Great brands, great experiences, great organizations.
Declining brands, woeful experiences and toxic organizations.
Two sides of a cultural stick perhaps.
In the old days, structure told us how things were supposed to work – the designed organization. Something was also telling us that structure may not work as intended – the lived organization. We’ve moved a long way to appreciate the organization today as a place of living and expression as much as a place of processes, roles or corporate outcomes (if not more). Ultimately, culture plays a big part in corporate success, and failure.
Culture was a really trendy topic some thirty years ago, before we realized some challenges with validation and organization effectiveness. Maybe more cult than culture! There are more opportunities today to evaluate this critical feature of corporate and working life; more tried and tested methods. So, let’s use them.
The challenge with culture is what we are measuring and why. Is there ‘good’ and ‘bad’ culture? How do we decide on factors to assess values, beliefs and assumptions? And assuming we can identify dimensions of meaningful insights, how does it relate to effectiveness, individuals, groups, leaders, stakeholders and customers? Or, to change and adaptation? Good cultural insights need tailoring. But don’t wait for the crisis. Culture creeps silently, for better and for worse, surviving the quarter perhaps, but eventually…
There are so many issues from culture it seems impossible to ignore. Talent management, succession, retention, collaboration, communications, structure, risk, resilience, innovation, strategic planning…and yes, even profit. Leadership matters because of the ability to be attuned to culture, the intangible yet very tangible force behind success as well as ruination. However, culture can now be a little more visible and a little less reliant on someone’s intuition, speculation or the occasional away day. Cultural diagnosis may be somewhat science and somewhat art. But now there’s more science, which can help with the art of leadership!
Virtually all aspects of strategy, organization development and effectiveness take something from cultural insights. We meet leaders every day and see the situations they encounter – organization culture is definitely one of them. At Friisberg & Partners we are very well positioned to support incoming and existing leadership with rigorous methodologies and tools for cultural diagnosis and change.
The success of the Board is 100% dependent on the success of the CEO the Board has hired.
Hiring is an extensive effort and is only worthwhile if the Board makes the right decision. Interviews, resumés and references give important information, however to avoid subjectivity and unconscious bias, cooperation with an Executive Search Partner is often the solution.
Using an experienced Executive Search Partner will bring additional benefits.
The Board‘s Chair should conduct individual discussions with each Board member regarding the organization‘s strengths and weaknesses, internal as well as market-driven challenges, and leadership needs for the future.
As a result a profile of the leadership attributes and behaviours necessary to successfully fulfil the CEO role can be developed and reviewed with the entire Board of Directors.
The Executive Search Partner will ensure the profile is both comprehensive and well tailored to the situation.
The most successful CEO appointments include consideration of both internal and external candidates.
It is important to remember that succession is rarely a neat process and the Board needs to have realistic expectations.
We recommend benchmarking to gain an objective perspective on the internal candidates and to assess the quality of CEO talent externally — particularly when the context, competitive landscape and company‘s strategy is changing.
An experienced Executive Search Partner will deliver job market insights in a short period of time.
An external Search should be led by the Chair of the Board together with the trusted Executive Search Partner to ensure that the very best candidates are considered.
The Partner that has trusting relationships with candidates, information sources and referees can help the Board to develop a long-list of prospects based on candidates' previous roles and industry experience.
Once a long-list is settled, all candidates, internal and external, should be ranked against the core competencies and attributes agreed in the CEO Profile. Those that best meet the profile should be included into the short-list.
The Nomination & Remuneration Committee and/or the Executive Search Partner will typically conduct interviews to reduce the list to a small group of 2 or 3.
The Board can get excited about a candidate‘s resume without fully understanding whether the executive’s views about strategic direction and leadership style are fully compatible with the Board’s own view, and within the framework of the organization’s desired culture.
Therefore the final candidates are typically given an opportunity to present to the Board, followed by Q&As. The presentation is useful to understand differences in the candidate's vision of the company‘s strategic direction, approach to leadership, personal motivations and aspirations.
All Board members should be involved in the interviews of the final candidates and use an interview guide that the Executive Search Partner can provide. The guide outlines critical competencies for the position and the key organizational culture attributes for rating the candidates in these areas. This eliminates subjectivity, helps to focus on concrete skills and performance, and allow agreement on a single candidate.
The Executive Search Partner is in position to arrange thorough reference checks. Ideally, the checks should be done in person with members of the Board present, so critical non-verbal communication is not lost.
We know that the most successful hiring processes are those in which the right people are brought to the table, the specification is designed with the future strategy in mind and the candidates are assessed holistically.
While there can be immense pressure to make a decision quickly, the Board must resist that urge and take the time necessary to make a fully informed decision.
Agata, over the last year you have introduced a very interesting benefit program for your employees related to health on the market. It seems to be the beginning of a long-term trend in HR. How did you come to this?
From the perspective of the HR department, the pandemic had a very positive impact on jump-starting the serious discussion about the mental health of employees. Until the pandemic, mental health was a taboo, which led to negative consequences for incumbents and businesses. For example, it had often led to stigma against the affected. Today we are talking about providing mental care as much as we are talking about healthcare. It is simply another very important benefit for employees.
During the pandemic it turned out that many people suffered in isolation. Our reaction as companies was only: "manager, your job is to take care of your people." In fact, we have shifted this burden onto them. This was a big challenge for many leaders, who did not know how to help their employees; they didn't even want to ask questions to employees about their well-being, because they lacked the knowledge on how to react to these answers.
It turned out that organizations are not completely prepared for this and the level of education in these areas is very low.
Have you found a way to help them?
Yes, maybe not solve the issues but relieve them.
We have created an educational program for managers - Mental Health First Aiders, which trains and prepares for psychological first aid. It is a global program.
We entered into cooperation with several organizations but we were primarily looking for a systemic support. Our partners in this project made selections and out of 100 people (of 800 employees in the company) who applied for the program, 20 were selected, trained, and certified.
These people are in the first line of help. They do not so much solve problems, but rather show our people where/how to find professional help.
How did your employees react to this?
Very well indeed. Though, as might be expected, not everyone utilizes the program to the same extent. However, the representation is so large that it also gives an insight into general and cultural problems within the company. We have an additional benefit in the form of identifying watchouts. We have also introduced 3 additional days off for psychological well-being.
Surely you are at the forefront of this change in the market, aren’t you?
Fortunately, our global CEO Wendy Clark attaches great importance to well-being, hence we have her support in this matter. Companies are beginning to expand the range of options for taking care of mental health. When it comes to the availability of psychological or psychiatric care, the statistics, especially in our part of Europe, are alarming. That is why such help must be developed. This is obviously an additional burden for companies, yet the trend is right and there is probably no turning back.
You say the topic was caused by a pandemic, but could it also have anything to do with other aspects of our lives?
Of course, with the whole geopolitical situation and lack of stability and predictability, etc. Additionally, the "snowflakes" generation is growing. They are extremely sensitive, emotional people who are not prepared for what they are about to find in the outside world. Then, what is a strong point may turn out to be a weakness and vice versa. Disagreeing on certain things in the company’s space is young people’s forte, however, the pandemic seems to have hit them very hard.
You say that the issue of employee benefits is changing. What other trends are you following?
Taking care of one’s career and competences of the future. Still few organizations deal with career counselling and re-skilling. This will be a very important change due to the rapid development of AI and digitization. We know that some professions will disappear, although, we cannot predict when it will happen. We are not yet faced with this challenge, but it may surprise us very quickly. It is necessary to do an in-depth analysis of what will disappear, what will appear, whether we have education in specific areas, or whether we can search for talents in other countries. Thus, it will certainly be another challenge that companies, especially HR departments, will face.
Having the right people in place can make all the difference to a company, especially in the fast-paced and competitive environment of private equity and venture capital.
Indeed, human capital is the most valuable asset of any organization. Without a team of talented individuals working together, it is difficult for a start-up or growth company to succeed, even if it has a great product or service.
The leadership dilemma is increasingly present in private equity and venture capital firms. It is the new key criterion!
Companies that are able to access this talent have a clear advantage over their competitors.
This is where Executive Search firms come in: they help private equity firms and their portfolio companies recruit the talent they need at this critical stage - and at various levels: from investment managers to fund managers to board members throughout the life cycle of the company: creation, development, support, transmission.
These three types of specialists, private equity, venture capital and executive search, have always been linked at the intersection of value creation and human capital.
But sometimes the boundaries between them become blurred. Indeed, some private equity funds acquire or create their own executive search functions. On the other hand, executive search firms are also starting to get involved in the venture capital sector, launching their own funds.
In France for example, this niche market is mainly focused on Paris and Lyon. It operates more discreetly in the regions, mostly through partnership with the local economic network, often as advisors to managers.
The challenge for Executive Search is to attract talent from other decision making centres.
With close to 20 years of experience in international board, C-level and leadership team assessment and development, Sabine has worked with senior executives as a trusted coach and advisor. She has partnered with national and global organizations of all sizes, including publicly listed corporations, family-owned businesses and the public sector.
Sabine provides a breadth of insight and advice in talent management, CEO succession planning and executive development, leading advisory projects on cultural or organizational topics, as well as development audits, assessments for mergers, and executive search mandates. By supporting digital transformation processes, Sabine also helps drive comprehensive change initiatives, organizational design, people development and cultural audits.
Sabine was with a leading international executive search firm for five years, as a Senior Principal in Germany and Head of Leadership & Talent Consulting for Austria and worked more recently for Russell Reynolds in Germany. She also co-founded her own boutique management firm and has worked for leading multinationals, including Accenture and Aon Hewitt.
She holds a BA in human resource management from the University of Salzburg and a Master’s degree in organizational and economic psychology from the University of Vienna. She has also completed certifications in labour law and executive leadership for global organizations and is a licensed trainer and coach. Sabine speaks fluent English and German.
Zoltan Petho, Chair of Friisberg & Partners International, also extended his welcome, “We were delighted to meet Sabine at our recent conference in Madrid and it is fantastic that she is opening a new Friisberg office in Vienna. Her immense and impressive experience will be a huge asset to Friisberg globally.".
Sabine is thrilled to be joining Friisberg & Partners International in these exciting times and is looking forward to working closely with the firm’s clients across the globe.
Toxic leadership exists in too many organisations – indeed we have seen it here in the UK at the very top of government. Unsurprisingly, the result has been a loss of trust by colleagues and the general public in their leaders, and with it trust in the organisations they lead.
A toxic leader is often hugely charismatic, effectively hiding their toxicity – indeed grandiose narcissists often emerge as powerful leaders and are considered as ‘rockstars’. Power quickly becomes consolidated in the hands of a few people who report directly to the toxic boss and anyone who questions them are quickly removed.
Edelman’s Trust Barometer (2021) indicates that “... none of the societal leaders we track — government leaders, CEOs, journalists and even religious leaders - are trusted to do what is right, with drops in trust scores for all.”
In some cases, toxic behaviour is actually a way of mitigating self-doubt, but they still create a culture of fear. In fact, toxic leaders don’t typically have a lot of self-confidence and they attempt to overcompensate by constantly elevating themselves at the expense of others; such organisations tend to have a high employee turnover.
A toxic corporate culture is the single best predictor of which companies suffered from high attrition in the first six months of the Great Resignation. The failure to appreciate high performers is another element of culture that predicts attrition. Compensation and burnout also influence attrition, but other aspects of culture appear to matter more.
There is insufficient accountability in many organisations for unethical and amoral behaviour of leaders. Indeed, we often reward financial results over the well-being of people, or the planet.
As well as focusing on good character and virtuous behaviour as the prime criteria for leader selection, we often recommend a more forensic approach in the appointment of executives with judicious psychometric profiling.
In a society where we are constantly told that everything is uncertain and volatile, where companies are transforming and acquiring more agile and digital management models, where unicorn companies dominate, where there is a lack of raw materials, of scenery, of leadership, where we compete with global talent (GIG economy), where projects without purpose no longer make us fall in love, and data is the DNA of any profession...
While we run as if we are ants living the present and not thinking too much about the cold winter, we are lucky enough that there are some cicadas who are doing their best to bring up real and lasting solutions that solve the long term while being very adaptable to the short term. These cicadas have a major purpose - more than us or even our companies’ - they are interested in adding, helping transforming and improving our society, and above all they want to provide the necessary tools to students and professionals to be self-employed and have employability (sustained over time) in a global market.
There are many professionals, vocationally or "by chance," working in educational projects, increasingly demanding more competition, more demand for a complex user experience to find hybrid or digital models - and thanks to these new figures that appear in the educational environment (along with the value that their teaching and research team have always had in these institutions), good practices from the professional world are being implemented and a real disruption is being generated when it comes to learning.
The education sector has finally got its act together. A sector (by some) poorly defined as the 3rd sector, slow, regulated and obsolete, a generator of ideas, applied research, thinkers and value. A sector that the smartest have identified as one of the engines of change, profitable in real transformation, with incredible human capital, technology and pedagogical models capable of making everyone learn and understand.
Given the evidence that there is a greater need to renew knowledge throughout professional life - Working Adult - with specialization programs, reskilling training, today there are countless possibilities and we are evolving to the concept of democratization of education, with quality options for all, in terms of content, format, duration and price.
To give this response to the market, organizations have also had to transform themselves and attracting talent in private institutions is one of the essential objectives. Without a good management team it is impossible to carry out this transformation, and above all it is impossible to carry it out on time.
Agile and very executive minds know how to recognize the rhythms of the labour market, the demand for talent, decision-making processes, expansion strategies and above all what they project inside and outside: what the labour market will demand and what a student needs to ensure successful learning.
In addition to this commitment to a more professional human capital, there is a need for technology as a management tool, as a learning channel and model, and as a guarantee of a personalized experience.
This situation is now driven by the entry of investment funds in private educational groups (schools and universities) that are "concentrating" the operation to have a greater offer and are driving a strong accelerator for change.
In this new scenario, the demand for a different-professional-types arise, to lead the operation in the investees, headquarters, or spin offs of these groups - managers with a 360º vision who are responsible for the income, and although they do not have experience in the sector, this allows an objective view.
In this area, the Business Development and Marketing Manager continues to be a sought-after and recognized profile. Private institutions thrive on their enrolment, so the effort to create a brand, attract the best students and be able to generate value innovation and obtain a positive response from the increasingly global market is essential.
B2B business development or Institutional Relations profiles are becoming more and more in demand. There is a need for constant learning as professionals, and companies are key in this mission by offering their employees quality training.
From the academic point of view, the figure of the Dean is essential. An academic and responsible manager with vertical knowledge, being able to value the area of knowledge by promoting research, partnership with companies and international educational institutions. They must ensure that their faculty is at the forefront of innovation because their future student employability is essential, not only to ensure the growth of the institution, but to harness the reputation and prestige of the faculty and therefore of the Institution.
Marta, for over a year you have been preparing your organisation for an objectively very difficult process, namely the acquisition of your company – UPC (Polish subsidiary of Liberty Global) by another market player. What was the biggest challenge?
Indeed, it has been a very challenging time for the organisation and surely, it is not over yet. From a CPO’s point of view, it is an extremely interesting and enriching period. Whilst preparing for the merger, we were well aware that this would be a highly emotional time for all our staff. And we knew that the only way to defuse this “emotional bomb” is to adopt transparent, clear communication with all the employees. As the Board, we could not take care of every single person – this was the role of line managers - but we wanted everybody to be fully informed about what was going on. At the same time, we wanted to understand our employees’ problems and doubts rather than to make assumptions, or to take a guess.
So what did you do?
We proposed several communication platforms, points of contact, with our employees and different programmes. But in focus groups, where people could voice their opinions, it became clear they feared that they would struggle to adapt to the new reality - they did not know what they were fit for or whether they could do something different...
And not that they will lose their job following the merge? This would have seem like the most obvious concern.
One is the consequence of the other. If “I can’t do it, I don’t know it, I might not be fit for it” then “I will probably lose my job”. We knew we had excellent people in our organisation, so we decided to concentrate on solving this problem and introduced a multi-stage, multi-module programme called “Energy For a New Beginning”. We wanted to build our employees’ confidence in their own abilities, knowledge and experience. As you know, one of the components of this programme, was a project named “Brand Yourself” which for the senior management group was executed in partnership with Friisberg Poland. Conversations with independent Executive Search consultants helped our employees to see and appreciate what they represented and what they could do with their career in the new organisation. Obviously we gave similar opportunities to all employees via internal coaching, measuring certain skills, special development days and dedicated workshops – that part was lead by HR Team.
Yes, it was a very interesting project. In a sincere, non-judgemental conversations people were able to open up, reflect and think through different issues related to their previous experiences. What else did you focus on?
At all times up until zero hour we had average market attrition and we delivered the business result with a surplus. It was due to the fact that our corporate culture has built commitment, motivation and a high level of employee satisfaction. These are always important factors in organisation management, but at times of incertitude and high emotions they become an essential protective shield.
A merger like this is always a culture shock. It is important to realise that the culture of the other organisation is usually different. It should not be discredited without exploring and getting to know it. In our case the processes, the procedures, the language – all of them were different, therefore the buyer had decided to give us three months following the merge to get to know each other, without introducing any substantial changes. This, however, made people fill uncertain, not knowing what was to happen, as if in a fog.
I think every solution has its pros and cons, just like the strategy of drawing a line under the past and taking quick decisions without exploring the essence of the matter. But regardless of the merger strategy, it is paramount to show people respect in the process.
The other thing is to redirect emotions towards constructive actions, to something one can have a say in. It is imperative – and this is the role of line managers – not to allow employees to split hairs about matters beyond their control. We play the cards we have, there is no other way round. But for the game to make sense, it requires commitment at all levels.
Taking care of people’s emotions at an individual level is a must, but it cannot only be done by the Board, this is untenable. It is the responsibility of each team leader at their own level.
If you were to give some advice to those facing a similar process, what would you say?
In one way this is good – I mean seeing people face to face is wonderful after so long being trapped behind a computer screen. However, it hasn’t taken me long to be reminded just how important it is to pay particular attention to those who don’t say much.
Increasingly I find myself eager to know what they would say: they just watch, and often with every meeting they get smarter, by saying nothing at all. They listen.
I have seen many leaders hurl words around the room like arrows. Those hoping for their next promotion do the same.
Ego can make you talk too much, but the person who is the loudest and talks the most in the meeting is not necessarily the smartest.
Of course, how we talk and listen are deeply influenced by our own personalities, cultural experiences and gender. It is sad but true that many men still talk over women. Women often feel they tread a thin line by making a point without coming across as too loud or aggressive. A woman who tells others what to do is often called bossy whereas to some men, giving orders can be one way of getting and keeping the high-status role. As a result, many women opt to stay silent rather than risk saying something wrong or being through of negatively.
Perhaps using as few words as possible to make your point, then knowing when to be quiet, is actually the skill we should all practise.
Those who listen should be encouraged to talk.
Those who tend to talk too much should be encouraged to listen.
Lorri Lowe
Partner, UK
Workplace flexibility, better benefits and higher pay are not the only causes of the current so-called 'Great Resignation'. While employee turnover is nothing new, the regularity with which people are moving roles is increasing, because their motivations are changing.
It wasn’t that long ago that jobs were a simple transaction – do the work and get paid. Motivations have been of a ‘carrot & stick’ nature for many generations. However, it has been reported recently that almost two-thirds of people would prefer to work for a company with effective environmental policies, and many millennials would actually accept a pay cut to do so. Quitting because of a mismatch between personal values and an employer’s was relatively rare but now it is not that unusual.
Employees don’t just want higher salaries, although they will of course demand them, they also want investment in their and society’s future. They want a collaborative endeavour, a shared sense of identity, and common purpose towards a greater good. It’s important to them that they have a genuine, though not necessarily an in-person ‘connection’, with their co-workers and their employer.
A strong ‘green’ ethos within an organisation is a key factor for many candidates when choosing where to work. Recent studies by Deloitte and McKinsey have highlighted the climate as the single biggest issue younger workers care about and this is consistent with the underlying trends we see in the media. Sustainability really is important if your company is to win the best talent out there. The current experience of many employers might not yet reflect this because a large proportion of management are Generation X, of whom only 17% feel the same way. As soon as 2025, Millennials will account for 75% of the global workforce, so understanding their mindset is an immediate issue, demanding attention and action right now.
The ‘greenwash’ of discursive prolix position statements (all abstract aspirations and woolly goal-setting) are easily dismissed and are increasingly being mocked. Consider too that the millennial candidate is, thanks to the convergence of many other factors, now in a relatively strong position to be the interviewer – that is, to determine if your company is worthy of their time.
Essentially, the efficacy of your answers to sustainability questions will boil down to whether your company can be trusted to keep to its promises. Some corporate soul-searching might be tough and corrective measures painful, but hard-earned credibility will serve you well over the longer term; and ‘employer branding’ has never been more important.
To achieve any meaningful change, companies must accurately measure and honestly report their carbon footprint. This isn’t just essential for the planet, it is an opportunity to relaunch and remarket your business, not just to its customers, but to the talent it will need along the way.
Having a published strategy on sustainability is no longer a competitive advantage, it’s a fundamental requirement – a pre-qualifier. The good news is, it’s never too late to get one, but it should be refreshed regularly to keep pace with the science and public sentiment. Get this right, and the best talent will be drawn to you. It assuredly will.
The really hard part is not the strategizing, nor the recruiting of such talent (both are challenging, no question) but it is the leadership of the business that is vitally important to get right. The skillsets and mindsets required of managers, executives, directors – and especially the CEOs – at the top of every company are very different now in this incredibly competitive recruitment market. If a company has the right leadership in place to respect and recognise the values of its people, as well as reward them for their efforts, it will have a fighting chance.
Lorri Lowe
Partner, UK
First published by the Confederation of British Industry on 6 June 2022 here.
You need to load content from hCaptcha to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from Turnstile to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More Information
