Healthy cultures are built by humble leaders

Healthy leaders can build amazingly healthy cultures if they set their minds to it and make it a priority. There are several traits of healthy leaders that can directly contribute to making the culture you have better, healthier, more effective, and better serve your mission. It starts with a posture of humility.

If ego is the enemy, then humility is your best friend. While some may view humility as a sign of weakness, it is, in fact, a sign of strength: the strength to see things as they truly are, the strength to listen to perspectives we may not naturally agree with, and the strength to accept difficult feedback. At every level of life, humility represents strength under control. Only truly strong individuals can embody humility.

Humble leaders embrace the belief that they have nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide. They don't need to be defensive. Instead, they focus on guiding a mission rather than pursuing a personal agenda. They lead collaboratively, recognizing that diverse perspectives contribute to the best solutions.

A key trait of a humble leader is their genuine care and concern for others. Unlike ego-driven leaders, who use people to achieve their own goals, humble leaders prioritize serving others. They strive to help individuals reach their full potential while working towards a shared mission. This approach fosters an environment where people are valued, their talents are nurtured, and the collective mission is successfully achieved. Humble leaders genuinely value and care about their team members!

The humility of leaders fosters a culture of humility throughout the entire organization, creating a powerful ripple effect. When an organization believes it has everything figured out and acts from a place of pride, it often becomes resistant to change. In contrast, organizations embodying corporate humility are more likely to seek better solutions and embrace innovation and new ideas. There is no substitute for humble leadership.

Egos, defensiveness and leaders

The defensiveness of many leaders to being challenged significantly affects a healthy culture because it shuts down needed discussion and dialogue and keeps staff from speaking fully and truthfully to leaders. In these situations, leaders must either learn new skills or be replaced if a healthy culture is a goal. Where there is not a free and welcome exchange of ideas, you have leaders who need to control others rather than release them. They shut down important candid dialogue, and their ego issues destroy and prevent a healthy culture.

When leaders cannot be challenged, and there is no free exchange of views, ideas, and opinions, a healthy culture cannot exist. In this context, ego becomes the enemy!

Ego is the enemy of good leadership and a healthy culture. Humility is your friend, while ego and pride are your enemies. Why do I say this? Ego causes leaders to overestimate their ability and underestimate the input of others. As a result, ego-driven leaders limit the input from others, don’t engage in robust dialogue, and listen to others poorly.

A fundamental principle of healthy leadership is the commitment to the mindset of "Nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide." Many leaders feel the need to prove themselves, which can lead them to exploit and pressure others to achieve their desired results. This behavior often results in impatience, anger, and a lack of forgiveness towards those who let them down.

What they risk losing is their pride and their agenda. Their leadership is often motivated more by their desire to succeed than by the organization's mission. Ironically, this drive is often fueled by personal insecurity, which hinders them from listening to others or considering advice that does not align with their views. As a result, their ability to access diverse wisdom and perspectives is severely limited.

Ego has a particularly insidious side; it can give rise to narcissism, where life revolves entirely around oneself. While one might believe this behavior stems from a place of security and confidence, it more often originates from deep insecurity. The outward confidence in one’s correctness and the bravado that comes with it often serve as a facade to conceal underlying insecurity.

Over time, the outward displays of confidence and bravado become protective barriers created by the insecure person within. These walls often prevent individuals from recognizing what is happening around them and understanding their role in contributing to organizational dysfunction.

I have had memorable conversations with leaders after conducting extensive interviews within their organizations. What stands out in these cases is the leaders' absolute denial of reality and difficulty in allowing outside perspectives to penetrate their protective walls. Their responses often include disbelief (my staff must be mistaken, or you, as a consultant, misunderstood), anger at their staff for expressing such views, or outright belligerence (I don’t care; I am the leader and will do it my way, regardless). In these situations, the protective barriers are so thick that the culture is unlikely to improve without a change in leadership. The problem is that such behaviors harm everyone around them, creating significant toxicity within the culture.

Ego issues fueled by insecurity hinder individuals from perceiving reality accurately. Secure individuals listen attentively, are willing to admit their mistakes, and are committed to addressing their blind spots and the more challenging aspects of their leadership. They can do this because they are comfortable in their skin and exhibit more humility than pride.

The more secure I feel, the more open I can be. In contrast, the more insecure I feel, the more I tend to hide my deficiencies and weaknesses. As a result, I cling to my ego, feeling that I have too much to prove and too much to lose.

The irony is that our staff knows our strengths, weaknesses, quirks, and deficiencies. When we deny who we are and pretend to be someone we’re not, they can see that we are not being authentic. Insecure and ego-driven leaders often fail to recognize that their refusal to accept reality breeds cynicism among their team members. This cynicism is harmful to a healthy workplace culture, and the leaders themselves foster it.

The adverse effects of ego are numerous. It prompts individuals to belittle others to elevate themselves. Those with inflated egos tend to blame others for their failures and take credit for achievements that belong to someone else. This mindset hinders honest and open discussions because leaders feel too insecure to address differing opinions. An ego-driven person often lacks respect for their staff and disregards the commitments outlined in the Leadership Contract. By trying to elevate themselves, they inadvertently diminish those around them.

In instances where I’ve shared the results of Culture Audits with senior leaders who were perceived by others as unhealthy or lacking leadership skills, they have been utterly shocked and disbelieving of the interview findings. This reaction highlights their poor self-awareness, understanding of those around them, and their resistance to engaging in open and honest dialogue with colleagues.

In one instance, individuals had been telling the leader for decades that he should step aside and take on a different role due to his inadequate leadership abilities. Instead of heeding the advice of the many who expressed their concerns, he listened only to the few who praised him as a great leader and stubbornly refused to step down. In the meantime, the organization suffered a severe decline; key staff members became disillusioned and left, and there was an urgent need to re-envision the mission and plan for the future.

The individual's deep-seated insecurity and ego blinded them to the realities of their abilities, the needs of the organization, and the feedback from those around them. This organization faced multiple issues that required attention, and it is unlikely to make progress with this leader in position. It is a tragic example of how ego can undermine the development of a healthy culture. A resolution is unlikely to be achieved in situations like this unless boards take action.

Unfortunately, even when a board is in place, there are often inadequate feedback mechanisms to assess the health of the organization's culture. Typically, problems become severe before any effort is made to understand what is happening. During this time, valuable staff members leave, demoralizing the remaining employees. In the case mentioned above, exit interviews with staff revealed significant issues with the senior leader, yet there was a lack of initiative to address the situation. Consequently, the cost to the organization was substantial. Ego can truly undermine a healthy culture.

A leader's maturity can be gauged by their willingness to engage in open and honest dialogue about any issues that affect the team or organization's success. The most effective leaders encourage and promote candid discussions surrounding important topics because they understand that open dialogue leads to the best solutions. They do not shy away from being challenged; rather, they welcome it.

As a leader, do you promote open and honest dialogue? Do you encourage a genuine exchange of ideas and allow your team members to challenge you? If your answer is no, what insecurities are holding you back? Are you afraid of not having all the answers or not getting your way? Whatever the fear may be, it often stems from your own insecurities, and these insecurities can significantly impact your leadership.

Becoming aware of our own Leadership derailers

If you lead others, there is a good chance that you also struggle with leadership derailers. Actually, every leader does. The question is not whether they have potential derailers but whether they know what their derailers might be. 

Derailers are behaviors, words, actions, or responses that prevent us from acting maturely as leaders.  For instance, the CEO who does not like to be challenged and responds defensively when they are, shutting down critical discussions that senior teams need to have, is dealing with derailment behavior. His/her defensive behavior is a derailer. The behavior is immature leadership, which could threaten their ability to lead well.

Leaders who do not accept and even solicit feedback from others exhibit derailing tendencies. Their lack of receptiveness to the input of those they work with prevents them from seeing themselves clearly and the state of the organization they lead. Their inability to listen to others and accept feedback creates a toxic environment because candid dialogue cannot be had, and real issues cannot be addressed.

Ironically, it takes the input of others to help us understand our derailing tendencies, where our leadership is coming from immature emotional intelligence rather than mature. It highlights the importance of leaders being inquisitive about their own emotional intelligence, receptive to feedback from others, and committed to addressing the derailing tendencies that negatively impact their team members. 

Here is something to consider. Most derailers are not about competency but rather about the emotional intelligence of the leader and how their EQ hurts their leadership, the organization, and those they work with.

It is relatively easy to recognize the derailers in other leaders because we have experienced them. It is often harder to see them in ourselves because we are used to our tendencies. This is where we need people around us who we give permission to speak into our lives and leadership. 

Leadership derailers can be simple, such as the tendency to not solicit feedback from others or ask the kinds of questions that would give us insights into what is truly happening in the organization or team we lead. They can also be more complex, such as narcissistic tendencies that elevate our own leadership at the expense of others. In either case, it comes down to an EQ issue where we have a needed growth opportunity. Derailers hurt our leadership, and they hurt those we lead if not recognized and addressed. 

When I led teams and organizations, I would periodically ask my associates if I did anything that really irritated them. Is there anything I am doing that you think others should do? Is there anything you wish you could discuss with someone, but haven't felt free to do so? In this way, I was being proactive in soliciting feedback and permitting them at the same time to speak candidly.

In the Intelligent Leadership coaching of the John Mattone Global organization, we help leaders understand their leadership styles' relative maturity or immaturity to move toward healthier leadership. This is achieved through a combination of healthy discussions, testing, 360-degree feedback, personal development plans, and a coaching process designed to foster the learning of new behaviors.

The challenge for anyone who leads others is to give permission and opportunity for those around us to speak candidly with us about potential derailers in our leadership. It could make the difference between a highly successful leadership tenure and one that comes off the tracks prematurely.

 

Ten ways that leaders can sabotage organizational culture

 

Leaders can inadvertently sabotage the culture they desire to create in their team or organization with behaviors that may seem insignificant to them but are very significant to those they lead. They are careless behaviors that leaders that demotivate those they lead because they send a message that their team is not valued or important.

One: Blowing off meetings, showing up late, or coming unprepared for scheduled meetings. I once worked with a colleague who regularly did not show up for scheduled meetings or, if he did, would come in 15 to 30 minutes late. This message was that I was not valued and my time was unimportant. I am sure my colleague thought nothing of it, after all, he valued flexibility but it became so common that the staff just expected that he may not show up. It was aggravating, to say the least. 

Healthy leaders value others' time, show up on time, and are fully present for the meeting at hand. 

Two: Telling people what to do rather than engaging in dialogue to understand the perspectives and ideas of staff. Leaders who simply tell staff what to do create a culture where staff are devalued and their wisdom left on the table. In these cultures, the only voice that really counts is the leader. Eventually, the best people leave the organization rather than work in an environment where their expertise is not valued.

Healthy leaders don't assume they have the answers; rather than telling, they dialogue to understand staff thinking and perspectives and devise better solutions.  

Three: When things go wrong, blame people rather than ask if some processes or systems could be fixed to prevent such failures. Blame is a terrible motivator. It assumes the worst motives when poor motives are rarely the reason for failure. In most cases, underlying issues explain why things go wrong, and failure can be a learning opportunity rather than a blaming opportunity.

Healthy leaders know that things will not always go well. Rather than blaming others, they seek to fix the underlying issue so that the "disconnect" does not happen again.

Four: Not taking the time to listen and ask good questions. Leaders often lack valuable information because they don't ask questions or take the time to listen, which means they assume they know what they need to know. This is not only a faulty notion, but it is also disempowering to staff who have insight that a leader does not have and desire that their voice be heard for the betterment of the organization.

Healthy leaders know many things they don't know, so they intentionally ask many questions and listen well. 

Five: Being quick to criticize and slow to encourage and lift up. Critical leaders create cultures that are fear-based rather than grace-based. Fear-based cultures do not breed healthy dialogue and the necessary give-and-take of ideas. There are often reasons that people have done something that a leader is unaware of unless he/she first asks questions and enters into a conversation. Leaders who criticize carefully and lift up regularly create a healthier culture than those who do the opposite.

Healthy leaders are slow to criticize and quick to encourage and enter into constructive conversation.

Six: Changing one's mind after the work has been completed by staff. I have watched senior leaders give an assignment to staff to work on a particular program, and then when they present the plan, the leader dismisses it because he/she now has a better idea. In one case, the work had taken the better part of a year. This was not because their work was not good but because the leader simply had a new and better idea. This kind of behavior is very demotivating to staff and indicates that the leader did not give good direction on the front end, did not stay engaged along the way, and was willing to dismiss the work out of hand at the end. Leaders who change direction frequently create chaos rather than stability.

Healthy leaders give good direction, stay engaged, and don't quickly change their minds for the "flavor of the month."

Seven: Micromanaging. Micromanagement is the failure to delegate responsibility and authority around a task or project and instead inserting oneself to check up, change, modify, or redo work that is in progress or that has been done. It screams, "I don't trust you to do this right," and often, "I want you to do this my way." So, it is about a lack of trust and needing to do things the leader's way. It is profoundly disempowering behavior.

Healthy leaders set boundaries and empower good people to do their work without undue interference. They don't insist that the work be done the way they might and are very careful about interfering in the process. 

Eight: Lack of appreciation. Leaders have a gift that many others don't have. They have staff available to help them do what needs to be done. They can delegate and get all the help they need. However, the key to healthy staff is to treat them with respect, dignity, and appreciation. When staff feel used, leaders lose coinage—a lot of it. Lack of appreciation creates a feeling among staff that they are being used, which creates cynicism toward leadership.

Healthy leaders never take staff for granted. They show their appreciation in their words, attitudes, and acts of kindness toward those on their teams. Their staff know that their leader is deeply appreciative of their efforts.

Nine: Narcissistic tendencies. To put this one in perspective, each of the behaviors listed above are, in fact, narcissistic behaviors. They are about me: What I want and choose to do rather than how I can best serve the mission and the staff of the organization I lead. Narcissism is the antithesis of servant leadership. Our leadership is not about me but about those we lead and the mission we steward. All leaders have narcissistic tendencies. That is part of the human condition. The question is whether we recognize those tendencies, work to counter them, and manage our shadow side. Narcissistic behaviors include wanting our own way, lack of collaboration and listening to others, treating others poorly, lack of accountability, believing too highly in ourselves, taking credit for success and blaming others for failure and the list could go on. 

Healthy leaders recognize and counterbalance their narcissistic tendencies with a servant-like attitude toward their staff. They also allow trusted colleagues to talk with them when those tendencies show themselves.

Ten: Lack of genuine relationships. A key ingredient to a healthy culture is getting to know those who report to us. Without an authentic relationship, staff will likely not be candid with us. Relationships mean that we take the time to get to know our staff. We ask them questions, learn about their situations, and relate to them as fellow human beings rather than simply staff.

Healthy leaders get to know their staff and create trust and understanding.

A healthy organizational culture is fostered in the little and the big things. The culture will rarely rise above the practices of the head of the organization or the head of the team you lead. Take your assignment seriously, and don't sabotage the culture by unhealthy practices. As a Master Certified Coach in Intelligent Leadership I can help you improve the culture in your organization. You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com.

Organizational culture is often a matter of the small decisions we make not just the large ones

Too often, we overlook the fact that every decision we make that affects others in an organization says something about our culture. Here are two recent examples.

My wife and I were recently in a local TJ Maxx in Manchnessy Park, where my wife loves to hunt for bargains. We found a few but then stood in the checkout line for an interminable amount of time, waiting to pay. Ten people were in the line when I got to the sole cashier. The crazy thing was that the store manager was up in the front, fiddling with cleaning up some items and ignoring the growing line. 

What did this say about the store culture? It clearly said that regardless of the company's value statement, the customer did not come first at this store. The fact that the manager could ignore the customers sent a strong message to those of us who were in the line and the rest of the staff that there was no need to be customer-centric. After all, the leader of this store certainly was not. It was all I could do not to say something as I watched the manager ignore his customers.

My wife works for one of the upscale care facilities here in Rockford, IL. I often get a glimpse at their culture through the stories she brings home. The dining facility has been practicing making food available to the staff, who help the residents eat at no charge or a nominal charge. Every day, the leftovers are thrown away (yes, you heard that right), so if there is food left, the restaurant staff will gift it to the staff who have been helping. 

No longer. Now, it is forbidden to give or receive free food, and the price of food has gone up for staff. And they continue to throw the leftovers away. 

The residents who eat there are aware of the new rules and wonder why the administration would do this when the uneaten food is discarded. The staff are all wondering the same thing. But here is the thing. This decision sends a clear message to the staff that they are not valued by the management. The management obviously wants additional income - by charging the staff more - and the net result is that staff no longer buy the food and cannot receive leftovers at no charge. One staff member was reprimanded for accepting food in front of the diners (residents) and staff who were there. And, of course, the leftovers are thrown away daily!

Every organization should ask this question when making decisions that impact their constituency: "How does this decision or my action reflect the culture we want to build here?" Or, "What message are we sending when we make this decision?"

When the store manager ignores the growing line of customers who want to purchase his products, he sends a message about the store's culture. I don't intend to go back! It was such a blatant statement that I was not valued there that I took note and said I would take my business elsewhere. 

When my wife's employer forbade staff from giving food destined for the trash to employees and then hiked the official price they were to pay, what did that communicate to staff and residents? Both groups walked away with a message about the culture that I don't think the management intended to send, but they sent it because they did not think through the implications of their decision. Those implications were lost on the decision-makers rather than on their constituents. 

Every day, leaders in organizations make decisions that impact their constituents. Unfortunately, they often don't consider those decisions in terms of culture and the message they are sending. Our well-written statements are frequently not reflected in our decisions, and our constituents read our actions far more than they read our finely-tuned value statements. In fact, our written statements about culture and values are meaningless when our actions contradict what those statements actually say.

When you should not write new policies

In my experience, organizations often have too many policies and policies that reflect a general distrust of staff. It is always interesting to read the policies of organizations I am helping because they usually give me insight into their past problems (solved, of course, by a new policy) and the general level of trust and empowerment in the organization, which is often low.

Here is something to remember. Policies reflect an organization's culture but do not necessarily create culture. People create culture, and policies reflect whatever culture is created. While policies are obligatory for any organization, how and why they are written sends a message to staff.

Policies should keep your organization legal, fair, safe, and clear on important issues. They are the non-negotiables that keep your organization in safe waters. They reflect the principles by which a healthy organization operates to keep it legal and fair with clarity. Policies are necessary to clarify expectations for everyone. However, not all policies are helpful, and they tend to proliferate if one is not careful. 

Here are some reasons not to write new policies.

One: Someone has done something dumb (It happens)! The answer is not to write a new policy but to deal with the individual who has crossed a line. It is unfair to other staff to establish policies based on one individual's bad choices. No policy can keep people from doing dumb things. Deal with the individual rather than write a new policy. The reason we often write policies when someone crosses a line is that we are not willing to have a difficult conversation with the one involved. And rather than a difficult conversation, we end up disempowering all staff. 

Two: You want to deal with an issue of organizational culture. Organizational culture is usually a matter of leadership rather than of policy. I can create a culture that avoids gossip, but I cannot write a policy to do the same. Some issues are issues of leadership and modeling rather than of policy. 

Three: You need to control what people do and do not do. If we need to control people, we are either poor leaders or have hired the wrong staff. Mostly, it is the former rather than the latter. The longer a policy manual, the more there is usually a desire to control rather than empower. And, in general, the longer a policy manual, the less empowerment an organization gives its staff. 

How do you clarify issues with staff other than writing new policies? Create a dialogue on the issues so they filter down through the organization. This honors your staff. Only write a new policy when necessary. 

Always remember that policies reflect how leaders see their staff. They reflect the culture of leadership within the organization.  It might be instructive for all of us who lead to have an outsider read our policies and give us feedback as to what they see. In one church I consulted with, I suggested that their policies reflected a great distrust of support staff. Reading them through that lens, they agreed with me. They had used policies to do all three of the above-named issues rather than simply spell out their non-negotiables and commitments. 

Policies can reflect a high degree of empowerment and trust of staff. More often, they reflect mistrust and the need to control. Leaders expect staff to trust them but often do not reciprocate with trust to their staff. 

Ten recognizable elements of healthy organizational culture

Organizational culture is not abstract. If it is healthy, it always includes these ten elements. These elements are easily recognizable when present and equally when absent. As you think about the culture in your organization, which of these do you recognize and which are weak or missing?

High clarity around everything that matters. Clarity is the foundation for all healthy cultures. Clarity around who we are, what we are about, where we are going, how we are going to get there, and what our culture must be to reach our preferred future. Clarifying your preferred future is critical because it is the goal that all strategic efforts of the organization must point towards.

Alignment of all staff around that clarity. Without clarity, you cannot have alignment. Once clarity is determined, staffing, programs, plans, and efforts can be aligned to that clarity. Lack of staff alignment is often a symptom of a lack of clarity because, in the absence of clarity, people make up their own clarity, resulting in competing visions rather than a single vision.

Healthy culture throughout the organization. If there are areas of dishealth in the organization, a Culture Audit can uncover them and allow them to be addressed. This is critical to developing a healthier culture as it is the unspoken “elephants” in any organization that sabotages their efforts to become healthier. You cannot have pockets of dishealth that are unaddressed and be a healthy organization.

Contrarian thinking. This is about helping staff think “outside the box” and understand that conventional wisdom is always conventional but not always wisdom. Organizations that desire to leverage themselves for maximum impact encourage innovative thinking and solutions that challenge the way things have been done before. This counterbalances the pitfall of “If you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got” syndrome. This starts with a culture where any issue can be put on the table except for a personal attack or a hidden agenda.  Learning a “nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide” attitude where egos are set aside for the common good of the organization changes everything.

A passion for people. Healthy organizations care about their people. They create environments where people thrive and not simply survive. They invite their staff in as active participants, eliminate silos, politics, and turf wars, and ensure that people are in a lane consistent with their wiring and gifts and have the tools they need to accomplish their work.

Intentionality and high accountability. Both intentionality and accountability are only possible with high clarity. With clarity and a description of the preferred future, there can be intentionality in moving in the direction of that preferred future. This also allows for accountability because there is clarity around the role that each plays. Healthy organizations are deeply intentional in their work and create cultures of high accountability.

Metrics that matter. What is measured is what gets paid attention to. It is critical to measure everything that is important to an organization and to find the right metrics to do so. Both soft and hard metrics are important when it comes to culture, and both should be tracked. If it is important, it should have metrics attached to it.

Scalable systems. Healthy organizations build healthy systems so that they do not need to reinvent the way they do what they do and can build on and strengthen those healthy systems. While people often get blamed when things go wrong, it is often true that it was not a people problem but a system problem that has not been well through. Proper systems allow an organization to grow and scale, while faulty systems hold them back.

Return on mission and vision. This is what all organizations should be about. We exist to create value for our customers and those who work in the organization. Healthy organizations are able to identify their return on mission as well as their return on investment. This can be a huge motivator for those who work with you.

Sustainability over the long term. The goal is to have an organization that is learning, growing, getting better, and achieving its goals over the long term. This is all possible if the previous nine elements are in place.

 Leadership coaching, governance/board training, staff/culture audits, change management, conflict management, establishing clarity, creating healthy cultures, leadership, and organizational consulting. tjaddington@gmail.com

The church stage, staff culture and leadership boardroom: Two of the three are indicators of culture in a church

The church stage on Sunday mornings often does not reflect the true nature of a church's culture. One wishes it always was because the stage is a put-together, friendly presentation of the church's persona. The only issue is that it is often not a true persona of who the church is. When it is, it is a beautiful thing. Sometimes it is not. The stage says this is who we are - please believe us.

The stage is a church at its best in many ways. But, the authentic culture of a church is not found on stage - that can be manufactured just like all the happy families who come in the doors after fighting with one another on the way to church. The true nature of a church's culture is found in the everyday relationships of staff: how they treat one another, speak about one another, support and cooperate with one another, resolve or don't resolve conflict, and the level of politics, silos, and turf wars (per Lencioni) that exist. 

How staff are treated by leaders and how they treat one another tells the story of church culture better than anything else. Healthy cultures have healthy relationships and are full of individuals with healthy EQ. The fruit of the Spirit is evident and easily found. Gossip and backbiting are rare. Conflict is resolved in healthy ways, and there is freedom on staff to speak one's mind, and candid dialogue is encouraged. This is a true sign of a healthy church culture. I don't assume anything from the stage presentation when working with a church. Instead, I press into staff relationships. And I don't rely on the word of the senior leader but instead, ask questions of the staff themselves. 

Staff retention speaks volumes, while a pattern of staff leaving - whether resigning or being let go - says something else. I once asked a church board who had retained me to determine why the senior pastor had just fired two beloved staff members if they had interviewed any of the many staff who had left in the past five years, and they all looked down sheepishly. So, I interviewed them myself and heard a familiar story. On the other hand, where staff stay long and remain engaged in their job with one another and others, you know that there is usually good DNA at work.

I often conduct staff audit interviews with all staff with open-ended questions. Very quickly, common themes emerge that speak to staff culture's health or dishealth. This is valuable information for churches desiring to improve the staff's health.

A third indicator of a healthy or unhealthy culture is the leadership board of a church. I often speak to individuals recruited to serve on a church board who entered that job with optimism and energy, only to be disillusioned by what they found. They often encounter boards that don't speak candidly, allowing elephants to exist in the boardroom that everyone knows are there. Still, it is not OK to talk about them, gloss over issues that ought to be examined and discussed, and a significant lack of clarity about who the church is and where it is headed. The closer you get to the core of leadership, the closer you are to a church's authentic culture. 

There are notable exceptions of healthy boards that operate in healthy ways. This is the exception rather than the rule, however. Boards are not trained in healthy governance, are reticent to address known issues, and are often either passive or ultra-involved depending on the season, with little in between. One thing is usually true: board health often reflects staff health. Where there is dysfunction on staff, there is usually dysfunction on the board, which is why the staff dysfunction is allowed to exist and flourish.

I long for church staff and boards to have the same joy, spiritual presence, and professionalism found on stage each Sunday morning. If that is true in your church, I congratulate you. Often, though, the authentic culture of a congregation is not found on stage. 

The Culture Series: Which of these descriptors describes your organization?

 

Does culture matter in an organization? Contrast the elements of good culture against dysfunctional culture below and ask yourself, which kind of culture do I want to be a part of? Then ask yourself how many elements of healthy culture are true of your organization.

Healthy Culture                                                   Dysfunctional Culture

I am appreciated                                           I feel used

I feel listened to                                            My views are dismissed or marginalized

I have a voice                                                I have no voice

I am empowered                                           I am micromanaged

I can engage in candid dialogue                   Candid dialogue has strict limits

Relationships are collegial                           Relationships are often unhealthy  

My boss knows how to apologize                My boss is always right

Company information is transparent           Company information is tightly controlled

My supervisor dialogues with me               My supervisor tells me

My supervisor shows he/she cares              My supervisor has little knowledge of me

I have input into important decisions          I have no voice in important decisions

My supervisor is patient and gracious        My supervisor is unkind and harsh

The company compensates fairly               The company is stingy in compensation

There is virtually no gossip                        The organization is full of gossip

Healthy teams are the norm                       There are a lot of dysfunctions on teams

There is clarity around our mission           There is ambiguity around our mission

We practice our defined values                 Our defined values are often violated

We have alignment on important things  There is little alignment

Conflict is rare and resolved                      Conflict is the norm and unresolved

Ethics and honesty are high                       Ethics and honesty are slippery

What is growing in your organization's culture?

 

Organizational culture and what it looks like is a critical component of any for-profit or not-for-profit enterprise. And you can be sure that your culture is growing either health or dishealth that will impact your organization. In fact, Culture is never neutral. It either contributes to a healthy organization or creates dysfunction and frustration. With culture, there is no neutral ground. 

Everyone who has worked anywhere has stories about culture. Many of them are unhealthy. The question is, why does dysfunctional culture so often get ignored? Why do leaders not deal with unhealthy aspects of their organization's culture?

Because culture sits in the background as an invisible, silent backdrop, we can simply get used to what it is without asking why or noticing its lack of health. We say about difficult people, "They are just like that," rather than asking why we tolerate their behavior. We get used to and content with what is rather than asking what could be. 

We may even have a level of cynicism about people or situations that frustrate us but assume nothing will ever change. We learn to accept substandard behaviors or lack of excellence and follow through. We are not surprised or bothered by unproductive meetings or unkept promises. We are used to what is. 

This is why there are often deep pockets of dysfunction in organizations, sometimes around one unhealthy individual that doesn't get addressed, yet it infects the whole. These pockets of dysfunction are like a petri dish of bacteria that is growing ugly stuff, but we are so used to it that we hardly notice. 

Sometimes, an organization's dysfunctional culture is so obvious that all see it. In other cases, that dysfunction is like a quiet illness permeating the company. Those pockets of dysfunctional culture create dysfunctional organizations which impact every individual, every team, and everything they do. 

Try a small experiment. Ask your coworkers or staff these three questions:

• If you could change three things about your workplace, what would they be?
• If you were in charge, what would you do differently?
• How would you rate the health of our culture on a scale of one to ten, with one being the lowest and ten being the highest? Why did you pick that number? What would make your score higher?

These questions and their answers are all about the culture and practices of your workplace. Some would object that the questions ignore many good things. That is probably true, but it is not the good things that create issues in an organization. Rather, it is the problematic things! If you focus on dealing with dysfunction and dishealth, along with a set of agreed-upon behaviors and attitudes, the culture of your organization will improve significantly over time. The result will be a more engaged workplace. 

The correlation between Emotional Intelligence and organizational culture

 It is a given that the Emotional Intelligence of an organization is the sum of the EQ of its members. In other words, the organization's EQ reflects the general emotional health of its people. When I ask people about the culture of their workplace, they can quickly identify the positive and the negative aspects of their organization. What they often don't realize is that they are describing the EQ of those who work there. 

In effect, the EQ of the organization (which reflects the EQ of the individuals within the organization) creates the organizational culture. There is a direct correlation between EQ and culture. So, if one is going to change the organizational culture, it becomes necessary to grow the EQ of its members. 

For instance, if one has a culture that is rife with gossip, backstabbing, unhealthy competition, conflict, and people taking credit when they should not or blaming others when they are to blame, one has a dysfunctional culture that reflects poor Emotional Intelligence among its members. The core issue is not the culture but the people who make up that culture and their level of emotional health.

The lower the EQ of the staff, the more dysfunctional the organization is. The higher the EQ of staff, the healthier the organizational culture. And the culture almost always reflects an organization's leadership as people take their cues from leaders.

Because we don't often think of organizational culture as related to the EQ of its members, we become frustrated with our inability to deal with issues in our organizational culture. However, by teaching and coaching in EQ, we can directly impact the culture of the organization in healthy ways. 

One issue that is often ignored is this: The EQ of leaders has a disproportionate impact on the organization as they are the ones who set the standard for behavior. They set the tone for how others are treated, how they serve, and how they lead from a place of humility. 

Some behaviors need to be illegal in an organization because they are antithetical to healthy relationships and interactions. As someone has said, Culture is what we create or allow. In creating a healthy culture, we model good EQ. In disallowing unhealthy behavior, we set a standard for what personal and relational health looks like.

It is instructive to look at your own organization and ask what the corporate EQ quotient is. Are you intentionally creating a healthy culture, or are you allowing things that hurt your culture?

All cultures have positive and negative aspects to them. Take a moment and think about the problematic areas of the culture of your team or organization, and armed with that knowledge, do some teaching and coaching in the requisite areas of EQ that are involved in the problematic areas.

For examples of the signs of good and poor EQ, click here.

Questions to ask your staff - and yourself

 

There is a wealth of information at the fingertips of leaders if they would take the time to ask their staff key questions. They know things you don't know and they can help your organization get better - much better if you and your leaders will take the time to ask key questions - and listen to the answers. Those questions can lead into rich dialogue, suggestions, ideas and insights that can literally change your organization. Here are some of the questions that I ask.

What is your happiness faction on a scale of 1-10 in your job. Follow up and pay close attention: What would make it higher?

If you could change three things about this organization, what would they be?

Are their things that you could be doing that you are not?

Are their any individuals in the organization who you believe are not positioned properly or who create significant issues for others?

What are the things that bring you joy and fill you?

What are the things the deplete you?

Tell me what a perfect day looks like for you?

If you were a consultant to this organization, what suggestions would you make and why?

How would you define the culture of our organization? Follow up: What would you like to change about our culture? Follow up: What are the best pieces of our culture? What are the worst pieces of our culture? Are their any pieces of our culture that you would define as toxic and unhealthy?

Is there something that you have always wanted to talk to a leader about but never had a chance? 

What would be the perfect role for you? How does that role compare to what you do currently? 

If a ministry: What do you think the spiritual temperature of our organization is? What would you recommend to see the spiritual temperature higher? 

What is your greatest joy in working here?

What is your greatest frustration in working here?

If you were advising me, what would you want me to know?

Do you believe that we are a highly empowered organization where people have the freedom to act without permission, or highly controlled where you need to ask permission before acting?

Do we have a culture where we can have honest and gracious conversation or are their issues that we cannot broach?

How innovative and entrepreneurial so you think this organization is? Give examples.

How hungry is your staff?

How hungry is your staff?

Hungry people get things done. They have energy, ideas, are proactive and even impatient. In my experience, there are not enough staffs that have this quality. Over time staff can get comfortable, fit into routines, get stuck in ruts and lose their edge. How hungry is your staff?

How does this happen?

Simply stated: Leaders allow it. They allow staff to fit into their little niche, doing their thing without needing to pay attention to the mission as a whole. They allow silos to develop where each division does its thing. Sometimes they even add too many staff which relieves their teams of having to train volunteers and needing to work hard. Accountability for getting things done lags and there is not a missional impatience to see things happen. Expectations are tailored to the schedules of staff rather than the needs of the organization.

There is a big difference between a hungry staff and a comfortable staff. There is also a big difference in the results. Where does your staff fit on this continuum? 

Lean staffs with a passionately held mission and vision are far hungrier than a bloated staff with a mediocre vision. It is a good reason to staff lean: Hire the very best, pay competitive wages and staff as lean as possible. Anytime we become comfortable we lose our edge.

This is why staff changes are often necessary when an organization needs to be revitalized. New energy is needed as well as new leadership and vision. Otherwise, the inertia of old ways and comfortable paradigms creates a drag that prevents the organization from moving ahead. 

This is also why it is wise for boards to give a new leader significant leeway to make needed changes. It can be painful but is often necessary.

Seven signs of a hungry staff include:

• A compelling vision that cannot be ignored
• A willingness to do anything with anyone to achieve that vision
• A can do attitude that is willing to do whatever it takes with whatever resources it has to move forward
• A highly entrepreneurial, collaborative, fun and idea driven culture
• Leaders who are in the trenches with their teams - doing what needs to be done
• A self starting staff who don't need much management
• Politics virtually don't exist

Think about the vocabulary you use in your workplace - and the implications for your culture

I recently worked with an organization to bring greater health to their staff culture. Every evening the last individual to work the front desk makes a list of all the "mistakes" that were made that day. Thus, the next day staff are confronted with their "mistakes" (it is the vocabulary they have been using) and in our conversations it became apparent that this language was highly demotivating, 

The word mistake conjures up failure and those who made the "mistakes" ended up beating themselves up over it. How would you like to come in every day and start your day reviewing your mistakes. Whether intended or not, those responsible feel like they failed and were being blamed - after all, it was "their mistake."

In the course of our conversation it occurred to me that the language being used was hurting people and the staff culture. I suggested that the word "mistake" is full of negative connotations and that there might be a better way to handle issues that come up. We decided to talk about "best practices" (a positive word that we all aspire to) and ban the word "mistake" (a negative word and charged with the concept of blame.

As I think about places I have worked or organizations I have work with I think of the question "Whose fault was it?" when something went wrong. That very question or phrase is laden with negative connotations. What if we were to ask another question: "What happened here?" That is a neutral question that is not focused on blame but on understanding so that whatever happened won't happen again.

The vocabulary we use can often be negative and demotivating. Try to find positive ways to state the same thing so that we life one another up rather than give people a sense of failure.