Fixing Corporate Culture

If you are happy working a corporate job, you're either a high level executive, or you're just trying as hard as you can to coast by and make some cash. Either way, I am happy for you. As for the rest of us, the idea of going in to your corporate job is draining, upsetting, and often hopeless. You feel stuck, in a rut, and it just seems like every good thing you want is burdened by nature that completely goes against what you're trying to accomplish as a company.

So what gives me the right to express an opinion here? Well... I've worked a total of 12 jobs in the past 15 years, going from standard corporate culture down to start ups, and I've held positions from support, engineering, management, and one even as a director. I've built teams, applications, worked customer side, done monitoring, supported things, dealt with infrastructure, Operations, etc. - and to add; I've been fired, I've been written up, I've been promoted, and nearly every company I chose to work for was in a state of growth... and I wanted that because I like the nature of growth; it gives you security, freedom, and opportunity that you just don't get from companies set in their ways.

However that growth state presents a lot of specific challenges... a lot of them actually. Ways that different organizations handle them has amazed me. One thing about me though, is I am naturally rebellious. I don't do it on purpose, but I typically like to have a reason, a connection to what I am doing, and at times I find myself at odds with others, including management when it comes to these things. During these growth challenges though, it will very likely end up that the company will end up taking routes that basically lead to corporate culture.

What is corporate culture?

Think about how you and your friends operate. You guys figure out times to meet up within your busy lives, maybe even a place to go. You have no intention but to hang out. You end up having lunch, going to a few places afterward, maybe if you're a partier then you end up at a bar or someone's house. Sometimes you even tag along with them for errands. Other times, let's say you guys play instruments, you might get together and jam with a few others buddies in a band. Maybe it even goes as far as you guys releasing music and playing shows. Yeah, fun right?

Corporate culture is basically the opposite of that. It's like you guys having phone calls to specifically plan out details of your next in-person encounter. You have to schedule the fun and make sure the fun is performed in order, in a certain way. You have to understand the time which you hang out, make sure you're on time, add it to your calendar, and provide life updates to each other to ensure that the scheduled "fun" time is still happening. During the period of those updates, you also have to decide what you want to get out of the "fun" time, what the end state of the session will be. If you have a band with more friends, you need to make sure that each person provides update, is writing the proper music and updating the band accordingly.

If you're anything like me... that is just absolutely dreadful. You don't make cool music, memories, or connections from a structure like that. Sure, having things in order is typically a good thing, but when you take away the freedom, you end up losing the innovation, humor, and creation aspect of it. You replace the love with a goal.

So is this culture just a toxic playground, mutated and ugly? Well no, there's plenty of good to it. You also might ask "is there any hope for it?" - yes, in my opinion. It would require a little too much overhaul across the US industries, but I do have a basic list of things that would make things better.

So consider this a thought experiment. Here we go.

Standards are a great thing honestly. Especially in technology, where you have hundreds, sometimes thousands of moving parts. The standardization of the tech helps folks understand what to do and helps people ease into things, learning and understanding in a natural sense.

For those of you who are not in tech and that might not make sense, let's take an analogy. You have a pantry, and you want to have EVERYTHING in that pantry in solid blue non-see-through tubs. So ultimately when you go into your pantry, all you're going to see is a bunch of tubs. If there are no labels, rhymes, or reasons for why anything is there, then every time you need something, you either have to operate off of memory, or continuously open the tubs until you find what you need. Let's say you decide to make labels for the tubs, and recruit your kids to help. Each of you take a 3rd of the pantry. You make labels based on the type of food, your kid decides to turn everything into jokes, and the other kid decides to abbreviate everything. So now your partner comes home, opens the pantry, and has to either understand 3 different labeling systems, or has to search through what may or may not be what they're looking for. Let's back up and say you and your partner make the labels, y'all talk about how you want to label them, and you make them in a similar way. Now when your kids come home and open the pantry, you explain to them the system and then everyone is on the same page.

The product, technology, or otherwise physical tools, items, or service that you provide, standardization is good. The problem with corporate culture is when you start applying that to teams, individuals, and departments.

So it all depends on what you're doing for work, but ultimately each situation is different. Each team has some individuals who operate best in their own ways and want to work with different motivations. So in a sense, you'd ultimately want each of those teams and individuals working in their best environments.

No no, corporate culture says that's too hard to manage and keep up with. We need to standardize how each team works, what they do, and how they do it. Leave just a little bit of slack to middle management to try and warp individuals into being motivated to work. Corporate also says that jobs need to be easier to do, so each team needs to do things in a specific way, so it's easier for someone to onboard... but we also need to make sure if they leave, change their mind, or get fired, we can easily replace them. If it's standardized, that opens the door to so many corporate opportunities; we don't need to pay as much, we can offload "easy" things to other people, we can hire an international workforce, or heck, we can even automate it away. Over time, standardization becomes limitation, and limitation becomes cheap.

Those who work are not Johnathan, the really cool engineer that everyone loves; standardization means that he is Employee 65784 who performs specific responsibilities. When Johnathan is treated as such, he will begin to feel small. When he feels small, he's less inspired, less willing, and ultimately less productive.

You might say "well that just sounds like bad management" - here's the thing. Middle managers, front line guys, they can only do so much. They sure can treat you like a human and fight for you, but the business has the ultimate say in things. If the business doesn't recognize your success, if they aren't willing to work with you on pay, and they never seem to respect your time, then it doesn't matter how good your manager is... you still feel like a number. Because a business is not a person, so of course it does.

People are unique, and so should their work style. Sure, certain things and processes should be standard, but your workday should feel like like a linear line, but more like a limited playground. Sure, as support you shouldn't be configuring security tool (or as a cook at a fast food restaurant, you shouldn't be managing advertising), but you should feel free enough to support the customer in the way that you choose to. Doesn't have to be a runbook, doesn't have to be a process, but rather the end goal being the customer is happy and problem is resolved.

The Solution - Don't put everyone in a bucket and slap a label on it. Treat people like people. Respect their time, their feedback, and their specific situations. It will absolutely change the game for your innovation, productivity, and people who want to work for you.

I've learned the hard way many times that HR, while being "human" resources, is not there for you. They want you to bring them problems, so they can shield the business from blowback. They want you to complete yearly training so the business can meet compliance needs. They develop leader training and bring in various 3rd parties for training to say they are developing you, helping you, so you can't fight the business saying you didn't receive any help. They want you to prove you can be promoted, deserve a raise, etc., so the business is paying more than they need to for people.

The problem becomes that HR is the ultimate place to go for anything people related, but they are end all, be all for it too. This leaves almost the entire company at the will of what HR decides. You have to be careful what you tell them. Careful how you tread with them. They become a nightmare to work with, and the fear of most employees. They are the "big brother" of the company.

This leaves employees at the mercy of them, and that feels isolating. It doesn't matter if your best friend is the owner and CEO, if HR sees you as a liability or a problem, you are utterly screwed. In America, most states also have "at will" work, so HR can literally cut you loose at any given moment, without reason, without cause. And not to mention, most middle managers and directors, don't really understand how they operate... so navigating things with them is highly difficult.

The Solution - Implement an HR group for the employees. These folks rather than be in favor of the company, would be completely in favor of employees. Specifically they would understand how business HR works, and they'd be a confidential group of folks dedicated to helping employees. I'll give a couple of examples of how I would think this would work, but I'll start by saying that they'd basically sit at the front line/middle manager level instead of the business level.

Let's say as a manager, you have this wild idea of implementing a new sub-team to your existing team. Obviously, you have no clue what that would look like, how to prove it, or who you could even bounce the idea off of before going on a large scale venture to prove it. Enter EHR (Employee HR), who could tell you exactly what you'd need, pre-vet it from an HR perspective, and work with you. No blow back, no convincing 5 directors they need to do it, no immediate idea shut down for standardization. Just the help you need.

You're still a manager... but you have a rather difficult and noisy employee. You feel for this person though, and you just want to help them succeed. With business HR, if you even express the need, they immediately flag that person as a problem. Sometimes in order to even gain HR attention, you need to file some sort of formal complaint or action plan. Enter EHR - a person who you and this individual could work with to help them understand, without the fear and permanent mark on your record. They could work with them, sit them down with you, and really help dig deep without consequences.

Now switch gears. Say you're an engineer, and you're working pretty dang hard, and have butt loads of respect around the company. Your friends outside of work in the same industry start getting new jobs, and man... they pay exceptionally well, and they seem to be super comfy. You on the other hand, are stretched really thin and are making like 40-50k less than all your friends. But why? You tell your manager, and then enter EHR - who can do whatever for you. They can run market comparisons in relation to the company, or in the market, or figure out why you're stretched so thin, and can mediate between you and your manager on how to make this right. Again, no being labeled as "difficult" or immediate shutdown from standardized market pay... just good ol' people trying to help you understand things.

I guess in short - a no BS version of HR with no power to destroy you, and all the power to help you.

Corporate wants progress. It says there's not enough action, not enough progress, and so much to do. On the other hand, it knows that we need to be careful, we need the proper collaboration, and we need various stakeholders to understand what's happening, why it's important, and what we need to do. It knows we have due dates, client commitments, and it needs certain things to market without being sued for misrepresentation. It also knows all the ways it can speed up anything.

But the business is not a person. It doesn't understand how people work. So we end up rushing, or getting stuck in planning loops, or often skipping a very important step in favor of "actionable" things.

So what's the common theme here? We're not solving a problem. We're making the business happy instead.

Okay okay, so you might ask - "why are you being picky here about your words? What are you? HR?" Look, I don't care if you call it "manure digging." To me at least, this is a very basic principle. Let's talk about it by definition.

• Purpose - This is identifying what you're ultimately trying to solve. Some call it "appreciating the problem." I agree with that wording. Your goal is to identify what isn't right, what needs to be solved, and why or what benefit we'll get from it.
• Solving the Problem - So we understand what the problem is and why we need to solve it, but at this point we don't understand how we're going to do it. This is where you should be dissecting the problem, and trying to piece it back together. This is where you'll really understand what tools you need to solve it.
• Solutioning - Now you know why, how it's going to be solved, and you know what tools you need. Solutioning is now figuring out how you use the tools to get to the end state.
• Planning - Figuring out who's going to do it, when, and making sure those who are doing the fixing are held accountable.

Let's take an example. It's a simple example, but I think it'll help you understand. Imagine you're in charge of running a pinewood derby race for cub scouts. It looks like this - click here and look at the first picture if you don't know what the track looks like.

One of your guys is getting ready for a derby this weekend, and he puts some tester cars on the track, release them and the cars start hopping off the track and smashing into each other. Strange... so he tries again, it keeps happening. Well they can't race their cars if they keep smashing into each other. Those kids are going to be disappointed, parents going to be mad, and heck, it's not really fair. Great - we just did the purpose work. We found a problem, and we know why it needs to be fixed.

You come by and watch it. Yeah, cars aren't staying on the track. You start looking a bit harder, and see they start acting funny about halfway down the slope. You have him do the cars again and you start noticing a little bump in the two middle lanes. The two middle cars are hitting the bump as they gain speed and hopping the rails. It looks like the wood is overlapping. You'll need to straighten out the wood. Probably going to need to take it apart and put it back to together properly so it's smooth. You take a look and see it's got screws, nails, and you may need to cut down that wood. You need a hammer, a screwdriver, and a sander. You just solved the problem. The cars are hopping the track, and you know how the track is built, and you get the necessary tools.

So now, you hand the tools to your worker. He starts looking and thinking... he figures out how to take it apart, and once he gets it apart, he develops some theories to what exactly he's going to try. Maybe it needs an extra nail or screw. Maybe he needs to sand the wood down. Either way, he's equipped and knows what needs to happen. He is solutioning.

Okay, we know it needs to be done by this weekend. He knows it's probably going to take a few hours, and some of the solutions may take a whole day. It's Wednesday, so it needs to be started no later than Thursday morning, and done by Saturday. That gives him about a day and half to do it. That's planning.

This, at least to me, is very simple. It's not hard. Corporate agendas and demands make it hard. Most commonly what I see happen is this instead.

1. Business identifies something that needs to be done.
2. Business decides when it needs to be done by.
3. Meetings after meetings after meetings. To talk about who needs to know.
4. Teams theorize solutions and make work.
5. Work is done under pressure, pre-emptively, and often is full of problems.
6. Re-iterate over and over until it's done.

The issue here, is that between 1 and 2, that's where the "solving the problem" thing comes into play. How can you plan, solution for, or agree to quality work if you have no idea what you're actually attacking and what you need to complete it?

What's funny though, is time and time again I see this play out. Nearly every time, it's a solid 6-12 month venture, and afterwards the business is happy, people are mildly celebrated on a call, or something. Just "yay" vibes for a day. If we would've spent some time solving the problem, it would've been done better, faster, and far more effectively. Maybe I am just negative, but the culture has me in countless pointless meetings, troubleshooting instead of building, and pressuring me to do things I know won't deliver the way they want. Then... we're celebrated for all the meaningless mess we made.

I already spent this whole section talking about the solution, so next thing!

As a director in a startup, I had endless opportunity to really delve into everything, make folks happy, and deliver quality products. As a manager now in a corporate setting, I am basically just a mailman delivering things. I have very little say in what comes my way, very little power to challenge it, and am somehow expected to operate as an expert when I spend most of my day information hunting, chatting pointlessly, and solving permission or ticket issues.

So the problem with managers in a corporate setting, is that they have no power, and they are pulled far too distant from their teams. You end up wearing all the hats but never leave the house. You are dragged into every issue so you can drag your engineers into it. You are assigned metric butt loads of long winded and pointless training. You are given a freaking mind map of their expectations of you. You want to help your team, but all you can do is empower them with what you can. You end up playing project manager, so the actual project managers can give updates. You pull data to prove whatever it is you need to prove. You adjust the workflow to accommodate company demands. You are expected to know enough about your team that you can speak intelligently, but do not have the experience to speak from the ground level. Especially in a remote setting, you're constantly pinged, pulled into meetings, and stuck researching random stuff. You end up playing organizer and errand boy. I could go on...

Not to mention in my personal experience, I spend all day talking to folks, but I feel more isolated than ever, because I have to stand on my own everywhere I go.

You might say - "well yeah that's the job" - and my response to you is... why? That's what they've been telling everyone for years, and no one realizes how ineffective it actually is, because your middle managers basically eat and cover up all the faults and issues of the culture and company for the sake of their teams. Things don't actually get solved, because if you let it burn, your team and the business suffers. If you bring it up, it'll get ignored because you're handling it; to the business there is no problem. I would strongly argue that if you fired all your managers today, there would be so many issues that you wouldn't know what to do. Not because the managers are doing a great job of holding it together (they are, trust me), but because the business lets those issues compile over time without solving them. Your managers are the band-aids to the bullet wounds.

That's not what a manager should be though. If you're constantly beholden to what the business wants, you end up only covering the businesses problems... and we call that a manager.

The Solution - Give your managers back the time and power they need to actually manage. A good leader is in the pit. A good leader thinks outside the box. A good leader is actively solving problems and making things better. The feedback should be of utmost importance from a manager. Their expectations should revolve around their interaction and involvement as a part of the team, not as an authoritative figure process business needs.

I know this is a wordy article, but I have one more point.

"What is a driver?" - I am glad you didn't bother to ask, but I'll tell you anyway. The corporate entity lives off of stakeholders and shareholders. Shareholders (investors, people who have stock in it, etc.) want something, the board makes a decision, it's the CEO's responsibility to make it happen, and the pressure is on. Stakeholders (aka people to blame) are identified and more pressure is given. All the way down to the intern doing grunt work.

By the time something gets down to the average employee, it's a demand. It's not a question, it's not an "ask" (I don't care what you actually say Mr. Corporate boss), it's not a request... it's a full on demand. If you won't do the demand, someone else will. They've already got a number and date in mind, there's nothing you can do to change it. What Mr. Corporate wants at this point, is for you to solve the problem of how you're going to get it done when they want it done.

In other words, it's a snowball rolling down a hill. The pressure gets bigger, the hope dwindles, and we at the bottom brace for impact.

Hold on though... what if we turned that around? So I did this with my last engineering team. I called it an "engineer driven team" as a leader, because I didn't make the decisions; I let them decide how they wanted to work. They got to pick the poison. They got to decide a workflow, a cadence, role structure, and all of that. Of course, they need some idea generation from someone who understands it, but ultimately they made the decision.

So what didn't change there if you noticed, was WHAT we worked on. We as a team can't control that, but what the structure allowed us to do was decide how and when we worked. What ended up happening was that the team became completely different. They had time to breathe, they became more effective, there were less issues, and overall a happier team. The team also got a lot of recognition and visibility as well, because they drove it.

The reason this is a great example is because that team was the end of the hill. There was nowhere lower to go. We couldn't offload to other teams, we couldn't refuse anything by the time it got to us... but as a team, we worked our own way, and set expectations to manage "upward" as they call it... but I call it the natural flow of how things should be.

Instead of a snowball, it should be a pulley system; top level sends stuff down, low level sends it back up.

Here's just a few rapid fire fixes that wouldn't be too hard, but are still definitely issues. No particular order and very brief.

• Recognition systems for those who work hard, but maybe not above and beyond. They set boundaries and do their job very well, they just don't sacrifice. They often get left behind for their half dead, but still alive coworkers who spend 80+ hours a week trying to make it.
• A full work day isn't 100% and should never be 100%. No one should expect 8 solid hours of no break, to the wall work, no matter what field you're in. Doesn't matter the system, I would argue for 60% everyday. Start at 100%, then remove it until it's 60%. When going gets tough, make it 80%, move it back to 60%.
• Overtime should always deserve something. Sure, salary and a few extra hours a month, okay I get that. If someone has to spend 4 hours one night doing specific thing because no one else can, it deserves something. If times get tough and you're team are working 10-12 hour days, they deserve more pay.
• Alternatively, we should force PTO without guilt, and punish those who work for the sake of work and not on personal time. If you see someone mentally struggling one day, kick them off. Come back tomorrow. If you see someone burnt to hell and back, give them a week to recover, with advice and maybe some extra cash.
• Meetings should have agendas and they should be focused. Chit chat, catchups, etc. should be "cooler talk" time, even in a virtual, but especially in a virtual world.
• If you are a remote first company, regardless of your title or authority, should make ALL in person events optional. Guilt or pleading requests for in person events should be an HR violation.

By the time I finish writing this, it's going to be close to a 5000 word article. And honestly I can sum it up in one paragraph. I'll give you a hint... it's in the name HR.

Corporate culture is based off of people being resources... not people. Because of that, every single thing the business does is centered around pulling value from the employees. They disguise it in "fun" events, celebratory time, large company meetings, but rest assured, there's a 99/100 chance they are doing it hoping you get a high and work harder. That your recognition inspires others to give more. Hoping that a collaborative event will spark innovation.

Which I find quite ironic honestly. They use events to foster innovation, but a majority of the time, the company was founded and gained success through and innovative environment, and it tends to cease when the environment becomes restricted. Higher productive, less creativity. That is the sacrifice they're willing to make.

Anyway, maybe it'll get better. Maybe I'll bow down and just accept it and help who I can. Maybe I'll escape. Each of us need to do what makes us light up. Do it. Take the risk, whatever it is!