Beyond the Transaction: How Meaningful Relationships Can Fuel Professional Success

Beyond the Transaction: How Meaningful Relationships Can Fuel Professional Success

by | Apr 21, 2024 | Culture, Job and career | 0 comments

 

Recently, I had a heartwarming reunion with an ex-colleague from Hong Kong in-person. It had been nearly a decade since we last met in person. We have been exchanging greetings almost every year on Christmas and new years, but this face-to-face encounter was special.

Then, I recalled that another ex-colleague had reached out a while ago asking me if I was interested in relocating to join his company in a senior role.

I left the USA in 2008, and met my ex-boss in 2017 in LA on a personal visit. What is quite interesting is that he drove to LA from San Diego because I was unable to travel to San Diego.

These instances got me thinking about the various connections I’ve made throughout my career.

Personal vs transactional relationships:

What I notice is that most of my interactions with people at work have been at a deeper, personal level, rather than at a transactional level.

In the professional world, relationships often fall into two categories: personal and transactional. Personal connections go beyond work tasks and into genuine interactions. These are the people who reach out because they genuinely think of you, not just when they need something. On the other hand, transactional relationships are more goal-oriented. People connect primarily to achieve specific objectives. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this – after all, transactions involve an exchange. But what if one side consistently benefits more than the other?

Adam Grant Perspective:

Adam Grant, the famous organisational psychologist and author, recently posted an insightful distinction on LinkedIn:

“In transactional relationships, people only reach out when they want something from you. They use your connection to achieve their goals. In meaningful relationships, people get in touch when they think of you. Staying connected and being helpful are their goals.”

The imbalance:

When only one side is gaining significantly in a transaction, it can create a sense of imbalance and unfairness. Ugh! This is often not sustainable in the long term, as relationships – whether personal or professional – thrive on reciprocity and mutual benefit. 

If one party consistently gains at the expense of the other, it can lead to resentment and a breakdown of the relationship. I am sure they impact trust and collaboration. That answers a question about ‘what causes toxic workplace environments?” Isn’t it?

You possibly do not have to think hard about that someone who contacted you only when they needed something from you.

“Ah, Mr. X is calling. I’m sure he needs something from me. He never calls otherwise.”

Why genuine relationships matter more:

Over the years, I have built numerous meaningful relationships. Those relationships have proven useful sometimes, but my objective of building those relationships was not their usefulness, it was the human interaction and connection that I value.

When you build genuine relationships, you’re creating a network of support, trust, and goodwill. These bonds may not pay off immediately, but they often lead to unexpected opportunities down the road. My (ex)colleague reaching out after many years to offer a good role is an example of a sustained connection that outweighs the transactional interactions. Believe me, there were many others who I do not remember anymore, or would not like to remember. 🙂  

Look, while transactional relationships are a natural part of a workplace, it’s the meaningful relationships that often leave a lasting impact on our personal and professional lives. They provide a foundation for genuine connections that can lead to personal growth, career development, and a sense of fulfillment. Although, it is entirely up to you what you value more.

Therefore, it’s beneficial to develop relationships not just for immediate gains but for the long-term satisfaction and the meaningfulness they bring to our lives. Success in the workplace is not just about what we achieve, but also about the relationships we build along the way.  So, whether you’re connecting with an old colleague or making a new friend, focus on the meaningfulness. It’s these connections that enrich our journey and make work more fulfilling.

 

Hiring Manager told me that the workplace was political and didn’t have a good culture

Hiring Manager told me that the workplace was political and didn’t have a good culture

by | Nov 22, 2023 | Culture, Leadership | 0 comments

“Rajesh, the culture of this place isn’t good and we have a lot of politics. It can be toxic at times, too.”

The hiring manager told me.

It was a long time ago. I was being interviewed for a placement in a different country, where I was to lead a decent size team for a mission critical business. (Don’t try to guess. I have moved around a lot). 😀

Anyway, we had a very good chat, and after looking at all the prospects, I decided to take on that role.

The workplace was exactly as the manager had described. However, it worked out well for me because I was reporting to this honest man who took care of his people and protected them from the nonsense and the office politics.

After a few years, things became challenging when a reorganisation took place. For the short period before I decided to move on, things became difficult as everyone, who reported to this manager and was shielded from unwanted politics, finally had to deal with it.

After a while, this manager left the organisation as well (he is now a CxO at a well know company).

After joining his team, I asked him why he was so candid at the interview. Clearly, that action would have made some people reconsider joining and he may have lost a few good candidates, too.

He said that honesty was the right thing to do. If he had lied or had hidden the facts about that workplace, he could have lost respect from people who were to join his team. And once the respect was lost, his team would have become weaker, and he did not want to lead a weak team.

When I look back, I realise that it was indeed a strong team. He had hired people who were assertive, knowledgeable, empathetic, and strong. He allowed us to hire good people, too. Most of us moved on and took bigger and better roles.

Now, you may ask me why I decided to take that bet? Was I desperate? Was I a fugitive trying to leave a country? Or, was I keen to join a war zone?

None of that.

I was working at a great place. This opportunity was going to open more doors for me, which it did. This hiring manager’s honesty proved to me that I will work with a good manager. As they say, find a good boss, not a good company. In this case, I had found a good boss which isn’t easy to do.

Next question: why was he there?

Well, he was there because he went along well with most of the executives and knew how to manage them. He was also there since the very beginning and was one of the pillars of the organisation. Even the dunmb folks know that they should remove the pillars. 🙂

Honesty and respect are the key ingredients of building a high performing team. Without them, there is no trust, collaboration, or feedback. A team that values honesty and respect can communicate openly, learn from mistakes, and grow together.

In this post, I have shared an example of how honesty established a connection of trust and respect for me. I hope you found it useful and inspiring. Thank you for reading and please share your thoughts and experiences in the comments section below.

Note: The featured image is created on Bing. I used the post headline as the prompt. 

Leading Change: A Story of Organisational Culture, Reward and Reprimand

Leading Change: A Story of Organisational Culture, Reward and Reprimand

by | Feb 26, 2022 | Coaching, Culture, Leadership, Management | 2 comments

This is a story from an organisation which I hated working for, but stayed for a couple of years because my then manager was a kind person and we both disliked the place equally. We were also comfortable with each other in talking about the incompetent people, who made the majority of that place and the organisational culture.

 

This place was a model organisation for all the wrong reasons. There were trust issues, toxicity, bad culture, nepotism, questionable management competence, lack of integrity, lack of empathy for employees as well as for customers among many other dysfunctions.

 

In simple words, it was a clusterfcuk. (A friend suggested that I replace it with “omnishambles”, which sounds more posh and sophisticated. Nah! doing so would dilute the effectiveness of this post. And more importantly, if I do use that fancy word, I will not be happy.)

 

Leading to win (that’s what I thought):  

At one point of time at that place, I was leading a digital transformation team. Even though the whole thing was completely screwed up, and the consultants were screwing it up even more, I am thankful for all the lessons I learned there. Plus, the bonus was that I got all the stories to share like this one.

 

The people in my team were part of the same system. Some of them were new, and  some had fused the organisation’s DNA with theirs. The environment was so bad, that all new people got influenced within weeks and became political quickly. If you don’t know how cults work, you can get an idea here.

 

Anyway, long story short. I was in the role for just a couple of months before I went for my planned leaves for about three weeks. The team was delivering the outcomes and I was doing my best to enable the achievements of those goals. I was coaching them, mentoring them and at times, holding hands to get work done.

 

Look, the problem with being too focused on your objectives is that sometimes you fail to read the room. People can be two faced and if you don’t realise that soon enough, they will do good enough damage. 

 

Airlines teach pilots situational awareness. Which is about being aware of one’s surroundings, and not just rely on the instrument. Not being situationally aware can cause trouble and that was the mistake I made too. I should have been more diligent in keeping an eye on environmental factors. It is like product companies keeping an eye out on subtle feedback coming out on Twitter and fixing problems before they become issues.  

 

Anyway, back to the story of the screwed up project and place.

 

Hoping for a reward:

 

When I returned from the leave and joined the work back, the CTO called me in his cabin.

 

The CTO was a nice person, but he wasn’t a charismatic leader and he lacked conviction (I was going to say ‘he lacked balls’, but that wouldn’t be nice, right?). His demeanor was of a person who is trying hard to stay in his job and not ruffle any feathers. But you know what, an appease-all policy makes your position weaker. In my opinion, stronger and assertive people command more respect and have better chances of staying or growing in their jobs than others.

 

So yeah, he called me for a quick meeting in his office.  

 

“Recognition time!”, I thought. 

 

Yes, you guessed it right. I was not going to get recognition. I was there for a reprimand. 

 

With a serious face, and a deep tone, he said that the team told him that Rajesh was gone, and no one noticed. It seemed that I wasn’t making an impact. And that I did not have control on the team. In his opinion, the team should have been dependent on my leadership.

 

Honestly, I felt betrayed by the team. I treated them as friends, and they behaved like grade 3 kids who tell on you to the teacher. I also felt bad that the team couldn’t see the bigger picture. They had much more freedom than other teams. 

 

So, when I replied to the CTO, he was instantly remorseful. 

 

I said, “I am actually quite happy to hear what the team said to you.”

 

He looked confused, and said, “What do you mean?”

 

I continued, “It seems that I was able to achieve my goal much earlier than expected. If the team believes that they were able to function without having someone guiding and driving them, then they have become a self-contained, self-organised team. They have learned much more about delivering innovative products than anyone else in the entire group. I know that there are many other organisations and teams that try their best to achieve self-organisation and never reach there. We should celebrate that we are doing the right thing.”

 

There was a long pause.

 

Then the CTO said, “I should have thought that, and I should have said that to the team. You are right. Sorry that I didn’t manage it well.”

 

WHOA! I never expected that I would ever hear those words. While there was no formal recognition, at least he understood what I was trying to do.


Culture change is hard: 

You might be wondering what happened next. When I tell this story to people, some assume that there was a happy ending with rewards, awards, recognitions, and a case study of organisational improvement.

 

No, nothing of that sort happened. Culture problems often have deep roots and resolving them takes time, courage, integrity, congruence, openness and willingness by the leaders first. I think it all starts with accepting that there are problems.

 

In this case too, culture problems were deep rooted.

 

To me, it was clear that trust was an issue. It was broken.

 

I did have an open discussion with the team and we discussed having honesty meetings. Someday I will write about that too. 

 

Most of the team members understood what they had achieved and that I was there to help. Yet, some of them were not onboard. They were laggards. After leaving that organisation many years ago, I came to know that the laggards were still there where they were.

 

Not long after that incident, I left that organisation. I knew that I was a square peg in a round hole. 

 

One can only try to change a system. Most of the time you can only influence a small part of a system and there is a high likelihood that this small part will go back to its old ways due to other parts of the system. 

When you try to change a system, not all parts of the system will react the same way. But that doesn’t mean that we stop trying.

 

I tried, I succeeded a little, and then I failed.

 

Change takes time. Effect of change can take even longer. And recognition and reward will not always be part of the process.

 

As change agents, we must be patient while remaining pragmatic.

I shared the team’s mistakes with everyone, then this happened…

I shared the team’s mistakes with everyone, then this happened…

by | Feb 14, 2022 | Agile, Culture, Delivery Leading, Product development, Product management | 0 comments

A few years ago, I led a product development effort at an enterprise. We were constantly experimenting, so had our fair share of wins and failures. But I had the feeling that we weren’t learning from mistakes quickly enough.

Large organisations maintain risk registers, which usually keep details of risks and issues. We also had a risk register, but it was being treated as one of those documents created for the sake of documentation.

Frustrated, I decided to put a poster on the wall with the title “Failure log”.

Why the heck a failure log?

The team reacted differently to the failure log. Some were amused, some confused, and some annoyed.

The annoyed ones saw this as exposing their weaknesses.

The confused ones didn’t know how showcasing our mistakes was going to help the project.

Others were happy that we were taking an initiative that could not only build psychological safety, but could also help us learn from our mistakes.

My challenge was that the organisation was not very mature. It was very much a command and control environment, so having the courage to publicly admit you’d made a mistake was a bold move, and to some extent a risk.

It was a risk because the board and the management team had invested heavily in the program and they were watching our progress very carefully. It was quite possible to face unintended consequences of making mistakes. In other words, it could have been a career-limiting – or perhaps even career-killing – move.

Luckily, the Chief Product Officer I worked with was progressively minded. He encouraged and supported experiments. Plus, the Program Director and I had become friends and she supported everything I did. Both could understand my vision and wanted to be part of it.

We were like a start-up within a traditionally managed enterprise.

Many of the team members, including the Product Leads and the Innovation Manager, were itching to do more and my bold step encouraged almost everyone to step up and forward.

I started adding smaller mistakes and things on that poster that could have been improved.

The Blunder!

And then one day… it happened!

A team member mistakenly sent a test email to hundreds of customers. It was a PR and Communications disaster.

You may be wondering why a test web page was connected with a production database?

The web page was built for a fake door experiment and the idea was to expose a very small number of customers to that page.

We got through that issue… but the question around recording that mistake on the Failure Log felt almost as tough.

The team was divided on sharing an embarrassing mistake with everyone else. Specifically in an environment where we were expected to have Gantt charts, detailed project plans, roadmaps, scripted test cases, and God knows what else.

So, what did we do about sharing the mistake?

After a bit of discussion within the team, we decided to include the mistake on the Failure Log because that was the right thing to do. There was a consensus about being congruent.

What happened after taking that major step?

I was sacked… right?

No. Nothing major happened at all. We were warned to be more diligent in future. That’s it. I thank my lucky stars for that.

Lessons that I learned:

But something did happen that was major for me:

  • The team became bolder
  • The experiments we quietly discussed earlier turned into open discussions
  • More items appeared on the Failure log, which by now had become the learning log
  • More and more visitors from other departments wanted to learn from us
  • And the best of all, the cohesion and collaboration among team members (as well as with the management team) improved

Taking a bold step, and then taking another courageous step on top of that, taught us many lessons and made us a great team. We delivered value to customers, and we were more open about our outcomes. Best of all, the tea cohesion improved.

I can’t ignore the fact that the senior folks I worked with made it easier for me to take bolder steps. If executives aren’t supportive, then forget about experimenting with new ideas.

The failure log was an experiment that could have gone in any direction. It could have become a political mess, or quietly died from lack of interest.

The Incongruence of Organisational Hierarchy

The Incongruence of Organisational Hierarchy

by | Oct 3, 2021 | Culture, Management | 0 comments

The incongruence between facts and claims in many organisations often bothers me. One of the biggest bogus claims that I have seen is the lack of hierarchy or the flatness of an organisation. What that means is that organisations claim to have very little or no hierarchy in their organisational structure. Such claims make an organisation look modern, open and cool. The flatness of hierarchy (do you see the contradiction here?) is used as a marketing tool to attract talent. After all, who wouldn’t want to work for a company where management teams are approachable and where one doesn’t have to worry much about too many titles.

Sadly, more often than not, organisations that claim to not have hierarchical structures, have unwritten ones. Worse, some of these places have a command and control culturer where the top boss or someone else in the upper echelons control everything.

Few years ago I worked for a financial organisation that did not have many levels in their organisational structure. I was leading a digital project with a budget of few millions. What I found surprising was that the senior management team asked for so many details from projects that the monthly report was over 200 pages long. Did they read the report? I doubt that. Soon I figured out that the structure was less hierarchical because the bosses wanted to keep all the control and didn’t trust others enough to delegate. Unfortunately, that culture flowed down and made that organisation a typical command and control driven culture despite trying to be Agile in vain.

Are their any positives of a hierarchical structure?

One vendor that I can think of is that a hierarchy gives you a possibility of climbing the organisational ladder. It is easier for a company to move people one level up but adding a ‘Sr.’ to their titles. It doesn’t cost much and employees stay happy with yearly promotions. Result is that everyone stays happier.

What to do if you end up in such an organisation?

Well, it truly depends on your own circumstances. If you enjoy your work and the hierarchy does not impact you and your attitude, then you have no problem. What matters is whether you continue enjoying your work or not, and whether you have the right opportunities available for you.

However, if you feel claustrophobic in there, or if you want to climb the organisational ladder fast, then may be you need to consider other options. Again, that’s all circumstantial.

 

 

 

Anonymous feedback sucks, but we give it anyway!

Anonymous feedback sucks, but we give it anyway!

by | Oct 12, 2020 | Culture, Leadership, Management | 0 comments

A little while ago, the team coach at one of my clients suggested that we collect feedback from the team anonymously to understand the ‘team health’. My opinion has been that you can explore and understand a team’s health by frequently talking and working with them. So, I wasn’t really in favour of gathering data anonymously, but since I had started working at that place  only a few days ago, I asked for more information. 

Turned out, the team coach, who was a nice person and was quite experienced, was actually not in favour of collecting anonymous feedback either. However, the inexperienced manager of that group truly believed that feedback should be collected that way and therefore commanded the coach to follow the process. 

I believe that most of us don’t like receiving anonymous feedback. To validate my assumption, I spoke to a number of people. However, I wasn’t entirely surprised when many of them told me that they didn’t mind providing it when asked. Some even admitted that they have exaggerated while giving feedback anonymously. Giving and receiving feedback can be daunting, however, it can be worse coming from an unknown source.

My experience is that managers who have a command and control mindset do not like transparency, conflict or challenge. They see that as confrontation and try to avoid that.

How people engage with each other, and how managers and team members give or receive feedback often tells a lot about an organisation’s culture. Correct?

I can see that you are nodding your head, most likely in agreement. Well, if you trust me enough then tell me about it.  

Let’s try to analyse the feedback given in an unidentified and unspecified manner. An easier way to analyse that is break it down.

Analysis points:

  1. Is anonymous feedback good or bad
  2. What happens when people are allowed to give feedback anonymously
  3. How do we feel when we receive anonymous feedback
  4. Criticism or critique
  5. What does good look like
A person giving feedback to another while hiding his face

Is anonymous feedback good or bad

The debate about anonymous versus face to face feedback isn’t new. In my work as a coach, consultant and sometimes as a manager, I have come across scenarios where leaders were looking for, and at times, encouraging, anonymous feedback. Their logic or assumptions often were similar. “People feel confident providing anonymous feedback and we learn what our teams actually think about the organisation or the processes or the management or all of these.”

Nonsense!! If the culture of a place isn’t conducive to openness, people will not tell the truth even in an anonymous survey.

If people in a team find it hard to offer direct honest feedback, then it is clear that the group has trust issues. Because if I trust you enough, then I’d feel confident that you would listen, pay heed and won’t mind about my feedback.

So, in general, it seems that anonymous feedback isn’t a good thing.  

What happens when you are allowed to give anonymous feedback? 

How people respond to a request for feedback largely depends on how they feel in the setting in which they are. We respond and react passively or negatively in an environment that makes us feel unsafe. That’s why the ‘feeling of safety’ matters a lot. When employees feel safe to challenge the management, they inadvertently also save their employers from a lot of trouble. When they don’t feel safe, they won’t bother telling the management that the organisation was on fire, and in some cases, literally.

In a blame culture, while some people give up hope that the management would take any actions on their suggestions; few others find the request for anonymous feedback a great opportunity to vent their frustrations. They may exaggerate situations, they may skew data by giving the lowest score for everything and they may even lie if they feel vengeful. And  why wouldn’t they? Anonymity provides them the veil to do things that they wouldn’t otherwise do.

Receiving anonymous feedback: 

Here is a scenario that you will possibly recognize.

“Hi, we need to talk”:

Your manager comes to you and says,”I have received some feedback about you from some of the team members. They think that your quality of work is poor, you delay their work by not responding on time and you arrive to work late. I’ll have to take some action if you don’t improve.”

Naturally, you are taken aback because you thought you had cordial and honest relationships with your colleagues.  You considered them your friends and you always assumed that they would approach you for any concern they had about your work. Anyways, you always believed that you produced high quality work. You have been praised for your work by the clients and this feedback did not seem to make any sense.

So, you ask,”who has given that feedback?”

Manager says, “All feedback that we receive is anonymous. We don’t want people to feel exposed or unsafe for providing information or feedback. And we also don’t want people who receive feedback to be vengeful.”

“That’s a load of bollocks!”, You feel like saying to your boss, but decide to keep this thought in the mind and don’t actually utter it. Times are tough and saying that could be a career limiting move.

Instead you mutter, “I understand that, but without knowing exactly what the issue is, I can’t accept or even take action on this feedback. Actually, I think all of that feedback is incorrect. If you tell me who’s provided this feedback then I will work with them to fix things.”

Of course you never get that information.

The problem in the above scenario is that you don’t have any specific information. The feedback was vague, you didn’t know who provided that. You also don’t know whether your boss misunderstood what your colleagues said about you or whether they all were truly two-faced people. If you have a weak manager, then the first thing that comes to your mind is whether your boss was making up all that feedback. 

Whatever the case maybe, now you have a dislike and distrust of almost all your team members and also your boss. The damage has been done.

Criticism vs critique:

Criticism is always an attack on someone’s person. When you give critical feedback, you’re talking about that person and how bad they are. However, when you critique, you talk about an attribute of a person, and not the person.

Brene Brown says this about anonymous feedback:

“If you’re not in the arena also getting your ass kicked, I’m not interested in your feedback.”

What does good look like?

The good looks like working in a culture where people feel safe speaking out, respect is a common behaviour, the management folks are open and honest in accepting mistakes and failures and actively ensure that their teams do the same by encouraging them.

I worked with few such teams (I have yet to see an ideal organisation) where people openly expressed their opinions and views. The leaders there created a culture where we felt safe to debate and challenge in an honest, healthy and respectful way.

In an environment like this, team members as well as managers can offer genuine and meaningful feedback in a supportive way. There you talk like mature people. And that not only helps the individuals to grow, but also helps their teams and organisations to stay on course. These cultures also encourage frequent and just in time feedback instead of waiting for a quarter of a year to deliver bad news.