Showing posts with label Enron. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Enron. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

A634.1.6.RB_RuggerioSteven

Business School Blues


On September 16, 2001, many American churches were standing room only.  History has proven that tragedies get our attention.  In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, millions of Americans flocked to churches and houses of worship.  But, for most, the shift in spiritual behavior was short lived.  According to tracking research by the Barna Group, within a few months the spiritual lives of the nation’s population were back to pre-attack levels (Barna, 2011).  Enron is a financial equivalent of 9-11.  Ethical terrorist like Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling, Arthur Anderson, and others disguised themselves as businessmen and ultimately leveled our economy.  Just as society woke to the realization of its vulnerability as a nation, the collapse of our economy and the unethical actions of business leaders have shaken many to the importance of ethical standards. 
When a terrorist cell is found, CIA agencies dig deep into their background to uncover motives and ideology.  We must do the same for the ethical failures of our business leaders.  One of the first places to start is our country’s business schools.  It is time to stop providing the obligatory ethics class and take more aggressive action to invest in qualitative studies centered on leadership, ethics, values, and integrity.  Four years after the scandals of the financial crisis prompted many deans and faculty to reexamine how they teach ethics.  Some say they still have not gotten it right (Korn, 2013).  Daniel Goleman (1995) said, “There is growing evidence that fundamental ethical stances in life stem from underlying emotional capacitates. Those who are at the mercy of impulse—who lack self-control—suffer a moral deficiency: The ability to control impulse is the base of will and character” (p. xxii). Academia must address the heart as much as the mind. 
I’ve learned there is a great difference between being smart and being wise.  My wife has a high school education and she is the wisest woman I know.  I am working on my second graduate degree and still make impulsive decisions.  Outside the latest technological impact in academia, little has changed over the past century.  In fact, with the advent of Standards of Learning (SOLs), our schools may have taken a step backwards.  Nowhere is this more obvious than in the area of leadership, ethics, and values.  Something has to change.
Podolny (2009) said, “Fifty years of effort to increase rigor have left even the best business schools with a bias against teaching qualitative disciplines like ethics and leadership” (p. 1).  This unwavering focus and attention solely on “hard” disciplines such as, economics, statistics, accounting, and marketing have created deep thinkers with shallow consciences.  As a result, people are losing faith in America’s business schools.
In order to reduce people’s distrust, business schools need to show that they value what society values.  They need to teach that principles, ethics, and attention to detail are essential components of leadership, and they need to place greater emphasis on leadership’s responsibilities (Podolny, 2009).  It must start early and follow through the learning life cycle.  When we were young, our “multiplication tables” were memorized and embedded in our mind because of repetition.  Ethics and values should be included as part of all education curriculum from middle school through graduate school.  Classes should start with definitions and explanations and grow to case studies, role-playing, and real life observations. 
For example, ABC News and John Quinones created a behind the scenes show called, “What Would You Do?”  It is designed to catch unsuspecting people in real life ethical situations.  Business schools should conduct similar experiments. And thankfully, some are. 
The Massachusetts’ Babson College, Michigan State University and other schools in Colorado are holding conference calls to exchange ideas on program design, course content, and building support among faculty members (Korn, 2013).   While some ethical courses are peppered throughout college schedules, they need to be immersed on all disciplines.  For instance, Boston University’s School of Management is introducing a required ethics course for freshmen business students, and is also taking instructors in other business classes to incorporate ethics into their lessons (Korn, 2013).
Today, church attendance has declined to pre 9-11 numbers (Barna, 2011).  As Enron fades and the economy reestablishes its footing, will we forget as well?  Will ethics become just another course to fill the time?  Or, will we keep pressing forward with additional qualitative studies to improve leadership and ethics?  Our goal as a nation should be to ensure business school graduates enter Wall Street and Main Street willing to make America stronger by gaining back the trust of the American public.  Our future and freedom depend on it.  

Steve

References
Barna, G. (2011). Barna Study Explores Faith in New York Since 9-11. Retrieved from
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Dell.
Korn, M. (2013). Does an ‘A’ in Ethics Have Any Value? Retrieved from
Podolny, J. (2009). The Buck Stops (and Starts) at Business School. Harvard Business Review,
            87(6), 62-67. 

Saturday, April 27, 2013

A521.5.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

                                                            A Business of Values



While traveling to Rwanda in June of 2009, Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, visited with the farmers and families partly responsible for producing some of their world famous Arabica beans.  Celebrating Schultz’s visit and his commitment to their continued collaboration, thousands of jubilant Rwandans stood shoulder-to-shoulder hanging on his every word.  In his book Onward, he writes, “Never before had the human side of the equation that guided Starbucks—a commitment to balancing people and profits—been so palpable.  Less than 50 feet away from me were thousands of lives that Starbucks had the power to help—or to hinder” (p. 290).

And the people cheered.

After the deregulation of the energy markets in 1998, Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling of Enron employed nearly 22,000 people and were voted America’s Most Innovative Company for six consecutive years from 1996 to 2001 (Yukl, 2010, p. 433).  However, all was not what it appeared.  With the help of accountants and attorneys, top executives created subsidiaries that looked like partnerships and made it possible to sell assets and create false earnings.  Under Lay and Skilling, unethical practices ran rampant.  When the gig was finally up, Enron sunk and thousands of individual hopes and futures went down with it.  It would become the biggest and most complex bankruptcy case in U.S. history (Yukl, 2010, p. 434).  

And the people cried.

Schultz (2011) said, “How leaders embody the values they espouse sets a tone, an expectation, that guides their employees future behaviors” (p. 294).  Ken Lay, shortly after his arrest by the FBI, said he took responsibility for Enron’s collapse but denied that he did anything wrong.  “I continue to grieve, as does my family, over the loss of the company and my failure to save it,” said Lay, speaking forcefully. “But failure does not equate to a crime” (Crawford, 2004).

Peel back the layers of most leadership failures and you’ll find a thin veneer of values.  Behind the fancy suits and corner office are many men and women driven by greed, power, and control.  Incompetence and ignorance, while disappointing and frustrating, can be forgiven.  Malicious dealings and unethical practices done solely for profits cannot.

Hemingway & Maclagan (2004), in their article Managers’ Personal Values as Drivers of Corporate Social Responsibility said, “Individual managers’ organizational decisions are driven by a variety of personal values and interests, in addition to the official corporate objectives” (p. 36).

Organizational values start with leadership.  Period.  No excuses.  What leaders say and do flow down to their people.  The ethical value of an organization is a reflection of its top-tiered leadership team.  In the competitive world of corporate business, churches, sports, or retail services, the values of its leaders—at all levels—ultimately influences the depth of its decision making.  Understanding ones personal values and the values of the organization is the starting point for aligning and synergizing those values.
Stephen Denning (2011) identifies four different types of values:

  1. Robber barons – firms whose only value is to crush the competition by whatever means.
  2. Hardball strategist – these firms avoid illegality, but in all other respects they pursue a single-minded focus on winning.
  3. Pragmatist – these firms pursue instrumental values, that is, values that are a central part of the organizations business strategy.
  4. Genuine ethical values – firms that identify values as a principle motivating force; values that go beyond what is necessary for the business strategy and that possess a genuine moral basis.


Rather than discover six months or a year into a job, individuals should have a rich understanding of their values and principles.  Highlighting workplace values such as, work/family life balance, truth and honesty, environmental consciousness, stability, and clear advancement tracks can steer potential employees toward a fulfilling position with a pragmatist and genuine ethical organization.

Employees who value competition, strong financial rewards, power, and adventure may find themselves more confortable in an organization led by robber barons or hardball strategist.

Mother Teresa would never work for Steve Jobs.  Billy Graham would never work for Donald Trump. Compatible values between employer and employee are instrumental factors toward an employee’s job satisfaction and an employer’s ability to motivate their workers to increase profits.  Identifying the corporate atmosphere is key to revealing its value set.

Denning (2011) identifies three components of an ethical community and atmosphere.  The first is trust: general expectation among members that their fellows will behave ethically toward them. The second is loyalty: acceptance of the obligation to refrain from breaching one another’s trust and to fulfill the duties entailed by accepting that trust.  And lastly, solidarity: caring for other people’s interest and being ready to take action on behalf of other, even if it conflict with personal interests (p. 132-133).

As an employee of Lockheed Martin, I have experienced each of these components in various forms.  For instance, in my supervisor’s absence, he asked me to fill his position as team lead.  When there have been disagreements about aircraft performance or logistical challenges, each member of our team has been able to communicate and disagree without being disrespectful. 

Lockheed core values identified as “do the right thing, perform with excellence, and respect others” complement my personal values very well.  Dr. Randall Hansen’s values assessment led me to identify my top five workplace values as (1) integrity and truth, (2) opportunities for influence, (3) friendship and warm working relationships, (4) stability and security, and (5) work/life balance. 

Lockheed Martin policies and directives support and enhance my top five values.  In times of tight budgets and leaner organizations, job security can be a factor.  However, Lockheed has shown in the event positions are eliminated, they diligently work to place employees in other positions.  If they cannot come to an agreement with the employee on a job, they offer strong severance packages and transitional assistance.

Denning (2011) said, “Shared values in an organization create trust.  People have confidence that others will do what they say” (p. 149).  With nearly 120,000 people employed at Lockheed Martin, it would seem difficult to ensure their core values persist through every division.  I believe they have been successful because they recognize and reward employees who do the right thing and perform with excellence.  Like any company, there are individuals that test the limits of values, in these instances; the company response reaffirms its commitment to ensuring their values are in tact.

In Built to Last, Jim Collins (1994) debunked the myth that most successful companies exist first and foremost to maximize profits.  He said, “Contrary to business school doctrine, maximizing shareholder wealth or profit maximization has not been the dominant driving force or primary objective of visionary companies.” “Yes,” he added, “they seek profits but they’re equally guided by a core ideology—core values and a sense of purpose beyond just making money” (p. 8)

On April 26, 2013, Marillyn Hewson, CEO of Lockheed Martin sent an email to all Lockheed employees that read; “One of the qualities that distinguish Lockheed Martin is our constant focus on the future. We never stop thinking about what’s ahead and how we can make tomorrow’s world better than today’s. Our progress on that front will be measured not just by our balance sheet, it will be measured by the value we create for everyone who’s counting on us, including our customers, our communities, our partners and our shareholders, and you, our employees.”

From what I’ve seen, she means it.

Legacy values.

Steve

References:

Collins, J. (1994). Built to Last. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Crawford, K. (2004). Lay Surrenders to Authorities. Retrieved from
Denning, S. (2011). The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons,
            Inc.
Hansen, R. (n.d.). Workplace Values Assessment. Retrieved from
Hemingway, C.A. & Maclagan, P.W. (2004). Managers’ Personal Values as Drivers of
            Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(1), 33-44.
Schultz, H. (2011). Onward. New York, NY: Rodale.
Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.