In the instances where the ideas were implemented, that happened after the Robin Hood employee’s termination. Implying that the boss displayed poor judgment reflected directly on the judgment of the executive who selected the boss. Or maybe their boss was handpicked for the job by this executive. They sometimes discovered that their boss and this person had a social tie outside the company. The reaction of the person they appealed to was much colder than they were expecting. The employees wanted to get their ideas implemented, not promote themselves or discredit anyone. Feeling that the matter was too important to drop, they would take it to someone higher in the organization. They would lobby their boss with the idea, but the idea would die there. In the cases presented, employees had an idea that they thought would improve their organization’s situation. Originally, we focused on situations that went beyond simple dissent but fell short of whistle-blowing. Chief executive officers have said that although everyone wants performance and efficiency, toeing the company line is even more important. I have friends at both companies and you both seem to have high caliber people who do many of the same things, and yet this company just seems to be better.” Kennedy was too busy unpacking his things at his new desk to listen to what the response was. During his next interview at another company, Kennedy replied to that same question with: “I am excited to find out why this company consistently returns higher profits per dollar of revenue than your competition. Ample literature details that for people to get ahead in organizations, they must show that they believe the logo and name on the side of the building is most important. The interview was cut short at that point, and Kennedy was sent away knowing he had said the wrong thing. Kennedy’s approach was well-intended, but evidently it was not what the interviewers wanted to hear. The name on the building or the logo on the letterhead isn’t what makes a company a good place to work.” He responded with “to get high performance in a company, you need to build teamwork and develop skilled, highly motivated people. He was asked directly why he wanted to work for this company. A few years ago, Don Kennedy was interviewing for a job. Fealty refers to the duty citizens (employees) have to be unquestionably obedient to the king (company) and his appointed representatives (e.g., your boss). In the myth, Robin Hood is rewarded because of his unfaltering allegiance to the king. The king punishes the wrongdoers and rewards Robin Hood for his loyalty and honesty. Unknown to the sheriff or the prince, Robin eventually gains access to Richard, enlightens him and appeals to the king’s morality. Robin defies local authority in the belief that the king would not allow the evil behavior if he knew about the situation. Good King Richard the Lionheart has been away on a crusade and is unaware of his subordinates’ excesses. Robin Hood witnesses the corruption of the sheriff of Nottingham and the wickedness of Prince John. We all know the story, but for the purpose of this piece, here is the condensed version that highlights the relevant themes: Could your subordinates be regarding you as the evil sheriff of Nottingham? What if you are seen as good King Richard? How can you best use your power? Here, we revisit the analysis and examine the issue from the managers’ point of view. Rather than leave it at that, we decided to address the problem from the perspective of those who could make an improvement. From the employee’s perspective, it seems that viewing management with suspicion and distrust is common. Audience reaction was positive and of higher intensity than typical from a technical crowd. We drew parallels between Robin Hood and any modern day employees who might circumvent the chain of command to address what they perceive as poor judgment by their supervisor. We recently presented a paper using the Robin Hood myth to help demonstrate the impetus for and potential perils associated with not following the expected protocol within an organization. In order to help decide what action to take, it is important to reflect on whether you may be the evil sheriff of Nottingham. The common reaction of punishing this behavior may not benefit the organization as a whole. In organizations where dissent is discouraged, employees may decide to jump the chain of command to find a champion for their ideas. The situation of dissenting employees, their immediate supervisor and a benevolent upper manager can be related to the characters found in the Robin Hood myth. Employees often develop a mistrust of management.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |