glax_newsletter_2013_in_brief_web-0

glax_newsletter_2013_in_brief_web-1

Download “2013 in brief” (PDF file, 0.4MB)

Adapt, change or die, says the famous business motto.

These findings in this report by the Center of Talent and Innovation show that innovation draws on diversity in two ways: employees with inherent diversity best understand markets and end-users that companies today are most keen to reach; and leaders with acquired diversity are best equipped to unlock the insights of these employees. At companies that harness both inherent diversity in their workforce and acquired diversity in leadership (“two-dimensional” diversity), employees are 75 percent more likely to have had a marketable idea implemented than employees at companies that fail to harness these drivers.

“What drives serial innovation? CTI’s ground-breaking research reveals the engine to be a diverse workforce that’s managed by leaders who cherish difference, embrace disruption, and foster a speak-up culture. Inclusive leader behaviors effectively “unlock” the innovative potential of an inherently diverse workforce, enabling companies to increase their share of existing markets and lever open brand new ones. By encouraging a proliferation of perspectives, leaders who foster a speak-up culture also enable companies to realize greater efficiencies and trim costs—another way that innovation drives bottom-line value.

Leaders have long recognized that an inherently diverse workforce (inclusive of women, people of color, gay individuals) confers a competitive edge in terms of selling products or services to diverse end users—what’s known as “matching the market.” Our research shows, however, that an inherently diverse workforce can be a potent source of innovation, as diverse individuals are better attuned to the unmet needs of consumers or clients
like themselves. Indeed, their insight is critical to identifying and addressing new market opportunities. We find that when teams have one or more members who represent the gender, ethnicity, culture, generation, or
sexual orientation of the team’s target end user, the entire team is far more likely (as much as 158% more likely) to understand that target, increasing their likelihood of innovating effectively for that end user.

Six inclusive behaviors, we find, are highly correlated with a “speak-up” culture, or an organizational environment where everyone feels free to volunteer opinions, suggest unorthodox approaches, or propose solutions that fly in the face of established practice. Leaders who exhibit at least three of these six behaviors unlock innovative capacity by unlocking the full spectrum of perspectives, opinions, and toolkits that diverse individuals bring to problem-solving. While critical at the team level, such leaders are especially transformative at the top, because they’re the ones who determine organizational culture by socializing their behaviors. Brilliant individuals and high-performing teams cannot deliver in a culture where channels for experimentation don’t exist, failure is penalized, and the loudest voice in the room is that of the leader.

Indeed, our research shows that when leadership lacks innate or acquired diversity, or fails to foster a speak-up culture, fewer ideas with market potential make it to market. Ideas from women, people of color, LGBTs, and Gen-Ys are less likely to win the endorsement they need to go forward because 56% of leaders don’t value ideas they don’t personally see a need for—a veritable chokehold when an organization’s leaders are predominantly Caucasian, male, and heterosexual, and come from similar educational and socioeconomic backgrounds. In short, the data strongly suggest that homogeneity stifles innovation. Fully 78% of our survey sample work for such a company.

Companies that harness both innate diversity in their workforce and acquired diversity in leadership are measurably more innovative than companies that fail to harness these drivers. Employees at companies with 2D diversity are more likely than employees at non-diverse companies to take risks, challenge the status quo, and embrace a diverse array of inputs. They’re also 75% more likely (35% vs. 20%) to see their ideas move through the pipeline and make it to the marketplace.

Most dramatically, our findings demonstrate a robust correlation between highly innovative, diverse companies and market growth. Diversity pays a handsome dividend: employees at publicly traded companies with 2D diversity are 70% more likely (46% vs. 27%) than employees at non-diverse publicly traded companies to report that their firm captured a new market in the past 12 months, and 45% more likely (48% vs. 33%) to report that their firm improved market share in that same time-frame.

In the final analysis, our research shows, companies with multicultural workforces have the means at handto grow and sustain innovation. The secret isn’t a surfeit of creativity, although creativity helps. It isn’t a lone genius, although genius never hurts. Rather, innovative capacity resides in an inherently diverse workforce where leaders prize difference, value every voice, and manage rather than suppress disruption. If innovation is
the Holy Grail, then diversity should be a company’s unrelenting quest.”

CTI-IDMG-infographic

Findings show lack of diversity in senior leadership impacts performance and market growth.

NEW YORK, September 25, 2013 – The vast majority of white-collar employees in the United States, 78 percent, work for companies that fail to realize their full innovative potential because their leadership lacks the inclusive behaviors needed to effectively “unlock” the innovative potential of an inherently diverse workforce. These findings are part of the “Innovation, Diversity and Market Growth” report, the first national survey that quantifies the correlation between diverse companies and market outcomes, and were released today by the Center for Talent Innovation (CTI), a leading global talent think tank.

The findings show that innovation draws on diversity in two ways: employees with inherent diversity best understand markets and end-users that companies today are most keen to reach; and leaders with acquired diversity are best equipped to unlock the insights of these employees. At companies that harness both inherent diversity in their workforce and acquired diversity in leadership (“two-dimensional” diversity), employees are 75 percent more likely to have had a marketable idea implemented than employees at companies that fail to harness these drivers.
Publicly traded companies with “two-dimensional diversity” are 45 percent more likely than publicly
traded companies lacking it to have grown market share in the last 12 months and 70 percent more
likely to have captured a new market.

More:

  • The study scrutinizes two kinds of difference: inherent and acquired.
  • Inherent diversity describes “embodied” difference—traits you were born with and have been consequently conditioned by.
  • Acquired diversity, in contrast, is not who you are but how you act as a result of what you’ve experienced or learned (e.g., cultural fluency, gender smarts, generational savvy)
  • “Two-dimensional” diversity describes leadership that exhibits both inherent and acquired diversity.
  • Teams with members who represent the inherent diversity of the team’s target consumer or client are far more likely to understand that target, increasing their likelihood of innovating effectively for that end-user.
  • Leaders who have acquired diversity are much more likely to behave inclusively than leaders who lack it. Behaviors include:

– Ensuring that everyone speaks up and gets heard (63 percent vs. 29 percent)
– Making it safe to risk proposing novel ideas (74 percent vs. 34 percent)
– Empowering team members to make decisions (82 percent vs. 40 percent)

Center for Talent Innovation Press Release

 

“After DOMA: What it Means For You” LGBT Organizations Fact Sheet Series details many of the ways federal agencies accord legal respect to married same-sex couples. The guide includes 14 factsheets on the following topics: Bankruptcy, Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), Federal Employee Benefits, Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Immigration, Medicaid, Medicare, Military Spousal Benefits, Private Employment Benefits, Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, Taxes, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and Veteran Spousal Benefits.

There are more than 1,100 places in federal law where a protection or responsibility is based on marital status. The ruling striking down DOMA will not be effective until 25 days from the decision, but even when effective, federal agencies—large bureaucracies—may need and take some time to change forms, implement procedures, train personnel, and efficiently incorporate same-sex couples into the spousal-based system. Until same-sex couples can marry in every state in the nation, there will be uncertainty about the extent to which same-sex spouses will receive federal marital-based protections nationwide. For federal programs that assess marital status based on the law of a state that does not respect marriages of same-sex couples, those state laws will likely pose obstacles for legally married couples and surviving spouses in accessing federal protections and responsibilities.

The fact sheet series was produced together by: American Civil Liberties Union, Center for American Progress, Family Equality Council, Freedom to Marry, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Human Rights Campaign, Immigration Equality, Lambda Legal, National Center for Lesbian Rights, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and OutServe-SLDN.

You can download factsheets here.

 

 

Won’t domestic partner benefits cost too much?

Domestic partner benefits incur only a minimal increase in health care costs, and most employers do not find that dramatic numbers of employees use the policy. Yet employers agree the benefits of offering equal employee packages in terms of public relations and attracting new employees is very beneficial. Here are some real world figures on cost and enrollment:

  • In April 2004, a spokesperson for American Family Insurance reported the cost of their health coverage had increased by no more than one percent since they began offering protections in 2002.
  • Also as of April 2004, CUNA Mutual Insurance reported that less than one percent of their 6,000 workers had signed on for these protections.
  • Public employers in Wisconsin that offer equal protections, like the City of Madison, have also reported cost increases of less than one percent.
  • When the State of Illinois was first considering extending domestic partner protections to state employees, the Illinois Department of Central Management Services estimated that the cost of providing domestic partner protections would be approximately one tenth of one percent of the state’s employee health care budget.
  • In 2007, Dane County reported that the cost of domestic partner protections is just over one percent of total health care expenditures.
  • In 2007, the City of Milwaukee reported that the cost of its policy was less than .003 percent of the total health care expenditures.
  • In 2007, Western Wisconsin Technical College reported that the cost of its policy is less than .12 percent of the school’s total budget.
  • When the State of Minnesota provided domestic partnership health protections to state employees, the Minnesota Department of Employee Relations reported that the increase in cost was only .05 percent in state employee health care costs—only $189,000 out of a total health care budget of $331 million.

 

Is it true that domestic partner health benefits are treated as taxable income?

Yes. Unfortunately, domestic partner health insurance is treated as taxable income for federal purposes. Your employer’s contribution to your partner’s part of the premium will be taxable to you. You will pay income tax and Social Security payroll tax on the portion of the insurance premium that your employer contributes to your partner’s policy. However, if you claim your partner as a dependent on your federal tax return, this would not be taxed. To qualify as a dependent, your partner must receive more than half of his or her support from you. For more information about this issue, visit the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) website.

Can’t anyone claim to have a domestic partner? How does our company avoid fraud?

Criteria for domestic partners frequently require that the partners have lived together for at least six months, are responsible for each other’s financial welfare, are at least 18 years old, and are mentally competent to enter into a legal contract. Many companies that operate in cities with government-sponsored domestic partner registries simply require that the employee be registered with his or her partner through the city registry. In Wisconsin, Madison and Milwaukee have such registries. Some employers require that employees sign an affadavit attesting to the long-term, committed nature of their relationship. For most employers, it’s more difficult to sign up a domestic partner for health insurance than it is to claim someone as your spouse.

Will our insurance company allow for such coverage?

Most major insurance companies now make domestic partner coverage possible, particularly for employers with 50 or more employees. Contact your insurance company to find out more about what they offer through their group policies. Smaller employers who cannot find an insurance company to carry a domestic partner policy will often provide some form of reimbursement for domestic partner health insurance.

Are domestic partner benefits only for same-sex couples?

No. Many companies define domestic partners as any unmarried couple—same- or opposite-sex. Fair Wisconsin chiefly advocates for same-sex domestic partner protections because same-sex couples are prohibited from marrying in Wisconsin—and therefore cannot access critical protections like health insurance coverage except through domestic partner recognition.

Domestic partner benefits are controversial—will there be a public backlash if we offer them?

Domestic partner benefits were once controversial, but today it’s becoming unusual not to provide them. More and more employees expect it, and the public supports equal protections. A 2001 statewide poll of 600 people conducted by Chamberlain Research Consultants found a majority (59 percent) of Wisconsinites support domestic partner health insurance coverage for gay couples. The sheer number of companies offering the protections also suggests that most of them have decided domestic partner benefits help their company’s image rather than hurt it. This is a mainstream business practice, and there’s really nothing controversial about it.

Is our company legally required to provide domestic partner benefits?

Your company may be required to offer domestic partner benefits if you do business with certain governments in other parts of the United States. The following cities require contracting companies to offer domestic partners the same benefits that they make available to married spouses: Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland, and San Mateo County in California; King County, Seattle, and Tumwater in Washington; and Minneapolis. In 2007, the state of California will also require companies with which it contracts to offer equal benefits.

Wisconsin state law does not require that your company provide these benefits.

Source: fairwisconsin.com

 

Article from DiversityInc

“When Pfizer sought to explore ways to reach smokers with its smoking-cessation product, the pharmaceutical giant tapped its talent pool last year for ideas. Since studies indicate a higher percentage of the LGBT population smokes cigarettes than the heterosexual population, Pfizer identified leaders from within its LGBT-colleague population to partner with the multicultural-marketing department to consider a targeted outreach to LGBT smokers.

Although the business-development details are still being determined, the initiative has far-reaching benefits. “We’ll also improve health within the LGBT community,” says Wil Yates, senior manager of information analysis and co-chair of both Pfizer’s New York City–based colleague-resource group, Out Pfizer Employee Network (OPEN), and the Global LGBT Council. Pfizer is one of DiversityInc’s 25 Noteworthy Companies this year.

An LGBT-friendly workplace has far-reaching benefits as well. DiversityInc uses inclusive criteria to determine The DiversityInc Top 50 Companies for Diversity�® as well as the 12 other lists, includingThe DiversityInc Top 10 Companies for LGBT Employees. Organizations on The DiversityInc Top 10 Companies for LGBT Employees list must:

  • Offer same-sex domestic-partner/spousal benefits
  • Have an employee-resource group aimed at LGBT employees and allies
  • Actively recruit LGBT people
  • Include content on their web sites aimed at LGBT employees and customers
  • Have a 100 percent rating on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index (CEI), which has seen a 17 percent jump over the past year in U.S. businesses earning the top rating (from 260 in 2009 to 305 in 2010) despite the down economy

In addition, DiversityInc confers with respected LGBT organizations—GLSENHuman Rights Campaign and Out & Equal Workplace Advocates, for example—for recommendations.

How Progressive Companies Create Welcoming Workplaces:

Leverage Employee-Resource Groups

Pfizer, the first pharmaceutical company to earn a 100 percent score on the CEI in 2004, has a global network of about 500 LGBT and allied members that has grown exponentially since being chartered in the early 2000s. (All of the DiversityInc Top 50 companies have LGBT employee-resource groups, or ERGs, versus 30 percent five years ago.)

In 2002, members of the New York, Michigan and Connecticut chapters of the LGBT group worked with the legal, HR and executive teams to institute same-sex domestic-partner or spousal benefits. Pfizer has since expanded its benefits to include gender-reassignment surgery. And with input from transgender employees who have transitioned in the workplace, OPEN is now collaborating across several departments to develop gender-transition guidelines. “It’s all about education,” says Yates.


Similarly, KPMG (No. 15 in the DiversityInc Top 50) taps its Pride ERG for advice in several critical areas, including recruiting. The group reviews all materials provided at on-campus events and conferences, noting verbiage, suggesting information pertinent to LGBT recruits and contributing testimonials. “It’s all about bringing your whole self to work—and that’s the message we want to provide to undergrads,” says Timothy Stiles, the group’s national co-chair and partner in charge of the Global Grants Program. Pride members also coach the firm’s recruiting personnel, preparing them with answers to questions job candidates may raise and “sensitizing them to LGBT issues [including micro-inequities],” says Stiles. KPMG was the first Big Four accounting firm to have a comprehensive policy for transgender employees and is No. 6 on The DiversityInc Top 10 Companies for LGBT Employees list.

But creating an environment where openness flourishes requires leadership commitment, notes Pfizer’s Chief Diversity Officer Karen Boykin-Towns. “Our chairman and CEO is a real advocate … for all diversity, but particularly in this space,” she says, adding that the executive sponsor of the Pfizer Global LGBT Network reports directly to the CEO. “The work OPEN is doing throughout the company is making it more comfortable for people to come out.”

Include LGBT Leaders in Business Development

Openly out leaders often provide effective and valuable insights where “traditional outreach might not be so successful,” says Boykin-Towns.
Developing these leaders, however, is key. American Express (No. 12 in the DiversityInc Top 50) is planning an employee leadership-development summit this fall to help train and enable several members of its Pride and other networks to take on decision-making roles. American Express—whose national Pride network has eight chapters and about 1,000 members (including 50 from the recently launched chapter in Mexico)—will be hosting this collaborative leadership event with Johnson & Johnson (No. 2) and Aetna (No. 30).

Endorse LGBT Events and Causes

A consistent commitment to sponsor pride events and LGBT nonprofits helps foster a positive brand identity. Consider the corporate partners of GLSEN, a national education organization that works to ensure safe schools for all students, regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity/expression. They include Wells Fargo & Co. (No. 43), KPMGCisco Systems (No. 37), American ExpressAT&T (No. 3) and IBM (No. 8)—well-respected companies that have also earned spots on this year’s DiversityInc Top 50 list. Pfizer and American Express were also recently recognized by GLSEN at its Respect Awards in New York City.

American Express has taken the event-endorsement strategy to a new level. The merchant-services division, responsible for signing on retailers to accept the American Express credit card, paired up with members of its UK chapter of Pride in the weeks prior to the annual corporate-sponsored Stonewall Equality Walk. Together, they canvassed hundreds of merchants in Brighton, a popular LGBT community about an hour outside London, and asked each to display a Stonewall Equality Walk decal with the American Express logo in their windows. “So now it’s not just our service reps having a conversation with a merchant,” says Peraino. “They have a Pride employee who can talk about the importance of that walk, the community and the fact that we as a company support it. It creates a different conversation—a relationship-building conversation.”

The result: 89 percent of the visited merchants agreed to display the decal, and American Express (also No. 8 in The DiversityInc Top 10 Companies for LGBT Employees) signed on four new merchants. The company is brainstorming ways to apply this and other LGBT-focused strategies in the United States.

Pipeline initiatives are equally important. Each year at Pfizer, for instance, up to 10 employeesmentor at-risk LGBT students who attend the Harvey Milk High School in Manhattan.

Add LGBT-Owned Business Suppliers

Pfizer’s diversity-leadership team has partnered with the procurement department to expand contract-bidding opportunities to LGBT-owned enterprises. Earlier this year, vendors certified by theNational Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce were added to the company’s supplier database, and Pfizer has already contracted new business to a lesbian-owned marketing-communications company.

Likewise, American Express has been building a database of LGBT-owned suppliers and, with its recently announced head of procurement, will begin opening up contract opportunities to these vendors for products and services. In the LGBT community, “supplier diversity really makes a difference,” says Peraino. “We’re going to make sure the focus gets shined on that within the coming year.”

Start a Diversity Dialogue

Having an LGBT-friendly company has an added benefit: It helps form an affinity with allied groups. Four years ago, when Pfizer introduced its Pride Journal (a collection of heartfelt first-person accounts written by LGBT or allied employees that’s posted on its intranet during the month of June), a healthy dialogue on sexual-orientation and gender-identity discrimination was started. “That really put issues of LGBT rights on the map for our broader colleague population,” says Nicholas Patrick, manager of worldwide communications and co-chair of both OPEN and the Pfizer Global LGBT Council.

Similarly, when American Express rolled out its global branding campaign that featured, among other stars, lesbian talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres, it became an instant hit with all consumers. So for all corporate leaders who fear the backlash of aligning the business with the LGBT community, take a tip from Peraino: “There really is no downside.”

 

We have all heard that in diversity and inclusion initiatives need support and drive from the very top to be successful.  So how do CEOs and top management show their commitment to diversity and inclusion?  We have asked a few diversity professionals for their opinions and have distilled their replies here.

“CEO commitment for D&I isn’t a simple, single statement and/or action, rather a process which involves the whole organization.  As D&I practitioners we often look to the CEO, or someone at the highest levels of the organization to support and advocate for D&I.   The usual reply we get is that their job is to make the business run properly.  When the business case for D&I is clear and aligned to the organization, there is an overall greater chance that the CEO will openly state his/her commitment.  Whether that commitment is linked to advocating the human capital component, new and emerging markets, corporate social responsibility, shareholder value and/or various other key business drivers – it is very important to provide senior leadership, with the information and knowledge needed to understand how D&I can be viewed as a business strategy and something that will enhance the overall performance of the organization. At the end of the day – it’s all about results (i.e., bottomline impact) with everything else simply conversation.”

“CEOs and management should demonstrate their commitment to diversity and inclusion through an active participation in the process. A few ways to demonstrate are: 

  • Attend meetings regarding D&I, whether they are ERGs or the Diversity Council. 
  • Creating a culture that requires support of organizational D&I initiatives.
  • Allocate funds for D&I initiatives
    Practicing D&I in their daily lives within and outside of the organization.”

“CEOs cannot carry the entire D&I initiatives alone. It is an organizational effort that requires participation at all levels.  However, there are things they could encourage:

  1. Looking at policies and structures to ensure these promote D&I
  2. Being educated themselves about D&I
  3. Allowing time for people to adjust to their organization
  4. Creating platforms for exchange and debate, and embracing even those who do not agree….for they have a right to an opinion too!”

“The CEO needs to –

  • work flexibly and promote flexible working,
  • actively mentor a diverse pool of talented individuals and not just those who match the top of the organisation,
  • change HR policies to reflect this”

“The CEO has to voice with conviction and confidence what s/he means by diversity and how diversity and inclusive culture are essential to the success of the enterprise. Diversity as “woven into the fabric” is a helpful metaphor to start with. 

  • The CEO must establish diversity learning (not training) programs. D+I learning means development of diversity skills, or competencies, from the bottom up; training suggests passive, top down, being-told-what’s-right-and-wrong.
  • The CEO must address diversity resistance. People often resist “diversity” and D+I training because they are being blamed for things they don’t do. They also sometimes think their personal belief system is being challenged by the “political correctness” of diversity programming. People are much more likely to accept and learn from diversity learning that steers clear of politics and stays based on research about things like unconscious bias. People must perceive that diversity learning benefits everyone and the whole enterprise.
  • The CEO must establish effective diversity learning platforms that are right for his or her company. Diversity programing should never shame, blame, or finger-point. It should start with basics, such as an inclusive definition of diversity. It should be engaging and fascinating. It has to be practical, i.e., affordable for the company and not overly taxing time-wise for the learner.”

 

 

This article appeared earlier this year in Harvard Business Review and looks at how rude and disrespectful behavior, often from the top, affects a company’s bottom line.  When employees are treated badly, this reflects negatively on the company’s performance and services to the clients.  Needless to say, there are more ways than one to treat people respectfully.  The Golden Rule of Inclusion states: “treat everyone the way you would like to be treated:”  However, the Platinum Rule of Inclusion trumps it by saying: “treat everyone the way they want to be treated.”  It does make a big difference.

When we talk about inclusion in the workplace, starting from a position of mutual respect is one of the most basic rules. Nobody likes working for a boss who constantly treats you disrespectfully, ignores your qualities in favor of your faults, however minor, and overlooks your achievements.  If employees are expected to give their best at work, the least they can expect is to be treated respectfully.  Being treated with respect bears more importance in certain cultures, such as Native American, or Asian.  The concept of “losing face” is also something that employers, managers and supervisors need to be aware of, as it can have serious repercussions for people outside the dominant culture.

“Rudeness at work is rampant, and it’s on the rise. Over the past 14 years we’ve polled thousands of workers about how they’re treated on the job, and 98% have reported experiencing uncivil behavior. In 2011 half said they were treated rudely at least once a week—up from a quarter in 1998.

The costs chip away at the bottom line. Nearly everybody who experiences workplace incivility responds in a negative way, in some cases overtly retaliating. Employees are less creative when they feel disrespected, and many get fed up and leave. About half deliberately decrease their effort or lower the quality of their work. And incivility damages customer relationships. Our research shows that people are less likely to buy from a company with an employee they perceive as rude, whether the rudeness is directed at them or at other employees. Witnessing just a single unpleasant interaction leads customers to generalize about other employees, the organization, and even the brand.

We’ve interviewed employees, managers, HR executives, presidents, and CEOs. We’ve administered questionnaires, run experiments, led workshops, and spoken with doctors, lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, architects, engineers, consultants, and coaches about how they’ve faced and handled incivility. And we’ve collected data from more than 14,000 people throughout the United States and Canada in order to track the prevalence, types, causes, costs, and cures of incivility at work. We know two things for certain: Incivility is expensive, and few organizations recognize or take action to curtail it.

In this article we’ll discuss our findings, detail the costs, and propose some interventions. But first, let’s look at the various shapes incivility can take.

Forms of Incivility

We’ve all heard of (or experienced) the “boss from hell.” The stress of ongoing hostility from a manager takes a toll, sometimes a big one. We spoke with a man we’ll call Matt, who reported to Larry—a volatile bully who insulted his direct reports, belittled their efforts, and blamed them for things over which they had no control. (The names in this article have been changed and the identities disguised.) Larry was rude to customers, too. When he accompanied Matt to one client’s store, he told the owner, “I see you’re carrying on your father’s tradition. This store looked like sh– then. And it looks like sh– in your hands.”

Matt’s stress level skyrocketed. He took a risk and reported Larry to HR. (He wasn’t the first to complain.) Called on the carpet, Larry failed to apologize, saying only that perhaps he “used an atomic bomb” when he “could have used a flyswatter.” Weeks later Larry was named district manager of the year. Three days after that, Matt had a heart attack.

The conclusion of Matt’s story is unusual, but unchecked rudeness is surprisingly common. We heard of one boss who was so routinely abusive that employees and suppliers had a code for alerting one another to his impending arrival (“The eagle has landed!”). The only positive aspect was that their shared dislike helped the employees forge close bonds. After the company died, in the late 1990s, its alums formed a network that thrives to this day.

In some cases an entire department is infected. Jennifer worked in an industry that attracted large numbers of educated young professionals willing to work for a pittance in order to be in a creative field. It was widely accepted that they had to pay their dues. The atmosphere included door slamming, side conversations, exclusion, and blatant disregard for people’s time. Years later Jennifer still cringes as she remembers her boss screaming, “You made a mistake!” when she’d overlooked a minor typo in an internal memo. There was lots of attrition among low-level employees, but those who did stay seemed to absorb the behaviors they’d been subjected to, and they put newcomers through the same kind of abuse.

Fran was a senior executive in a global consumer products company. After several quarters of outstanding growth despite a down economy, she found herself confronted by a newcomer in the C-suite, Joe. For six months Fran had to jump through hoops to defend the business, even though it had defied stagnation. She never got an explanation for why she was picked on, and eventually she left, not for another job but to escape what she called “a soul-destroying experience.”

Incivility can take much more subtle forms, and it is often prompted by thoughtlessness rather than actual malice. Think of the manager who sends e-mails during a presentation, or the boss who “teases” direct reports in ways that sting, or the team leader who takes credit for good news but points a finger at team members when something goes wrong. Such relatively minor acts can be even more insidious than overt bullying, because they are less obvious and easier to overlook—yet they add up, eroding engagement and morale..

The Costs of Incivility

Many managers would say that incivility is wrong, but not all recognize that it has tangible costs. Targets of incivility often punish their offenders and the organization, although most hide or bury their feelings and don’t necessarily think of their actions as revenge. Through a poll of 800 managers and employees in 17 industries, we learned just how people’s reactions play out. Among workers who’ve been on the receiving end of incivility:

  • 48% intentionally decreased their work effort.
  • 47% intentionally decreased the time spent at work.
  • 38% intentionally decreased the quality of their work.
  • 80% lost work time worrying about the incident.
  • 63% lost work time avoiding the offender.
  • 66% said that their performance declined.
  • 78% said that their commitment to the organization declined.
  • 12% said that they left their job because of the uncivil treatment.
  • 25% admitted to taking their frustration out on customers.

Experiments and other reports offer additional insights about the effects of incivility. Here are some examples of what can happen.

Creativity suffers. In an experiment we conducted with Amir Erez, a professor of management at the University of Florida, participants who were treated rudely by other subjects were 30% less creative than others in the study. They produced 25% fewer ideas, and the ones they did come up with were less original. For example, when asked what to do with a brick, participants who had been treated badly proposed logical but not particularly imaginative activities, such as “build a house,” “build a wall,” and “build a school.” We saw more sparks from participants who had been treated civilly; their suggestions included “sell the brick on eBay,” “use it as a goalpost for a street soccer game,” “hang it on a museum wall and call it abstract art,” and “decorate it like a pet and give it to a kid as a present.”

Performance and team spirit deteriorate. Survey results and interviews indicate that simply witnessing incivility has negative consequences. In one experiment we conducted, people who’d observed poor behavior performed 20% worse on word puzzles than other people did. We also found that witnesses to incivility were less likely than others to help out, even when the person they’d be helping had no apparent connection to the uncivil person: Only 25% of the subjects who’d witnessed incivility volunteered to help, whereas 51% of those who hadn’t witnessed it did.

Customers turn away. Public rudeness among employees is common, according to our survey of 244 consumers. Whether it’s waiters berating fellow waiters or store clerks criticizing colleagues, disrespectful behavior makes people uncomfortable, and they’re quick to walk out without making a purchase.

We studied this phenomenon with the USC marketing professors Debbie MacInnis and Valerie Folkes. In one experiment, half the participants witnessed a supposed bank representative publicly reprimanding another for incorrectly presenting credit card information. Only 20% of those who’d seen the encounter said that they would use the bank’s services in the future, compared with 80% of those who hadn’t. And nearly two-thirds of those who’d seen the exchange said that they would feel anxious dealing with any employee of the bank.”

The article by Christine Pearson and Christine Porath appeared in Harvard Business Review, and is an excerpt from their book “The Cost of Bad Behavior: How Incivility Is Damaging Your Business and What to Do About It”

 

Article by: Kazim Ladimeji

Hiring for culture fit is one of the key hiring mantra in the modern recruiting world. In fact, there are studies that show that one of the main reasons that new hires fail is due to a lack of culture or attitude fit in one form or another.

But, the more that I have looked at the hiring for culture fit paradigm the more uneasy I become with it. I think the term has been oversimplified and I think there are many situations when it is appropriate to hire someone who may be disruptive to your existing culture, and below I have set out several reasons why you might recruit people who really don’t fit your culture.

1.Your culture may be toxic

It could be that you current organizational culture or department subculture is toxic. For example:

Does your organization take too many risks or too few risks? Is there a lack of customer focus? Is your culture truly customer centered? Does your organization have an appropriate level of ethical conduct? And, more important, are these culture failings damaging employee engagement, customer satisfaction and shareholder satisfaction? If the answer is yes, then you may have a toxic culture and, along with other interventions, there is a strong argument to start hiring folks who don’t fit the current culture, but who are more in tune with a desired future cultural state.

2. More innovative organization

It is no coincidence that many of the world’s most innovative companies are also in the Fortune 500. It shows that innovative organizations can disrupt the market and gain competitive advantages, which ultimately drive success.

If you hire people from different industries, with different attitudes, with different view points and with an altogether different outlook, admittedly, you and some of your team members may clash with these disruptive elements; however, they can be a disruptive force for good, challenging yours and the team’s ideas and the status quo.

Yes, they will rock the boat (but most businesses are not on boats), but if this energy and disruption is managed and channeled effectively, you will generate new ideas, new ways of looking at things and perhaps open doors to new opportunities that you never knew existed. It could result in you opening a new office in a new country, launching a new product, or totally overhauling an existing product its mediocrity the organization has become accustomed to and accepting of.

3. Create a more customer-centric business

Your customers and clients will be diverse in terms of their individual personalities, outlooks, and attitudes. Organizations with a broader range of personalities, outlooks and viewpoints will be able to engage far more effectively and flexibly with a diverse client base. It can make you more customer centric.

4. Greater access to talent

If your organization can accept and channel a broad and diverse range of personalities and opinions, it will undoubtedly have a much larger candidate resource pool at its disposal, meaning it may be able to hire quality people faster.

5. More flexible

Having a broad range of attitudes, outlooks, and preferences can mean that your organization is able to respond in a more flexible way to a changing and dynamic marketplace. For example, as changes in the marketplace create a greater need for risk taking, the naturally innovative can step up to the mantle. But, if a period of consolidation is required, then perhaps the more conservative stalwarts then come in to their own. A diverse culture can make you more flexible and adaptable making it easier to exploit opportunities and combat threats.

 

Retrieved from: http://www.recruiter.com/i/5-reasons-to-hire-people-who-dont-fit-the-culture/?goback=%2Egde_61998_member_239646283

Event Notice

Fierce Foundation's Empower Generations LIVE Event

FIERCE Foundation recognizes the transformative power of the 1Life Fully Lived approach, which personally guided Carolyn Colleen out of generational adversity and into success. Now, we’re excited to bring this […]

Learn More

Multi­cultural Resource Guide

This guide lists established and emerging resources that reflect and celebrate cultural diversity in our area.

View Guide