1. The founding partners of KRW claimed to be strong on integrity and responsibility to their clients. How were those values aligned with their organizational actions?
In the beginning their actions were not aligned. Some of the misalignment may have been related to the relatively new business. Their ideals were possibly untested and they had not thought through the process of ‘what to do if …’ What was clear from the story is that the first reaction to a stressful and new situation was not the most moral response. They were thinking only of themselves and not what those choices would do to others. If they had been honest with themselves they may have looked at the goals of their business and realized that they were very selfish. That may be acceptable if there is only one or two people in the company. As they grew, their goals or attitude of “let’s have fun and make money” did not grow with them.
2. How did KRW owners handle organizational responsibility during their first financial crisis?
The owners of the company were thinking of their goal; to “have fun and make money”. Unfortunately, they acted as if that were their only responsibility when the first real financial crisis was upon them. In their minds the objective of their business was at stake so they went to the first solution that may have alleviated their soon expected failure to meet their goal. They laid off most of their workforce. Their decision was shortsighted and not fully founded. They gave severance packages to the workforce and in some cases, had hired them back before they had even burned through the severance money. That says to me that those workers were paid to sit at home under pretty stressful circumstances. KRW could have done much better to have continued to employ those workers but refocused them on building the business. They would have gotten something for the money paid out and improved their business at the same time. But hindsight is 20/20.
3. What action finally triggered a fundamental realignment of KRW’s priorities? Was it proactive or reactive?
After, once again, pushing their staff beyond breaking point, one of the managers laid down the law. In essence, the staff declared, 'we are valuable assets and you must treat us as such. We will continue to work hard for you if you will exhibit the values you strive to teach; having integrity and doing the right thing.'
The change was simply reactive. The owners did not objectively look at the organization to evaluate how to improve the labor problems, so when it came to a head they had no alternative than to change into what the employees were asking for. After all, it was not outrageous things being demanded. If they were to put the same goal to the company as a whole, it would have been a much easier realization to see that unmeetable expectations and overburden do not equate with “having fun and making money”. If they had looked at the company in this way, they may have seen the problem and corrected it in a proactive manner.
4. What role did KRW owner/partners play in re-articulating organizational values?
According to the article it was the employees who grabbed onto the rudder and started to steer in a new direction. They seemed to be able to clearly articulate what their individual goals were. When the individual goals were evaluated together they seem to meld into one new mantra: “do the right thing”. It appears the company knew the theories and was able to teach them, but putting them to practice in a business model was outside their ability.
5. How did KRW owners handle organizational responsibility during their second financial crisis? What had changed?
During the second financial crisis they were able to make better choices. Some of this likely was the experience they had gained; they did not want to make the same mistakes. But also, the culture had changed. It was no longer an institution focused on profit of owners only, but the wellbeing of the entire company. Owners/executives even sacrificed their own money to make sure those who had truly shaped the organization were able to remain employed for as long as possible. Times were tough but loyalty was very high. In part because they were able to make a difference, but also because the owners were now living what they sought to teach and were looked up to.
6. In the end, how well did KRW leadership come to embrace their responsibility to serve others?
Once the cultural change took place it appears that the leadership was able to see the results of behaving according to the ethical compass. Although the change was lead by staff, it was adopted throughout the rank and file. Each person in the organization was able to see the value that the company had for society and see their dreams coming true; “make the world a better place”. Leaders were so effected by the changes they made personal sacrifice for those who worked for them.
7. In this case, how would you assess the impact of moral realignment on organizational long-term viability?
Moral realignment was essential for them to continue doing business. The “train wreck” really happened while they were experiencing a time of growth and success. They did not have any mechanisms in place to deal with the reality of growth. They needed more work done, but did not have the skills or trained resources to do it. The first ditch solution: put more pressure on the good workers you have to become more productive. When stress is high and a multitude of tasks are ahead you can rarely work efficiently without some accountability and prioritization. In this case the owners were called on the carpet to be accountable to the actions of not giving proper resources for the work at hand.
8. How might this scenario have played out differently if KRW leadership had acted in alignment with positive established principles and values from the beginning? What would you have done?
KRW ended up as a good organization which valued the people and customers they worked with. If they had started off on that road, they may have arrived sooner. Instead of wasting money and time during the first financial crisis, they may have been able to focus on internal processes that would ensure smooth growth and a full declaration of goals, values and missions. With the direction declared each employee would have been able to make each choice in harmony with the company. Maybe they would have had a plan in place to implement if another financial crisis were to present itself. Then in 2001, they would have enacted the plan and made the modifications needed to ensure their success.
If I were at the helm, I may have made some of the same mistakes. Ethics being the center of focus for now, I would like to say that being selfish and ignoring the impact of my decisions on others would not be one of them. It is truly hard to say what I would have done, I have one advantage over them, I see the entire story knowing how it ends. How wonderful would life be if we knew the outcome of each decision? Fortunately, we do know the end of one story: Christ wins and we spend eternity with Him!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment