Corporate Culture The questions

April 2016 Publication No. 16-01 2 1 Introduction Concerns have been raised over ASIC’s recent interest in organisational culture. Financial System Inquiry chair, David Murray, voiced his doubts about any organisation’s ability to assess and report on its cultural framework. His comments reflect some of the questions leading executives are asking in response to the challenging people issues facing Australian business today.

Five questions every board should be asking: • Have we conducted a confidential organisational culture survey recently? • Who checked that we asked all the right questions? • What did responses show were our main risk areas? • What have we done to get an independent, deeper look at these risks? • How might our process be compromised by conflicting interests?

Can an organisation assess its own 2 Culture? The common wisdom about culture highlights the human and financial risks associated with an unhealthy culture and the measurable benefits which result from a healthy culture.

Recognising that a healthy culture is important in attracting staff, many firms have included statements about their culture on their websites. However, these statements typically have an aspirational tone and are based more on how the business likes to see itself rather than on any objective data.

Evidence shows that there are a handful of factors which have the greatest influence in creating a positive culture and one is that leaders “walk the talk” of the organisation’s values. Another is the financial incentives structure. A further determinant of a healthy culture is the way challenge is invited and responded to, particularly at senior levels of the organisation. Healthy cultures welcome challenge and honesty. Unhealthy cultures suppress dissent. Last year we conducted a strategic review of a national organisation with over 5000 employees. Our 3 focus was leadership and culture. During the interview process, one of the senior leaders recounted an event which spoke to the heart of their culture.

He said “I listened to what was being presented by my colleague and thought the information was totally and fundamentally wrong. However, in spite of this, I said nothing and neither did anyone else in the room. On the way back to my office, another colleague who had also been present said, ‘Do you think he was lying to save his job or is he genuinely that deluded?’.”

The reality is that an organisation’s ability to assess its own culture correlates directly with how healthy its culture is.

This anecdote highlighted a shared understanding of “the way we do things around here”. Even at the highest levels of the organisation, challenge was not wanted, not effective or both. It was a red flag of risk and an indicator that the company culture was undermining its ability to achieve any of its goals.

This was a company with a large HR team who had also spent millions of dollars on consultants in an attempt to create a positive work environment. They had done several standard surveys, including employee engagement, and seemed to be monitoring the people issues. However, a more thorough examination showed that while there was a lot of information, the right questions weren’t being asked. There were no questions in any of the surveys asking whether leaders were a role model for company values, nor if staff had confidence in its leadership.

This situation highlights the difficulties with a company evaluating its own culture.The CEO who authorised the feedback processes had a vested interest in not putting his own capability, and that of the senior people he had recruited, under too much scrutiny. The HR team believed they were doing a good job in difficult circumstances. They didn’t want to hear too much criticism from unhappy staff. The consultants were also conflicted in evaluating the results of their own efforts. Lots of data was produced to meet reporting and regulatory requirements but the real picture lay in what was unreported.

Ironically, the reality is that an organisation’s ability to assess its own culture correlates directly with how healthy its culture is. Organisations with a healthy culture and strong leadership will assess themselves with rigour and integrity. They have the resilience to accept their failings and address them. Equally, businesses with unhealthy cultures and leaders who have a personal agenda to preserve the status quo will do a very poor job. They want to be seen to do something while hiding the facts. They may comply with requirements but will present data that obscures or omits the truth.

All internally conducted surveys should include a set of core, compulsory questions which reflect the important differentiators between a healthy and unhealthy culture. We are working currently with an organisation at the request of the board who have some concerns 4 about the results of recent staff surveys. They suggest there may be issues with bullying and unethical behaviour. The initial response of the CEO was to suggest that he would get the Big 4 firm who audits the company to look at the issues and write a report for the board. The partner in the audit firm is conflicted by both his personal and professional relationship with the CEO. His report would be unlikely to implicate the CEO and other executives in any serious way. The board wisely suggested a more independent review.

So what does this mean in regard to assessing culture? Confidential internal surveys are good indicators of risk but they are only as good as the questions they ask. If internally administered surveys are to be seen as informative and valid, there should be a mandatory set of core questions which reflect the most important factors associated with cultural health.

For example, surveys should include questions that help to determine whether: • The leaders are role models of the organisation’s values. • The HR function is seen to be independent and trustworthy in dealing with complaints of inappropriate behaviour regardless of who is involved. • Challenges, honesty and professional debate are invited and well received at all levels. • Poor performance is managed constructively in all instances. • There are robust, confidential 360 degree feedback processes in place which are incorporated into performance assessment. • Performance incentives reflect stated values. • Excellent performance in all the areas which the organisation says it values is recognised.

Where the survey responses indicate a risk in any of these areas, an organisation cannot be relied upon to conduct a deeper examination of its own problems.

Where staff surveys identify risk, it is unlikely that the organisation can be relied upon to conduct a more thorough examination of its own culture and to disclose all pertinent information. Further investigation should be carried out by an external body that is independent and not conflicted by other relationships with the firm.

To summarise, in some ways assessing culture is analogous to doing an internal audit on important people issues. As with any audit, businesses with the most to hide will do the worst job if asked to audit themselves. Similarly, if there are imposed reporting requirements, they will supply the necessary paperwork to avoid further scrutiny.

About the author

Yvonne Willich | Psychologist | +61 3 8623 3346 | [email protected]

Yvonne Willich is the resident organisational psychologist at KordaMentha. She regularly consults with the senior leadership group on cultural matters and assists with strategic organisational reviews on behalf of the firm’s clients. KordaMentha is a specialist advisory and investment firm with prominent forensic, real estate, investment, turnaround and restructuring groups.

Whether our clients are looking to expand, invest, detect inappropriate behaviour or overcome under‑performance within their organisations, our team of over 350 specialists draw upon extensive industry and functional experience to deliver the best outcomes for stakeholders.

Contacts

Melbourne Level 24 Level 5 Chifley Tower Level 10 333 Collins Street 2 Chifley Square 40 St Georges Terrace Melbourne VIC 3000 Sydney NSW 2000 Perth WA 6000 Tel: +61 3 8623 3333 Tel: +61 2 8257 3000 Tel: +61 8 9220 9333 Fax: +61 3 8623 3399 Fax: +61 2 8257 3099 Fax: +61 8 9220 9399 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Brisbane Singapore Level 14 Level 6 16 Collyer Quay 12 Creek Street 75 Denham Street #30-01 QLD 4000 Townsville QLD 4810 Singapore 049318 Tel: +61 7 3338 0222 Tel: +61 7 4724 9888 Tel: +65 6593 9333 Fax: +61 7 3338 0298 Fax: +61 7 4724 5405 Fax: +65 6593 9399 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

New Zealand Level 16 Tower Centre 45 Queen Street Auckland 1010, New Zealand Tel: +64 9 307 7865 Fax: +64 9 377 7794 [email protected]

kordamentha.com

This publication, and the information contained therein, is prepared by KordaMentha Partners and staff. It is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. It does not constitute advice, legal or otherwise, and should not be relied on as such. Professional advice should be sought prior to actions being taken on any of the information. The authors note that much of the material presented was originally prepared by others and this publication provides a summary of that material and the personal opinions of the authors. Limited liability under a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.