I read an evaluator’s
report of an organization years ago in which a fairly senior officer was
reported to have complained of feeling like the boss’ ‘walking stick’. At the
time I found the comparison unusual but on reflection it didn’t take a whole
lot to appreciate how apt an analogy it is to some relationships in organizations.
Walking sticks are ordinarily
supports, aids, facilitators, enablers, help, props. Made tough to go the long
haul without breaking. With them we can manage a respectable posture and as long
as that posture is impossible or difficult without the walking stick, we lean
on them. They are also handy in many ways; reaching at things otherwise out of
reach, warding off danger, dealing out threats and so on. And not surprisingly as
soon as a sense of stability and security is attained the props are discarded
without a thought; dropped somewhere out of sight though within reach, just in
case they are needed. Stretching this idea of walking sticks to the
organizational setting it is easy I should think, to find a few among our
fellow workers and even within ourselves.
Work relations that leave
others feeling used and ignored or dis-empowered like the officer in the
evaluation report are problematic to say the least. This is so because the
feeling of disenchantment is often quickly spread through an entire
organization especially when it emanates from a senior person with a wide scope
of responsibility or someone who is otherwise central to an organization’s
business. The sad thing is that the very reason why people turn out as walking
sticks is because they often bring (high) value to another’s job or output.
That this fact is seldom acknowledged, celebrated or rewarded is what
ultimately leads to embitterment. So how do we treat the people who prop us up
and help us shine?
A comment by an employee
during an organization’s end of year review meeting recently provides an
example of the challenge. In the meeting some staff had commented that the
organization’s continued survival was attributable to a few star
employees. The comment, indifferent to
the contributions of others in the organization and not considering the
environment in which it was being made (a meeting of all staff of the
organization), was met with sharp resentment by another employee during a break
out session. The point made was simply that the “star officers” were aided in
diverse ways by the contributions of others who were not in the fore-front of
affairs and who could not claim the achievements as their own. The organization’s
achievements were therefore that of the whole or at the very least a few more
employees’ and it was a shame not to acknowledge that.
No doubt there are
several little ways to acknowledge the people who contribute to our collective
successes and sometimes who really make things happen in organizations. I share
a couple;
Suppose a co-worker
suggests an idea or roadmap for work in a conversation. The idea probably gets
refined along the way within formal processes and leads to an important organizational
strategy. It does not hurt to make reference to the one whose original idea it
was. And if a committee of sorts is to work with that idea, it may help to
include this originator in the committee with a central role. If a presentation
of the idea is to be made to a senior level group, it may be valuable to help
the originator of the idea to introduce it to them. And for the love of ourselves,
it is a bad idea to change the idea of another person without reference to the
person that yielded the idea to us in the first place!
Again, on a daily basis a
junior employee collects and feeds information to a superior who uses this as
basis for analysis and high powered presentations lets say. Do we wonder what
this junior officer thinks about the use to which this information is made and
what valuable insights one might get from such a person if only we asked? If we
did, it might open up opportunity to enrich an employee’s job.
The above suggestions and
many more that others may have do not actually resolve what to me is the more
fundamental reason why it is easier in some environments rather than others for
people to become “walking sticks” in organizations. It seems to me that the
challenge transcends the need for recognition and acknowledgement of staff contributions
to enhancing job autonomy, responsibilities and authority generally in order
that an employee can take pride in delivering a meaningful job in and of
itself. Let’s face it when a person’s contribution
only manifests or yields dividends within the context of another person’s job
or a person is consistently having to be the ‘walking stick” of another, there’s
at least one of two problems present – a structural dis-articulation of the organization or a capacity
deficiency.
