Are your workplace dilemmas different because you’re in the public sector? In this episode of HBR’s advice podcast, Dear HBR:, cohosts Alison Beard and Dan McGinn answer your questions with the help of Bernie Banks, a retired U.S. Army general and a professor at Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. They talk through what to do when you want to effect change as a middle manager in the military, you’re battling misperceptions of public-sector work as you switch to the private sector, or you want to boost the morale of your team of government workers.
Listen to more episodes and find out how to subscribe on the Dear HBR: page. Email your questions about your workplace dilemmas to Dan and Alison at [email protected].
From Alison and Dan’s reading list for this episode:
HBR: Four Lessons in Adaptive Leadership by Michael Useem — “Military leaders need new tools and techniques to face a fast-changing and unpredictable type of enemy—so the armed services train their officers in ways that build a culture of readiness and commitment. Business leaders need just such a culture to survive and succeed, given that they, too, face unprecedented uncertainty—and new types of competitors.”
HBR: Exerting Influence Without Authority by Lauren Keller Johnson — “If you’re like most managers, you’re facing this sort of challenge more often these days because of flatter management structures, outsourcing, and virtual teams. For those reasons, a greater number of managers now need to get things done through peers inside and outside their organizations. In this age of heightened business complexity, moreover, change itself has grown increasingly complicated. A majority of change initiatives now involve multiple functions within and even between companies, and many such efforts encompass an entire firm.”
HBR: Which of These People Is Your Future CEO?: The Different Ways Military Experience Prepares Managers for Leadership by Boris Groysberg , Andrew Hill, and Toby Johnson— “Much has been said about the general leadership qualities fostered by military experience and how they apply to business. Less noticed have been the branch-specific skills—process management, for instance—that can have significant implications for the success of military veterans in the corporate world.”
HBR: What I Learned from Transforming the U.S. Military’s Approach to Talent by Ash Carter — “At a time of economic, technological, and labor evolutions, organizations have to change to compete for the best talent. As I learned, that meant looking in new places and in new ways, taking care of families more than ever before, and helping those who leave succeed so that they continue to be good examples to those who might join up.”
DAN MCGINN: Welcome to Dear HBR: from Harvard Business Review. I’m Dan McGinn.
ALISON BEARD: And I’m Alison Beard. Work can be frustrating, but it doesn’t have to be. We don’t need to let the conflicts get us down.
DAN MCGINN: That’s where Dear HBR: comes in. We take your questions, look at the research, talk to the experts, and help you move forward.
ALISON BEARD: Today we’re answering your questions from workers in the public sector with Bernie Banks. He’s a retired U.S. Army general and a professor at Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. Professor Banks, General Banks, thanks for coming on the show!
BERNIE BANKS: Well, thank you very much. It is an honor to be with everyone today.
ALISON BEARD: SO, what’s the biggest misconception about government work?
BERNIE BANKS: One, that government doesn’t have a profit motive and consequently the stakes are associated with the decisions they make, are not as great. Two that government moves at an inherently slower speed than industry. Three that people in government service don’t face the sector of being fired or laid off to the same extent as those in the private sector. And then finally that those who opt to go to the government sector aren’t as qualified as their counterparts in the private sector.
DAN MCGINN: Why do you think that belief is pervasive?
BERNIE BANKS: Because people tend to stay in the government sector to a greater extent for a career, whereas in the private sector people don’t stay with the same company.
ALISON BEARD: I find interesting the idea that the public sector is all lumped together because obviously, a state transportation department is very different than the army or the State Department, right?
BERNIE BANKS: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. Context always matters.
DAN MCGINN: Dear HBR: I’m a member of the U.S. military, the equivalent of a middle manager. I really want to do what I can to make the organization a better place. Unfortunately, I’m pretty much limited to coaching and mentoring. I’ve no direct control over, or input on hiring, firing, or compensation. And there are restrictions on what I can do. For instance, in the past, it’s been common to use liberty, or paid time off as an incentive. But as much as I would like to give people more time off, the workload and current staffing levels don’t support that. Another hurdle is the very loud echo chamber I have to deal with. A common attitude among military superiors is that’s new and I don’t like it. It’s a constant battle. Among senior enlisted officers, where I am, anything corporate is taboo. Any slight change in the status quo requires an immense amount of effort and offers fails due to lack of support from upper management. This was true most recently when I tried to get us to establish simple departmental goals. Since everyone has a relatively short period of time at each command, you only have a few years to get a good evaluation. So many senior people look for ways to stand out, while at the same time, not rocking the boat. The result can be chaos and it hurts the morale of junior members. I’m personally getting burned out, knocking my head against the wall. With just six years until I reach my military retirement and pension eligibility, I’m not going anywhere. So, what can I do to better sell ideas to those stuck in the mud?
BERNIE BANKS: Well, first I’d say welcome to organizational life. One of the things that we’re fond of doing in the military is making the assertion that no one has it as hard as we do. Bottom line is you’re always going to have challenges associated with people. You’re always going to have challenges associated with process. You’re always going to have challenges associated with maintenance of the status quo. So there’s several things to go through here. Resistance happens at the individual group and organizational levels according to research. But regardless of what level you’re encountering resistance, the number one reason why resistance occurs according to research is the perception of loss. So many times we’ll ask the question, why aren’t you on board with this? Why are you pushing back against this, name your thing? A better question to ask would be, what are you afraid of losing and why?
ALISON BEARD: Yeah. I recently did an interview with Jonah Berger who’s a Marketing Professor at Wharton and he studies how people change minds. You really need to start with questions. You can’t tell people what the right thing to do is. You have to help them figure out that the right thing is in their best interest and that starts with conversation. Consultation, coalition building, getting people to not see where you’re going, see where they want to go, and understand that it’s in line with your vision.
BERNIE BANKS: Absolutely. People are incentivized to act in ways that allow them to accrue more benefits. And so they’ll hold onto what they’ve got if they don’t perceive that what they could gain is better than the maintenance of their current set of benefits. Research also indicates that when people leave organizations, rarely do they leave solely for compensation leaves, they leave because of the people, and specifically, the people who are leading them. And so your job as a leader is to think about how do I become the leader who gets that person to move to a place that’s in their interest and in the organization’s interest?
DAN MCGINN: I wonder if the culture of the military, where people give direct orders and expect them to be followed, whether that creates a challenge to use soft influence and managing without formal authority?
BERNIE BANKS: It’s a great question Dan and here’s what I’d say to that. Many times when people are advocating for what they want their leader to do, they’re not advocating from the position of the leader, they’re advocating from their own position. If you look at the work of Michael Useem out of Wharton, he wrote a book called Leading Up. And I always found that book to be extraordinarily helpful during my time in the military. And in it, he provided a five-step framework for how to lead up effectively. And the first step is, understand your superiors’ perspective. So, what are they thinking about that is causing them to behave in a manner that’s contrary to how you would have them behave? Number two, he said build relationships. Do you take the time to build a positive relationship with the influence target? Number three, you have to be able to understand how will they benefit from what you are advocating? Number four, and this is one that people frequently don’t think about. Be good at what you do. And then the last thing from Useem’s framework is be clear about what you expect. So, what is it that you’re asking of the leader specifically?
ALISON BEARD: Yeah. I think what we’re talking about here is influence without authority. How does someone who’s in middle management and doesn’t feel as if they have a lot of power, effect that change? So, influencing superiors is definitely one, but isn’t that more difficult in a military setting where there is clear hierarchy and a boss can just say, and maybe I’m wrong, because I haven’t worked in the military, but a boss can just say, no, we’re not doing it that way because I’m your superior.
BERNIE BANKS: Yes. But, you know what I found is, that’s not a military thing. That’s an organizational thing. Now, yes, you can say OK, there’s a chain of command. I’ve provided my input. The chain of command says noted. We’re doing X and then you’re obligated to execute on that so long as it’s not illegal, immoral, unethical, or unsafe. That’s part of the military obligation. All that being said, influencing without formal authority you have to think about how do you leverage those other bases of powers as part of that influence process? So, you think about bases of power. There are six of them. Reward. The power to give. Coercion. Power to take away. Legitimate. The power or form of authority. Expert. The power of knowledge. Referent. The power of relationship and information. Let’s say we’re solely talking about the relationship this person has with their immediate supervisor. There are ways in which they can leverage information, expert, and referent to great effect. So, do you understand your superior’s perspective? Do you understand the mission? Do you understand the outcomes that are trying to be achieved? And can you create a compelling picture of how you can create better outcomes, faster while engendering greater loyalty through whatever it is you’re advocating? Because if in fact you can demonstrate that, then why would they say no?
ALISON BEARD: So, let me ask you, Bernie, as someone who’s been in the military, does this person sound like he’s reading this situation accurately?
BERNIE BANKS: My impression, the military that culture values stability. The importance of honoring the chain of command. Process and procedure. And so I don’t believe that what’s being asserted is wildly off the mark. I do believe that saying you don’t have the ability to influence to the extent that you would like to is an easy way to opt out of recognizing you do have the ability to influence, but to do so will require you to be very dogged and precise in how you go about it.
ALISON BEARD: So Dan, what are we telling our military middle manager?
DAN MCGINN: What he’s experiencing is really very normal, even if he wasn’t in the military. Part of life as a middle manager anywhere is you try to exert influence and sometimes you don’t have the formal authority to back it up. Michael Useem’s book, Leading Up, has great advice on why our listener’s superiors might not immediately buy into what he’s saying. That might be worth a look. There are great incentives for him to continuing to try to change the organization. There’s incentives for promotion. If he keeps trying and is able to get promoted, not only will it be good for his family and good for his finances, but it will also be good for him emotionally. It will give him a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment that’s currently lacking from the job. The listener notes that he’s only got a few more years to retirement and we’d urge him to really embrace this challenge and to keep working at it. Don’t give up.
ALISON BEARD: Dear HBR: I’ve worked as an attorney in a state government agency for almost 14 years. It’s very stable work. In this economy, I understand that’s a blessing. Still, I’m ready to pivot to a private-sector career in a non-traditional legal role. I don’t want to work for a law firm, but I’m interested in a role that would allow me to use the critical thinking analysis and operation skills I’ve developed as a practicing attorney. Here’s my challenge. I found it very difficult to make this pivot. I wonder if it’s because people have a negative impression of government workers that they’re too rigid and lack innovative ideas. I’ve heard comments to that effect made by private sector attorneys. Do you have any advice for a government employee who wants to transition to a private-sector career?
BERNIE BANKS: My initial impression is that we might be conflating the challenge and this notion that maybe it’s because of having been in government. If you’re seeking to do something that is very different than what you’ve been doing as a professional, doesn’t matter where you’ve been, it might be that what you’re trying to do, people are having a hard time assessing whether or not you’d be good at it. So, it might be that individuals have a negative impression of government service, but it might be that hey, here’s somebody who’s been an attorney who now wants to take on leadership roles in the private sector, but yet, we don’t see anything on their CV that would lead us to understand are they good at that?
DAN MCGINN: I wonder if our listener might be facing two different stereotypes, not just coming out of government, but also being a lawyer. Lawyers are trained to think and act a certain way and not everybody thinks that they’re positive. So, I wonder if she’s actually facing a couple of different sets of headwinds and she might be too focused just on the government piece of it and not enough on the legal background she has.
BERNIE BANKS: Dan, that’s a great point. It might very well be the case. One of the things I highlight here is this nontraditional legal role. So, I’m not able to ascertain whether you’re still looking for something that falls within the realm of the legal function, or you’re trying to take your background in the law and apply it in something that doesn’t require a background in law.
ALISON BEARD: So, if the problem is her lack of direct experience, that’s something we hear a lot about how do I get a job when the only way to get that job is to have already done the job? So, do you have any advice on that front Bernie?
BERNIE BANKS: Yeah. I think that’s one of the classic challenges for anyone who’s looking to pivot. How do you convey potential when you don’t have the foundational experiences? And so, people go about that in a variety of ways. They can either take the experience they have, translate it to show how competencies they’ve developed could engender their success in whatever it is they’re trying to compete for. They could go out acquire experience in other settings, or they might have to take a step back and say, in order to get my foot in the door, I’ll have to start at a lower level than what I was doing previously. But doing so will allow me to acquire the experience that people are desirous of seeing on my CV.
ALISON BEARD: Yeah, I love all of those ideas. One thought that I had in that vein was to arrange for a tryout. If there is an organization that she’s interested in, making contact, explaining what she’s looking to do, and putting her hand up for a project that they might need help on. We published a piece by the CO of Automatic who that’s how he evaluates new hires, new candidates. So, she could show them exactly what she’s able to do in that way.
BERNIE BANKS: Absolutely. Absolutely. I mean sometimes, I always go on this notion of contingency type things where hey, you got to bet on self. Creating contingency-based contracts and understanding that yes, despite the fact that you have 14 years’ experience, you still have to prove yourself because they don’t see a direct translation to the context in which they operate and the things you’re trying to do.
DAN MCGINN: If our listener is worried that there’s stereotypes around government workers, how does she communicate that she’s different? That even if some of those stereotypes might be true, they don’t apply to her?
BERNIE BANKS: It’s a great question. So, one is demonstrating how your behavior aligns with the valued norms and beliefs of the organization you’re trying to gain access to. Two is to get trusted agents who work in the context you’re trying to access to say, this person would be a good fit, and here’s why. Well, we know from research is the number one reason why senior executives fail when they go to a new organization is a lack of understanding of the culture. Hands down. And so, this is the same thing here. When you’re coming from government and you’re going into the private sector, that can be a very different culture and so your challenge is to be able to highlight to people, one, do you understand the culture you’re trying to access and two, can you give statements that indicate you are capable excelling in that kind of culture?
ALISON BEARD: I wonder too if our letter writer could flip the script a little bit and say, I understand that this might be the perception of people who’ve done the job that I have in the public sector for as long as I have, but here’s how I break that mold. Address it head-on with the people that she’s networking with, with the people that she interviews with, and then also maybe make a virtue of her government experience.
BERNIE BANKS: Yeah, I love that. This notion of fit and agility, it’s highly correlated with the concept called learning agility from Lombardo and Eichinger, two researchers out of the Center for Creative Leadership. Now, what their research found is the number one indicator for potential is past performance. The number two indicator potential is how well you learn. And so, I think anyone who’s trying to make a pivot, the thing they have to be able to clearly articulate is how have they learned to navigate new environments previously, how would they take their ability to learn and apply it to the environment they’re seeking to enter?
DAN MCGINN: Alison, what’s our summary?
ALISON BEARD: So, we’d love this letter writer to take a step back and understand that it might be not that people are stereotyping her for being a government worker, but they don’t really understand the transition she’s trying to make. Maybe it’s the fact that she’s an attorney and lacks direct experience in the roles that she’s trying for. So, what we want her to do is to, work harder at taking the experience that she has and translating it. Showing how her competencies and her previous work apply to a new field. Maybe acquiring some experience through nonprofit and community activities. We’d encourage her to be willing to take a step back and start at a lower level if she needs to. She could also volunteer to do a temporary project, or tryout to show her value. In general, we would love for her to do more work, to understand the organizations that she’s trying to join. Demonstrate how her behavior and values align with those organizations. Address stereotypes that she might be facing head-on. Show that she has transferrable skills, but also that she has the ability to adjust to and learn in new environments. We want her to be a multi-sector athlete, but we think she needs to do the work to get there.
DAN MCGINN: OK, third question. Dear HBR: I oversee a government agency with fewer than 100 employees in the Pacific. I’ve been the director for two years. Since I started I’ve seen double-digit gains in the Federal employee viewpoint survey. Most of my team members really appreciate the direction we’re headed. To keep a pulse on the team, I’ve instituted a regular feedback mechanism via a survey. It’s once every two months, five questions total. I share the results at an all-hands call. Overall the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. However, there seemed to be one or two employees who absolutely hate anything and everything we’re doing and the government in general, including our pay. Their comments are extremely negative and sarcastic. It’s very biting and feels personal to senior leaders at times. Those workers share nothing positive about the mission, vision, culture, et cetera. It seems like they’re just mad at the world and trying to find any venue to make it known they aren’t happy. I care about my employees. It pains me to think that I’ve got a team member or members that hate life that much. I feel for their family and friends and I’m really worried about the damage they’re causing the organization. How do I help these silent anger mongers who can’t find joy? Should I even worry about the small minority? General Banks, what do you think?
BERNIE BANKS: Well my first thought goes to for that silent group, are they meeting the job requirements? So, are they making mission, are they adhering to standards? Because that is always first and foremost their obligation. And it’s also the obligation as a leader that you have in dealing with them. So, if they’re not meeting standards, if they’re not making mission, then you have to make that assessment of what would be required so that they can do it effectively and if you don’t believe you have adequate resources to get them up to what’s required, then how do you make that transition transpire?
ALISON BEARD: Yeah, I had some questions about this one too. It was unclear to me whether this bad attitude from one or more employees was being expressed privately, only in these feedback surveys and so, anonymously, or if it was a more public thing that was infecting morale across the group. Because I think you’re right Bernie, that if there’s a performance problem, and if there’s a sort of emotional contagion problem, our letter writer needs to address this immediately. What do you think Dan?
DAN MCGINN: It’s hard to really know. If it’s just one or two people in a hundred person organization, and they’re performing up to standards, so that’s not an issue. Whether they’re going to become contagious or whether they’re toxicity is going to spread throughout the entire organization, it’s hard to say for sure.
ALISON BEARD: So, how does he discern the risk of transmission?
BERNIE BANKS: Well, my experience has been: rarely is somebody who’s extremely dissatisfied, extremely quiet. [LAUGHTER] That’s just been my limited sample size. That if in fact you do have somebody who’s expressing extreme dissatisfaction, they tend to share that dissatisfaction with others.
ALISON BEARD: And also, just to throw in, our letter writer has asked for this feedback and they’ve given it to him, so that creates a bit of an obligation to address it.
BERNIE BANKS: Absolutely. Anytime you ask for feedback you have an obligation to address it. So, you have to be able to do your own diagnoses of what really is going on with these folks so that you can then figure out what you can do to address the needs of these folks. But it all starts with what conversations are you having with them beyond issuing these surveys?
ALISON BEARD: So, how does he approach these employees to start that conversation?
BERNIE BANKS: Always make it behaviorally anchored. So, when someone says, I get the sense that you’re not very happy, or you know, I get the sense that you’re pissed off. That’s not behaviorally anchored. A behaviorally anchored statement would be, recently I saw you yelled at so and so. Or, you expressed significant displeasure with X. Could you help me to understand what caused you to feel that way and how we might address that going forward? Behavior can be observed, measured, and modified. Cognitions many times cannot.
ALISON BEARD: If he’s getting these comments anonymously, but suspects who the people are, does he just ask them for a meeting, pull them aside? How does he single them out and begin to engage?
BERNIE BANKS: I don’t think you single anybody out. I think you engage them like you engage all your people. Don’t just engage select groups of your people. So, this goes back to process. Bottom line is what’s your process for engaging your people routinely in ways that matter? So, are you adhering to that? Having the monthly meetings, having the quarterly meetings, engaging them, not only in terms of what’s happening but where they’re going. How they’re feeling. What do they see as their obstacles? What plans would they have to foster their success? If you’re doing that routinely, you’re going to start getting insight into the information that matters. But if you’re doing it episodically, odds are you’re not going to get what you need, when you need it.
DAN MCGINN: In his letter, our listener says he’s worried about these employees’ families. He thinks that they just hate life. I wonder if he’s drawing boundaries correctly around the pieces of these people’s lives that he’s responsible for and whether he’s not making a much more of a global issue than it really is.
ALISON BEARD: Well, I read that as thinking that he was extrapolating a little bit too much from comments. Someone who’s annoyed with their job and annoyed with their organization doesn’t necessarily hate life. They’re annoyed with their job and annoyed with their organization, so I feel like as Bernie said, he needs to just dig deeper here and figure out what is the problem that they have with the work, or his leadership? And you’re right Dan, put aside personal problems which a boss can and can’t help with, but the primary focus clearly should be the work.
BERNIE BANKS: And there’s a fine line on this notion of personal versus professional. But I do think leaders have an obligation that when they see indicators that the person might be off the rails. That they have an obligation to always ask is there anything I can do to help you achieve your desired aims professionally or personally? And if the organization has resources that can be allocated towards the personal things, to make them aware of those.
ALISON BEARD: So, Bernie this is a show on the public sector. Do you think this situation would be any different if our letter writer was working outside of a government agency, at a corporation?
BERNIE BANKS: My short answer is no. How you approach this really is no different for a public sector employee than it is a private sector employee because at the end of the day it all comes down to how you elect to engage the parties who have expressed dissatisfaction with what they’re experiencing. That’s not a public or a private setting. That’s a leadership thing.
ALISON BEARD: So, Dan what’s our advice?
DAN MCGINN: We suggest our listener ask a few basic questions. First, logistically does he know exactly who these unhappy employees are? If he’s not positive about the identities, it will be harder for him to do a whole lot about this. If he does know who they are, are they performing well? That’s a threshold question here. We think he needs to dig deeper. We think he needs to know exactly what the complaints are about, why they’re surfacing the way they are. We think he should be doing check-ins and listening more. We don’t think these surveys should take the place of regular and consistent conversations with all of his people. We recognize he has a large team, but we think he needs to be proactively asking one by one, about the unhappiness to try to get to the bottom of it. Our listeners asking questions about these employees’ personal lives, whether they’re depressed or unhappy, or not getting along with family members. We think a leader does need to have some level of concern over those kinds of issues, but really we think he needs to focus on what’s going on at work here. He should see the feedback he’s getting as a symptom. He should dig deeper to try to make a full-blown diagnosis about what’s happening and then come up with a treatment plan. Understand the nature of the problem and then set out to fix it.
ALISON BEARD: Terrific. Bernie, thank you so much for being on the show.
BERNIE BANKS: Thank you.
ALISON BEARD: That’s Bernie Banks. He’s a professor at Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University.
DAN MCGINN: Thanks to the listeners who wrote us with their questions. Now we want to know your questions. Send us an email with your workplace challenge and how we can help. The email address is [email protected].
ALISON BEARD: We also want to thank Louis Weeks and Nick DePrey for composing our theme music.
DAN MCGINN: We hope you liked today’s episode and if you want to get the next one automatically, please go to your podcast app and hit subscribe.
ALISON BEARD: And if you liked the show, please give us a five-star review.
DAN MCGINN: I’m Dan McGinn.
ALISON BEARD: And I’m Alison Beard. Thanks for listening to Dear HBR:.