dispatches from the new world of work

Shifting Values

External, uncontrollable disruptions such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina have an astounding impact on the economy. Some businesses are affected more than others, but the impact is immediate, forcing the need for a quick response and a shift in priorities. Other, less apparent disruptions, can be more damaging to the long-term health of an organization. For example, such disruptions include shifts in consumer preferences and buying behaviors, a reprioritizing of values that influence consumer and employee wants and needs. We witnessed this phenomenon as a result of 9/11. Individuals suddenly had a desire to connect with family, friends, their community; they had a need to feel engaged, to have a sense of belonging. Organizations responded to consumer preferences by focusing on creating experiences that evoke a positive emotional response ... "branding" as opposed to marketing.

What BusinessWeek reports about Microsoft—losing "key" talent, reminds us that the same value shifts that change consumer behaviors also change employee behaviors. A growing economy creates opportunity for talent. Great talent has no reason to tolerate work that is not meaningful, organizations that don't value individuals' contributions, workplaces that are so bureaucratic they make innovation nearly impossible. A culture that breeds complacency and leaders in denial can kill a company, but it's such a slow process that companies often don't feel the pain until it's too late. Microsoft is a perfect example of this.

Darci Riesenhuber posted this on 09/20/05.

Comments

The Business Week article actually goes on to cite some exciting and innovative areas of Microsoft, including the game division and the MSN internet search group. Any and every company has people who are not happy with the style. Management changes as companies change, but often people who were happy under a small start-up atmosphere are not happy in the different atmosphere of a fully-grown corporation. The article also states that Microsoft's annual turnover rate is about 9%, which is 1% LESS than the industry average. Microsoft also gets 60,000 applications per month, so someone must want to work there.

But, please, don't state that the Business Week article proves that Microsoft is a perfect example of a company that stifles innovation, etc. The article most decidedly does not prove this.

Posted by Mike at September 20, 2005 1:08 PM

Much of what we see in corporation that breeds contempt and employee churn is our Six Sigma mentality to human beings. After some time with a company, the management tends to shift its focus from the employee strengths to the employee weaknesses.

This is managing to the exception and will always fail. The result is employers who feel the need to look outward for talent because new employees never have a negative track record. The additional result is employees must look outside their current employer for increases in compensation and rewards. Talk about stifling creativity and innovation!

The greatest leaders have always found a means of putting their employees in positions that exploit their strengths. Good leaders don't waste time on trying to correct their employees' weaknesses.

Posted by Doug Karr at September 20, 2005 2:25 PM

Gosh, there's a surprise: a person whose been offered a job elsewhere but is sued by his current employer paints a black picture when it comes to court. And - gulp - there's employee turnover in a competitive industry like software. Wow, do you think that may ever happen on Wall Street or in sport or in journalism even?

I'm no MS fan (I'm an Apple user, apart from work) but they seem to have the sort of problems many big, middle-aged businesses have - including staff who are possibly going through their first economic trough and who have lost the initial thrill of going to work on a specific, exciting project.

Nice point above by Doug, but I'dd add a codicil: "Good leaders don't waste time on trying to correct their employees' weaknesses; they're aware of their own strengths and weaknesses and build teams that compliment each other."

Posted by Mark JF at September 21, 2005 6:58 AM

I think creative people like creative trendsetting opportunities. MSFT has done this many times with groundbreaking technologies, recently, focus is on "containing open source" which probably isn't possible to preserve the franchise and "patch" a broken architecture.

the best opportunity with Vista was wasted when it became more stuff glued on top of the "old architectures" for compatibility. NT was architecturally distinct from old windows.
that's what Vista needed to be, now it's more than 3 years late, Office sales are flagging, open source platforms gaining ground, on back office .. which are enterprise sales.

then there is scaling.

like CSCO, too big. why execs don't do spinoffs into divisions, give their entrepreneurial peers new responsiblities, and share holders more excitement risk and opportunity is beyond me. process overtakes, impulsive ignition....disappears when scaling stops.

innovation becomes absorption or borgian assimilation, but not "reimagining" or creative destruction..... MSFT has been to big for years, because it seems unable to move quickly.

also, name a gee WOW product done in recent years.... i'm unimpressed.. Features have replaces groundbreaking... and most of the features go unused anyway.

sure people want to work for MSFT, they always will, that doesn't mean "the ship" sails sweetly does it..

Posted by kurt at September 21, 2005 8:13 AM

I have worked in a young organization for a few years now and have watched it get more and more process and proceedures Hr dominant as we grow. I believe that it is a natural progression much like a marriage. The re-invention of work and the workplace needs to become an ever growing dialogue. I thank this site for planting seeds.

Posted by Gary Fox at September 22, 2005 6:55 PM

A blog that readers interested in the inner workings of Microsoft might be interested in is Mini-Microsoft.

I found the author's writing to be thoughtful and educational. One interesting aspect of Microsoft that he refers to is what he calls a "rank and yank stack system" for employee reviews. It sounds an awful lot like Jack Welch's system from GE. That would be the Six Sigma mentality that Doug Karr mentions above, I believe.

Posted by Scott Peterson at September 23, 2005 3:51 PM

Yes, institutionalization is a natural process that will happen to startups. Studies show that you need to institutionalize one year ahead of your IPO. HR gets hired along with employee #51. Missing the quarter will happen sometime after the IPO. All of this is a unavoidable natural process.

Posted by David Locke at September 25, 2005 1:51 PM