0:00

Hello and welcome to Sticky from the

0:13

Inside, the employee engagement podcast

0:15

that looks at how to build stickier,

0:18

competition-smashing, consistently

0:20

successful organizations from the inside

0:22

out. I'm your host, Andy Goram, and I'm

0:25

on a mission to help more businesses turn the lights on behind the eyes of their

0:29

employees, light the fires within them, and create tons more success for everyone.

0:39

This podcast is for all those who believe

0:42

that's something worth going after and

0:44

would like a little help and guidance in achieving that. Each episode, we dive into

0:48

the topics that can help create what I

0:51

call stickier businesses, the sort of

0:53

businesses where people thrive and love to

0:56

work, and where more customers stay with

0:58

you and recommend you to others because

1:01

they love what you do and why you do it.

1:04

So if you want to take the tricky out of

1:06

being sticky, listen on. Okay then. We've

1:13

spoken a lot on this podcast about the

1:16

importance of purpose and culture. I have

1:19

banged on about moving all that stuff from

1:22

the surfaces of impressive wall murals and

1:24

mouse mats and into the very mindset of

1:28

your organizations. Because when you share

1:31

and really transfer ownership for these

1:33

things, that's when they have their full effect and benefit. Now, being seen as a

1:38

purpose driven organization that shows more compassion and humanity has been, I

1:43

guess, a thing for quite some time now,

1:46

even though there are still too many, to

1:48

my mind, that think this stuff is just

1:50

mere fluff, there is no doubting its

1:53

current popularity or the fact that these

1:56

elements are key to attracting and retaining certain talent nowadays,

2:00

particularly the younger generations, as

2:02

they start to make up the majority of the

2:04

workforce as we move forward. Now, if

2:06

you're still a member of the fluff party after that, that fact alone should

2:11

seriously make you take more notice of this stuff anyway. I've also been pretty

2:16

clear about the need for the promise that's made and marketed to match up to

2:20

the reality. Now that can be tough to

2:23

maintain at times with whatever the market

2:26

or the economy throws at you especially,

2:28

and staying true to your values when under

2:30

those sorts of pressures can be a really

2:33

testing time, especially if they are only

2:36

skin deep. But that's when they add the

2:39

most value, guys. It's also fair to say

2:41

that these values, like compassion, can

2:44

come under real pressure at the employee

2:47

level, too, especially when we end up dealing with disagreements, performance

2:51

issues, accusations of bullying, poor

2:54

behavior, and other such matters. The way we approach and deal with such matters

2:59

also needs to stay in line with those

3:02

values, but I'm not so sure they always

3:05

do. So how do we stay true to our values

3:08

in the face of all of these challenges.

3:12

Well, with me today is David Little, CEO

3:15

of the TCM Group, which is an award

3:17

winning mediation, culture change and

3:20

leadership consultancy. His 30 years of

3:23

work as a facilitator, a mediator, a

3:26

coach, a leader and an accomplished author

3:30

make him an expert partner for today's

3:32

discussion around authenticity, fairness,

3:36

consistency and organizational integrity.

3:40

And by the way, the TCM group were awarded

3:42

the coveted HR Impact Award at the recent

3:46

Personnel Today award. So you can be sure

3:48

David will be absolutely steering us in

3:50

the right direction during this episode.

3:53

Anyway, enough of me. Welcome to the show,

3:56

David, Andy, I've been looking forward to this a lot. Thank you so much for having

3:59

me. Oh, absolute pleasure, my friend. It's

4:02

always a joy to speak to you and especially I can't wait to push your

4:06

buttons and hear all your passion and

4:08

energy come through on this topic. We're going to talk about today. Before we start

4:12

pushing anyone's buttons, do me a big

4:15

favor, my friend. Let's just get a little

4:17

bit more about your background, what

4:19

you're currently up to and where your focus is. Thanks, Randy. Everything you've

4:24

just been talking about, I'm absolutely passionate about. So just kind of where

4:28

did that fire start burning in me? So

4:31

going to go right back to the early ninety s now. I am a young guy just leaving

4:36

Nottingham on his way up to, up to university and I went to study a degree in

4:39

race and community relations, which at the time, in the late 80s, early 90s wasn't

4:44

necessarily quite in vogue. We hadn't had

4:46

Stephen Lawrence and many of the other things that had brought this into sharp

4:49

relief for us. I wanted to be a copper,

4:51

actually. I wanted to go into the police. Andy and I went to go and study this

4:56

degree in race and community relations, which I think is fair to say it was quite

4:59

a left wing, left leaning course. I loved

5:02

it. I learned so much about the social,

5:05

economic, societal, community factors

5:08

which underpinned not just racism but

5:11

discrimination in so many forms. And I

5:13

went to apply to be a police officer and

5:17

unfortunately my degree, Andy was in how

5:20

the police and the media had conspired to

5:23

criminalize mugging as a black crime, where actually young black men were more

5:27

likely to be victims of mugging than they

5:30

were to be offended. And how I looked at

5:32

in particular met and the sun newspaper at

5:34

the time and I stood up in my selection

5:37

center, the graduate selection center for this police force, and we had to talk

5:40

about ourselves and everyone talked about their geography degree and their history

5:44

degree and their lovely academic

5:47

achievements and I started to talk up in front of this room of very senior police

5:51

officers in this recruitment center about

5:54

the intrinsic sense of racism that we saw

5:58

within policing within our societies. And

6:00

this is in 1992, so it's fair to say I

6:03

didn't get invited in and I was go down.

6:06

Well, no, didn't go down as well as I might have know and good as me, how things

6:12

change. So I went away and I started to work in community engagement, which was a

6:16

real pressure of mine. And I got into the

6:18

area of mediation and restorative justice. I heard about some work being done in

6:22

Bristol and in London, so I went and found

6:25

out and started to look at this amazing

6:27

thing called mediation and restorative justice, which at the time was barely

6:31

heard about or talked about. So I set up

6:33

what was one of the country's first mediation and restorative justice programs

6:37

up in Leicester, the lovely city of Leicester in East Midlands, and started to

6:41

bring neighbors in dispute together, went

6:45

to work in schools. I set up a project called Chris, the conflict resolution in

6:48

Schools programme, treating young pint

6:51

sized mediators in the classroom and in the playground. I loved it and I was very

6:55

fortunate. The BBC came in and made a

6:57

documentary of my work for their one Life series, actually, which was a wonderful

7:01

achievement. And I started to be invited, go into serious criminal activity, up to

7:05

and including unlawful killing and

7:08

bringing together victims and offenders and families together. And I started to

7:12

realize the power, Andy, of dialogue, of

7:15

engagement, of empowerment, of alignment,

7:18

of listening, of empathy. You talked a lot about compassion. I started to see this

7:22

playing out in some tough environments. And I got a phone call from the UK Civil

7:27

service, the Cabinet Office and two large

7:29

London boroughs to come in and do some work with them, to bring in this stuff

7:33

around restorative practices, into their

7:35

work around inclusion and diversity and

7:39

equity. And it was groundbreaking. This is

7:42

2001, and I studied an MBA to try and

7:45

understand how businesses work. I got a

7:47

distinction in my MBA looking at restorative practices as a driver of

7:52

organizational change and underpinning.

7:55

I'm a big fan of total quality management,

7:57

japanese management system. So I looked at

7:59

conflict management within the value chain and I looked at conflict resolution as

8:02

part of quality system in organizations.

8:04

Slightly boring, but really interesting, I

8:07

thought. And I dived into that. I got my

8:11

distinction in that and then realized,

8:13

Andy, I started to go into organizations and I started to speak to people about

8:18

their experiences of disagreements,

8:21

quarrels, fights falling out, grievances,

8:23

bullying, harassment. Whoa, whoa. I

8:30

couldn't believe what I was hearing. I

8:32

could not believe how bad it was. I could

8:35

not believe how woeful our organizations

8:38

were at handling this stuff. The stuff

8:40

that's so natural and so human and so

8:43

inevitable was being handled or

8:45

mismanaged, I would probably argue, through these horrendous systems and

8:49

processes. Retribution, blame, avoidance,

8:53

the kind of punishment, the aggressive

8:56

confrontational system. So I saw an

8:58

opportunity and I set up my business

9:00

called total conflict management. Drawing the thumb, total quality management and

9:04

integrated conflict management systems. Bit of a geek on that. I loved it. Bought

9:09

into the Kaizen principles very much in

9:11

terms of quality systems for managing

9:13

conflict. So unashamedly borrowing heavily

9:16

from those japanese management systems. But it's great stuff coming out of Harvard

9:19

and Cornell as well around integrated

9:22

conflict management systems. And off I

9:25

went, off I went. And this is in 2001, and

9:30

a bit of a man on a mission. I went out to

9:32

try and change the way we handle conflict.

9:35

But of course, organizations being

9:39

organizations, they didn't realize that this guy was on a bit of a mission to go

9:41

and handle conflict. They just thought I'd be quite a handy, convenient person to go

9:45

and resolve the problem for us. Dave, do

9:50

you go and sort it out? And all of my

9:53

lovely systemic, structural, institutional

9:56

and cultural work was put to one side in

9:58

favor of. I was the corporate band aid. I

10:01

was that person. And I realised I didn't

10:04

like being the corporate band aid. I mean,

10:07

look, Andy, I was running a very successful, thriving business by this

10:11

point. But I realized this wasn't me, this

10:15

wasn't why I was doing it, wasn't my

10:18

purpose. So I started to go and bang on. I had to bang, by the way, I wasn't just

10:21

knocking gently. I had to bang on the door of HR. I had to bang on some of those

10:25

executive suites. I had to go and bang on the door of managers. I had to almost in a

10:30

mediated way, force my way in and say,

10:34

look, do you know what you're doing to

10:37

your people? I see your LinkedIn posts. I

10:40

see you celebrating compassionate, purpose

10:42

driven cultures. I see the wonderful

10:45

things you proclaim in your employee value

10:47

proposition. I see how wonderful your

10:50

organization is. But when I'm talking to the people who are slipping through all of

10:54

the cracks in those floorboards in your

10:56

organization and you're bringing me in as your corporate bando, I can assure you

11:00

with a high level of confidence that their

11:03

experience does not equate to what you're

11:06

trying to proclaim to the outside world.

11:09

And I saw the Ulrich talks about these

11:14

paradoxes. So I'll use the word paradox because I think it's probably quite a

11:17

nice. It felt sometimes worse than a

11:22

paradox. I sometimes suspected it was

11:25

being driven for certain reasons and

11:28

people gained from these processes, but the paradox was we were talking about

11:33

these modern and progressive systems. But

11:35

when we fell out, when we disagreed, when our performance dropped, when our behavior

11:40

slipped in one way or the other, we came

11:43

down and crushed those situations and

11:46

those individuals, and it didn't feel right. So that set me on a mission, Andy,

11:50

to go and start talking about culture and

11:52

HR and leadership and, wow, that's been

11:55

the last ten years. Fantastic. What a

11:57

background, mate. That's some impressive

12:02

background and puts you in the box seat

12:04

for leading this discussion today. And,

12:09

David, it would be remiss of me to just

12:12

pick up with you on the recent award that

12:14

you picked up. I mean, that's a pretty big thing, right? We were blown away. It was a

12:18

fantastic night and a real achievement. And it was a testament to the partnership

12:21

that we've been building with Burberry,

12:23

who are great organizations, take this stuff so seriously. And Claire Salter at

12:28

Burberry has been such an incredible

12:30

advocate and ambassador for new

12:32

approaches, for managing disagreements, for handling concerns and conflicts. So,

12:36

yeah, the award was a celebration of a

12:38

project we've been working with Burberry on for the past couple of years, Andy, to

12:43

replace grievance and disciplinary

12:45

procedure with a resolution framework,

12:48

what we called in Burberry a stepping stones to resolution framework. And we

12:52

created, and Burberry created within the

12:55

organization a tool called the Burberry

12:57

Hub, which provides support for managers,

13:00

for employees, and for others who want to

13:02

find a way of navigating their way through

13:04

disagreements and challenges. And it's working in the US, in the UK and working

13:09

globally. The response from everyone

13:12

involved has been so positive and the

13:14

award really did shine a light on

13:16

innovative practices from an employment law and employee relations perspective,

13:20

and was a fantastic celebration of a new

13:23

progressive approach for managing these

13:26

perennial problems that I think many of us

13:28

understand of conflicts and disagreements in the workplace. So, yeah, it was a real

13:33

career high for me. And thanks again to

13:35

everyone at Burberry, but also the TCM team. We all went out, we were all there

13:38

for that night, and I think it was a real

13:41

chance for us to come together and

13:43

celebrate being a fabulous tea. Well, many

13:46

congratulations, my friend. That's some deal. Thanks, Andy. I've still got the

13:51

hangover. I sort of mentioned in the intro

13:56

that words like compassionate and purpose

13:59

driven have become almost all the rage. Or

14:03

certainly they're headlining, but I'm a

14:07

huge pedant when it comes to promise

14:11

versus reality. I get really wound up with

14:14

people spending time marketing money,

14:17

telling one story about their organization. But then something is very

14:22

different behind the wizard of Oz curtain.

14:25

What's your experience been, particularly

14:28

with that mediation background? When things get difficult, when you're under

14:34

pressure, when businesses have got performance issues, when there's

14:37

disagreements, when there's accusations of

14:40

bullying, what do you see happen to

14:43

organizations where either that veneer of

14:47

values slips, or they absolutely double

14:50

down and deal with stuff in adherence with

14:52

their values. But what have you seen? It's

14:55

a really great question. A mediator is a

14:59

person centered approach, but I also think in systems, and I've been quite fortunate

15:03

in respect, to be able to bring my

15:05

approach to the mediator and a restorative

15:08

practitioner and that close work with individuals. But think of this

15:11

systemically, so I can analyze that through a sort of lens of the system in

15:13

our organization. I think the first thing that I see within organizations is a huge

15:19

culture, which I often describe as

15:21

extensive inaction or extensive

15:24

overreaction, and that results in people

15:26

falling through the gap of needing to have

15:28

action. Now, that action are the things we're talking about, compassion. But what

15:31

does that actually mean as a management intervention? What does that look like? To

15:34

be able to listen, to hear, to have empathy, to have a deep understanding of

15:38

how another person feels, to engage with those individuals. But we don't codify

15:42

those words. We just use those phrases so

15:45

they're not built into management

15:47

capabilities, into leadership behaviors. We don't see them in job design. How many

15:52

times have I sat in workshops over the last 30 years and the delegates have said

15:56

to me, I'll call out to the room in the

15:58

conference, I'll say, look, what are some of the causes of conflicts and tensions in

16:02

your own workplaces? And I can say with

16:05

confidence that 100% of those conferences,

16:08

someone's hand has got up and said, we're not investing in our managers and giving

16:11

them the tools that they need. This is 30

16:13

years later. So we're not giving our

16:15

managers the tools they need to be able to nip issues in the bud, to listen, to

16:19

understand. So as a result of that failure to act, the individual experiences an

16:24

increasingly worsening scenario. We then

16:26

move into our formal processes, which is

16:29

like pouring fuel onto a fire. They're

16:32

acrimonious, they're hostile, they're driven by a paradigm, a justice paradigm

16:36

of retributive justice. It's about finding

16:39

faults, right, wrong, win, lose, blame,

16:42

shame, defend, punish, sanction, destroy,

16:46

and, unfortunately, destroy. While it might not be designed in. I don't see the

16:50

word destroy written into grievance procedures, bullying procedures. But if

16:54

you take a look at them, the word destroy,

16:57

it's screaming out, they're about

17:00

destroying. They're about protecting the organization from the risk of an adverse

17:04

outcome in the courts or tribunal. And it's about destruction. So when we start

17:08

to look at those processes, inaction,

17:11

overreaction, destruction, retribution,

17:14

blame, punishment, when we start to

17:16

experience those systems, the stress, the

17:18

harm, the distress that causes on

17:21

individuals is profound. And that also

17:23

then begins to impact on their performance, their productivity, their

17:26

experience, how they treat customers, the

17:29

customer experience. So the root of all of

17:31

this stuff, Andy, is how do we engage with

17:33

people at a point of difference,

17:36

divergence and disagreement. And until we

17:38

can start to get that right, any hope to

17:41

be able to deliver world class employee

17:43

experience or human experience or people experience, choose the jargon phrase

17:49

that's online today, no way we'll be able

17:51

to deliver that compassionate leadership and that compassionate management. It is

17:56

just words. If we experience, you and I,

18:01

you, anyone could fall out at any time.

18:04

Disagreement is a healthy expression of

18:06

two people finding a new reality, a new truth, a new way of working together. So

18:10

if our experience in the workplace of

18:12

disagreement is that it is centered around

18:16

those paradigms I've described, it

18:19

undermines everything about being a human

18:22

in the workplace. And what it does from a

18:25

business perspective is it undermines the

18:27

potential for creativity, innovation,

18:31

learning and insight. Now, in this rising

18:34

world of automation, in this rising world

18:37

of AI, what does the human bring to the

18:40

workplace that can't be automated, that

18:43

human condition that drives learning,

18:47

insight, creativity, understanding, they

18:49

become the currency of the successful

18:51

organizations of the future. They're the currency that drives the talent retention

18:57

and attracting the top talent. That's the

18:59

currency which attracts the top investors.

19:01

It's the currency which brings in the best

19:03

customers. It's the currency which drives social value, stakeholder value, strategic

19:08

value, and of course, shareholder value. So this becomes the currency of the firm.

19:12

So unless our organization can readdress

19:15

how we handle that moment, so much value

19:19

is lost and so harmful, so destructive, so

19:23

toxic and so damaging. But the good news

19:25

is organizations like Burberry, we're

19:27

working with the BBC, with Nex, with big

19:31

banks, with big global organizations,

19:33

these are striving to do it better. But so

19:36

many organizations, Andy, are like,

19:39

they've got this vice like grip. And until

19:42

we can release our vice like grip on

19:46

retribution and open our minds to a new

19:48

approach and show some courage, I worry I

19:52

really do worry about the impact on our

19:54

people, but actually the impact on the organization as a whole. I think this is

19:58

where this conversation really intersects

20:01

with the sort of, I guess, the focus of

20:04

the things that you and I talk about, and like to talk about that, the differences

20:08

behind some of those things. But when I'm

20:12

listening to you talk about the landscape

20:15

of disagreement in organizations, then

20:19

what I have to think about in the

20:22

background is, what's your experience been

20:26

about how good people are staying true to

20:29

their values and actually when they get

20:31

parked or dismissed, because, well, this is different. We're dealing with a

20:35

disagreement or something. It's almost a

20:38

daft question, but I'm just interested because somebody goes in and talks about

20:41

this. It's not a daft question, and I think it's changed over the 30 years that

20:44

I've been working with organizations. The

20:47

30 years ago, I think there was a sort of suck it up kind of attitude to this stuff,

20:51

and people did, but it destroyed them

20:54

internally. And we saw a horrendous impact

20:56

on people's mental health, their well being. We saw some very serious and very

21:00

high profile situations where people

21:03

affected were affected in a very terrible

21:05

way and teams were destroyed. I remember doing a mediation in a team where the

21:09

manager had literally brought one of the

21:12

estate people in to build a wall, literally build a wall in the team to

21:16

split two parts of the team. It was a

21:21

visible expression of this manager's inability to cope with this team. I think

21:25

fast forwarding now, I think people are not sucking it up anymore. People are not

21:28

tolerating it and accepting it anymore. Andy and although there are a lot of

21:31

people out there and people who listening to this podcast, no doubt, who have

21:36

personal experience with this, will still

21:38

see the same pattern forming in our

21:42

organization. But people are now calling out the paradox or the hypocrisy. People

21:46

are starting to demand better. I think we

21:48

are starting to see people shifting the

21:51

great resignation that followed the great

21:54

pandemic, and people starting to make real

21:57

decisions about where they wanted to put their time and their labor into the

22:01

organization, people putting their own wellness and well being above their

22:05

financial requirements and making some

22:07

powerful life choices. I think the rise of

22:10

social media has given people a voice for

22:12

challenging and calling out behaviors. I think there's less acceptance of the toxic

22:17

culture. And of course, we can look at so many examples over the last twelve months

22:20

of high profile toxic cultures which have

22:23

begun to shift the dial in the way that we

22:25

think about organizations. There was a fire service only this week which had been

22:29

taken over by commissioners because of a

22:32

toxic culture. So there is now no

22:34

regulators. The Care Quality Commission come to mind, amongst others who are out

22:38

there expecting organizations to be

22:40

demonstratively building better cultures,

22:43

there's a change happening. People are starting to become less tolerant. The

22:47

problem I perceive exists still is the

22:50

canker that exists within the organization

22:52

is the policy framework. Because what

22:55

we're taught, Andy, as managers and as HR

22:57

professionals, is follow your policy. And

23:01

that's the first thing you can walk into any CIPD course or any leadership program

23:07

or any HR conversation. And the first

23:09

thing is, let's just follow your policy. And it all becomes a mantra. Follow your

23:12

policy. Follow your policy. If the policy

23:15

takes you on a journey of blame, shame,

23:18

punish, destroy, and you're following your

23:21

policy, then we have to take a long, hard

23:23

look at the policy environment that's created in our organizations. So whilst

23:27

one is optimistic that change is happening

23:29

and people are calling this out and people are standing up and saying, this is not

23:32

acceptable, and as I said, big

23:35

organizations like Burbuy and others are doing something better and doing something

23:39

different till we start to change and

23:42

rewire our thinking about the rules based

23:44

system within our workplaces, and this goes to the principles around justice and

23:48

how we think about justice in our

23:50

workplaces, it will forever be dressing

23:53

around the edges until we have this big

23:56

conversation about what is it that HR are

23:58

trying to achieve through their policy frameworks and how do we adjust fair,

24:04

inclusive, sustainable, lasting,

24:06

compassionate outcome through a rules based system which isn't centered around

24:10

blame, shame, punish, destroy. And we're

24:13

starting to see that discourse happening,

24:16

but it's not, in my view, happening fast

24:18

enough because every day is another life

24:21

destroyed, another relationship thorn, a

24:23

thunder, another organization finding

24:26

itself in a court over something that should have been dealt with at a much

24:29

earlier stage. Yeah, I think it's really

24:32

interesting because you mentioned the

24:36

support isn't being given to the managers.

24:38

And on occasions we have referred to that

24:41

cohort as the frozen middle in an

24:43

organization because they are being given

24:47

instruction from on high and caught

24:49

between the people in their care and sort

24:52

of oscillating somewhere in the middle at

24:55

times. And as somebody, I guess, who's had

24:58

to administer and implement policies, the

25:02

thing I always found was, and I've had

25:05

good examples of working with a policy and

25:11

others where I've felt completely exposed,

25:13

is that where the difference has been, has

25:16

always been in the human focus. I found as

25:20

a leader, director, manager of people, in

25:24

that we didn't all act the same. We didn't

25:26

all have the same personal values. And if

25:29

I fought against a policy to try and treat

25:33

someone who, in a way, I felt that they

25:36

should and deserve to be treated, then an

25:39

element of fairness was at risk because I

25:41

was treating somebody differently to the

25:43

policy. But the policy felt either out of

25:46

touch or inhuman at times. Is that a

25:50

conflict that you recognize? It's a

25:53

massive one, and you've touched on a really interesting point. So people offer

25:56

up policy as a form of driving consistency

25:59

and compliance. We've got the policy, it

26:01

drives consistency and compliance. It will embed fairness and parity and equity in

26:05

the workplace. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's like the Wild west,

26:10

it's that bad. If I gave six managers an

26:13

example of a colleague putting their hand

26:16

on another colleague's knee in a pub on a

26:18

Friday, and I say, follow the policy and

26:20

take me to an outcome, I'm going to get

26:22

six different outcomes. I'll tell you why. I'm going to get six different outcomes.

26:26

Heuristics, bias, personal beliefs,

26:28

personal experiences, so many factors that

26:30

will make that up. Now, there's nothing in the process that provides any governance.

26:34

There's no compliance, there's no scrutiny

26:36

of the process. So the manager is a,

26:39

they're not given the skills to manage it

26:42

effectively, b, it's full of heuristics

26:45

and bias. There's no governance and

26:48

accountability within that process. So the manager is left to hang out, to drive, and

26:52

if they say or do the wrong thing, they

26:54

too then will themselves be a victim of

26:57

said policy. So the manager feels unable

27:01

to act. Hence that drives that inaction I was talking about. Or if they do take

27:06

robust action and the organization perceives it's the wrong action, or the

27:10

employee feels it's bullying or harassment of some form or another, then the act

27:14

falls on their said manager. So we remove

27:18

those elements of the policy framework for managers and we build in same ways. If

27:21

you're making an employee redundant, or if

27:23

you were going through a recruitment process, we build in objective criteria,

27:27

what I call the resolution index, and we

27:29

build in a decision making process, a

27:32

triage process, if you will, whereby the

27:34

manager, in partnership with one of their

27:37

people, partners in partnership with their

27:39

union, will sit down and look at a particular case and they will start to

27:42

assess the case against a set of objective

27:45

criteria. Severity, complexity, the

27:47

duration of the case, the needs of the parties, the risk of situation, the risk

27:51

to the business and to the individual. So we're doing a dynamic risk assessment, and

27:55

through that triaging process, we'll start

27:57

to, in essence, score the case from a low

28:02

medium to higher score, and based on that

28:04

score would then suggest, okay, which is the best way for us to handle this? Is

28:08

this a misunderstanding between two

28:10

people? Well, let's go and have a coffee. Let's get some coaching in and maybe

28:13

provide some support to help them work their way through that. If it's a more

28:17

serious situation, then, well, perhaps we could bring in a mediator and a

28:21

facilitator to bring our two parties together. And of course, in the more

28:24

serious cases, it may well be we need to go down the more formal route and

28:28

investigation suspension, resulting in

28:30

some form of a formal outcome. But what

28:32

we're doing with organizations is designing in a system for providing

28:38

consistency, objectivity, and scrutiny.

28:40

And we also develop resolution centers.

28:43

They're like a very modern version of an ombud scheme. And the resolution center

28:48

evaluates the process. And providing, like

28:51

Burberry creates the Burberry hubs. They're supporting managers. But what I

28:54

get really excited about here is if you

28:57

look at Baroness Hacy's review of the

29:00

Metropolitan police or read any review of toxic culture, it is going to contain this

29:05

line in it. Andy, the organization failed

29:08

to learn the lessons from past situation,

29:10

quote unquote, guarantee. Every single

29:13

toxic report I've ever read said that. So

29:16

within the resolution center, there's a constant system going back to my Kaizen

29:20

principles, the idea of constantly

29:22

learning from cases that are coming through the system, which then drives

29:26

institutional, cultural, and systemic

29:28

change. And the other thing that I think is really important is when I speak to the

29:32

manager or the employee of the situation that you've been talking about, I say to

29:36

the organization, look, did you send out a survey monkey questionnaire or a type form

29:41

questionnaire to the parties, asking them for their feedback about how well the

29:44

process went? And they laugh. People laugh at me, go, why would we send out a survey

29:48

monkey questionnaire? We know exactly what they're going to say. They hated it. They

29:51

found it an awful process. They felt ill

29:54

equipped, under prepared, left to hang

29:56

out, to drive. Of course, we wouldn't send out a survey monkey questionnaire. I say,

30:00

that's the most important survey monkey

30:02

questionnaire you are going to send out. Absolutely. Go and ask them for their

30:07

experiences, and let's build those experiences and bait them in to the way

30:11

that we handle these situations. So the resolution center becomes this powerhouse

30:15

within the organization. It brings people

30:18

together. It provides that objectivity

30:21

that I was talking about. It provides the

30:23

scrutiny, it provides the learning to

30:25

drive structural, institutional and cultural change. It gives voice of

30:30

employees into the system and it allows

30:32

this whole process and momentum of what's

30:35

classically known as employee relations and case management to become. This is why

30:40

I believe HR has the potential to become

30:42

the most strategically important function in our firms. Because as they start to

30:46

handle conflicts, conduct concerns,

30:49

complaints in a more progressive way and

30:52

have the ability to do this, it engenders

30:55

a whole new social contract within our

30:57

workplace, bringing unions and managers

30:59

together. It positions that function as a

31:02

strategic driver of data and evidence of

31:05

what's really going on for our people. And

31:07

then it begins to drive the cultural

31:10

transformation that so many people are yearning for and so many are scratching

31:13

their heads saying, well, where do I start? I tell you where we start on

31:16

cultural transformation, Andy, very

31:18

simple. Go and listen to our people.

31:21

Listen. Why ask questions you already

31:23

know? The answers mean, what is the point

31:27

of mean? I can put a survey together for

31:29

you if you want on that, but I don't think

31:31

it's worth anybody's time. I think that's

31:36

fascinating because you're now beginning for me to add some real clarity around

31:42

what this move from how you've described.

31:44

And I always find your language, and this

31:47

isn't a negative, I always find your language so strong because you use words

31:52

like retributive and destroy. And what

31:56

you're now talking about is restorative.

31:58

These were never words that were used in

32:01

any HR conversation that I've ever had.

32:05

Never. But the very nature of taking a

32:08

breath and thinking about what you're saying and the general theme and push

32:12

being, well, we need to get a win here.

32:15

Someone needs to win this argument and it

32:17

needs to be us because otherwise it's going to cost us a load of money. Forget

32:21

about all the money that you're losing and wasting on all the fallout. Of all of

32:24

these millions of pounds, by the way, Andy, millions of pounds. In some

32:28

organizations, yeah, but we can write that

32:31

off against something else. To the

32:35

restorative world. You've mentioned the

32:39

guys like Burberry and the frameworks that

32:42

you're now working with as we move

32:46

forward, where are we going? What's the

32:48

best practice, who's leading that and what are the benefits? Yeah, really great

32:52

question. So I mentioned earlier in one of my answers a kind of throwaway comment,

32:55

but I'm going to go back to it, if I may. I talked about the four measures of value.

32:59

I talked about social value, I talked

33:01

about stakeholder value, I talked about strategic value and I also talked about

33:04

shareholder value. So the notion of the value chain and the value proposition in

33:08

our organization is shifting. It's been shifting for some time. We've seen the ESG

33:13

agenda, the metoo movement, we've seen

33:16

various factors in terms of racism and

33:19

catholic misogyny in our organization, social justice movement. But there's a

33:23

paradigm shift in terms of how we measure value. It's much more human measure of

33:28

value now, much more of an impact on

33:30

society. And I think for me, the direction of travel, particularly for the people

33:34

profession and the HR profession, is to

33:36

lean into these new measures of

33:39

organizational value and to connect the

33:42

external value of the organization with

33:44

the internal value within the

33:46

organization. And by breaking down some of the old systems which undermined value,

33:51

the systems we've talked about, which

33:53

caused a lack of engagement, low

33:55

productivity, low morale, unhealthy workplaces, unhappy workspaces, poor team

34:00

climates, inadequate management practices, so on and so forth. So as the HR function

34:04

leans into this new concept and these new

34:07

principles of value, and brings that

34:09

external value into the organization, in

34:11

essence, to use the term, to mediate

34:14

between the organization's needs and

34:16

aspirations and the needs and aspirations of the workforce, rewiring the rules based

34:21

system, equipping and empowering and

34:23

enabling managers and employees have those conversations. Creating a powerful system

34:27

of employee voice and employee activism, and welcoming that and encouraging that.

34:31

That begins to underpin some really important principles. But I talked earlier

34:35

about unlocking innovation, creativity and

34:38

learning and insight of the future

34:40

currency that underpins those four value

34:42

propositions. If the HR function can

34:44

unlock that currency, then it starts to

34:47

drive business performance and

34:50

productivity. And suddenly, again, by unlocking those opportunities and those

34:53

principles of value, those measures of outcome, and that strategic alignment of

34:58

needs and aspirations of the workforce, of

35:02

the management and employer as a whole,

35:04

then? Actually the HR function sits in this incredibly powerful space, working

35:09

with unions, working with leaders, and working with managers. And that's the

35:13

direction of travel. That's what I call a transformational culture. A truly

35:16

transformational culture is where we unlock all of that potential. And we're

35:20

working with some really great organizations and seeing some

35:23

organizations who are moving beyond values

35:26

on their lobby walls, who are moving beyond flashy purpose statements, who are

35:30

moving beyond some of the rhetorical or

35:33

semantic sort of side of values, and actually saying, how do we use our values

35:37

as a golden thread that runs through our employee value proposition, into our job

35:41

design, into our systems and processes?

35:44

How do we create that alignment between

35:46

the needs of the workforce and employees? How do we connect customer experience and

35:50

employee experience, and create that alignment. So the future, I think I'd

35:54

probably use the words like alignment

35:57

because I think that's a powerful role. I'd use the words like empowerment. I'd

36:02

use phrases like enabling people to have

36:05

the conversation, managers to have the

36:08

conversation. I talk about courage, the

36:10

courage to listen, courage to challenge

36:15

sometimes the courage to shut up and

36:18

really hear what someone is saying. The

36:20

ability to create a sense of common purpose and alignment. It doesn't mean

36:24

we're all going to agree, we're not building robots here. This is person

36:28

centered, but it means we're at least broadly pointing in the same direction.

36:32

And when we do disagree, we can turn to

36:34

each other and have those disagreements.

36:37

The future of work and the work I'm doing

36:40

of transforming work and building these

36:44

transformational cultures and these principles as I'm describing to me, it's

36:50

just phenomenally exciting and it's very

36:55

driven by it. I love the idea of the

36:59

values in a business doing what they're supposed to be and be that kind of golden

37:03

thread holding everything together. That's what I kind of, in my sad moments, that's

37:08

what I kind of wish for, wistfully sitting

37:11

here at my desk hoping for a world where

37:14

these things really happen. Yeah. Doesn't

37:16

have to be aspirational. I think when we're talking to organizations and I'm

37:20

going to say, look, let's get your policy framework, let's get that manager's job

37:23

description out. Let's look at those competency frameworks. When I ask this

37:27

question, I don't mean it to be rude. It's

37:29

like, well, where are your values? Let's

37:33

take that question forward. What will you do now to put the value then? It doesn't

37:37

need a degree in rocket science for people to sit down and say, actually we can move.

37:42

And organizations, I think, can move from

37:44

aspiration to actual intentional delivery

37:47

of the values by just asking some very

37:49

simple questions like, well, where are

37:52

they? Where have they gone? Have they gone for a walk? Have they gone down the pub?

37:57

Where are our values? No, they're stuck on the lobby wall. Well, grab, pull them in

38:00

and get them in and let's have a chat with them. Let's do something with them. Do

38:03

something with them. If they're not right, let's change them. I think what's

38:07

interesting is that some still see

38:11

strategy as one thing and values as

38:14

another thing. And you've used the word

38:16

alignment. I mean, the values should be

38:19

there to help you deliver your strategy.

38:21

Right? It's the way we go and deliver this

38:23

stuff. And if you haven't got the right

38:26

behaviors or values in the business to deliver your big missions or vision, well,

38:31

they're not the right things. And I think

38:34

the minute you really understand what your

38:38

organization needs to hit its targets, its

38:41

missions, and what the people inside will

38:44

respond to when you can find the

38:46

connections between those things, powerful

38:49

stuff happens. Absolutely. They're the levers that you're pulling. And I think

38:52

for every manager, every business leader,

38:54

every HR person, you're pulling those levers because the values are the levers

38:57

of organizational success. And if it feels

38:59

like there's a false dichotomy between

39:01

strategy and culture, or the strategic

39:04

narrative and our values, then we're constantly immersed in this sort of very

39:08

distracting battle between these two things, and it's exhausting. And of

39:12

course, what happens, it pinches lots of holes in the organization. So our HR

39:16

department goes in and fills all of those holes in our organization with these

39:19

really dreadful policies and processes

39:22

which are like the little boy sticking his

39:24

fingers in the dam before it bursts, the

39:27

alignment closes those gaps. We don't need

39:30

so many pieces of paper, we don't need to keep chopping down trees to make new

39:33

policies for our employee handbook. By creating that alignment and using those

39:37

values pull us together. So moving from those false dichotomies of this or that,

39:41

this or that, I think I see a lot of those

39:45

dichotomies in organizations. Again, those

39:48

paradoxes. But the people function is

39:51

really well placed, I personally think to

39:53

become the custodians of values, to be the

39:56

drivers of purpose, to help to create that

39:58

alignment. And again, what better role for

40:00

an HR, a people professional or people and

40:04

culture professional? If we see HR

40:06

transform into a people and culture function, which is so exciting, and

40:10

dropping off the old transactional,

40:15

retributive, reactive HR of the last 30

40:18

years, and embracing a new model of HR,

40:21

which is proactive, transface,

40:23

transformational, putting people before process, actually, there are huge

40:27

opportunities there, and the values

40:30

provide that landscape. And as you said,

40:32

if they're not right, change them. But

40:34

they're your levers of success. We need to

40:36

stop pulling them. But I do think rather

40:39

than being defaulted to, it's HR's job.

40:42

No, it's the organization's job. HR are

40:45

there to help us, guide us, hold us to

40:48

account, make sure things are working, change them if they're not, and really

40:52

help connect all those dots. Time is

40:56

flying. What a surprise, David. It does

40:59

when we start chatting. What a surprise,

41:02

mate. Making this transition from

41:06

retributive to a restorative approach.

41:11

Where does one start? And I know you sort of said before, hey, have a chat and

41:16

listen, but where does an organization

41:19

start, my friend? What do we need to do?

41:21

Yeah, I think the first thing I'm going to ask do you believe in the following

41:26

assertion, that a happy employee works

41:31

harder, that harmony in our teams is a

41:34

more effective driver of engagement and

41:37

customer service, that a healthy workplace

41:40

helps us to be the best version of ourselves and to thrive. And when

41:43

combined, a happy, healthy and a harmonious workforce can underpin and

41:49

underscore high performance of our organization. So the first question is, do

41:53

you believe as an organization in that

41:55

assertion? If you don't, then let's start

41:59

somewhere else, because that's going to be the key assertion. If you don't, then

42:02

start to go and look at some of the data and the evidence and the metrics. But if

42:05

we do believe in that assertion, let's go

42:07

through. Let me focus on the policies

42:10

again. There's so much we can do, Andy, but let me focus on the policy. Let's get

42:13

your grieving procedure out. Let's mark in

42:16

red pen all the parts of that procedure

42:18

that make people unhappy, unhealthy, and

42:22

where it breaks down harmony. And with a green pen, mark all of the parts of the

42:26

process which is about driving happiness.

42:28

Dopamine, oxytocin, serotonin, endorphin,

42:30

the happy hormones, the positive stuff, rather than the cortisol and the

42:33

adrenaline that we see so vividly

42:35

expressed, which are the bits that drive harmony through dialogue. Does dialogue

42:38

have primacy? Are your values clearly stated? Is it about creating these

42:43

healthier environments? If you've got a

42:45

spec of green pen on your grievance

42:48

procedure, like a spec, and I mean, you

42:50

might have even accidentally just dropped it on your procedure, please send it

42:56

through to me, and I'd love to see it as

42:58

an example of best practice. My bet is it

43:01

is shining red. So let's recalibrate. Of

43:06

course you need red pen in your procedure,

43:09

but let's recalibrate that. Let's rewire

43:11

that procedure. There's an equal balance

43:13

of green and red pen. Let's look at our

43:15

leadership competencies. Are you giving the leaders the tools that they need? Are

43:18

you leaning into those transformational

43:21

leadership principles, those wonderful feminist leadership principles around

43:24

driving equality and equity in our organization, the servant leadership

43:28

principles? Do you believe in those? Do you believe they're important? If you

43:31

don't, then maybe that's another

43:34

conversation. But if you do, do they actually start to form behaviors and

43:38

competencies and capacity buildings for your leaders and managers. What role do

43:42

your leaders play? Does this become part of your strategic narrative? Is your

43:45

strategy all about profit and shareholder

43:48

value proposition? Or is it about the

43:51

things we've been talking about? And do they feed into the corporate strategy? Do

43:54

the values feed into that? If not, what

43:57

can we do about that? To your point around

44:00

HR, in my book transformational culture, I

44:02

talk about developing culture hub, chaired

44:04

by the chief people officer, bringing

44:07

together key players within the organization. I've offered eight enablers

44:12

of a transformational culture and we've talked about many of those. To creating

44:16

these powerful multidisciplinary hubs or

44:19

culture hubs within our organization, to

44:21

bring people together to have these amazing conversations. There's so much we

44:25

can be doing. There's so much we can be

44:27

doing. It's so exciting. I see here and I'm just like, wow. Yes, I could listen to

44:31

those all day. I'd like to see them in action in lots of places. And I'm sure

44:34

there are businesses out there doing great

44:36

things. I just need to hear more of them

44:39

because they don't take the headlines,

44:42

unfortunately, it's the other stuff that does, mate. It's the time in the show

44:46

where I have to ask you to try and sum up

44:49

your pearls of wisdom on things that could

44:53

just about fit on three sticky notes. So

44:56

if we're looking to really align, empower,

45:01

engage and have a more restorative

45:04

approach to conflict and positive

45:08

cultures, what are the three little sticky notes that you'd leave behind? David? Yes,

45:12

I think the message is brevity. I hear that loud and clear. Andy. So I think we

45:18

have to give dialogue. Primary dialogue is the best way of resolving issue. George or

45:24

is better than war. Whether it's a

45:27

geopolitical conflict, whether it's in the Middle east or in Europe or elsewhere, or

45:31

whether it's an office, a quarrel,

45:33

dialogue is the only true way to resolve our issues. So give dialogue primacy. Get

45:38

people talking and throw everything you

45:40

can at getting people talking and design

45:42

that in. Build bridges, don't build walls.

45:46

Mediation is not a sign of failure and it

45:49

is a sign of wonderful success. If I've

45:51

got a dripping tap, yeah, I'm going to go and try and fix the tap in my kitchen. I

45:54

think I could fancy myself and I'll go onto YouTube and maybe watch a video on

45:57

how to do it. But when I start flooding

46:00

the kitchen floor and the poor cats having

46:02

to swim around to find their food, I think

46:05

we've got a slight problem. So bringing in

46:07

a coach, bringing in a mediator, bringing in a facilitator is not a sign of

46:11

weakness. It is a sign of strength. So to do it early and don't be embarrassed or

46:15

afraid to do that, I think the final one

46:17

is going to align to what we've been

46:20

saying today. But our systems, in our

46:23

organizations, the rules based systems, draw heavily from a litigation inspired

46:27

model of win, lose, right, wrong, defend,

46:30

attack, balance of probability. If you

46:32

rely on those old systems of the past, if

46:34

you rely on the status quo of the past,

46:37

you will get the same results tomorrow.

46:39

But things have to change. They have to change now. There's an urgency for us to

46:43

change things. Design out retribution. And

46:46

by designing out retribution, you're not

46:48

putting your organization at risk. There's

46:50

no statutory requirement in the land that

46:54

requires you as an HR professional or an

46:56

organization to blame. Shame, punish,

46:58

destroy your people. So it's not going to

47:01

put you at risk of doing something innovative and creative. And of course,

47:04

the tribunals and the court service are

47:07

encouraging greater compassion, greater focus on alternative dispute resolution

47:11

processes. So be brave, be courageous, and

47:13

do the right things for your people and for your organization. Wonderful message

47:17

to finish with, my friend. A wonderful

47:19

message to finish with. I think for me,

47:22

this whole conversation just has doubled

47:24

down. The fact that if you're going to be a purpose driven organization, you need

47:30

humanity and consistency, and something

47:32

like your values can absolutely act as a

47:35

roadmap. And they will be especially

47:37

powerful if you've got that kind of

47:39

framework you've talked about today. And we'll see more people retained and happy

47:44

and fulfilled in the work that they do and

47:47

businesses being successful as a result.

47:49

David, I've loved talking to you. Thank

47:51

you so much for coming on. If anybody

47:53

wants to find out a bit more about you and

47:56

TCM group, where can they go? Sure,

47:58

there's a couple of pointers I can give. So the first one is the TCM group, and of

48:02

course, I'm all over LinkedIn, as you would expect. I'm also the president of a

48:06

fantastic little organization called the People and Culture association, which is a

48:09

global hub for people, professionals, for

48:12

leaders and managers who are interested in this stuff. So you can find

48:17

[email protected] and I've got books coming out, so I'm working on two

48:21

books at the moment, which I think they might well break me. Andy. So I've got my

48:26

two books that are out managing conflict and transformational culture, so kind of

48:31

pop. David Little into Google or Tson

48:33

Group into Google and you'll probably track it down somewhere. Well, we will put

48:37

all of that in the show notes, my friend. I'll make sure people get access to it.

48:40

Thanks so much for coming. My friend and I

48:42

look forward to our next conversation. You take care. Fantastic. Thanks so much for

48:47

having me today Andy. I really enjoyed it. No problem my friend. All the best. Okay

48:51

everyone, that was David Little, and if

48:54

you'd like to find out a bit more about him or any of the things we've talked

48:57

about today, please. Check out the show

49:00

notes. So that concludes today's episode.

49:06

I hope you've enjoyed it, found it

49:09

interesting, and heard something maybe

49:11

that will help you become a stickier, more

49:14

successful business from the inside going forward. If you have, please like comment

49:19

and subscribe. It really helps. I'm Andy

49:23

Goram and you've been listening to the sticky from the inside podcast. Until next time. Thanks for listening