Inspiring people to use business as a force for good

i
INSPIRING PEOPLE TO USE
Business
as a Force
for Good
JIM PENNYPACKER
EDITOR

INSPIRING PEOPLE TO USE BUSINESS AS A FORCE FOR GOOD
ii

iii
Business
as a Force
for Good

iv

v
MAVEN HOUSE
Business
as a Force
for Good
JIM PENNYPACKER
EDITOR

vi
Published by Maven House Press, 4 Snead Ct., Palmyra, VA 22963
610.883.7988, www.mavenhousepress.com, info@mavenhousepress.com
Special discounts on bulk quantities of Maven House Press books are available
to corporations, professional associations, and other organizations. For details
contact the publisher.
Copyright 2018. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise) without either the prior permission of the publisher
or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the
Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923;
978.750.8400; fax 978.646.8600; or on the web at www.copyright.com.
While this publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative
information in regard to the subject matter covered, it is sold with the
understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting,
or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is
required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought.
— From the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the
American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations
ePDF ISBN: 978-1-47540-00-2

vii
Preface ix
1 The Interface Backstory 1
2 A New Paradigm of Branding 11
3 The Changing World of Work 26
4 How Fit Impacts Organizations 39
5 Socially Responsible Leadership 53
6 You Can’t Bestow Empowerment 63
7 Diversity 72
8 How to Enhance Your Culture with Lean 81
9 The Changing Nature of Volunteerism 84
10 Your Nonprofit in a Shrinking World 92
11 Nonprofit Projects 96
12 Case Study: Building a House 106
13 Leaving a Legacy of Values 110
14 What’s On Your Tombstone? Leaving a Legacy Behind 121
15 Final Words on the NICE Philosophy 133
CONTENTS

viii

ix
Maven House recently changed its mission to the fol-
lowing: to publish books that inspire people to use business
as a force for good, books that challenge conventional thinking,
introduce new ideas, offer practical advice, and illuminate paths
to greatness. To celebrate the change, I’ve pulled together excerpts
from some of our bestselling books that support that mission.
These engaging, easy-to-read excerpts offer practical advice,
step-by-step guidance, and proven practices that will help you:
• Understand that purpose matters in transforming your
organization into a brand that’s a force for good
• Discover new ways of thinking about sustainability, social
entrepreneurship, and profitability
• Unleash your potential for personal success by
understanding the need for meaning and positive work fit
• Learn lessons about the nature of socially responsible
leadership, social contracts, the importance of shared
values, and the need for authenticity and engagement
• Find innovative ideas about how to leave a business legacy
that you can be proud of
And if you’ve gotten helpful advice from any of the authors, be
sure to check out their books.
— Jim Pennypacker
PREFACE

x
PREFACE: STORY TIME

1
I don’t think any CEO expects to stand before his maker
someday talking about shareholder value that he created.
A corporation makes a profit to exist. It’s not the other
way around. It’s not existing to make a profit. In my view,
it ought to exist for some higher purpose than just share-
holder value. And that higher purpose extends to respon-
sibility for all creation.
— Ray C. Anderson, Founder, Interface, Inc
In the words of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, “No
man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river
and he’s not the same man.” The people we meet and the experi-
ences we have along life’s path change us. Some more than others.
The opportunity to conduct a research project with global carpet
manufacturer and sustainability pioneer Interface, Inc., awakened
CHAPTER 1
The Interface Backstory
Mona Amodeo, PhD
Excerpted from Beyond Sizzle: The Next Evolution of Branding, by Mona Amodeo,
Maven House Press, 2018.

2
me to what’s possible when people are fully engaged in working for
something they believe in and feel connected to.
During the course of this research, I experienced firsthand the
capacity of purpose to ignite the passions of people. An excerpt
from one of the many interviews I conducted with the company’s
employees demonstrates this point:
When I am lying on my deathbed and someone asks what
I did with my life, who cares if I say I, we, produced thou-
sands of rolls of really great carpet, but if I can say that I was
a part of something that changed the business models so
we are working with the environment and not against it –
creating a better world for our children and their children
– now that’s saying something.
— Billy, Interface engineer, 2004
THE STORY
This story begins in Atlanta, Georgia, in March 2004, with my in-
troduction to the man who would become known as the “radical
industrialist.” That man was Ray C. Anderson (1934–2011), the
founder of Interface, Inc. Thinking back to that first encounter
with Ray, I remember being very excited to have finally landed a
meeting that I had worked for months to secure. As I stepped off
the elevator at Overlook, Interface’s corporate headquarters in At-
lanta, I had no idea that step would be the first in a journey that
would reshape many of the views I held about business, and about
Interface, Inc. is the world’s largest manufacturer of modular carpet. The
company produces the carpet squares you have likely seen in commercial
buildings, or even in someone’s home.

3
the direction of my career. Over the years Ray became a teacher,
mentor, and friend that I feel honored to have known.
I first became aware of Interface and Ray through an article
given to me by a colleague in my doctoral program. He was aware
of my growing interest in sustainable business as a research topic
for my dissertation and thought Interface might be worth explor-
ing. The article spoke of how Anderson, a Georgia Tech-educated
industrial engineer and entrepreneur, was transforming his com-
pany from what he described as a “plunderer of the earth” to an
exemplar of sustainable manufacturing. As I read the article, I be-
came interested, although more than a little skeptical.
While the early sustainability pioneers (exemplified by names
like Ben & Jerry’s, The Body Shop, and Tom’s of Maine) had in-
spired my interest in the emerging triple bottom line concept of
business, they also led me to ask a different question. These early
adopters were founded with the values of social and environmen-
tal responsibility infused in their culture, but I wondered if a com-
pany not born with this DNA could change. Interface looked like
the perfect place to find the answers.
Having grown up in Georgia in the heart of the southern textile
world, I understood a little about the traditional mindset of manu-
facturers. I was pretty sure that neither the word sustainability nor
the concept triple bottom line accounting championed by Inter-
face was a part of this industry’s vocabulary. Yet here was a profit-
able and successful carpet manufacturer being lauded by leading
THE INTERFACE BACKSTORY
Sustainability is most often defined as meeting the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. There are three
main pillars: social, environmental, and economic. These three pillars are
informally referred to as people, planet, and profits.

4
environmentalists as a hero. Several questions came to mind: Was
this the real deal, or just PR spin? And if it was real, how did this
transformation happen? These questions became the focus of my
research.
For more than a year, I lived and breathed Interface. Ray and his
team gave me full access to the people who had been a part of the
journey. I listened to stories from the corner office to the shop floor.
Forty interviews, mounds of archival data, and yards of video foot-
age captured hours of conversations with Ray and others and led to
a 250-page document – my dissertation – “Becoming Sustainable:
Identity Dynamics Within Transformational Culture Change at In-
terface” (a title only an academic can produce). But, as esoteric as it
sounds, this title does capture the essence of what was learned.
Ray Anderson’s Vision for Interface
“To be the first company that, by its deeds, shows the
entire industrial world what sustainability is in all its di-
mensions: people, process, product, place, and profits
– by 2020 – and in doing so we will become restorative
through the power of influence.” (August 1994)
Over the span of my research, as employee after employee shared
their stories, it became increasingly clear that Interface was able to
transform itself because its people became connected to a deeper
purpose for their work, more than simply making great carpet.
Triple bottom line is an accounting framework that was coined by entrepreneur
and corporate responsibility expert John Elkington in 1994. It takes a broader
view of measuring performance beyond the traditional single bottom line:
profits. The model includes social, environmental, and economic performance
metrics (johnelkington.com).

5
Anderson created this connection by engaging them as central
players in bringing his vision to life. Maybe his days playing foot-
ball for Bobby Dodd at Georgia Tech embedded his understanding
of the unstoppable energy of a fired-up team united by a shared
vision of doing something really big.
The stories shared by the people who were a part of the Inter-
face journey to sustainability reflected a transformation of their
attitudes from skepticism to commitment as they embraced the
need to take responsibility for the negative impact their company
was having on the environment – and do something about it. One
of the marketing executives said it this way, “I don’t come to work
every day just to sell another yard of carpet that people walk on,
or wipe their feet on, or that makes their office more beautiful. I
am here to build a better world for us and for our grandchildren.
We know there’s a better way, and we’re here to prove it.” Better for
them translated into proving that building great products and a
profitable business could sit side by side with leaving a better world
for future generations.
A petroleum-intensive carpet company becoming a symbol of
environmental stewardship? Imagine just how unattainable that
seemed to the people of Interface in 1994.
Yet I learned from Interface and subsequent clients to never
underestimate people’s ability to achieve a seemingly impossible
dream when they’re committed to a purpose.
Nonetheless, embracing change didn’t happen overnight. One
of the company’s first employees summed up the reaction most had
when they first heard Ray’s challenge: “To be honest, we thought
he’d [Anderson] gone ’round the bend. We kept thinking that it
would just go away, but it didn’t; he just kept at it.”

6
The same pioneering spirit and tenacity that had driven Ray
Anderson to introduce the “crazy” idea of carpet tiles, which
birthed the company in 1973, had once again led him to go
beyond the limits of “the way we’ve always done things.” His
entrepreneurial spirit and commitment to a new set of values
set Interface on a new course. Unwavering focus ultimately in-
fused an entire company with a heightened sense of purpose,
enthusiasm, and determination to prove that he and they were
right. New behaviors associated with this vision fundamentally
reshaped how the people of Interface redefined the purpose of
their company as they moved over the years from initial skepti-
cism to advocates for Anderson’s views. Over a four-year period,
Interface emerged with a new brand as a leader and an authentic
symbol of a new, more-sustainable approach to manufacturing.
It had rejected the false choice between profit or responsibility,
and it was proving that it was possible to produce innovative
products that people wanted, be profitable, and take care of the
environment. These efforts were reinforced with rounds of ap-
plause from people both inside and outside of the organization.
People wanted to be a part of this company that was changing
the face of manufacturing.
THE POWER OF PURPOSE
Answers to how others can transform their organizations into a
brand that matters, just as Interface did, emerged from one of the
most important insights I learned from Ray Anderson and the
people of Interface during my time studying and consulting with
the company.

7
Great organization brands are anchored in the connections
people feel to a vision that is meaningful to them. Their en-
gagement with a collective purpose creates levels of per-
formance that cannot be forged by surface-level attempts
to motivate people.
PURPOSE MATTERS. It feeds the soul and replenishes our en-
ergy. Purpose lived through actions anchors us, connects us, mo-
tivates us, and ultimately defines us. Life fueled by the search for
our own personal why is the very definition of the human spirit.
Today, we all seem to be searching more than ever for human con-
nections that support our life’s journey. The illusory promises of-
fered by technology, in a strange way, have done just the opposite.
Tweets aren’t conversation, and Facebook “likes” don’t define rela-
tionships. This vacuum created by these promises has been inten-
sified by the speed of change, which has spun us into thousands of
disconnected pieces and parts, often leaving us wondering where
we belong, and if anything we do really matters.
So, what does all of this have to do with Beyond Sizzle: The Next
Evolution of Branding, a book you most likely found in the business
section of your favorite bookstore? While the impact of purpose
and the importance of relationships can’t be directly accounted for
in a spreadsheet or an accountant’s ROI calculation, both purpose
and relationships influence, in so many ways, everything that ul-
timately defines the traditional bottom-line measurements of suc-
cess.
A confluence of forces is fueling the awakening of leaders to
the potential of organizations to reach new levels of prosperity by

8
becoming places where employees are more engaged, excited, and
productive because they feel that what they do has an impact be-
yond the moment, the year, or even their lifetimes. They matter.
This truth is being reinforced with increasing frequency by re-
searchers, authors, and other thought leaders – all proclaiming the
growing influence of corporate purpose and values alignment on
decisions about whom we choose to work for, purchase from, or
contribute to.
Old ideas that limit the purpose of business to quarterly share-
holder returns are being toppled. People are rewarding companies
who have an expanded view of success measured by the triple
bottom line. It’s clear. This once-fringe business perspective often
associated with Birkenstocks and granola, now has a seat at the
boardroom table. There is much for all of us to learn from Interface
and from others who have blazed new paths to prosperity fueled
by purpose.
Can organizations matter more because they become places
where people live their values, where ideas are nurtured, grow, and
thrive? Can they become environments where people feel excited
and engaged in being a part of producing innovations that make
their communities and the world, better? Can they become a force
for change? How can we correct a trajectory that by our own hands
has produced real threats to the quality of our lives and the legacy
we leave future generations? And, can this type of company create
positive energy that radiates beyond its walls to attract and retain
the trust and loyalty of customers, donors, or investors?
Absolutely. It has been done by some. Therefore, it can be done
by many.

9
This is not only the right thing to do, it’s the smart thing
to do
The Interface research answered my original question about if
and how a company, not born with the DNA of sustainability
values, could change its culture. But my search for these answers
also spawned new insights into the connections between culture
change and branding. Over the past fifteen years, my exploration
of this connection has led to the insights in this book about what
it takes to transform organizations into brands that matter to cus-
tomers, employees, and the world – just as Interface did.
Today, the world is searching for more companies like Inter-
face. By this I mean companies that embrace the importance of
corporate responsibility demonstrated in both words and actions.
I hope this book will support leaders who are ready to respond
to this call. In the words of Ray Anderson, “This is not only the
right thing to do, it’s the smart thing to do, from a pure business
perspective.”

10
Print and digital versions
available at amazon.com,
barnesandnoble.com, and
independent bookstores
About the Author
MONA AMODEO, PhD, is a catalyst
for transforming organizations into
brands that matter. She is the founder
of idgroup, a Certified B Corporation.
Amodeo leads a team of dedicated
experts with a vision to move business-
as-is to business-as-it can-be. Prior to
opening idgroup in 1989, Amodeo was
a broadcast journalism instructor and
international documentary producer at
the University of West Florida. She earned
a PhD in Organization Development and
Change from Benedictine University and
a master’s in Communication Arts. Her
work spans the boundaries of scholarship
and practice in the disciplines of
branding, communications, and
organization development and change.

11
The answers you get depend upon the questions you ask.
— Thomas Kuhn
Iam not proposing that everything we do in branding needs
to be thrown out the window. The psychological tenets of so-
cial identification that birthed the practice of branding remain a
powerful force in influencing people to choose X over Y. However,
what is needed is a paradigm shift that reframes branding through
a new lens that more accurately reflects the shifting demands of the
marketplace.
Through the lens of The Next Evolution of Branding organiza-
tions become brands that matter by engaging stakeholders in shap-
ing, sharing, and living stories that reflect the highest intentions of
the company and the people it serves. This involves fundamental
shifts in our view of how we do branding (Figure 2.1). Those who
CHAPTER 2
A New Paradigm of Branding
Mona Amodeo, PhD
Excerpted from Beyond Sizzle: The Next Evolution of Branding, by Mona Amodeo,
Maven House Press, 2018.

12
embrace this new paradigm will not only survive the challenges
they are facing relating to the shifting view of the responsibility of
business, the growing power of marketplace opinions, and the in-
creasing skepticism of formal communications – they will thrive.
Shifting the focus from What we do to Who we are speaks to
the importance of everyone in the organization feeling connected
to a company’s core purpose, values, and beliefs. From sizzle to sub-
stance reflects the importance of operating with integrity and au-
thenticity by aligning behaviors with the values of the organization
and the people it serves. Movement from convincing to connecting
symbolizes belief in the importance of resisting spin in favor of
engaging people in honest, meaningful communications. The final
shift from me to we acknowledges that organizations are part of a
bigger world, thus reinforcing the realization that every company
has impact on customers, employees, and the world. Each person,
each organization, has a choice to decide if that impact will be pos-
itive or negative. The movement from me to we also acknowledges
that branding is not the domain of the C-suite or of any single
Social Identification is defined as a person’s sense of who they are based on a
sense of belonging to a group.
Figure 2.1. Shifts Required in the Next Evolution of Branding
From
What we do
Sizzle
Convince
Me
To
Who we are
Substance
Connect
We

13
A NEW PARADIGM OF BRANDING
department. Your brand is the co-creation of every person who
interacts with the company – directly or indirectly.
CORE PRINCIPLES OF
THE NEXT EVOLUTION OF BRANDING
Corporate brands that resonate with an increasing number of con-
scious consumers build cultures that live a brand that matters. The
Next Evolution of Branding calls on organizations to respond to
this opportunity by adding responsibility to the list of credibility,
distinctiveness, and desirability, traditionally used to define strong
brands.
Let’s pause here to take a deeper look into the fundamental
principles that underpin this shifting paradigm. Embracing these
principles promises to build cultures that thrive because employ-
ees feel engaged and empowered and in turn this creates brands
that are trusted because they are authentic. The first two principles
acknowledge the growing importance of building responsibility
into brands. The second two principles address the need to manage
the hyperconnectivity and skepticism of the marketplace by rec-
ognizing the walls that once existed between external and internal
audiences have crumbled.
Principle 1. Social Contract
At the core of brands that matter is the belief in the importance of
organizations forging a social contract with society. Some of you
may remember the concept of social contract from studying names
such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rous-
seau in your high school government classes. This belief revolves

14
around the idea that we all have ethical and political obligations to
every other individual in our society. Thus, the idea reinforces the
importance of balancing rights and responsibilities.
While the social contract concept dates back to early philoso-
phers, it is increasingly relevant to today’s leaders, who are being
challenged to examine their organizations’ responsibilities to their
employees, the communities they serve, and the world in which
they operate – including the natural world.
There is a growing call from both customers and employees
who are looking for something more from organizations. Yes, they
want good products and services, but there is growing evidence
confirming that policies reflecting a commitment to responsible
corporate behavior influence the decisions of emerging genera-
tions about what they buy and where they work. In the future, or-
ganizations will be judged not just for the quality and price of their
products but for who they are. This goes back to ideas advanced in
the 1980s by the pioneers of values-based businesses such as Ben
& Jerry’s, The Body Shop, and Tom’s of Maine, which first inspired
the research I did with Interface. All were founded with the belief
that it was possible to follow the dictum of Benjamin Franklin and
“do well by doing good.” These pioneers of responsible business
translated this idea, not as a shiny veneer, but as a commitment to
purpose that lived at the core of the organization’s existence. Val-
ues and purpose defined their businesses.
It appears we have reached a tipping point in the collective
consciousness about the responsibility of business. Old ideas that
limit purpose to quarterly shareholder returns are being toppled.
People are rewarding organizations that operate with a set of values
that expand responsibility to triple bottom line measures, which

15
Core Principles of
the Next Evolution of Branding
Principle 1. Social Contract
Organizations have a social contract with society.
Principle 2. Moral Compass
A leader’s most important role is to define the mor-
al compass of his or her organization.
Principle 3. The Brand Ecosystem
Trusted reputations are created by viewing organi-
zations as interconnected ecosystems. This whole
system perspective replaces the outdated refer-
ences to us vs. them by embracing the reality that
branding is a process of connecting the we. Every-
thing is connected. Everything communicates.
Principle 4. Moments of Truth
Organizations create reputations as brands that
matter by building trust. This is accomplished by
engaging employees in aligning an organization’s
identity (who we believe we are) with the expecta-
tions created by formal communications and ex-
periences delivered at every corner of the organi-
zation – what we define as moments of truth.

16
includes their impact on people and the planet, not just profit. Even
Fortune magazine, one of the most powerful voices in the busi-
ness world, seems to be on board. The publication’s “Change the
World” list “is meant to shine a spotlight on companies that have
made significant progress in addressing major social problems as a
part of their core business strategy.” (Murray, 2015). Alan Murray,
Fortune editor, explains the magazine’s reason for acknowledging
these companies this way: “It is based on our belief that capital-
ism should be not just tolerated but celebrated for its power to do
good.”
Topics like corporate citizenship can feel abstract, but in re-
ality, we are simply talking about organizations choosing to be a
good citizen by operating with respect and for the mutual benefit
of all. This means acknowledging the importance of the give-take
relationship between a business and the people who keep the busi-
ness in business – employees, customers, and the communities
the business serves. The following excerpt from an article that ap-
peared in The Economist offers insight into this connection (Davis,
2005):
More than two centuries ago, Rousseau’s social contract
helped to seed the idea among political leaders that they
must serve the public good, lest their own legitimacy be
threatened. The CEOs of today’s big corporations should
take the opportunity to restate and reinforce their own so-
cial contracts in order to help secure, for the long term, the
invested billions of their shareholders.
The author calls leaders to answer a question which on the surface
is quite straightforward: How do we balance what’s good for our

17
organization with what’s right for the larger society? The answer
is equally simple: Leaders must accept the challenge to strengthen
the and between profitability and purpose. Reframing purpose,
not as a line in their mission statement or public relations add- on,
but as a key driver of profitable companies.
The belief that a social contract should exist between busi-
ness and society connects to what is often referred to as corporate
social responsibility (CSR). This philosophy has its roots in busi-
ness ethics and reaches beyond the idea that the responsibility of
business begins and ends with philanthropy. In their book Beyond
Good Company: Next Generation Corporate Citizenship, research-
ers Bradley Googins, Philip Mirvis, and Steven Rochlin define two
criteria of the next generation of corporate citizens (Googins et al.,
2007):
• Minimize Harm: This means taking account of and
minimizing the negative impact of a firm’s footprint in
society. The main injunction is “do no harm.”
• Maximize Benefit: This means creating shared value
in the form of economic wealth and social welfare,
including reduction of poverty, improved health and
well-being, development of people, and care of the natural
environment. Here the message is “do good.”
While minimizing harm is certainly a worthy starting point,
the full potential of organizations as brands that matter lies in
their willingness to move beyond simply doing no harm to doing
good. What it means to be a “doing well by doing good” culture is
unique to each organization. Not everyone can be environmental

18
champions like Interface, but every leader and every organiza-
tion can ask the question, How can we leave the world better than
we found it?
Figure 2.2 offers a summary of the stages of corporate citizen-
ship viewed through five stages. The progression shows the mean-
ing of corporate responsibility evolving from the elementary stage
where the focus in on legal compliance. These companies only give
lip service to its importance. At the other end of the spectrum are
the game changers, companies that have fully integrated the triple
bottom line measures of success into their culture and are now us-
ing their voice as a platform for creating societal change. The Stag-
es of Corporate Citizenship is useful in guiding discussions about
where an organization feels it is and where it wants to go.
Principle 2. Moral Compass
One of the most important roles of a leader is identifying and mod-
eling the values that define the moral compass of his or her organi-
zation. Like a compass we use to define stable and absolute direc-
tions when embarking on a journey, organizations depend on their
moral compass to guide decisions and to confirm they are headed
in the right direction to reach their destination. The moral compass
directs the decisions and behaviors of organization members by
providing ethical guidance about what is right and what is wrong.
Prospering in a competitive environment requires attracting
the best and the brightest employees. Embracing purpose and val-
ues that go beyond self-interest is of growing importance in build-
ing committed and high-performing teams. Establishing the moral
compass starts with three questions:

19
Q1. Are we doing what’s right for people?
Q2. Are we doing what’s good for the environment?
Q3. Are we protecting the financial stability of our company?
Answers to these questions are associated with triple bottom
line measurements of success. Brands that matter place these val-
ues at the core of who they are and are committed to constantly
working to manage the delicate balance between them. There is no
perfection. But keeping these questions at the forefront of every
decision will keep everyone in your organization connected to its
highest intentions.
Figure 2.2. Stages of Corporate Citizenship (Googins, Mirvis, and Rochlin 2007)
Stage 1
Elementary
Stage 2
Engaged
Stage 3
Innovative
Stage 4
Integrated
Stage 5
Transforming
Citizenship
Concept
Jobs, Profits,
and Taxes
Philanthropy,
Environmental
Protection
Stakeholder
Management
Sustainability
or Triple
Bottom Line
Change
the Game
Strategic
Intent
Legal
Compliance
License to
Operate
Business Case
Value
Proposition
Market
Creation or
Social Change
Structure
Marginal Staff
Drive
Functional
Ownership
Cross-
Functional
Coordination
Organizational
Alignment
Mainstream:
Business Drive
Issues
Management
Defensive
Reactive,
Policies
Responsive,
Programs
Pro-active,
Systems
Defining
Stakeholder
Relationships
Unilateral Interactive
Mutual
Influence
Partnership
Multi-
Organization
Alliances
Transparency
Flank
Protection
Public Relations
Public
Reporting
Assurance Full Disclosure

20
By viewing your moral compass through the lens of the social
contract (your organization’s responsibility to its employees, cus-
tomers, and the world) you can set the true north for your orga-
nization. Setting this direction is more than a “feel good” exercise.
As part of the organization’s creed, it becomes central to the value
proposition of the organization.
These first two principles define important strategic discus-
sions for organizations that want to connect with a growing group
of customers and employees who are looking for more from or-
ganizations than just great products and services. The third and
fourth principles explained below address the importance of align-
ing behaviors with the professed social contract and moral com-
pass of the organization.
Principle 3. Organizations as
Brand Ecosystems
Everything is connected and everything communicates. This view
replaces branding strategies that are over-dependent on image de-
velopment aimed at convincing with efforts that reflect an equal
focus on connecting customers and employees with the highest in-
tentions of the organization at every touch point of the brand ex-
perience. Building organizations as brands that matter is as simple
and as complex as connecting the dots of what is said and what is
delivered. This begins by acknowledging that brands are the results
of an interconnected matrix of communications where customers
and employees are equal partners with the organization in co-cre-
ating the meaning of the brand. This requires different attitudes
about what it means to manage a brand.

21
Brands that matter remove false barriers between internal and
external communications. They see the process of building au-
thentic brands as choreographing the multiple ways the organiza-
tion interacts with people within its walls and with its larger envi-
ronment. They understand the strength of the brand is determined
by the cohesiveness of the whole system. This is defined as the
identity, image, culture, vision, and reputation of the organization.
Identity. The organization’s internal narrative reflect-
ing beliefs about “who we are.”
Image. A collection of verbal, visual, and behavioral
cues that influence the impressions and expectations
people have of a company.
Culture. The assumptions, values, and beliefs shared
by organization members. This collective understand-
ing directs the behaviors of people in the organization.
Culture impacts the experiences people have with the
organization.
Vision. An organization’s aspirations for the future.
Reputation. Effective brand management that consis-
tently aligns expectation with experiences (moments
of truth) creates strong brand reputations. Poor brand
management that doesn’t deliver experiences that
meet expectations creates weak brands.

22
Through this lens the ultimate goal of branding is to create trust
by aligning expectations and experiences. Over time this creates a
corporate reputation that reflects the vision of the company.
Principle 4. Moments of Truth
Powerful stories that tap into people’s feelings remain at the core
of great branding. But stories alone, regardless of how compelling
they are, aren’t enough. We live in a time when experiences are be-
coming an increasingly important part of the mix needed to build
authentic brands. Creating a story that reflects the truth behind
your name is crucial. According to Josh Feldmeth (2016), former
CEO of Interbrand North America and current Senior Partner at
Prophet, “Organizations that offer a powerful story, brought to life
through the behavior of their people and products, will generate a
higher level of loyalty and emotional engagement from customers
actively looking for confidence amid uncertainty.”
Establishing new approaches to branding that create emotion-
al connections by shifting focus from convincing to connecting is
vitally important. This requires building a culture where people
inside the organization are fully engaged in delivering what has
been promised in the messages designed to build image. These
experiences are also increasingly important in the cluttered com-
munications landscape because they are likely to become the only
thing that offers the sustained differentiation needed to build an
organization’s reputation.
The simplest example of the importance of this connection is
that of a restaurant advertisement that shows a picture of mouthwa-
tering food, artistically arranged on a plate and served by smiling
servers, only to have the real experience be a stark contrast: bad

23
food served by unkempt and rude servers. Fancy advertising is a
waste of money if the promise offered by the images isn’t delivered.
The sizzle of communications must be validated by the substance
of actions. A good deal of money and time is spent by organiza-
tions that ultimately fail to build the brands they want to build
because they leave out one of the most important success factors:
engaging people inside the organization to deliver the expectations
promised.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Thomas Kuhn (1922–1996), quoted in the opening of this chap-
ter, introduced the term paradigm shift in his book, The Struc-
ture of Scientific Revolutions (Kuhn, 1962) to explain the impor-
tance of understanding the frames people use to solve problems.
The Next Evolution of Branding outlines a new paradigm that
helps organizations overcome the growing challenges faced in
building bonds of trust by reframing branding through a new
lens that gives equal attention to messages and experiences that
define the brand.
The Next Evolution of Branding is built on a belief in the im-
portance of engaging all stakeholders – the whole system – in
shaping, sharing, and living a story that emanates from the core
of who the organization is, what makes it different, and the impact
it wants to make on the world.
The social contract and the moral compass frame the or-
ganization’s commitment to purpose, which ultimately connects
the values of the organization with what matters to customers,
employees, and the world. Focusing on engaging people in the

24
organization in aligning the actions of the organization with
these deep-felt values is what produces authenticity. This de-
fines what is needed to overcome the challenges faced in build-
ing both brands and reputations in an increasingly hypercon-
nected, skeptical world – a world where people want to connect
with organizations that stand for something and that stand be-
hind their promises.
People want to connect with organizations that stand for
something and that stand behind their promises.

25
About the Author
MONA AMODEO, PhD, is a catalyst
for transforming organizations into
brands that matter. She is the founder
of idgroup, a Certified B Corporation.
Amodeo leads a team of dedicated
experts with a vision to move business-
as-is to business-as-it can-be. Prior to
opening idgroup in 1989, Amodeo was
a broadcast journalism instructor and
international documentary producer at
the University of West Florida. She earned
a PhD in Organization Development and
Change from Benedictine University and
a master’s in Communication Arts. Her
work spans the boundaries of scholarship
and practice in the disciplines of
branding, communications, and
organization development and change.

26
There’s always a story. It’s all stories, really. The sun
coming up every day is a story. Everything’s got a story
in it. Change the story, change the world.
— Terry Pratchett
The story of work in America today isn’t pretty. Workers
are feeling overwhelmed, burned out, disengaged, anxious,
and stressed out to the point of feeling ill. People are working more
hours than ever, especially in competitive professions such as law
and management, and many people report feeling pressure to work
even more than the 47-hour-a-week average reported by Gallup
(Saad 2014). Despite studies that show that our collective health,
wellness, and performance are decreasing with long hours, people
are working even harder and taking fewer vacations for fear that if
they don’t appear “all in” they may lose their jobs. In their article
on managing high-intensity workplaces, Erin Reid and Lakshmi
CHAPTER 3
The Changing World of Work
Moe Carrick and Cammie Dunaway
Excerpted from Fit Matters: How to Love Your Job, by Moe Carrick and Cammie
Dunaway, Maven House Press, 2017.

27
Ramarajan (2016) said that “organizations pressure employees to
become what sociologists have called ideal workers: people totally
dedicated to their jobs and always on call. . . . In such places, any
suggestion of meaningful outside interests and commitments can
signal a lack of fitness for the job.”
Human beings at work are simply not thriving, and this affects
the performance of the organizations in which they work and the
communities in which they live. Despite technological and social
gains worldwide, the people who do the daily work tasks to keep
economies, industries, and governments contributing are less vi-
brant, happy, and fulfilled than ever before, and they’re therefore
likely not doing their best work. The traditional “good jobs” sup-
ported by Roosevelt’s New Deal, which offered good benefits, per-
manent security, and potential for advancement, have evaporated
under the weight of startups, mergers, and global connectivity.
Michael graduated from a good university a few years ago
with a bachelor’s degree and a great GPA. After studying leader-
ship, he decided to work for a few years before deciding if grad
school was right for him. Six months as an office worker left him
empty and demoralized because of the drudgery and sameness
of the work. Next, he worked at a factory on a bread line, hoping
that manual labor would provide some satisfaction. A tri-lingual
speaker, Michael is passionate about climate change and corpo-
rate responsibility; he’s frustrated that he hasn’t been able to find
a place to hang his hat, but he doesn’t want a corporate job with
endless hours. He wonders, doesn’t anyone want a worker like
him? Someone who wants to make a difference, can work hard,
can write well, and is very good on a team? He’ll give his all to the
right job if he can find one!
THE CHANGING WORLD OF WORK

28
Joan, on the other hand, is in her early 50s and considering
her next move. She studied accounting as an undergrad and has
worked hard her whole career as a mid-level finance person. Her
kids are almost grown, and she would love to find work that makes
her heart sing a bit more. She’s had three bosses in three years and
wonders if there’s a better role or company for someone like her.
She worries that her computer skills are dated, but oh how she
would love a change!
Joan and Michael, in two very different stages of life, seek jobs
that will fulfill them and put bread on the table, but they’re strug-
gling to find the right fit. They’re not alone: a study by The Energy
Workforce Trends that Impact Fit
1. New and Ambiguous Roles
2. Increase in the Desire for Meaning at Work
3. Flexibility as a Currency
4. Information Overload
5. Distributed Companies and Teams
6. Speed
7. Cloud Workers (Outsourcing)
8. Sustainability Imperative
9. Diversity
10. Overwhelmed Workers
11. Generational Turnover
Figure 3-1. Listed above are the top trends affecting employer/employee fit
today.

29
Project found that 59 percent of workers are physically depleted,
emotionally drained, mentally distracted, and lacking in mean-
ing and purpose. In the same study, only 30 percent of employees
say they have an opportunity to do what they enjoy most at work
(Schwartz and Porath 2014b).
KEY FACTORS TO
DETERIORATING HAPPINESS AT WORK
The world of work is in great flux. There are new productivity
tools introduced every week that are supposed to help us get more
work done, faster. We’re connected with employees and colleagues
worldwide via a multitude of devices that are always on. These
changes in the world of work have both positive and negative ef-
fects on people globally.
Let’s look at the top trends affecting employer-employee fit to-
day:
New and Ambiguous Roles
New jobs appear every year that didn’t previously exist, with titles
such as Social Media Coordinator, Director of First Impressions,
Unschooling Counselor, and Growth Hacker, to name a few. In
our technology-driven economy of service businesses, where in-
formation (data) rules, jobs are morphing in novel and unantici-
pated ways. Gone are the days when the selection of one career
path in a known profession was a sure thing for life (doctor, lawyer,
civil servant). And even in known professions, paths are changing
quickly. For example, physicians may review MRIs from thousands
of miles away without seeing the patients, or marketing managers
may work only in the digital media realm. And this pace of change

30
will increase over time – it’s estimated that 65 percent of the jobs
that will be available when today’s kindergartners graduate college
don’t even exist today (Rosen 2011).
Increase in the Desire for Meaning at Work
The days when a job was just to make money to provide for the
family have passed; the purpose behind our drive to work has
shifted. Increasingly, new workers (especially the Millennial gen-
eration) seek meaning when they look for a job. This means that
despite the perks, promotions, pathways, or professions of a par-
ticular role, if employees can’t find a higher purpose in their work
or company, they’ll feel disconnected, disenfranchised, and, ul-
timately, misfit (see Chapter 3, “Meaning Fit”). While it’s pos-
sible that this has always been so, it feels more acute today when
long-term employer-employee relationships are not a given. In
fact, most people can expect to have 11 to 13 jobs during their
lifetime.
Flexibility as a Currency
Workers today aren’t satisfied with traditional nine-to-five work
hours and much prefer to schedule their work around hobbies,
caregiving, and lifestyle choices. This alters the traditional con-
struct of an “office” where people sit in cubicles or meeting rooms
and crank out documents and information. People want portabil-
ity and flexibility regarding the way they work.
Information Overload
Today, availability of data isn’t an issue: we’re swimming in in-
formation every minute of the day, accessible by various devices

31
and from locations as wide-ranging as a boat in the Arctic to our
neighborhood Starbucks. Access to information isn’t an issue, it’s
knowing what information to pay attention to, and whether that
information is relevant to our decision-making process.
Distributed Companies and Teams
Digital connection anywhere, anytime, means that people and
work are no longer organized in traditional settings. People
work across platforms, time zones, languages, and cultures
more than ever before, putting increased demand on commu-
nication, clarity, and team cohesion. This trend puts pressure
on employees at all levels to build social capital with people in
all directions to get things done. It’s not only feasible but likely
that you have a boss or teammates you’ve never met in person.
This changes how we relate to one another, how we partner, and
how we learn.
Speed
Things happen faster than ever in the world of work, resulting in
increasing pressure for workers to assimilate huge volumes of data
and make decisions fast for fear of falling behind or missing an op-
portunity. The internalized pressure to do more in less time leads
to the iconic heads down, shoulders hunched, running-in-place
image of U.S. workers – all action, very little reflection.
Cloud Workers (Outsourcing)
An increasing number of workers are freelancers today, and com-
panies frequently reduce costs by outsourcing work to part-time
or occasional workers to avoid overhead (Nunberg 2016). This

32
combination provides flexibility for workers but fails to deliver
stability and predictability, which impacts their ability to keep
ahead of living expenses, plan for major life events, and take ad-
vantage of company benefits. This trend has negative implications
for the social contract between employer and employee regarding
long-term security, and this affects families, communities, and in-
dividuals.
Sustainability Imperative
Business growth for growth’s sake is being replaced by many orga-
nizations with purposeful profitability – responsible growth done
in ways that minimize impact on the environment, people, and
communities – where greed has given way to values, profit with
impact, and business as a force for good. The rise of social entre-
preneurship means that more and more companies form daily that
not only make money but also make a difference. The new business
status of benefit corporations and B Corps (see bcorporation.net)
– embraced by strong consumer brands such as Patagonia, Dan-
sko, and Method – are evidence of consumers’ interest in products
that, at a minimum, do no harm. This has implications for employ-
ees, particularly given their increasing desire to find meaning and
purpose at work.
Diversity
Numerous factors impact the extent to which organizations seek
more diverse pools of workers. The case has been made that having
people with diverse experience, views, and contributions makes
companies better (as long as they can navigate conflict). Beyond
quotas and government regulations regarding equal employment

33
opportunity, organizations increasingly seek workers who repre-
sent their client population. And rather than focus on people who
are alike, employers are seeking those with diverse experiences and
perspectives to elevate their creativity and innovation. There are
still challenges with recruitment and retention of minorities, but
the tide has turned when it comes to an interest in and commit-
ment to diversity.
Overwhelmed Workers
The volume and speed of changes in global markets have created
an overwhelmed workforce. Because of this feeling of being over-
loaded, inundated, and overstretched, there’s been a tremendous
increase in the popularity of yoga, meditation, and mindfulness.
Brigid Schulte (2014) writes in her book, Overwhelm: How to
Work, Love, and Play When No One Has the Time, about the costs
of our work-hard culture as well as ideas for how we can reclaim
our lives together. With productivity decreasing with excessive
work, we should all be incented to reduce or eliminate our feelings
of being overwhelmed.
Generational Turnover
The long-anticipated brain drain of baby boomers entering re-
tirement has hit at last. With an estimated 53.5 million Millen-
nials in the workforce in America in 2015, the transfer of power
and influence is well underway, and because of generational dif-
ferences we’ll undoubtedly continue to change how we work.
Millennial workers are motivated by different priorities and are,
by their very nature, changing how work unfolds. Interestingly, a
2015 Gallup survey showed that Millennials are the least-engaged

34
generation at work – only 28.9 percent say they are actively en-
gaged (Adkins 2015).
ASK YOURSELF . . .
• How have I been impacted by any of these workforce trends?
• Are there other trends that are impacting my work situation?
IMPACT ON OUR FIT
So what do these trends mean in terms of your ability to find the
right work fit?
What We Look For In A Job Has Shifted
Let go of outdated notions of what to look for in a job. Gone are
the days when incremental salary increases, a desk with a view, a
particular title, and prestige were essential elements of work. In
the new world of work, what matters to us is dramatically differ-
ent, and we have more leverage than ever before with employers
to get exactly what we want. Smart companies know that it ben-
efits them to find workers who are a good fit, so knowing what
matters to you significantly increases the likelihood of finding a
great fit.
The Six Elements of Work Fit, Reprioritized
The six elements of work fit that we’ve identified are likely very
similar to those that mattered to employees in the past, but the im-
portance of each element has shifted, especially since the global re-
cession of 2007–2009. Meaning and lifestyle fit, for example, have

35
become more important as employees let go of traditional notions
of the American Dream, such as financial gain, and focus instead
on their well-being.
Culture fit has become increasingly vital to a workforce that
values transparency, which is much more available in the digital
age of social media; employee empowerment initiatives and stud-
ies have shown that the ability to feel like you’re a part of the com-
pany greatly increase motivation and morale.
Job fit has shifted since many entry-level jobs require ad-
vanced education, and people are specializing with more train-
ing and experience. And, finally, relationship fit shows up in the
work-fit equation because people increasingly work as part of
multiple teams, requiring unprecedented partnership and col-
laboration.
The Process is Highly Personal and Subjective
The proliferation of “Great Places to Work” rankings in magazines
reflects the degree to which employers care about their company
being perceived as a favorable workplace. And to a degree, these
ratings and company descriptions are useful to job seekers, helping
them to find companies whose employees rated certain attributes
highly. On the whole, though, our research confirms that just be-
cause a company is on the list doesn’t mean that they’re the right
fit for you. In fact, because of their time sensitivity and focus on
morale and motivation, these ratings function best as promotional
tools for an organization rather than as a provider of any guidance
for you in determining potential work fit. Time after time, we’ve
interviewed employees who worked in top “Great Places to Work”
who left because the work fit was poor for them.

36
Learning Matters
In the face of today’s dynamic workplace, the opportunity to learn and
develop in a role, at any level, is extremely important. Our interest in
growing, in contributing, and in learning more (about the work, our-
selves, the organization, the market, being a team player, and leading)
is a critical aspect of finding an ideal work fit. Because we’ll hold many
jobs over our lifetimes, one of our essential human needs – to get bet-
ter by learning and growing – can and should be met by our work.
Society Needs Organizations, So Fit Matters
Despite the growth in the number of freelancers, there are still
vastly more people employed full- or part-time by organizations.
Our social structure depends on organizations large and small for
some of the things that make civilization as we know it work: a tax
basis that supports social services, retirement possibilities, insur-
ance cost reduction, and the synergistic lift that organizations can
achieve through cost sharing, innovation, creativity, and impact.
Accordingly, if organizations continue to be the primary employ-
ers, work fit becomes essential to the organizations themselves as
well as to the individuals who work in them.
IT’S UP TO YOU
Companies are focused more than ever before on solving the puz-
zles of attracting and retaining the talent they need for their busi-
nesses to thrive, but ultimately the responsibility for finding a great
work fit is on your shoulders. Knowing yourself, and being able to
assess an organization for fit before you join it, are critical skills
as you hunt for the right place to hang your hat. We expect that

37
organizations will strive to get better at being people-centered to
ensure fit and reduce their costs, but you, the individual job seeker
wanting a great work fit, must take the reins and be responsible for
finding the best workplace for you.

38
About the Authors
MOE CARRICK is Principal and Founder
of Moementum, a Certified B Corporation
and consulting firm. Her client portfolio
includes Prudential Financial, Nike, REI,
World’s Finest Chocolate, TechSoft, The
Nature Conservancy, and others.
A frequent presenter, Carrick has
spoken at South by Southwest (SXSW)
and numerous TEDx events. She is
Certified as a Coach, Sr. Professional in
Human Resources, DiSC Practitioner,
and Daring Way Facilitator. She earned
a BA from the University of New
Hampshire and an MS in Organizational
Management from Antioch University.
CAMMIE DUNAWAY is Chief Marketing
Officer of Duolingo, which offers
free language education worldwide.
Previously she served as U.S. President
and Global Chief Marketing Officer of
KidZania, EVP of Sales and Marketing at
Nintendo, and Chief Marketing Officer at
Yahoo!.
A frequent presenter, Dunaway has
and numerous TEDx events. She sits
on the boards of Planet Fitness and
Red Robin. She earned a BA from the
University of Richmond and an MBA from
Harvard Business School.
Amazon
Bestseller
Job Hunting

39
Engaging the hearts, minds, and hands of talent is the
most sustainable source of competitive advantage.
— Greg Harris, Quantum Workplace
Organizations are waking up to the recognition that work
fit matters. They may use different words to describe it (em-
ployee engagement, employee satisfaction, culture, climate, or or-
ganizational health), but there’s clearly a growing understanding
that the better employees’ needs are met at work, the healthier,
happier, more engaged, productive, and loyal they are to their or-
ganization. People who enjoy their jobs are more likely to feel in-
spired by the goals and values of their company, exert effort, and
stay employed with the organization. The business case is irrefut-
able – take care of employees and they’ll take care of business.
The days when employees expected nothing more than a pay-
check are gone. Led by Millennials, employees are increasingly
CHAPTER 4
How Fit Impacts
Organizations
Moe Carrick and Cammie Dunaway
Excerpted from Fit Matters: How to Love Your Job, by Moe Carrick and Cammie
Dunaway, Maven House Press, 2017.

40
seeking meaning as much as financial incentives from their em-
ployers and are unabashedly and rapidly changing jobs when their
needs aren’t met. As Barry Schwartz (2015), author of Why We
Work, says, “We want work that is challenging and engaging, that
enables us to exercise some discretion and control over what we
do, and that provides us opportunities to learn and grow. We want
to work with colleagues we like and respect and with supervisors
who like and respect us. Most of all, we want work that is meaning-
ful – that makes a difference to other people and thus ennobles us
in at least some small way.”
CEOs are responding to the trends and to the growing body of
research in unprecedented ways. Mark Bertolini of Aetna raised
wages, improved health benefits, and introduced yoga and mind-
fulness training. Netflix announced unlimited paternity leave.
Google is legendary for its onsite amenities, which include a com-
munity garden, sleep pods, and cafeterias that serve free lunch and
dinner. Leaders are paying attention to growing their capacity for
fluently handling “the soft stuff” – motivating, inspiring, and con-
necting with the people who work for them.
Lara Harding, People Programs Manager at Google, said, “At
Google, we know that health, family, and well-being are an impor-
tant aspect of Googlers’ lives. We have also noticed that employees
who are happy . . . demonstrate increased motivation. . . . [We] . . .
work to ensure that Google is . . . an emotionally healthy place to
work” (Gourlay, 2009).
Franchise company Great Harvest Bread employee Bonnie
Harry says, “Giving your employees space to learn and support
to grow creates a symbiotic relationship. They gain valuable life
and work skills and you gain not only good employees but also the

41
satisfaction of mentoring and helping them. And if they move to
another career, you’ve both benefited from the experience of work-
ing together.”
In addition to gaining loyalty through perks such as updated
offices, free food, fitness centers, and classes, smart companies are
focusing on benefits to provide employees with more flexibility as
well as looking for ways to get them involved in company deci-
sions. Outdoor products retailer REI uses social media to get em-
ployees at all levels talking to each other via campfire circles about
the things they care about (Kowalsky 2012). And small tech com-
pany TechSoft 3D involves employees in all locations in annual
discussions on values and strategy to increase buy-in on where the
company is heading.
Companies of all sizes are beginning to recognize that fit mat-
ters. Small companies reap the benefits of positive employee work
fit even more directly than large companies since each person has
a greater influence on morale and results. Employees at small and
midsize firms often find opportunities to take on more responsi-
bilities, earn greater recognition for successes, gain ample expo-
sure to new practice areas, and have a more direct impact on a
company’s bottom line.
Employees want to be in an environment where their values
and beliefs are aligned with the organization and where they feel
supported to do their best work. In research among employees who
were considering a job change or who had recently switched em-
ployers, the top reason for a change was that the employees desired
an opportunity to do what they do best (Mann and McCarville
2015). They want to fully contribute their talent and experience.
Employees desire fit.
HOW FIT IMPACTS ORGANIZATIONS

42
SO JUST WHAT DOES FIT MEAN
TO ORGANIZATIONS?
As we said in the first chapter, work fit isn’t about looking alike or
being part of the same social group, class, race, or gender. It’s about
employees having a common set of values, desires, and expecta-
tions with their organizations that allows them to do their best.
Onecommonlymeasuredoutputoffitisemployeeengagement,
typically defined as the emotional commitment an employee has to
the organization and its goals. Emotional commitment means that
engaged employees care about their work and their company. They
don’t work just for a paycheck, or just for the next promotion, but
on behalf of the organization’s goals. We believe that when fit is
right the connection can go even beyond engagement to inspira-
tion. Eric Garton (2015) at Bain & Company researched the differ-
ence between satisfaction, engagement, and inspiration. He found
that if satisfied employees are productive at an index level of 100,
then engaged employees produce at 144, nearly half again as much.
But then comes the real kicker: inspired employees score 225 on
this scale. From a purely quantitative perspective, in other words,
it would take two and a quarter satisfied employees to generate the
same output as one inspired employee.
As one pundit put it, employees react differently when they en-
counter a wall. Satisfied employees hold a meeting to discuss what
to do about walls. Engaged employees begin looking around for
ladders to scale the wall. Inspired employees break right through
it. Inspiration happens when fit is right.
One of the first researchers to study organization-people fit was
Jennifer Chatman (1991), a professor at Northwestern University.

43
She conducted research over a two-and-a-half-year period in part-
nership with eight of the largest U.S. public accounting firms. She
surveyed junior audit staff during their initial orientation, asking
them to sort through value statements (about quality, respect for
individuals, flexibility, risk taking, etc.) and rank how consistent
each statement was with their own beliefs. After 12 months she
had the junior auditors rate their satisfaction and intent to leave.
She saw a high correlation between fit at entry and satisfaction,
as well as a negative correlation between fit and intent to leave. In
other words, when fit is good, employees are likely to contribute
their best work, and companies obviously benefit from this.
Brian Chesky, CEO at AirBnB, understands this. Most compa-
nies create their core values after they’ve hired a few dozen people;
Airbnb created theirs before they hired anyone. Before hiring his
first employee, Chesky ran through hundreds of applicants and in-
terviewed dozens of people. It took him six months to find the
person who was the right fit. Chesky says that he viewed bringing
in this first employee as analogous to bringing the right DNA into
the company. He didn’t view the process as merely bringing in a
person to build a few features, he viewed it as a long-term invest-
ment in establishing the culture of the company. He wanted a di-
versity of backgrounds and experience, but he didn’t want diversity
of values. As Brian says, “There’s no such thing as a good or bad
culture; it’s either a strong or weak culture. And a good culture for
somebody else may not be a good culture for you” (Bulygo 2015).
Innovative companies strive to hire for fit but understand that
they can’t always get it right. Zappos believes so strongly in the
concept of fit that the company offers exit payments to new em-
ployees who come to understand the organization and then decide

44
that they’re not a good fit. Zappos recognizes the tremendous ben-
efits that come with the right match of skills, values, and goals, and
the huge cost of getting it wrong.
The organizational costs of having employees who are misfit
are significant. Gallup estimates that actively disengaged employ-
ees cost the United States $450 to $550 billion in lost productivity
per year (Borysenko 2015). And the problem is global. Unengaged
employees in the United Kingdom cost their companies US$64.8
billion a year. In Japan, where only 9 percent of the workforce is
engaged, lost productivity is estimated to be US$232 billion each
year. A bad hire costs a company revenue, customers, and pro-
ductivity, in addition to the hard costs of recruiting, training, and
developing a new employee (as much as $50,000 in the United
States), and the costs increase the longer a misfit employee is on
the job (Gallup 2013). Getting fit right from the beginning, or at
least ending poor work fit sooner, saves energy, time, money, and
effort. Let’s look at some of the drivers of the cost of misfit.
TURNOVER
One of the easiest costs for organizations to quantify is employee
turnover. When employees feel unmotivated and unhappy, they
are much more likely to leave their job and employer. Turnover,
both that which is initiated by the employee and that which is ini-
tiated by the company, has become a tremendous and troubling
expense for organizations.
Because of differences in job complexity and skill levels, it’s
tough to say precisely how much value an employer loses when
a worker leaves. Turnover costs also vary by wage and the role of

45
the employee, but in all cases it adds up to significant expense. A
Center for American Progress study found that the average cost
to replace an employee is 16 percent of the annual salary of those
holding high-turnover, low-paying jobs and up to 213 percent
of the annual salary of highly educated executives (Boushey and
Glynn 2012).
And these costs may fail to include a full accounting of the im-
pact. Josh Bersin (2013), a consultant who has spent years studying
the subject, outlines factors a business should consider in calculat-
ing the real cost of losing an employee. These include:
• The cost of hiring the new employee, including advertising,
interviewing, screening, and hiring.
• The cost of on-boarding the new person, including training
and management time.
• Lost productivity: it may take the new employee one to two
years to reach the productivity of an experienced person.
• Lost engagement: employees who see high turnover among
coworkers tend to disengage and lose productivity.
• Customer service and errors: new employees take longer to
perform a task and are often less adept at solving problems.
• Training cost: over two to three years a business is likely to
invest 10 to 20 percent of the employee’s salary in training.
Beyond the detriment to the bottom line, turnover can dam-
age team dynamics. The group loses not only rapport but the leav-
ing employee’s unique expertise and contributions. Teams must
also shoulder the burden of extra work until a replacement can be

46
trained. Furthermore, losing talented, knowledgeable employees
can be a drain on a company’s leadership pipeline, and rampant at-
trition can also take a toll on an organization’s carefully cultivated
workplace culture. The dynamics of the organization, such as trust
between employees, the degree to which conflict can be navigated,
and clarity of purpose and direction, change every time an em-
ployee exits or enters.
The evidence is conclusive – to avoid the high costs and dis-
ruption of turnover, companies need to do a better job of insuring
that hires are a good match for the requirements of the job and the
culture of the organization. As employee tenure continues to shift
from people who work at one place for 25 to 35 years to people
changing jobs 11 times or more in their lifetime, employers will
feel pressure to speed up recruitment and orientation processes to
reduce the costs of turnover, but these costs will still exist in one
form or another.
ABSENTEEISM AND LOST PRODUCTIVITY
Even if they don’t leave, employees who are misfit are likely to cre-
ate significant costs because of their absenteeism. When they’re
suffering from job misfit, employees are likely to miss more days
of work. While injuries, illness, and medical appointments are the
most commonly reported reasons for missing work, they are not
always the actual reasons. In our experience, there are many other
factors that cause employees to “call in sick.”
• Bullying and Harassment – Employees who are bullied or
harassed by coworkers and/or bosses are more likely to call
in sick to avoid the situation.

47
• Burnout, Stress, and Low Morale – Heavy workloads,
stressful meetings or presentations, and feelings of
being unappreciated can cause employees to avoid going
into work. Personal stress (outside of work) can lead to
absenteeism.
• Childcare and Eldercare – Employees may be forced to
miss work in order to stay home and take care of a child or
elder when normal arrangements have fallen through (for
example, a sick caregiver or a snow day at school) or if a
child or elder is sick.
• Depression –The National Institute of Mental Health
asserts that the leading cause of absenteeism in the United
States is depression. Depression can lead to substance
abuse if people turn to drugs or alcohol to self-medicate
their pain or anxiety. A study in 2010 indicated that
depression caused $51.5 billion in indirect workplace
costs because of absenteeism and “presenteeism” (reduced
productivity while at work due to depression) (Robison
2010).
• Disengagement – Employees who aren’t committed to
their jobs, coworkers, and/or the company are more likely
to miss work simply because they have no motivation to
go.
Absenteeism costs U.S. companies billions of dollars each year
in lost productivity, wages, poor quality of goods and services,
and excess management time. According to Absenteeism: The
Bottom-Line Killer, a publication of workforce solution company

48
Circadian (2005), unscheduled absenteeism costs roughly $3,600
per year for each hourly worker and $2,650 per year for salaried
employees. In addition, the employees who do show up to work
are often burdened with extra duties and responsibilities, which
can lead to feelings of frustration and a decline in morale.
SERVICE, QUALITY, AND SAFETY
The benefits of fit extend to the way that employees create products
and deliver services. Research has shown that positive employees do
a better job producing quality products and creating satisfied cus-
tomers. Conversely, it’s easy to imagine the potential outcomes from
unhappy employees interacting with customers, making key deci-
sions about quality, or evaluating product innovations. Poor quality,
suboptimal manufacturing, and lost customers and revenue are all
significant risks in such instances. A study by the consulting firm
Denison tested the relationship between organizational culture and
customer satisfaction using business-unit data from two different
companies – a home-building company with multiple divisions and
an automobile company with 148 dealerships. With a few excep-
tions, firms with higher culture scores had higher customer satisfac-
tion ratings (Gillespie et al. 2007).
One positive example of the link between fit and service comes
from Morrison Management Specialists, a company of more than
20,000 people that provides food, nutrition, and dining services
to healthcare and senior living communities. Morrison recognized
that their employees were the key assets and resources that would
differentiate them from their competition. They undertook a num-
ber of activities, such as using virtual coaches and stay interviews

49
(one-on-one conversations that reveal important ways to engage
associates) to integrate talent-focused behaviors into the organiza-
tion’s culture and subsequently increase employee engagement, de-
crease employee turnover, and improve overall operational effec-
tiveness. Major organizational metrics were tracked from 2006 to
2010, including employee engagement, turnover rates, and patient
or client satisfaction. Employee engagement rose approximately 30
percent, turnover rates dropped approximately 15 percent, and cli-
ent satisfaction rates rose approximately 16 percent, an important
outcome. “We have no other significant change to tie this metric
change to except that we are doing this engagement initiative,” said
Andrea Seidl, senior vice president at Morrison.
Similarly, at Saks Fifth Avenue, the luxury retailer based in
New York, executives were looking for ways to boost service to
customers in their highly competitive market. Saks officials decid-
ed to measure employee engagement and customer engagement
at stores. Customer engagement included the willingness to make
repeat purchases and recommend the store to friends.
Saks found that “there absolutely is a correlation between em-
ployee engagement and customer engagement” and that employee
engagement creates loyal, repeat customers and increased sales
(Bates 2004). Vice President Jay Redman indicated a 20 to 25 per-
cent improvement in stores with great engagement.
A similar dynamic holds true for manufacturing firms. Com-
panies with highly engaged workforces realize fewer quality de-
fects, fewer safety incidents, and less waste. Beer manufacturer
Molson Coors found that engaged employees were five times less
likely than non-engaged employees to have a safety incident and

50
seven times less likely to have a lost-time safety incident (Vance
2006).
PROFITABILITY
The bottom-line motivation for many organizations is to create prof-
its to share with their stakeholders – investors, employees, and the
community. In their global workforce study, Towers Watson (2012)
found that companies with the lowest level of engagement had an av-
erage operating margin of 10 percent. Those with traditionally high
engagement scores had a margin of 14 percent. The study found that
companies with inspired employees – those who have not only the
willingness but also the physical, emotional, and social energy to in-
vest extra effort – have operating margins almost double those of
companies with less-engaged employees.
When employees struggle from lack of fit they become indif-
ferent toward their jobs – or worse, they outright loathe their work,
supervisors, and organizations. They can cost their organizations
money and can even destroy work units and businesses.
As one of our survey respondents said, “Work misfit, which for
me is often caused by lack of challenges/interest in the job and/or
micromanagement, often leads to a decline in my work productiv-
ity and possibly even quality, which leaves me feeling disappointed
and unsatisfied, and doesn’t help the company either.”
Contrast this to a workforce filled with employees who are in
jobs where they thrive and who are emotionally connected to the
mission and purpose of their company. When employees are in the
right environment they are passionate, creative, and entrepreneurial,
and their enthusiasm fuels growth. These employees are involved in,

51
enthusiastic about, and committed to their work and workplace, and
they’re driving the innovation, growth, and revenue that their com-
panies need. These employees are the foundation for a company that
consistently wins. When employees are enrolled to contribute their
highest and best work, companies simply do better.
ASK YOURSELF . . .
• How would my organization benefit from a greater focus on helping
employees find their fit?
• What change could my company make that would delight me?
• How would that change impact my performance?
• How might that change impact the company’s business results?

52
About the Authors
MOE CARRICK is Principal and Founder
of Moementum, a Certified B Corporation
and consulting firm. Her client portfolio
includes Prudential Financial, Nike, REI,
World’s Finest Chocolate, TechSoft, The
Nature Conservancy, and others.
A frequent presenter, Carrick has
and numerous TEDx events. She is
Certified as a Coach, Sr. Professional in
Human Resources, DiSC Practitioner,
and Daring Way Facilitator. She earned
a BA from the University of New
Hampshire and an MS in Organizational
Management from Antioch University.
CAMMIE DUNAWAY is Chief Marketing
Officer of Duolingo, which offers
free language education worldwide.
Previously she served as U.S. President
and Global Chief Marketing Officer of
KidZania, EVP of Sales and Marketing at
Nintendo, and Chief Marketing Officer at
Yahoo!.
A frequent presenter, Dunaway has
and numerous TEDx events. She sits
on the boards of Planet Fitness and
Red Robin. She earned a BA from the
University of Richmond and an MBA from
Harvard Business School.
Amazon
Bestseller
Job Hunting

53
The following points provide a quick summary regarding
the nature of socially responsible leadership:
• Requires being authentic about core values and a higher
purpose
• Is based on trust between various stakeholders striving
toward common goals
• Entails a long-term perspective that goes beyond short-
term performance metrics
• Is built on the concept of respect for others
• Supports the optimum development and utilization of
human talent
• Has regard for the conservation of our planet, as opposed
to depletion and disruption
CHAPTER 5
Socially Responsible
Leadership
Charles C. Manz, PhD, and Craig L. Pearce, PhD
Excerpted from Twisted Leadership: How to Engage the Full Talents of Everyone in
Your Organization, by Charles C. Manz and Craig L. Pearce, Maven House Press,
2018.

54
• Involves serious thought about how to make all systems,
processes, and protocols sustainable
• Causes you to think seriously about the legacy you want to
leave
Why would anybody care about socially responsible
leadership? Well, if you don’t, chaos will ultimately ensue.
That’s the simple answer. But how about a more pragmatic reason?
Most people are inherently attracted to, and motivated by, socially
responsible causes. Certain individuals, however, are so self-serv-
ing, and so corrupt, that they couldn’t care less; after all, they’re
infected by the leadership disease. Inoculating your group, unit,
or organization against the leadership disease requires socially re-
sponsible leadership. Perhaps Abraham Lincoln put it best when
he said, “You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by es-
caping it today” (see Figure 5.1).
So what is socially responsible leadership? It depends on the
context, but the basics are simple. Rather than simply focusing on
short-term financial returns, socially responsible leaders consider
multiple stakeholders’ interests. Here the research is clear. To the
extent that people feel that they’re a part of leadership decisions,
they’re far more willing to both buy into espoused goals and to give
plenty of leeway when leaders espouse unconventional goals. The
upshot is that people become far more committed to, and psycho-
logically engaged with, socially responsible leadership.
At the same time, there’s been a surging interest in the notion
of virtues at work. Indeed, there’s a growing branch of organiza-
tional sciences devoted to the concept of positive organizational

55
Figure 5.1. Abraham Lincoln was an early advocate of socially responsible
leadership.
scholarship (POS). The folks in this field have found that having a
positive orientation to people, planet, and profit has a good influ-
ence on people.
So what are the building blocks of socially responsible leader-
ship?
SEVEN STEPS TO
SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP
How do you deploy socially responsible leadership in an organiza-
tion? Primarily it’s an executive-level prerogative, but there’s a role
for all people, whether inside the organization or as part of the com-
munity. The key is to start by building authenticity, transparency,
and trust (level-one socially responsible leadership). When these
foundational building blocks are in place, the next step is to focus
on positive outcomes for people, planet, and profits (level-two so-
cially responsible leadership). Finally, you need to work on making
Figure 18. Socially Responsible Leadership
You cannot escape
the responsibility
of tomorrow by
escaping it today
Abraham Lincoln

56
Seven Steps
to Socially
Responsible
Leadership
ESTABLISH
AUTHENTICITY
FOCUS ON
PEOPLE
HELP
PROTECT THE
PLANET
BE
PROFITABLE
BUILD
TRUST
ENSURE
SUSTAINABILITY
PRACTICE
TRANSPARENCY
Figure 5.2. These seven steps will help you deploy socially responsible leadership
in your organization.
it all sustainable (level-three socially responsible leadership). Figure
5.2 provides a visual depiction of the seven steps of socially respon-
sible leadership.
Step 1: Establish Authenticity
Without authenticity what do you have? A game, a game of duplic-
ity, cynicism, and double-dealing. By authenticity we don’t mean
that people should be authentic jerks. To the contrary, we mean that
you should find your authentic inner good, and display it. Authen-
ticity requires a bit of soul searching. You need to think very care-
fully about who you are and who you want to be. Then, building on

57
the self-leadership high road, ensure that you act according to how
you truly want to be perceived by others.
Step 2: Practice Transparency
Transparency is critical. When actions are opaque people are al-
ways guessing about what’s taking place behind the curtain. Trans-
parency doesn’t mean disclosing every little detail of your life. Rath-
er, in the context of socially responsible leadership, transparency
means being clear about the rationales for the decisions you make.
It means enabling others around you to see the books, so to speak.
It means being honest about mistakes, and enlisting others to help
you improve for the future. As a leader you’re a role model. Lack
of transparency has been closely linked to corruption around the
world. The non-profit group Transparency International has been
tracking corruption at the nation level. Figure 5.3 shows their map
of the world that documents the perceptions of people regarding
the amount of corruption that exists in their countries. The darker
the shading in the country, the more corrupt it’s believed to be by
the people who live there. (There are a couple of exceptions. There
is, for example, no data for Greenland or Western Sahara, a dis-
puted territory.)
Leaders should strive to create openness and transparency
throughout their interactions with others. The alternative is dis-
mal.
Step 3: Build Trust
Authenticity and transparency greatly facilitate trust. But it takes
more than that. You need to prove that you’re trustworthy by fol-
lowing through on your commitments, or at least by informing

58
Figure 5.3. This map shows the perceptions of people regarding the amount of
corruption that exists in their countries. Darker areas are more corrupt. Note:
The lightest areas on the map (e.g., Greenland and Western Sahara – a disputed
territory) are unrated. Source: Transparency International.
Science on Socially Responsible Leadership
people up front when you’re not able to do so. Trust is the lubri-
cation for all social interactions. Without trust, the cost of doing
business is always higher. People need to hedge, when they don’t
trust, in order to engage. Neuro-economics research has proven
that trust is directly related to economic productivity. Need we say
more?
Step 4: Focus on People
Having established authenticity, transparency, and trust, it’s time
to focus on the core of socially responsible leadership. The first half
of the core involves focusing on people. The key is to do what Pe-
ter Drucker advocated decades ago: “Focus on peoples’ strengths,

59
and make their weaknesses irrelevant.” Everybody has knowledge,
skills, and abilities to contribute, and everybody can make a mean-
ingful impact. Force-fitting people into inappropriate roles sim-
ply results in frustration and a waste of human talent, which isn’t
responsible leadership. Unfortunately, not everyone is self-aware
enough to have a complete appreciation of their strengths and
weaknesses, and they often seemingly set themselves up for fail-
ure. As a leader, it’s your duty to monitor, coach, and place people
in positions where they can thrive.
Step 5: Help Protect the Planet
We all have a role in safeguarding our planet. And this role is mag-
nified for leaders. People emulate what they see in leaders. So, as
a leader, you must take responsibility for the planet. This doesn’t
mean that you need to quit your job and start picking up garbage
along the freeway. It simply means that you shouldn’t purposefully
cause environmental damage, and you should be careful with your
thinking and decisions about the long term. There are many moral
zealots who visibly engage in causes for the environment, only to
privately engage in action that’s in direct contrast to their public
positions. Just be sensible, and help others to do the same.
Step 6: Be Profitable
For an organization to be socially responsible, it must be finan-
cially sound and provide the resources necessary for continued
operations. If the values, culture, mission, and other intangibles
are in place, profits tend to follow . . . but there’s certainly no guar-
antee of this. The organization must offer some concrete value that
customers or clients desire. Drucker once said that the three most

60
important questions that must be addressed by any organization
are: Who are our customers? What do our customers find of value?
And how can we deliver that value? There are no shortcuts. It’s an
organizational imperative.
Step 7. Ensure Sustainability
While people, planet, and profit are the core of socially responsible
leadership, it’s all for naught if it’s not sustainable. Think carefully
about how to establish mechanisms, protocols, and cultural val-
ues that will help to sustain your organization’s focus on people
and planet well beyond any leadership role you occupy. Part of this
process harks back to some of the advice we offered earlier regard-
ing the other strands of leadership. For example, you should help to
develop leadership in others through utilizing SuperLeadership to
encourage self-leadership and shared leadership, thereby engaging
them in the leadership process and creating a more robust leader-
ship system that’s able to absorb shocks to the system. Your true
legacy is to ensure the sustainability of socially responsible leader-
ship. Of course, profits are important to sustainability as well.
TIME TO REFLECT
Socially responsible leadership takes work. In what ways have you
demonstrated a strong social responsibility orientation? What
were the challenges? How would you advise people who are facing
moral dilemmas? What are the keys to ensuring that you maintain
a socially responsible stance on leadership? Take some time, right
now, to write down advice that will help you engage in socially
responsible leadership.

61
A Place to Record Your Thoughts
In what ways have you demonstrated social responsibility?
What were the challenges?
How would you advise people who are facing moral dilemmas?
How will you maintain a socially responsible stance on leadership?

62
About the Authors
CHARLES C. MANZ, Ph.D., is the
Nirenberg Chaired Professor of
Leadership in the Isenberg School
of Management at the University of
Massachusetts Amherst. In addition
to his academic work, he is a speaker,
consultant, and bestselling author of
more than 20 business books, including
SuperLeadership, Self-Leadership,
Emotional Discipline, and The Leadership
Wisdom of Jesus.
CRAIG L. PEARCE, Ph.D., is the Ben
May Distinguished Professor in the
Mitchell College of Business at the
University of South Alabama. In addition
to his academic work, he is a speaker,
consultant, and entrepreneur. He’s the
author of Share, Don’t Take the Lead and
the editor of The Drucker Difference and
Shared Leadership.

63
As a leader, you know that you’ll be able to accomplish far
more through employees who are empowered than employ-
ees who habitually seek approval or permission before taking any
action. But Empowerment can be an elusive concept in practice.
I once observed members of a senior leadership team as they
listened intently as the vice president of human resources reported
on the findings from a survey designed to measure Empowerment
levels throughout the company.
The results were disappointing, and the team’s concern was
obvious. The business unit’s president seemed most concerned of
all. He was usually a stickler for staying on-agenda, but when the
fifteen minutes that had been allotted for this discussion had come
to an end, he said, “I know our time’s up, but this is important. Let’s
keep at it.” Thirty minutes later, the president finally called time
out. His reluctance was obvious when he said, “We’ve got to move
CHAPTER 6
You Can’t Bestow
Empowerment
John Guaspari
Excerpted from Otherwise Engaged: How Leaders Can Get a Firmer Grip on
Employee Engagement and Other Key Intangibles, by John Guaspari, Maven House
Press, 2015.

64
on to other things.” He turned to his vice president of quality: “It’s
clear that we’ve got some process problems that are causing people
to think they’re disempowered. Get your best Six Sigma people on
it. Have them identify those process problems and pull together
teams to fix them.”
Then he turned his attention to his full team: “Let me be as
clear as I can be. You are all empowered. I need you to go back to
your people and make sure that they know that they are empow-
ered, too!”
For just an instant, the vice president of marketing looked like
he wanted to say something. Just as quickly, though, he decided
not to. When the meeting adjourned, I managed to get a private
moment with him: “You looked like you were about to speak up.”
He nodded.
“What was it you wanted to say?”
“I wanted to say that we can tell our people they’re empowered
until we’re blue in the face, but if people don’t feel empowered,
then they’re not empowered.”
“Why didn’t you say it?”
He furrowed his brow and shook his head. “Nope,” he said.
“Too risky.”
Empowerment isn’t something that is generously handed down
from the more rarefied levels of an organizational chart in a ges-
ture of corporate noblesse oblige. Rather, it’s a sense of assuredness
that people at all levels of the organization have as they do their
jobs. Here is a definition that captures that sense:
A feeling of safety while exercising judgment on the job
Let’s parse things a bit more finely.

65
1. Empowerment is a feeling that the other person has, not an
assertion made by the leader.
To tell people “You are empowered!” is a little like the old joke
about the commanding officer telling the troops: “All liberty is can-
celled until morale improves!”
The marketing VP’s instincts told him that he should speak up.
He didn’t say anything because he thought it would be too risky;
he didn’t feel safe enough to do so. In other words – and ironically
– he didn’t feel sufficiently empowered to question the boss’s direc-
tive about Empowerment.
2. Empowerment is a feeling of safety.
One clue to just how empowered people feel is the kind of
questions they’re asking themselves when the time comes for them
to take action.
They probably feel reasonably empowered if they’re asking
themselves questions like these:
• Have I done my due diligence?
• Is my decision consistent with our strategy?
• Is it aligned with our business goals and our mission?
• Is it up to the highest standards of responsible and ethical
behavior? Does it accurately reflect our values?
• When all is said and done, is this the best decision I can
make for the business?
But here’s a question suggesting a considerably lower degree of
empowerment:
• Will the boss rip my face off?
YOU CAN’T BESTOW EMPOWERMENT

66
Granted, that may sound a bit melodramatic, but I’ve heard
those exact words used by people – senior people – who had been
so beaten down by such treatment over the years that they felt like
they had to look over their shoulder when choosing between Coke
and Pepsi in the company cafeteria.
The “rip my face off” example may be extreme. The feeling be-
hind it, though, is not uncommon at all.
3. Empowerment comes into play when there is judgment to
be exercised.
Here’s a concern about Empowerment that’s felt, though not
always voiced, by many leaders: “I’m afraid that what starts out as
Empowerment will turn into anarchy.”
But Empowerment doesn’t mean that anything goes. It has to do
with exercising judgment on the job. And the most basic judgment
to be made is knowing whether or not the situation at hand calls for
judgment in the first place. You can’t violate company policy and then
explain your decision away by saying, “I felt empowered to do it.”
In the course of a business day, people face a constellation of
situations in which they may be called on to exercise judgment
regarding what to do:
?
?
?
?
?
?VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?

67
Empowerment is not a one-size-fits-all proposition. As a lead-
er, you have to make judgments as to just where the boundaries of
Empowerment are for each individual on your team. Let’s say one
of your team members has worked with you on many projects over
the years, and you’ve always found her to be utterly credible and
reliable. You feel safe in trusting her judgment in widely ranging
circumstances. She gets a lot of white circles:
Another one of your team members, though, might not come
up to such high standards. He’s a perfectly capable, perfectly com-
petent employee. But there are certain circumstances in which you
feel you need to keep a somewhat tighter grip on the reins.
You might want him to check in with you (gray circles) as he’s
moving through his decision-making process:
VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?
VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?

68
Or maybe checking-in isn’t enough. You might want to ap-
prove the call (striped circle) before he makes it:
The key point here is that both team members can still feel fully
empowered as long as two conditions are met.
First, they have to be clear as to where the boundaries are –
what’s black, what’s white, what’s gray, what’s striped.
The second condition has to do with what happens when
someone operates within those boundaries, but – as happens in
the real world – things just don’t turn out according to plan. (The
white circle with the black X through it.)
Let’s go back to the melodramatic extreme. If things don’t turn
out according to plan, and the leader rips the person’s face off, well,
VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?
VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?
X

69
let’s just say that the selection panel for the Empowering Leader of
the Year! award won’t be dropping by for a site visit any time soon.
Here’s a far more empowering reaction: “You did your due dili-
gence and made a decision according to your best judgment. It
didn’t turn out the way we had hoped it would. It happens. Judg-
ments aren’t infallible. Let’s find some time tomorrow to talk about
whether or not there were any early warning signs we might have
missed.”
Of course, if things “not turning out according to plan” be-
comes a pattern …
… then the leader has a judgment to make. It may be time to
rein things in a bit more.
VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?
X
X
X
X
VIOLATE
POLICY?
COKE OR
PEPSI?

Inspiring people to use business as a force for good

Inspiring people to use business as a force for good

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Último

Último (20)

Destaque

Destaque (20)

Inspiring people to use business as a force for good