Meridian Group - Company Culture Consultants

The Cardinal and the Senator: Lessons in lost leadership, the power of speaking out and the steep price corporations pay for silence.

Last month, two unusual leadership events made national news. First, in early December, 58 priests led by a Rev. Robert W. Bullock, pastor of Our Lady of Sorrows Church in Sharon, signed a letter urging Cardinal Bernard F. Law of Boston to resign. Over the previous months, Rev. Bullock had become increasingly critical of Cardinal Law. When Rev. Bullock called a diocese-wide gathering of priests to discuss the issues, Cardinal Law forbad the meeting. Defying the Cardinal's command, Bullock went ahead. The gathered priests drafted and signed a letter urging Law's resignation. They delivered it to the cardinal's residence on Monday, December 9th. By Friday, December 14th, the Pope had accepted Cardinal Law's resignation.

I was driving home when I heard this full sequence of events on NPR. My eyes teared up. I felt the extreme dedication and resolve of Rev. Bullock that overcame his fear and ingrained obedience to the hierarchy. Anyone who has worked in a hierarchy knows what must have been going though the heart and mind of Rev. Bullock. His was truly an extraordinary act.

Imagine this in corporate terms. A first line employee speaks out against the CEO's behavior. The CEO forbids the employee to continue his actions, but the employee perseveres, mobilizing peer support to draft, sign and send a letter to the Chairman of the Board who then asks the CEO to step down. Pure fantasy.

December's second event was that same week. GOP Senate Leader Trent Lott was on the verge of losing that same—and sometimes elusive but essential ingredient of leadership—followership. The following week he moved aside.

Leadership requires Followership

When I was a student in the Business School at UC Berkeley, a professor asked our class to consider, "If a General gives an order to 'March!' but no one steps forward, does the General have authority?" The professor's point was that the authority to lead is legitimized by the consent of his subordinates. A leader is always wise to behave in ways, or to issue commands, that fall inside the limits of the subordinate's agreement. We don't often think of authority as coming from below, but we saw this when Cardinal Law no longer had the support of his priests.

Leaders Who Value Success Seek Out Feedback

Very few leaders deal creatively with feedback. Many do not see employee comments as information about how they see their goals, needs and experiences, i.e. the company's culture. Instead, leaders tend to personalize employee feedback as criticism of themselves and their decisions. Movie mogul Mr. Samuel Goldwyn once called his staff together and told them: "I want you to tell me exactly what's wrong with me and MGM, even if it means losing your job."

We are each exquisitely sensitive to the moods of leaders. We honed this skill over a lifetime, first with our parents, then with friends, school and college, and later as employees. Body language is all we need. The message, "Back off!" is loud and clear—and obeyed.

As a pundit said, "There is little difference between bravery and stupidity." Before speaking out, most of us lean heavily on the side of caution. We think first of our career, house payments and family. That is usually more than enough to produce silent compliance with a leader's behavior, no matter how egregious.

In the free market of democracy, and in volunteer organizations, members usually speak out. In most corporations, life is different. When an employee hires on he make a—largely unconscious—somewhat Faustian pact with his employer. "In exchange for money, I will produce what is required and will not openly or publicly criticize the actions of leaders and others."

Organizations Pay the Price of Placid Compliance

But this pact does not eliminate an employee's reaction to their leader. It just pushes it underground. In Boston, the congregations showed their frustration openly by reducing church attendance and contributions. Such options don't exist in companies. There, people express frustration covertly—and largely unconsciously—usually by reducing their level of engagement. When corporate leaders are closed to feedback people respond with less energy, enthusiasm and commitment.

Added together, the loss of productivity from employee withholding costs US companies trillions of dollars annually. Leaders can avoid this by creating a work culture where people feel they are valued team members—where they receive adequate information and feel safe to express their opinions.

Easy to say, but judging from the small number of safe-to-speak-up workplaces, mighty hard to do. TIME magazine recognized just how hard that is by awarding their Persons of the Year award to three "Whistleblowers". These were people who spoke out in work cultures where speaking out is dangerous.

Systems, machines and companies that are open to feedback simply work better. It is good for people and good for business. Wise leaders know this.



	Site Map \| FAQ \| Search
	A Better Workplace --- Meridian Group's Newsletter, Number 15, 1-15-03

	The Cardinal and the Senator: Lessons in lost leadership, the power of speaking out and the steep price corporations pay for silence. Last month, two unusual leadership events made national news. First, in early December, 58 priests led by a Rev. Robert W. Bullock, pastor of Our Lady of Sorrows Church in Sharon, signed a letter urging Cardinal Bernard F. Law of Boston to resign. Over the previous months, Rev. Bullock had become increasingly critical of Cardinal Law. When Rev. Bullock called a diocese-wide gathering of priests to discuss the issues, Cardinal Law forbad the meeting. Defying the Cardinal's command, Bullock went ahead. The gathered priests drafted and signed a letter urging Law's resignation. They delivered it to the cardinal's residence on Monday, December 9th. By Friday, December 14th, the Pope had accepted Cardinal Law's resignation. I was driving home when I heard this full sequence of events on NPR. My eyes teared up. I felt the extreme dedication and resolve of Rev. Bullock that overcame his fear and ingrained obedience to the hierarchy. Anyone who has worked in a hierarchy knows what must have been going though the heart and mind of Rev. Bullock. His was truly an extraordinary act. Imagine this in corporate terms. A first line employee speaks out against the CEO's behavior. The CEO forbids the employee to continue his actions, but the employee perseveres, mobilizing peer support to draft, sign and send a letter to the Chairman of the Board who then asks the CEO to step down. Pure fantasy. December's second event was that same week. GOP Senate Leader Trent Lott was on the verge of losing that same—and sometimes elusive but essential ingredient of leadership—followership. The following week he moved aside. Leadership requires Followership When I was a student in the Business School at UC Berkeley, a professor asked our class to consider, "If a General gives an order to 'March!' but no one steps forward, does the General have authority?" The professor's point was that the authority to lead is legitimized by the consent of his subordinates. A leader is always wise to behave in ways, or to issue commands, that fall inside the limits of the subordinate's agreement. We don't often think of authority as coming from below, but we saw this when Cardinal Law no longer had the support of his priests. Leaders Who Value Success Seek Out Feedback Very few leaders deal creatively with feedback. Many do not see employee comments as information about how they see their goals, needs and experiences, i.e. the company's culture. Instead, leaders tend to personalize employee feedback as criticism of themselves and their decisions. Movie mogul Mr. Samuel Goldwyn once called his staff together and told them: "I want you to tell me exactly what's wrong with me and MGM, even if it means losing your job." We are each exquisitely sensitive to the moods of leaders. We honed this skill over a lifetime, first with our parents, then with friends, school and college, and later as employees. Body language is all we need. The message, "Back off!" is loud and clear—and obeyed. As a pundit said, "There is little difference between bravery and stupidity." Before speaking out, most of us lean heavily on the side of caution. We think first of our career, house payments and family. That is usually more than enough to produce silent compliance with a leader's behavior, no matter how egregious. In the free market of democracy, and in volunteer organizations, members usually speak out. In most corporations, life is different. When an employee hires on he make a—largely unconscious—somewhat Faustian pact with his employer. "In exchange for money, I will produce what is required and will not openly or publicly criticize the actions of leaders and others." Organizations Pay the Price of Placid Compliance But this pact does not eliminate an employee's reaction to their leader. It just pushes it underground. In Boston, the congregations showed their frustration openly by reducing church attendance and contributions. Such options don't exist in companies. There, people express frustration covertly—and largely unconsciously—usually by reducing their level of engagement. When corporate leaders are closed to feedback people respond with less energy, enthusiasm and commitment. Added together, the loss of productivity from employee withholding costs US companies trillions of dollars annually. Leaders can avoid this by creating a work culture where people feel they are valued team members—where they receive adequate information and feel safe to express their opinions. Easy to say, but judging from the small number of safe-to-speak-up workplaces, mighty hard to do. TIME magazine recognized just how hard that is by awarding their Persons of the Year award to three "Whistleblowers". These were people who spoke out in work cultures where speaking out is dangerous. Systems, machines and companies that are open to feedback simply work better. It is good for people and good for business. Wise leaders know this.