Waste Not, Want Not

 

Why toilet paper market disruptor ‘Who Gives a Crap’ is on a roll.
BY GLENN CULLEN

 

With a company name of Who Gives a Crap (WGAC), it would initially seem incongruous that the first lesson many of its staff will learn is one of perseverance. A self-proclaimed market disruptor of the toilet paper industry – which donates 50 per cent of its profits to improve sanitation in third world countries – the business only really got legs because one of its co-owners refused to get up off his seat.

Founded by Simon Griffiths, Danny Alexander and Jehan Ratnatunga in 2012, WGAC needed to raise $50,000 in pre-orders to start production of its toilet paper range. Griffiths (pictured) came up with the idea of sitting on a toilet in the warehouse and not getting up until they met the target, all the while filming an ad and livestreaming his, ahem, movements. There were scenes reminiscent of Danny Glover in Lethal Weapon and some numb buttocks but 50 hours later the mark was met and Who Gives a Crap got wings.

“The idea that you can sit on a toilet for more than two days and start a business through sheer belligerence says a lot about the company,” explains Phil King, head of production and sourcing.

Five years on and WGAC has moved millions of toilet rolls, donated about $500,000 to its charity partners and employs 28 people in an operation that’s expanded into the United States, Philippines and now England.

The gist of the operation is this: WAGC sources its forest-friendly toilet paper, tissues and paper towels and has them manufactured in China. They’re shipped to Australia and distributed to seven warehouses around the country, ordered almost entirely online and then sent direct to the consumer. Most employees work in the ‘customer happiness’ department, that is sorting out orders and ensuring people get their product.

“On the inside, we look and operate like many start-ups,” King says.

“We’re really de-centralised; there is no office and while we do have hubs like the Inspire 9 work space in Melbourne where a few of us gather, most of the team work remotely. We have customers, team members and warehouses across three different countries and that makes communication really important.”

To wit: this year marked the first time the full team actually all met in person.

Smart use of technology has thus become key to operations. WGAC uses platforms such as Slack (group messaging), Trello (project management) and Zendesk (customer service).

“We have some structured, standard meetings, but we are [the corporate structure] very flat and, typically, people take a lot of ownership for their piece and get their heads down. We’ve gotten really good at being succinct in our communication with each other. Our days aren’t bloated with internal meetings because they just don’t work.”

The hybrid model of splitting profits with donations is core to the operation, with Griffiths maintaining that if there wasn’t the prospect of financial return for some of WGAC’s early backers they may have struggled to get the level of interest they did. King also feels pure not-for profit ventures can get more political.

“In the NGO world there are multiple stakeholders in terms of your philanthropists and I suspect that takes more time, takes you away from what your core vision is,” he says.

For the staff it is also a vital plank — they can earn a wage, take shares in the company and contribute to an organisation that is making a difference.

 

“Employees want companies that give them a reason to get out of bed to feel that they are doing something positive,” King says.

 

“Everyone has a common bond around why they are here, yet it’s rarely spoken of. We all enjoy toilet humour, but really the given is that we all enjoy being part of something bigger than ourselves.”

While King maintains that mix can provide a best-of-both-worlds scenario, giving money away is not always as easy as it sounds and often comes with an extra level of scrutiny.

Griffiths discovered this first hand with the Shebeen Bar in Melbourne, an establishment he ran where profits from the exotic lagers and wines were slated to fund overseas aid projects.

But because it didn’t make cash profits for three years and was ultimately shut down, largely through complications arising from regulatory issues, there was no scope to fund anything. It resulted in some media barbs but Griffiths was unrepentant, saying he would do it all again.

WGAC appears to have no such woes with their key beneficiary, Water Aid, delighted with the amount of money that is now being raised for them.

“I think that there is extra responsibility in being a social enterprise, because so many consumers place their faith in us and will us to succeed on their behalf,” King offers. “But the positive energy around that is the best of that world, not the worst.”

 

The disruptors

Who Gives a Crap is in good company in shaking up its field, joining the likes of Uber, Airbnb and Deliveroo in changing the industry paradigm. Here’s a few other market disruptors you may not have heard of:

Quid: Big Data is everything these days and Quid is making waves in the information platform sphere with its Internet scouring tools to create trend maps that tell its customers what is getting media traction.

Shoes of Prey: An Australian company that allows you to design your own shoes at a sensible price while guaranteeing their fit. Carrie Bradshaw would be proud.

Space X: Rockets to Mars are not just a Hollywood fantasy for Space X, the aerospace disruptor that aims to get people to the red planet in the coming decades. Started by Elon Musk, founder of electric car company Tesla.

Temple & Webster: Taking on IKEA and department chains may sound foolhardy but Temple & Webster has found quite the niche with its subscription-based homeware offerings.

Social Intelligence: A human resources company that uses next-level social media scanning to determine whether there are any red flags attached to that would-be employee.

 

 

Did you know . . .

  • 2.4 billion people across the world don’t have access to a toilet.
  • More people have a mobile phone than a toilet.
  • WGAC boasts that its production method has saved 47,968 trees and 101,170,933 litres of water, while 8060 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions have been avoided.
  • Almost 900 children under five die every day due to lack of adequate toilets and diseases associated with poor sanitation.
  • There are no inks, dyes or scents in WGAC products and they’re ‘tree free’, whereas more than 98 per cent of toilet rolls sold in Australia are made from virgin fibres (non recycled and typically from trees).
  • Since 1990, nearly a third of the current global population has gained access to an improved sanitation facility (that’s 2.1 billion people).
  • A World Health Organization study in 2012 calculated that for every $1 invested in sanitation, there was an economic return of $5.50 in lower health costs, more productivity and fewer premature deaths.

 

The Leadership Road Less Travelled

 

With a new name comes a new resolve for the Institute of Managers and Leaders to treat leadership more holistically, as seen in our latest book, Leadership Matters: 7 Skills of Very Successful Leaders

By David Pich

As you can probably imagine, over the past two years as chief executive of the Institute of Managers and Leaders (formerly the Australian Institute of Management), I’ve heard an awful lot about leadership. I’ve also been asked a lot about it and I’ve read a lot about it. I’ve spoken to the Institute’s members – and lots of other managers and leaders – about leadership. That’s an awful lot of conversations about leadership. And so there should be: leadership matters.

After all of these conversations and discussion about leadership, there’s little doubt in my mind that it’s best defined as being a unique blend of inspiration and perspiration. But a rarely acknowledged issue is that the vast majority of today’s thinking around the topic of leadership is focused on leadership > from the inspiration perspective. While undoubtedly important, this perspective is what I think we all might agree is the ‘sexy stuff’ of the leadership debate.

Today we’re living in a post-psychology world. We’re surrounded by – and the debate about leadership is dominated by – soundbites and memes and by reality TV. These days every person and their dog (or indeed their cat) has a blog, a LinkedIn profile, an Instagram account, a Pinterest page and a Twitter feed about leadership.

We’re bombarded with images and quotes telling us that leaders  must be resilient, authentic, brave and emotionally intelligent. We’re reminded that leaders must listen, reflect, sympathise, empathise and every other form of ‘ise’ you can think of.

All of this is what I like to call the LGS stuff – or the leadership guilt stuff.

It’s the stuff that makes us as leaders feel inadequate. Of course, it’s the stuff that sells coaching sessions, self-help courses and lots and lots of books, and let’s face it, keeps people like Tony Robbins in business!

It’s all absolutely true of course. A leader does need to be resilient, authentic, brave, emotionally intelligent and all the other things. There is absolutely no doubt that all the leadership guilt stuff is important in making in good leader become a great leader. It’s true there are personal attributes that leaders must develop and hone to improve their leadership. And it’s absolutely true that myriad books, coaching options and indeed Tony Robbins-inspired courses can – and do – assist.

And it was this observation that led to the Institute’s first book on leadership for a number of years.

Leadership Matters: 7 Skills of Very Successful Leaders tackles the real work of leadership. It looks at the nitty gritty, the tough stuff. It’s about the leadership grunt rather than the leadership guilt.

So, why did we decide to take the leadership road less travelled with our first book under the newly named Institute?

The answer lies at the heart of the rebrand of the Institute. The newly named Institute will focus on setting the standard of management and leadership competence and striving to see this standard accepted nationally. At the heart of this will be a focus on the things that managers and leaders actually do to mark themselves as great managers and leaders. This focus, by definition, is about the perspiration of leadership.

In short, you can be the most resilient person it’s possible to be. You can be acutely aware of yourself and in touch with your own emotions and feelings and you can be as bold and brave as the next manager and leader. But this alone won’t guarantee you success in the profession that is management and leadership. Having the ‘right’ personality and behavioural traits will only get you so far. If we’re going to set the standard for management and leadership competence and if we’re going to accompany managers and leaders on their personal leadership journey, we must look at leadership much more holistically.

We must include the hard work, the heavy lifting, the tough stuff. This is exactly what the book does. It tackles the perspiration of leadership. It does this by considering seven of the core skills that contribute to successful leadership. There are others of course. But the seven skills detailed in the book are those skills that, in researching the book, the Institute’s Policy and Research team found were ubiquitous.

The seven skills of very  successful leaders are:  Setting strategy; Defining culture; Leading people; Making decisions; Ethical leadership; Inclusion; Networking.

CHAPTER 1: SETTING STRATEGY

The Institute’s book starts where successful leadership typically begins – with a plan.

Successful leaders have a plan. They have a vision and a direction, and they know where they’re going and why they’re going there.

Successful leaders tend not to wing it. They don’t make a habit of guessing or second guessing. On the contrary, they set out on a path with a relatively clear view of where they’re going and how they intend to get there. Of course, good leaders need to be flexible in the execution of their plan, but they never lose sight of the ultimate objective that lies at the heart of their strategy.

A good example of the power of plan – or a dream – is seen in the leadership of Martin Luther King.

MLK had a dream – he had a vision. He knew what the future could look like. He could see the possibilities.

Of course, as leaders we can only dream of having a mere fraction of the impact MLK had, but to be successful we can perhaps take a little leaf out of his leadership book.

 

CHAPTER 2: DEFINING CULTURE

Successful leaders must focus on getting the environment right so that they – and their team – can deliver the strategy.
Culture is absolutely key, but it’s all too often ignored because it’s too often placed in the too-hard basket. At its heart, culture is about people. It’s about the people we work with and the teams we work in. These people and these teams are all absolutely crucial to the success of a leader.

The culture a leader creates will determine the success of the strategy and ultimately the success of the leader.

This chapter of the book asks leaders to think about their business, their team and, more broadly, their organisation. It asks what the core strategy is and whether the culture is aligned to that strategy. Are the recruitment, reward, recognition and reporting policies and processes aligned to support the strategy? Of course, if the culture doesn’t support the strategy, change will be required.

 

CHAPTER 3: LEADING PEOPLE

This chapter is possibly the defining chapter of the book. In terms of successful leadership, it’s the BIG ONE, the piece de resistance. There can be no doubt that a leader leads.

In one sense, managing is easy. Managing is about knowing the processes and implementing them. It’s about  dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s. It’s about following the rulebook and ticking the boxes. But leading people is something  else entirely.

Leading – and leadership – is about recognising and celebrating individual differences, motivations, skills and experiences. It’s about balancing the individual, the team, the plan, strategy and the vision. And then working hard to keep the all of these often competing demands in balance while delivering.

CHAPTER 4: MAKING DECISIONS

That leaders make decisions is an obvious statement of fact. But successful leaders make the right decisions and they make those based on sound research and wise counsel.

In this chapter we argue that successful leaders typically understand the decision-making process. They weigh up the options, they narrow things down, they analyse and — of course — they agonise. But after all of this, they make a decision. There is, of course, another thing that successful leaders do when making decisions . . . they consult. This aspect of decision making means they identify those experts they can trust and rely on and then they ask questions and listen to the answers.

CHAPTER 5: ETHICAL LEADERSHIP

In essence, this chapter urges managers and leaders to be ethical. Always.

Effective leadership is based on the principle of leading by example. Successful managers and leaders cast a shadow that others walk in, find comfort in and seek to copy. As such, leaders must set the bar for what’s right and what’s wrong and this bar needs to be set much higher than many of today’s leaders chose to set it.

The role of a leader is to set the standard of behaviour that others look up to. When it comes to ethical behaviour, successful leaders must walk the talk.

CHAPTER 6: INCLUSION MATTERS

This chapter argues that successful leaders celebrate, support and encourage diversity and inclusion.

Leaders must look to the future while keeping a sharp eye on the present. And they must recognise the future is likely to be different. Leadership is about recognising this and celebrating this difference – and embracing it. Leaders must prepare now for that future.

Successful leaders are coaches and mentors. They are inclusive. They involve and include people regardless of gender, sexuality, ethnicity, disability or colour and they operate without prejudice and with an innate sense of fairness.

CHAPTER 7: NETWORKING IS WORKING

This chapter supports a long-held view of the Institute. We believe that successful leaders get out of their offices; they meet people, they network. A successful leader has a significant group of people he or she can turn to, rely on, and be with.

No leader is an island, they must keep up to date and well across the latest thinking, technology developments and people. They need get out there, get known and be seen.

To coin a phrase I personally find really quite dreadful, to be successful in the modern world, leaders do need to put some time into their personal brand. Of course, this doesn’t mean that networking and connecting socially always comes easily to every leader, but leaders recognise the power that comes from of having a finger on the pulse of knowledge and information.

In this way, the Institute believes that successful leaders recognise that networking is working.

 

  • Click here to secure your copy of Leadership Matters for the special member price  of $25 (including postage)

Transparency Will Get You Everywhere

 

Thinking about a rebrand? It’s time to listen to consumer and become the consumer. By Candice Chung

 

Here’s a question every customer wants to know about a company’s rebranding campaign — what’s in it for them?

The ability to answer this question at each stage of a rebranding exercise is key to retaining customer loyalty and creating ‘good news’ narratives.

“Once you’ve worked out your vision, mission and direction, the next step is to put yourself into the shoes of the consumer [or member],” says Barbara Pesel, Managing Director of communications agency Pesel & Carr. “In other words, you need to become the consumer and work out what they want to hear about your brand.”

Strategic empathy is crucial to getting stakeholders on side with branding initiatives. “It is really about saying to the market, ‘We’re here, we’re listening to you. We’re still relevant and this is what we’ve come up with,” says Pesel.

Some of these perceived benefits might include new product offerings, better customer access, or improved services. “Ultimately, people care about the quality of the product and their overall customer experience,” says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School.

Transparency is another key factor. “Try to be transparent about the need to re-brand,” says Hartley. “That is, don’t just spring it on your customers, introduce it to them and let them know why this is a benefit to them.”

Above all, customers want to feel respected. According to a 2016 customer quotient study by Harvard Business Review, “Customers trust companies that they feel understand them. They respect companies that they believe respect them in return.”

This overall sense of trust can be broken down in five main elements: openness, relevance, empathy, experience and emotion. And a company’s performance on these key indicators “predicts loyalty outcomes and is clearly correlated to profit and growth”.

“The way in which brands have become very smart over the years is that they’ve stopped talking how wonderful they are, and started to focus on what makes their customers unique,” says Pesel. In the end, companies that demonstrate an ability to listen actively and apply strategic empathy will win them the kind of loyalty they need.

 

 

 

Brand Is You And It Is Them

 

 

Making people want to identify with your brand is crucial to any rebranding as Candice Chung explains

 

 

At the most fundamental level, all forms of rebranding is an attempt to influence the subtle chemistry between a company’s reputation and their customer’s social identities.

“Rebranding is not merely about revamping a brand name or logo, it’s about changing a company’s message, goals and their culture,” says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School. “This requires a vision for the brand that is inspiring to customers, stakeholders and employees.”

To ensure an overall alignment of visions, first, a company needs to understand what it represents to its customers. “Specifically, what does this brand say about them and their social identities?”

Our social identity refers to a self-curated sense of who we are, and the groups we belong to. For instance, those who cycle to work may identify with people who stay fit; they may also identify with being environmentally conscious. Each of us contains a multitude of social identities, which in turn become powerful triggers to our consumer behaviour.

 

“Successful rebranding is about surprising or delighting customers in a thoughtful and authentic way.”

 

“When consumers identify with a social group that has a well-defined, positive image, they tend to select products that most clearly broadcast membership in it,” according to a recent report by Harvard Business Review.

“Toyota’s [environmentally-focused] marketing for its Prius hybrid car provides an example of how to do this well. By September 2014 the Prius accounted for over half the hybrids ever sold in the United States.”

As Revelian CEO Cherie Curtis pointed out in her recent ‘Change’ podcast with Institute of Leaders and Managers CEO David Pich, “brand is an interactive thing”.

“How much do your members/clients want to attach their identity to your brand? That is the biggest endorsement they can provide,” Curtis says. “It’s about people wanting to associate themselves with that brand.”

Most big rebranding mishaps result from companies not taking the time to understand their customers’ attachment to the brand, says Dr Hartley. “Wanting to merely inject a bit of modernism into a brand is not enough.

“Successful rebranding is about surprising or delighting customers in a thoughtful and authentic way.”

New Name, New Opportunities

 

How successful rebranding can open up new markets for your business. By Candice Chung

 

Regardless of the core business of a company, one of the main aims of of rebranding is to change the expectations you’re setting for your stakeholders.

Companies typically find themselves at a strategic crossroad in response to changing market conditions or increased competition, says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School. Or they may consider rebranding as a way to support growth strategies that involve moving into new markets – extending their appeal to a wider range of clients, a different gender or age group.

No matter the reason, there is one common thread between all successful rebranding campaigns. “Rebranding done well involves acceptance and continued brand loyalty by your established consumer market,” says Dr Hartley.

Below are some stand-out examples of Australian companies that have broken new grounds by re-energising their brands while maintaining customer loyalty, according to Dr Hartley.

Virgin Blue In 2010, the company renamed and repositioned themselves as Virgin Australia. This was in response to a drop in market share and revenue after entering the market as a low cost airline. Keen to compete in the upmarket business and leisure segment, they repositioned the brand with a new culture and a new customer experience. The comprehensive rebrand led to a name change and focused on a more contemporary look and appeal.

 

‘Rebranding does well involves acceptance and continued brand loyalty by your established market’ – Dr Nicole Hartley

 

Woolworths’ notable 2009 logo relaunch involved a signatory new W for Woolworths, styled with a green apple and accompanied by a new tagline, “The Fresh Food People”. The rebrand hits back at the growing perception that a large percentage of Woolworths’ food was imported. Importantly, it reflects the company’s commitment to fresh produce, which was proudly Australian grown. Their additional commitment includes showcasing the baked goods section within the stores, so shoppers could see fresh food production in action.

ANZ wanted to focus on delivering a brand image that pushed them from being a domestic to an internationally recognised brand – particularly in the Asian markets. A new tagline for the bank – ‘We live in your world’ delivered on this in their 2009 campaign. They also launched a new logo that spoke to a more diverse population. The use of a lotus as the main image “represents ANZ in all its markets regardless of language”, and signifies cultural resonance with the Asian market.

Super Retail Group’s 2012 rebranding campaigned aimed at making a clear distinction between two of their flagship brands – Amart (All) Sports and Rebel Sports. The shift was to rename Rebel Sports as ‘Rebel’ – repositioning it as a premium sports retailer, while enhancing the focus on a female sports enthusiasts market. Rebel Sport had been identified as overly masculine, and the revamp of Rebel (with a new yellow and black logo), together with an effort to make its product offerings more women-friendly, ultimately helped to expand its female market.

 

Rebranding an Aussie icon

 

From retaining relevance to winning market share, there is a lot to be gained from an effective rebranding campaign. Here’s what we can we learn from Bonds — the Aussie retail giant that has continued to reinvent itself over the past century.

 

By Candice Chung

 

Designer Coco Chanel once said, “In order to be irreplaceable, one must always be different.” While the celebrated icon and businesswoman may have been addressing the fashion world, her game-changing advice is just as relevant when it comes to managing corporate image.

For established companies, one way to redefine their point of difference — and remain competitive in a changing market — is through strategic rebranding.

“Ultimately, rebranding gives you an opportunity to communicate, and to go out to your stakeholders again with a good story.” says Barbara Pesel, Managing Director of communications agency Pesel & Carr. “It’s really about saying to the market, ‘We’re here, we’re still relevant, and more importantly — we’re listening to you.’”

Before attempting a rebrand, however, it’s crucial that the company has a strong grasp of its core DNA. Pesel defines this as the sum of an organisation’s vision, mission and values. “Vision is about long-term goals. Mission is what you’re going to do to get there. And your values are your guiding principles.” A sudden or unexplained shift away from any of these factors can risk alienating core customers.

In recent years, a handful of major Australian brands have attempted to reinvent themselves with varying degrees of success. Woolworths notably relaunched its logo in 2009 to focus on ‘freshness’, Virgin Blue moved away from its low-cost origins by repositioning itself as Virgin Australia in 2010, while Radio Shack failed to attract a younger clientele by changing its name to The Shack in 2009.

 

‘Rebranding is really about saying to the market, ‘We’re here, we’re still relevant, and more importantly — we’re listening to you’

 

One household name that has continued to excel at brand reinvention is Bonds. From its early days as a small manufacturer of women’s hosiery in 1915, to its introduction of the iconic Chesty singlet that put them on the map in 1920, the company has evolved into an established leader in today’s $2.5 billion underwear business.

Throughout its 100 year-plus history in the retail market, Bonds has successfully remodelled itself from a masculine, working class icon to a quintessentially Australian brand that appeals to all ages and gender. “Our brand values are at the heart of everything we do,” says Bonds Head of Marketing Emily Smalls. “We design comfortable, great-fitting products, we innovate with the changing consumer landscape and we ensure our communications reflect our brand values.”

For Bonds, those core values are authenticity, inclusivity and a sense of irreverence. And it’s the company’s ability to translate their DNA across an ever-expanding product range that allows it to grow without losing its following.

Bringing Sarah Murdoch on board as an ambassador in 2001 was a watershed moment in Bonds’ 102-year history.

“Rebranding done well involves acceptance and continued brand loyalty by your consumer market,” says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School. “Two elements come into play here: understanding your key markets and being transparent about the need to rebrand – [in other words], letting your customers know why this is a benefit to them.”

One of the ways Bonds has managed to achieve this is through an effective use of ambassadors. For instance, the introduction of Sarah Murdoch as the face of Bonds has been instrumental in the launch of Bonds Bras and the Female Chesty in the early 2000s; as has the hiring of Pat Rafter to re-energise its male underwear range. Since then, Bonds has continued to introduce new products with personality-driven campaigns fronted by the likes of Rachel Taylor, Miranda Kerr and rapper Iggy Azalea — each reflecting a different facet of the company’s distinctly Australian DNA.

“Ambassadors put a very human element to a company’s image,” says Pesel. “When you think about it, Bonds is all about the first thing you put on in the morning and the last thing you take off. Their ambassadors are people who are able to embody the everyday experience and allow their customers to identify with it, too.”

Above all, the brand has remained agile while upholding its reputation because of a simple reason, says Pesel: “The key thing with Bonds is that it has never tried to be anything but itself. This sense of reliability, along with their ability to put themselves in their customer’s shoes, is ultimately what sets them apart.”

Embracing Change: Hot Tips from Young Leaders

 

The new leaders: how they think and why they’re totally suited to these times

 

By Nicola Heath

 

Change. It’s the greatest challenge young leaders face today.

“In one year, the amount of change we are exposed to is probably equivalent to 10 to 20 years of our parents’ generation,” says Luke Higgins, a Managing Director and Technical Architect at global professional services company Accenture.

In the past, change was optional. Organisations could maintain the status quo and remain successful, says Higgins. “Now we don’t have a choice. We have to change one way or another, to survive. You can see that with the Fortune 100 companies, every 10 years, you look at them and many drop out because they haven’t changed.”

As technology and methodology constantly evolves, the trick is identifying the right one to adopt. Which change will drive enough value to justify the investment? “That’s always the hard part,” says Higgins. “You need to be sure the change is worth the effort.”

Disruption is part of the architecture at Accenture, where Higgins runs two strategies in parallel. The first is an emerging strategy that tests new ideas and technologies. If successful, they are then incorporated into a deliberate strategy, where assets are scaled, refined and eventually rolled out.

AIM Emerging Leader board member Bec Hovey is Associate Director of Online Marketing at University of Southern Queensland. Change is so important to her team, it has its own catchphrase: ‘positive reframing’.

“It’s part of our team DNA,” she says. If something goes wrong – a ‘curveball’ in the team’s parlance – the first questions are, “‘How can we reframe this? How can we bring back the positivity to this situation, and what can we do, and what can we control at the end of the day?’”

Bec Hovey . . . mastering the art of dealing with ‘curveballs’

In this environment, the ability to adapt is fundamental. Success lies in being “resilient enough to be continuously improving and continuously adjusting what that end goal might be,” she says.

Jess Ferguson AIMM, Manager at EmploysurePLUS Services, agrees. The challenge, she says, lies in “building enough agility to flourish in a disruptive time.”

“My team works in a constant space of learning and adapting. This is particularly necessary when you’re working in the business of disruption,” Ferguson says. “We don’t take things for granted or get complacent. We know that things could change and evolve at any point and we embrace the growth that comes with that, and support each other in whatever way we can.”

Many of us are resistant to change – not so Ferguson. “I don’t like being stagnant. I’m a total optimist and believe I can make the best of anything that comes my way,” she says. “Being agile and flexible and open to the shifting direction that we move in is something that I’m very comfortable with it. Actually, I really enjoy it.”

In an age of volatility, Higgins believes an effective leader needs clear direction. That means evolving and adapting to new technologies at a micro level, but, Higgins says, “you have that over-arching macro view that is always consistent.” As a leader, you need to be open to finding new ways to achieve the end goal.

 

‘We are more adaptive to technological change’ – Bec Hovey

 

Viewing change as an opportunity, not a threat, is what sets young leaders apart from older generations, suggests Hovey. “We are more adaptive to technological change.”

Hovey introduced Facebook Workplace to her team in 2016 as way to improve inter-campus communication. Using the tool – particularly video chat – has improved collaboration and transparency between the Brisbane and Toowoomba offices.

Ferguson, who also uses Facebook Workplace at Employsure, says the tool has been crucial in helping leadership communicate vision and other important insights to teams. “It’s been a huge connection tool for the entire business.”

Jess Ferguson . . . constantly learning and adapting is the key.

Technology permeates everything Higgins does at Accenture too. “Every decision I make is data driven,” he says. He is also always asking how technology can improve the way his team operates. “How do we introduce automation, AI, robotics to do our job in a better way so we don’t have to use manual labour to do that work anymore? That’s where we leverage technology a lot.”

At Thankyou, a Melbourne-based social enterprise, team members use task management tool Asana and video-conferencing service Zoom, which Managing Director Daniel Flynn (pictured at top) says has proven useful in connecting teams on the road. “We’re setting up to launch in New Zealand so we have teams that live in different countries. It helps us connect and keep moving at a fast pace.”

It’s important to continue to evolve, be open to new ideas and new technology, says Flynn. “We try and fail until we find a good fit.”

 

‘It’s not about me, it’s about us’  – Daniel Flynn

 

If today’s leaders want to solve the world’s problems – poverty and climate change among them – Flynn believes focus needs to switch from the self to the collective. Where we look inward, we must look outward, he says. “We need leaders who are focused on things greater than themselves and not just career progression.”

In this quarter, social enterprises like Thankyou are leading the way. Its mission is simple: to empower people to help end poverty. Thankyou’s leadership team tries to embody the organisation’s ‘we, not I’ ethos. “It’s not about me, it’s about us and how we can create change outside of our scope,” says Flynn.

“If I see people who are just trying to build their careers, step on people to get ahead, to be honest they don’t last long at Thankyou. It’s just not the culture we’ve created.”

 

Millennials in the workplace

A quick Google search of ‘millennials in the workplace’ brings up results such as:

  • How to understand Millennials in the workplace;
  • What Do Millennials Really Want at Work?;
  • 11 tips For Managing Millennials

These results speak to a wider trend throughout the workforce – that many workplaces struggle to lead and retain millennial workers.

There is some debate over exactly what demographic millennials are, but generally the term is understood to mean anyone born between the early 1980s and the early 2000s. They are the first generation to come of age in the new millennium. This same demographic is also referred to as Generation Y.

Unsurprisingly, this generation is more technologically savvy than any of the preceding generations. Broadly speaking, they are more politically liberal than other generations, with a strong focus on social awareness and individual responsibility. And they have brought to the workforce skills that many organisations struggle to utilise and expectations that they fail to meet.

Millennials place a high value on work-life balance and often expect an employer to provide them with ongoing learning and development, career progression and mentoring and strong leadership. Only 2% of millennials view a career as a job for life, compared with 12% of other generations in the workforce. On average, Generation Y anticipate staying with an employer for roughly two to four years, while the average for the remainder of the workforce is over six years.

In turn they are accused by older generations of being entitled, narcissistic and unfocused, sometimes referred to as “Generation Me”.

Leadership expert, author and speaker, Simon Sinek, received a lot of attention for an interview he did in 2016 addressing millennials in the workplace. Sinek spoke about how he is regularly asked why millennials are un-leadable and why so many organisations struggle to meet their needs and hold on to them. Sinek outlined four main reasons why he thinks this is happening.

The first is the style of parenting many millennials were raised in. Sinek argues many of that generation were raised with the attitude “you are special and you can have whatever you want just because you want it”. Their self-esteem was massaged through “participation awards”, which ultimately devalued the effort more worthy award-winners and only made the kids who do poorly feel embarrassed.

Sinek suggests that this inflated sense of self-worth is shattered upon entering the workforce which then fosters low self-confidence and self-doubt.

Sinek’s second explanation is millennial’s unique relationship with technology. For many millennials their use of social media and mobile phones is a source of dopamine, a naturally-occurring neurotransmitter that helps control the brain’s reward and pleasure centers. Dopamine elevation is typically associated with alcohol and drug addiction. The pleasure sensation that the brain gets when dopamine levels are elevated creates the motivation for us to proactively perform actions that can recreate the sensation. Over time, by artificially raising the amount of dopamine the brain perceives is “normal,” the drugs – or social media – create a need that only they can meet. Sinek proposes that because many millennials have no restrictions set on social media use they are learning to seek validation and support from devices, not people. This can lead them to feel very isolated in the workplace, unable to form the type of relationships with their peers that would otherwise help support them.

Sinek’s third explanation is impatience. Millennials have grown up in a world of instant gratification. They’ve never had to learn to wait. They then apply this desire for instant gratification to jobs and relationships.

And then millennials’ relationships with self-esteem, social media and instant gratification are all put into play with Sinek’s fourth reason – the corporate environment. Millennials, without the skills to cope with stress and form connections, and in constant search for immediate results, are placed in corporate environments where their well-being is valued less than profit-making.

He argues it is the responsibility of the current leaders to help millennials by changing the corporate environment. “They blame themselves… but it’s not them. It’s the total lack of good leadership in our world today that is making them feel the way they do.”

Below are some methods for shifting your workplace environment to best welcome millennials, and make the most of their unique skills.

Enable training and career development

Highly-educated millennials have the opportunity to make their jobs a source of personal pride and fulfilment – they are more inclined to view their job as a method of “making an impact” on the world and providing meaning, rather than merely a means to make money. They want to grow, and react poorly to any sense of staticity or stagnancy. Rather than managers and leaders seeing this as a burden, it can be approached as an indication of millennials’ commitment to – and genuine investment – in the role.

Develop a welcoming workplace culture

Snide and petty comments about millennials’ perceived laziness and lack of focus does not create an environment millennials will particularly enjoy. Remember that every generation has had gripes about the generation that comes after it. Instead, take advantage of the millennials’ comfort and ease with working in teams. Make the most of their tech-savviness and ability multi-task. Millennials potential short-comings are usually paired with a skill other generations don’t have – don’t miss out what these skills can offer you workplace.

Adapt your management style

Much is made of millennials’ delicate egos and over-dependence on praise. But it is worth recognising the value of regular recognition of good work – for all your staff members, not just millennials. Rather than dismiss millennials’ needs as childish and unsupportable in the corporate world, look to what aspects of their upbringing and experience could have value. Don’t resist change simply on the grounds that it is unknown – instead make use of what’s now available to you.

Finally, it is important to note that any broad generalisations about an entire generation of people are inevitably going to paint only the broadest brush strokes, and for many these characterisations of millennials will be far from the truth. Indeed this portrait has been regularly criticised for only really encapsulating the traits of largely white, affluent millennials in the Western world. It’s therefore crucial that this commentary be taken with a grain of salt.

The problem with the open-plan office and how to fix it

The open-plan office: collaborative and egalitarian or noisy and unproductive? Whatever your view, it’s a layout many Australian workers are familiar with.

The open-plan office developed in the 1950s in post-war Germany and then swept across the corporate world. Its two perceived benefits are cost and increased collaboration.

There is no doubt that, on paper, open-plan offices offer the cheaper option, as you can accommodate more people in a smaller area to cut down on your office space. In the United States, the average office space per worker fell from 20.9 square metres in 2010 to 16.3 square metres in 2012. In Manhattan, where real estate is at a premium, each worker occupies just 11.1 square metres.

The open-plan office’s other selling point is that it fosters a flow of ideas between employees that would be impossible if they spent their working days isolated in private offices. However recent research casts doubt on this claim.

Instead of improving communication in the workplace, one Australian study found that the open-plan office, and its latest variant, hot-desking, had a negative impact on colleagues’ relationships.

Instead of improving communication in the workplace, one Australian study found that the open-plan office, and its latest variant, hot-desking, had a negative impact on colleagues’ relationships. The researchers found that offices occupied by one, two or three people offered “the best situations for workers”.

Another study that surveyed workers who moved from private to open-plan offices had a similar conclusion. “The benefits that are often associated with open-plan offices did not appear: cooperation became less pleasant and direct and information flow did not change,” wrote the authors.

A 2013 study found that any benefit from increased interaction between staff was wiped out by losses due to noise and lack of privacy. Employees who work in open-plan offices also tend to report higher levels of stress, take more sick days, and are less productive.

But if we accept that for cost reasons the open-plan office is here to stay, what improvements can be made to address its shortcomings?

 

modern office

The use of ‘segmented space’ is a growing trend in contemporary office design. (Photo: iStock)

One answer is the ‘segmented office’, a design philosophy “based on the idea that different spaces are needed to support different tasks and different personalities,” explains Libby Sander, a lecturer at Bond University, in a piece published at The Conversation.

A segmented office might have small rooms where people can work uninterrupted, larger rooms for meetings, communal tables for informal catch-ups, standing desks for brainstorm sessions, and phone-free quiet zones. Workers move around the office to suit their different activities.

The segmented office is not the perfect solution, however. Sanders reports that employees often feel frustrated having to carry a laptop, cords and other work materials around the office, and annoyed when they can’t locate a staff member. A shortage of rooms and private spaces was another common gripe.

 

CASE STUDY

DEAKIN UNIVERSITY CADET BUILDING Deakin University CADET building

Deakin University’s new $55 million Centre for Advanced Design in Engineering Training (CADET) building is an office-free zone.

Designed by Gray Puksand and built by Cockram Construction, its workspaces comprise a series of ‘blended environments’ designed along activity-based working principles to use space more efficiently and effectively.

“It’s understanding what activities go on and then designing spaces to suit those particular activities,” explains Kean Selway, chief operating officer at Deakin University (an AIM Affiliate Member). “[But] it’s not just a case of pulling the walls down and everything works. We have to be very careful about how we zone certain activities.”

 

 

 

 

There are, for example, quiet zones that cater for people who need to concentrate. “You can go into that area with the expectation that you can sit in silence and you won’t be distracted or interrupted by people. You don’t need to build offices and walls and locked doors to create that quiet environment,” says Selway.

“At the other end of the spectrum, there are highly collaborative spaces where the table heights are raised to almost a bench height, and the seats are raised as well. It’s a far more active, almost stand-up environment where people can move around easily and collaborate and talk around tables.”

Privacy – or the lack of it – is another issue. Deakin University has replaced its landlines with mobile phones, so people can walk and talk. “We have a range of rooms that people can step in and out of to have a private conversation,” says Selway. “It’s a very dynamic use of space.”

Meeting rooms that lie empty for most of the day have been replaced by “collaboration spaces”. But there are still a few meeting rooms available, where “you can close the door and have a formal, private meeting with typically between four and 14 people,” he says. And with Deakin University spread across four separate campuses, they’re equipped with video-conferencing and presentation equipment, “As a university, we use video-conferencing equipment as a natural extension of everything we do,” explains Selway.

“Everyone has ended up with much more functional, more beautiful, more usable, more enjoyable spaces because there’s been this shift in practice from ‘I own’ to ‘we share’.”

Small power point-free meeting rooms – “so people can’t charge up their laptops and their phone and spend hours in there alone”– complement the more formal meeting spaces.

The CADET building also aims to cater for people’s different working styles. “A person may want privacy for part of the day, or part of the week, but not all of the week,” says Selway. Those who want desks have them, he adds. “Some people have a highly reliable, predictable work pattern and workflow, so… staying in the same place all the time actually works highly effectively because that’s what they do day in, day out.”

Where people don’t require the same “reliability of environment”, that space can be freed up to improve productivity and engagement. “It’s embracing the complexity and sophistication of the way in which different groups work,” says Deakin’s COO.

 But perhaps the biggest shift has been in moving attitudes from ‘I own’ to ‘we share’.

“Traditionally in a university environment, certain people would have certain offices with four walls, lots of bookshelves, and an exclusive right to that space. The one thing we understood was that the more walls that we build and the more doors that we lock, and the more exclusive use we enabled when people don’t actually need it, we are spending…  hundreds of millions of dollars on new development of floor space that we don’t need,” says Selway.

“[We have tried] to remove this right of ownership of spaces, by an individual or a team or a faculty, and say ‘we’ll design beautiful, usable, flexible spaces… but share them when you don’t need them’.”

This approach means Deakin University has been able to invest in the quality of the spaces rather than increasing the volume. That’s saved the university $400 million that would have otherwise been spent on new buildings. Instead, $200 million has gone into renewing existing campus buildings. “Everyone has ended up with much more functional, more beautiful, more usable, more enjoyable spaces because there’s been this shift in practice from ‘I own’ to ‘we share’,” Selway says.

While it’s difficult to measure the effect of blended environments on productivity, Selway points out that increased usage represents a better return on investment in physical space. He adds that people have told him they’re having more conversations in a more natural way, which encourages the development of new ideas and innovations. “If you look at the innovation companies around the world and you look at the way they’re designing their office spaces, they’re designed for people to come together and collaborate, not to retreat and isolate.”

And how do the staff feel about working in the new building?

Reaction is split, says Selway. “There’s a group of staff that are up for anything, and they find any change a really interesting, positive environment with new opportunities. There’s the group that is reasonably positive, thinking ‘I wonder how this is going to work for me personally. I’ll give it a go and see.’ And then there’s the group who will always be reticent to changing what they’ve grown to know over time. You always have a small group that says ‘that doesn’t really work for me, I don’t like it, it’s not the way I’m used to.’ You just have to accept [that].”