociated process. That process of dissociation is amplified by the language that we create.
For example:
People became employees
Employees become Human Resources
Human resources become FTE… full time equivalents
Or now PTE, part time equivalents
FTE’s become headcounts
And heads are severed by several methods.
Redundancy, outsourcing, contracting.
The power of language cannot be underestimated.
One employee said to me that in her organization Human Resources was referred to as the department of Human Remains. That of course everyone was going to give positive feedback on the electronic employee survey, as they did not want to become one of those remains. This is an example of where Boards and Management teams have relied on measurement systems that have helped them dissociate, whether they realise it or not.
As Einstein said.
Not everything that can be measured matters
Not everything that matters can be measured.
Nor can we underestimate the short term thinking.
Such short term thinking rewarded by short term incentives is not good for business or society. The research has been available for years from such prestigious institutions as London Business School of Economics, however it has fallen predominately on deaf ears.
The structure of short term incentives often drives people who reap the reward to disassociate from those who don’t. It may help to explain why inequality has now reached a 75-year high in Australia.
The good news is several countries and a few organisations are realising the consequences of ongoing job losses and underemployment in a technological driven gig economy.
They are exploring options and seeking guidance, on how as responsible leaders, they can create financially viable businesses and contribute to a healthy society.
Understanding the issues and asking critical questions is a powerful way to seek realistic answers to difficult and complex problems.
The two questions I ask responsible leaders, who have the courage to engage in the conversations, are these:
1. What actions do they need to take and what structures do they need to challenge, to ensure the ongoing economic viability of both their business and the society in which they operate?
2. What do they need to do to re connect with the people and communities they serve?
What answers would you give to these questions?
