Please provide a feedback reponse to the discussion from another student posted below:
Week 6 Discussion: First Why and Then Trust
Simon Sinek’s TED talk touches on similar messages in his lectures – culture and trust. His ability to relate business models and behaviors to everyday feelings brings a familiar message to many. This video brings significant importance to what he calls “the split.” It referenced how organizations prioritize revenues over culture and people. He offered numerous examples of how money has a history of diminishing the passion from an organization’s foundation and increasing stress (TEDxMaastricht – Simon Sinek – “First Why and Then Trust,” 2011). How does the “split” continue to happen again and again? How are the values of an organization not enough to prevent this? I would argue that values are far from enough, hence the need for culture.
Making more money and being more profitable requires more people and more effort. The argument makes sense and is certainly relatable to many. After all, culture is an ever-evolving set of collective beliefs, values, and attitudes (Passport to Trade, 2014). Sinek often mentions surrounding ourselves with people who believe what we believe (TEDxMaastricht – Simon Sinek – “First Why and Then Trust,” 2011). He says our survival depends on it. Money is necessary for our society to live. However, is it a positive culture if a company’s culture is to better its bottom line with little regard for the employee’s wages?
Returning to a time when human interaction and a handshake meant something would be a fantastic thing. Yet the level of technology in our daily lives, our time spent behind a screen, makes this incredibly challenging. How can we overcome the inability to come together? A good leader, according to history, would be on the floor talking and interacting with workers. The humanity has left organizations, and it shows (TEDxMaastricht – Simon Sinek – “First Why and Then Trust,” 2011).
Three critical issues in my organization that would help me create a better culture are improving the information flow from the bottom to the top. There is not enough of this. When we come together as a group, and the floor is open for anyone to speak, it is often met with silence. This is an excellent opportunity to ask ourselves how we can create a better environment to instill trust in our team and listen to their concerns, no matter how unpleasant (Rosenbach, 2018). We cannot fix what we do not know, and we will not know if we do not listen.
Another issue is collaboration on projects. A key group of stakeholders, the executive chefs, have had autonomy up until the last few years. In that time, all decisions about menu and creativity have been taken away. Granted, it was done with good intentions and to correct poor decision-making. However, a new foundation has been laid. To improve my relationships with this group and build culture, I should use our monthly in-person meeting to present upcoming projects and ask each chef to imagine every possible way the plan could fail and why (Rosenbach, 2018). I would hope that my initial efforts would curtail complete obliteration, but the point is this. If they feel they are a part of the process, they will better respect the end decision and the program on their campus. Moreover, suppose they have the opportunity to voice dislikes or alternate views as the project is coming along versus after the fact. In that case, everyone will benefit from the program’s betterment and future ideas.
Lastly, we are currently designing a new food hall for one campus. This massive undertaking is expected to be a five-year construction project with a nine-figure price tag. The call we had on Tuesday with the architects and consultants was literally how to limit human interaction and expedite the process of retrieving food. Like Sinek said, “nothing replaces human contact” (TEDxMaastricht – Simon Sinek – “First Why and Then Trust,” 2011). The video advised doing the opposite of everything we were striving to achieve. And I love Simon Sinek. How did I miss this lesson? I was too caught up in the “efficiency” model, moving thousands of people through a relatively small space, minimizing labor, and maximizing revenues.
I can attest that the primary driver behind this is that we have terrible service in this particular space. It is not a good experience for anyone. The solution has been to remove the human element. Is it right? Is it because the culture is fractured, and can we fix it? I cannot imagine turning the ship at this point, but I can at least remind the group why we are designing the space. It is not for revenue. It is for our community and the people who visit our facility. We are fortunate not to be driven by labor, as our services are seen as an amenity to the organization’s overall purpose. Does the design mirror our purpose? I would argue it does not. Improving the design to focus on guest interaction will have a positive and lasting effect on our guests and staff. Our organization’s work can be challenging and unpleasant, and this is a timely opportunity that could have a lasting cultural impact on our team and guests.
References
Passport to Trade. (2014, October 22). Business culture definition and business etiquette tips. Business Culture. https://businessculture.org/business-culture/
Rosenbach, W. E. (2018). Contemporary issues in leadership (7th ed.). Routledge.
TEDxMaastricht – simon sinek – “first why and then trust.” (2011, April 6). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VdO7LuoBzM&feature=youtu.be