How To Navigate Layoffs?

I was a little disappointed we didn't get to discuss how to handle group layoffs in class today.  Hopefully most of us will never have to go through that process, but I was wondering what people would consider the optimal approach to be.  This year, with COVID, I saw a lot of friends get laid off from high profile companies in the most impersonal, heartless ways. I was shocked to hear of reputable companies doing mass layoffs in a single zoom room (with 10, 15, or 20 people getting let go of at once). I understand the desire to avoid gossip and to just get difficult things done ASAP, but surely that should be balanced with at least a bit of compassion, responsibility, and personal touch.  

In reality, the people on the receiving end (who were often pretty high performing employees beforehand) now have horrible views of their former companies and management teams.  I'd think any benefit the companies gained from moving that quickly has been more than lost in reputation and public perception.

All that said, I'm just generally curious to hear how others might think of letting 10+ go in the same day.  Any best practices, tips, or things to avoid?

Colin

Establishing authority as the youngest person in the room

One of the study questions from last week that we didn’t address in class was the question around how you should respond to any comments or actions of the three VPs during that initial meeting between the three VPs and the co-CEO. The VPs were clearly showing their disrespect of the co-CEOs and even engaging in some deception (for example, the comment about the Woodbridge office’s sadness about the former CEO’s departure). While we discussed in class that you could prevent this from happening by meeting with the VPs individually earlier on to build a relationship from the beginning, I’m sure there will still be situations where you are coming in to lead people who may not respect your authority, especially if you are the youngest person in the room. 

When initially forming that relationship, is it best to try to build rapport and trust or to establish authority? Is there a way to approach it that addresses both? Let’s take the VPs arriving 12 minutes late to the meeting as an example. This seems pretty unacceptable, but it also might start the meeting off on a very tense note if that’s what you immediately address going in. On the other hand, if you don’t address it at all, you lose authority and encourage this behavior from happening in the future. To balance the two, I would probably try to address it at the end of the meeting after gauging how the VPs feel about me. However, I’m curious if there’s a better way to approach this head on. 

Reframing the Paradigm: Work Culture Meets Cancel Culture

Everywhere you look, someone or something is being canceled. First came the egregious transgressors with the Me Too movement, then there were the nuanced individual and group callouts, and finally we saw corporate America at large being dealt a hand that many would not wish on their worst enemy. The term "cancelled" has become ubiquitous and likely sends chills down the spine of whoever dares to ponder the situation happening to them. 

Although less binary in nature, we have also come to see employees airing their grievances with work practices and culture in the public sphere. In December 2019, Away received backlash after employees reported toxic culture practices to the press - practices that the accusers alleged "created a culture of intimidation and constant surveillance." During Summer 2020, Ellen DeGeneres came under fire for enabling a toxic atmosphere on her show. Most recently, 60 employees left Coinbase last week after the Company's CEO refused to "be political," an assertion they deemed toxic.    

I wonder how these fears would play into the decision making and behavior of our protagonists. How does one weigh company culture with employees' idiosyncrasies with underperforming or toxic employees (and what if the manager is toxic himself / herself)? In Lazier Industries, we see Lazier fearing a potential lawsuit by firing Smith, whose manner was unapproachable and brusque. Lazier likely wants to avoid such a fate and might consider keeping Smith or reimagining his role - unless it is 2020 and he must also navigate employees taking to their local newspaper - or worse yet, the Wall Street Journal - and exposing Smith and the Company at large. I would be really interested to discuss this as a class to navigate scenarios where we must balance such tradeoffs and / or rectify what has been deemed a "toxic workplace."

The Donna Weathers Situation (FreeMobility)

As a class, we saw Donna's disinterest in taking finance and Excel courses to equate to a lack of coachability. This very well may be true. It's also apparent that the rest of the executive team is skeptical of Donna's value in EMT meetings. Clearly, something in this dynamic has to change for FreeMobility to get on the right track. 

In the scenario where we wanted to keep Donna, we focused our discussion on how to strengthen her team's forecasting and reporting structures -- in other words, enabling Donna and her team to fit into the mold expected by her EMT peers. Again, this should be part of the strategy: for productive meetings and a productive company, we need the EMT to be able to communicate clearly and efficiently. At the same time, as Chen and Conroy, I see another element that needs to be addressed if Donna will be willing to stay: Donna needs to feel heard on her terms. Let Donna show off her strengths and expertise on the product just as the EMT has shown off their expertise in the conference room. 

Donna knows the product market better than anyone else at the company; she has longstanding relationships with customers and spends at least one day a week testing products herself. It's likely that the ex-consultants on the EMT have never stepped foot inside the manufacturing plant, spoken with users, or sat in the FreeMobility chair themselves. 

I'd work with Donna to organize an EMT field trip to the manufacturing plant, and arrange interviews with FreeMobility chair users. In this setting, Donna would be in her home environment, making her feel more comfortable and confident in sharing her expertise and vision. In turn, I'd hope that the EMT would develop more respect for Donna's expertise, and more empathy for the user. In future EMT meetings, Donna would still need to present better numbers (ideally prepared by a new hire with expertise in this area), but hopefully this off-site exercise would have paved the way for more respectful, productive relationships to form between Donna and the rest of the EMT.

Lingering thoughts on the FreeMobility case

This was a really thought-provoking case on FreeMobility. I found myself reflecting almost all of lunch on a few important questions I still have regarding today's discussion:

1) My partner and I have discussed many times starting a venture together, whether that take the form of some investment fund, conducting a Search, or potentially even doing something entrepreneurial together. We think we complement each other very well professionally, similar to Conroy and Chen, but today's questions related to the optics of that has left me with more questions than answers about dually owned/managed enterprises with people in a relationship. @Alyssa - would be eager to hear your thoughts further on where you have seen these arrangements most successful, and any insights from your experience on "red flags" that an endeavor is best not to pursue with your partner?

2) I really appreciated Caroline Pringle's comment in the chat related to Donna Weathers and her coachability/receptiveness to suggestions around her performance. As an executive of the company, being willing to take feedback, adjust one's actions, and pivot with the changing needs of the business seems critical. Seeing how Donna reacted to the simple suggestion of taking some Excel courses felt like problematic fixed mindset and someone shutting out constructive advice. Yes, in this specific example, we could have hired someone to support her in pulling together some metrics. But in other cases, I would imagine that mindset would prove, again down the line, to be a barrier to progress and adapting the business to new challenges. 

3) One thing we didn't talk about too much was the role of Kate Lewin (VP of Ops). As new, incoming executives to the company, it was clear to Conroy and Chen that Kate was a "leader" of the executive team, with the rest of the VPs seeming to defer to her in that first meeting. I'd be curious if that is a net asset (i.e. an aspiring leader who wants to really step up and make the company better) or a liability (i.e. a holdover from the old way of doing things who will probably be vocal in changing directions)? Not sure it's the same in every scenario, but she seemed like a persona very important to the future of the company that we didn't spend a ton of time reflecting on. 

co-CEOs role play

 

Last class we discussed about FreeMobility case and we performed role plays about situations addressed by the co-CEO’s. In many of them I saw the CEO role player offering solutions to quickly address the employees’ complaints or requirements, which made me think in the possible consequences that could have on the mid or long term. A higher salary, benefits or free time could be some fast/easy solutions that would easily come to mind.

Personally, I think that a CEO that offers fast/simple solutions to complex problems presented out of the blue  may show that s/he doesn’t take time to reflect and get to a definitive solution, and also shows some weakness, as s/he can change his/her mind easily (the other alternative is that s/he really is a brilliant expert, but there must be topics in which s/he can't provide the best solution inmediatly). In the mid or long term, that attitude would lead to numerous complaints that may be just aiming condition improvements. There are situations in which a CEO must act fast and offer smart solutions, but usually there is time to sit down and take a few minutes to think and align decisions with the goals every CEO must have.

Improving Sales Outcomes (Lazier)

 In our most recent discussion, we spoke at length about how Bob should address Scott Hawthorne's lagging sales numbers with Anthony Wilson, SVP of Sales. Quickly, we focused on how to make Anthony more accountable for Scott's performance, ultimately landing on tying Anthony's bonus to his team's performance to incentivize Anthony to take a more hands-on approach to managing Scott. Another strategy that could work in tandem with this bonus incentive is to provide more explicit management training to both Scott and Anthony.

I was surprised we didn't spend more time exploring how the shake-up in the sales team leadership could have affected the team's performance in the first few quarters with Scott on the job. For one, while Scott has a proven track record in the industry and valuable contacts with customers, by transitioning to Lazier he was tasked suddenly with managing a team over twice as big as his 12-person group at his old company. Scott is coming to Lazier after being a regional sales manager for a large competitor. In addition to the doubling of his direct reports in his new role, Lazier's smaller size -- and Scott's relatively large jump up the ladder -- necessitates some learning curve for Scott to become successful in his job. While I understand Bob's frustration at the unrealized sales targets, I also understand why Scott may have been so focused on creating trust and productive relationships with his new employees. As Anthony has been such a hands-off manager, Scott likely used the same strategies that brought him success in his previous position, when managing relationships with his team would have taken less than half of the time it takes at Lazier. 

Since sales numbers show clear upward trajectory, it appears that Scott's strategy has some merit. Its success could have been expedited --and Lazier could have started to hit sales targets sooner -- had Anthony been a more active mentor to Scott during the onboarding process. Anthony is ultimately responsible for Lazier's sales performance; he too has a vested interest in the performance of his team. However, that Anthony was a rockstar salesman in his own right does not mean he is naturally a rockstar executive-level manager of a sales team. Like Scott, Anthony is also in a new role. It does not appear that Bob has provided Anthony with focused mentorship or executive coaching. With a stronger sense of and ownership over his responsibility to mentor his new hires, Anthony would become a stronger leader and Scott would likely adjust more quickly to his new role at Lazier, resulting in a quicker turnaround of the sales team's performance.