HR, introduce ‘anchors’ to provide stability amid work turbulence

Expect the unexpected

There’s another crisis around the corner and it’s heading your way.  How often have you heard that?

The number of sudden surprises affecting you and your business seem to mount up: extreme weather, interest rates, product failure, cyberattack, gender discrimination complaints, supply chain disruption.  This is the start of a long list.

In 2022, Collins Dictionary nominated ‘permacrisis’ as the word of the year.

A new vocabulary has developed to describe our times: black swans, polycrisis, perpetual upheaval, normalized unprecedentedness, predictable unpredictability.

Today’s advice therefore is – you have to be more adaptable, more flexible, and more responsive in the face of constant change.

Turbulence for all

This is not a new argument.  In the 1950s, a study of the electronics industry in Scotland identified two distinct management systems; mechanistic and organic.

Mechanistic systems emphasize rules and efficiency, and rely on rigid job descriptions, fixed hierarchy, and specified communication channels.

Organic systems are based on teams and collaboration, job descriptions and hierarchies are loosely defined, and communications happen as required.

The study found that mechanistic systems worked well for companies whose environment was stable (yes, it seems that there were such organizations back then).

Organic systems worked better in turbulent environments where the ability to adjust rapidly to changing conditions is vital.  Mechanistic systems are slow to react, and they stifle innovation.

What does ‘organic’ look like in practice?  We once interviewed an employee of a computer manufacturer in the west of Scotland: “What is your job title?”

He replied, “I don’t have one.  I’ll tell you what I do, and you can tell me what my title should be.”

When asked to describe the organization structure, he struggled.  The result was a series of overlapping circles and ovals that looked like a child’s drawing of a rabbit.

Turbulence now affects everyone.  Organizations with stable environments are hard to find.

The old argument is still valid.  But instead of turbulence we have VUCA: Volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.  Instead of organic teams, we have agile scrums.

Too much change?  Not a bit of it – bring it on.  Some of us prefer the surprises and challenges of constant change.  Coping with novelty is exciting, developmental, satisfying.

Stress for some

There is a problem with the organic argument: lots of people don’t like it.  Although this was one of that Scottish study’s key findings, it has been overlooked.

Organic (or agile) systems can create problems for those who work there.  The absence of job specifications generates anxiety and insecurity.

This is uncomfortable if you have a low tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty.

Some of us like to have a clear job description, and a predictable career path up the hierarchy.

Take that away, and motivation and performance are likely to fall.  Staff may quit, or start quiet quitting.

Most of us are more familiar with organizations that use detailed job descriptions and traditional hierarchies.

We don’t have good evidence on how many organizations have flat structures and empowered teams.  But we do know that some experiments have not worked well.

For example, a German company that tried this approach found that a hierarchy emerged anyway.

Staff spent more time discussing how they would solve problems collaboratively than they spent solving problems.

A vision of continuity

The case for adopting adaptable responses to surprises and crises is not going away.  So, how can we get the benefits of flexible systems, without the problems.

This is where HR can play a key role, in promoting a vision of continuity, in the face of rapid change.  But standard management advice works against this.

When it comes to implementing major changes, leaders are told to make clear how bad things are, and stress the urgency.

This is ‘the burning platform’ approach to change.  We’re going to break with the past and create a whole new future.

However, people also value coherence, consistency, and continuity.  Breaking with the past can trigger anxiety, and resistance.

It helps, therefore, to emphasize what isn’t going to change, to provide reassurance and stability.

Even with major change, some things are likely to stay the same.  Continuity reduces uncertainty and is likely to reduce resistance to change.

Anchors aweigh: the HR contribution

How can HR signal continuity, and help to avoid the problems of turbulent or VUCA environments?

The answer lies with six ‘anchors’ that offer employees stability.

Anchor 1: Purpose:  The organization’s purpose – the reason for its existence – is unlikely to change.  The nature of your role may change, and you may find yourself in another location, with different colleagues.  But you will be contributing to the same overarching goal.

In practice: When Google became Alphabet, staff were reassured that the company culture and values would not change.  When Microsoft took over LinkedIn, it was made clear to employees that LinkedIn would not be absorbed into Microsoft.

Anchor 2: Participation:  Large-scale changes can be complex.  We will therefore be asking you to take part in helping to design what is going to change and how.  We also want you to tell us what should not change, to maintain continuity with the past.

In practice: Adobe uses a periodic Pulse survey to assess employee opinions about change.  Is morale dipping?  Do people feel information-starved?  Are senior management seen as out of touch?  Starbucks also uses this approach.

Anchor 3: Transparency:  These changes may be radical.  However, we will let you know in advance what the substance and implications will be.  Indeed, through your participation in change design, you will know what is going to happen, and have a say in how we do this.

In practice: Given the need for rapid responses to change, Standard Chartered, IBM, and Telstra (an Australian telecoms company) want their managers to communicate, facilitate, and coach, instead of supervising and directing.

Anchor 4: Minimum critical specification:  Most people prefer some guidance with regard to their job responsibilities.  But this does not have to be detailed, just spelling out the main role dimensions.  This leaves ambiguity, but a minimum critical spec offers reassuring clarity and stability.  The same approach can apply to the organization structure.

In practice: The British Army uses a ‘mission command’ system in which teams can decide actions for themselves, witihin the overall aims of the mission, and without detailed orders.  Spotify uses autonomous teams which make their own decisions, with a minimum of bureaucratic rules.

Anchor 5: Psychological safety:  When dealing with unexpected crises and surprises, inevitably, mistakes will happen.  But we need to learn and help, and not punish when things go wrong.  Failure to fix a problem that we haven’t faced before is a ‘praiseworthy failure’.

In practice: IBM and Nike have employee assistance and wellbeing programs.  Ford offers employees financial counselling.  To help deal with overload, Slack has put in place work management initiatives.  GE offer career transition services.  EY (Ernst & Young) has mentorship programs for less experienced employees.  Deloitte has peer support groups to share experiences and to counteract the isolating effects of change.

Anchor 6: Commitment:  Rapid developments in technology are going to make some of today’s skills obsolete.  But we are committed to investment in your development, to reskilling and upskilling.  Why not recruit new and already qualified staff?  We would like to retain your company knowledge.

In practice: Amazon has a major retraining program, to support major changes due to changes in technology and customer needs.

The cost-benefit calculus

Permacrisis requires an organizational response that some of us will find rewarding.  But some of us will find it uncomfortable – and this will create recruitment, motivation, performance, and retention problems.

Emphasizing continuity, alongside change, can increase the comfort factor for those who have concerns.  We have outlined six anchors that HR can introduce to make turbulent contexts more comfortable.

These anchors are not big budget items, compared with the costs of poor performance and staff turnover.

The benefits in terms of staff retention, motivation, and performance, are likely to be significant.