All Posts in Business Ethics

|In: Business Ethics|Last Updated:

I’ve figured out the difference between scientific knowledge and business knowledge. Scientific knowledge depends on facts, logic, and the rigorous testing of ideas in the laboratory and field. Business knowledge depends on the assertion of pet biases with great confidence and exorbitant billing rates.

For example …

By now I’ve read or listened to at least a dozen authorities in the field of managing organizational change. Most begin by explaining that resistance to change is wired into the human brain, natural and instinctive, the result of millions of years of evolution.

As it happens, my graduate studies were in the field of sociobiology, so I’m confident I know more than these “experts” about what is and isn’t hardwired into the human brain. Yes, there is some hard wiring in the human brain. For example, the ability to learn language is a native capability. Bipedal walking is another piece of standard equipment, although the ability to simultaneously chew gum must be learned.

So there is some hard wiring. Not a lot, but some. But no, resistance to change isn’t any of it, nor do people (at least, not those raised in Western cultures; I’m insufficiently knowledgeable about the rest to speak with confidence) resist all change as a matter of learned behavior either.

Want proof? Here’s a simple experiment you can perform in the privacy of your own organization. Offer your employees an upgrade to a piece of core technology they use every day: Buy them a new car of their choosing. You’ll pay for the gas, insurance, maintenance and repairs, and there are no strings attached.

How many employees do you really think will resist this change?

Few people automatically resist change. What’s most commonly mistaken for resistance to change is something quite different: Fear of the unknown.

Most people do fear the unknown. The nature vs nurture question notwithstanding, it’s easy to understand why the unknown is to be feared. Whether you imagine a Toe Monster lurking under your bed, a crazed mugger lurking in some dark alley, or layoffs lurking under the current process re-engineering effort in your company, the possible risks of the unknown — death, destruction and unemployment — outweigh the possible benefits.

Which is why the most useful tools in any change leader’s toolkit are the “Three C’s”: Communication, communication, and yet more communication.

That’s what’s required to change the unknown into the known. If the known is a new car, so much the better. If not, at least employees know the worst that can happen, which is always better than the worst they can imagine.

Comments

|In: Business Ethics|Last Updated:

When Cortez landed on the shores of became Mexico later on, he issued the famous order, “Burn the boats!” It’s testimony to either his leadership ability or his ruthlessness that his men didn’t shout back, “What are you, nuts?”

Through dumb luck (for the Spaniards that is) the Aztecs caught smallpox from Cortez’s crew and Montezuma despite his ongoing revenge, lost his empire. Cortez didn’t win because of his watercraft incineration but that hasn’t stopped it from becoming a symbol for total commitment to a result.

In business, burn-the-boats tactics are less useful than contingency plans. You can’t count on your competitors to fall apart all by themselves (they often do, but you can’t rely on it), and sailing back to Spain in an empty ship (that is, cutting your losses and trying the next idea) usually makes more sense than being either buried or eaten (filing for bankruptcy or being acquired at bargain-basement prices).

Many companies that have chosen to outsource IT burned their boats without realizing it. They signed a contract in which a change of heart is expensive, time-consuming, painful and risky — they can’t, in other words, go back. When negotiating an outsourcing deal, the business equivalent of a prenuptial agreement is essential. An outsourcing prenuptial agreement makes re-insourcing possible. Usually, it will include transition of both staff and intellectual property back to the client in case of contract termination. Otherwise the balance of power in the relationship belongs to the outsourcer, not the client.

That’s a very bad idea.

Imagine your CEO has decided to outsource IT and you’re part of the negotiating team. What do you need to know? Here’s one important fact: The outsourcer’s sales team is there because they love The Deal, not because they love running IT.

For the folks who sell big outsourcing contracts, closing a big deal is a rush. It’s a bit like a cocaine habit. When someone snorts cocaine, the user feels a rush of euphoria when the drug is inhaled (or so I’ve read). But when the drug wears off they sink into a funk, and to reach the same level of exhilaration they need an even bigger hit. The Deal has an equivalent impact on outsourcing companies: It provides a rush of euphoria as the deal closes, followed by something of a funk as the hard work of contract delivery starts … followed by the need for the rush of the next Deal.

These people don’t enjoy actually running IT. Running IT would interfere with pursuing the next Deal. If they’re smart, they’ll bring someone who loves running IT to their side of the table, but they might not be smart, because that individual … the future account manager … doesn’t love The Deal. The account manager has to deliver on the contract when it’s signed. That can interfere with The Deal.

That’s exactly why you’ll insist that the future account manager is part of the negotiating team. With this team composition, love of The Deal will keep the outsourcer at the table, unable to walk away, and the account manager’s need to run a successful account will prevent impossible-to-keep promises. (Don’t leave it to chance. When in doubt look the account manager in the eye and ask, “Can you deliver that?”)

There’s one other item to remember: You, not your employer, are your top priority. Look out for your own interests first.

Isn’t this immoral? Amoral?

No.

When your CEO decided to outsource IT he didn’t take your best interests into account. When the outsourcing company started the sales process, the process probably didn’t start in your office with your sponsorship. This is business, and altruism isn’t part of business. Nobody is going to look out for you except you.

So if you have any leverage at all, negotiate an arrangement that protects you. Have the CEO create a new executive position and promote you to it immediately. Or, become the outsourcing company’s account manager. Do what CEOs do and negotiate a golden parachute for yourself in exchange for your support during the transition.

While you’re at it, negotiate the best deal you can for the employees being outsourced. When they become employees of the outsourcing companies they’ll lose their seniority. It isn’t hard to insist on a contract provision that fixes this, but you need to ask for it — it won’t come automatically. If you become the account manager you’ll need their support. Even if you don’t, it costs you nothing.

And, it’s the right thing to do.

Comments