(Like this article? Read more Wednesday Wisdom!)
It is a little known feature of Wednesday Wisdom that we do reader questions. For instance, G.W. wrote to me and asked: “Do you also have the impression that over time more and more people around you are highly agreeable and, when there is a problem, are choosing not to speak up?”
Yes, dear G.W, that is definitely a thing, though I am not sure that it has been getting worse recently, but I’ll get to that later. Let’s talk about the overall problem first.
Borrowing from my countryman Sidney Dekker, who said it much better than I could ever have: In general, the reward for not speaking up is much greater than the reward of speaking up. Even worse, whereas the reward for speaking up is uncertain and delayed, the reward for shutting up is immediate, direct, and certain.
And there it is, nothing more to be said, really, except maybe for some “fun” examples and explanations.
I am quite certain that all the readers of Wednesday Wisdom have experience with the unfortunate reward mechanics of speaking up and shutting up. I was born with poor impulse control and consequently I speak up more often than the above reward function would consider optimal. As a result, the number of times that people started conversations with me that started with: “It’s not that you’re wrong, but…” can no longer be counted on the fingers of two hands. And not only that, I have definitely gotten in trouble in my career for speaking up, even when I was, if not exactly right, definitely not entirely wrong.
There are lots of problems with speaking up, the biggest one being that you might be right and are embarrassing someone. Quoting Edgser Dijkstra, who was quoting Anthony Jay: "In corporate religions as in others, the heretic must be cast out not because of the probability that he is wrong, but because of the possibility that he is right."
Being right is surely embarrassing, but speaking up and being wrong is also not awesome. For one you might prompt other people to start doubting the plan and that comes with more research, experimentation, and delays. And who wants delays? Velocity, that is what we need! You nerds and your “facts” and “data”! More bias for action! Show some team spirit by being agreeable! And who are you to disagree?
Even when you are quite certain that the car is going to drive off the cliff, it does usually not pay off to speak up. Let’s begin with the following consideration: If and when that happens, will you still be around? If not, why take the risk to speak up? And even if you will be around, will you be owning that problem? Remember, failure is often socialized, so even if you fail, you fail as a group and individual responsibility often evaporates. As an example: I recently listened to a podcast on the demise of Swiss banking giant Credit Suisse. These guys were heading for the cliff for years, while giving themselves big bonuses and afterwards saying that really there was nothing they could have done. In a world like that, why not lean back and take it easy?
So why don’t people speak up? Because of the large probability of social and reputational trouble.
You can see this clearly in the way we treat whistleblowers. In some cases, problems are so big that people with actual consciences can’t take it anymore and speak up. First inside the organization, and when that doesn’t work, in public. What happens to these brave souls who are usually right and who uncover enormous scandals? Are they lauded? Rewarded?
Anyone who follows any credible news outlet with some regularity knows that whistleblowers are often ostracized, sued, harassed, fined, punished, fired, you name it. Only two weeks ago, Boeing whistleblower John Barnett was found dead from a “self-inflicted” wound, probably due to stress and a hostile work environment.
Speaking up is seldom rewarded and often punished.
That’s double plus sad, because research indicates that organizations with a great safety record often have a culture where speaking up is expected and accepted. These organizations value a diversity of opinion and have low barriers for people to speak up. In these organizations, things still go wrong, but things never get out of hand and big whoppers that lead to disasters are prevented. For instance, cultural barriers around addressing superiors are thought to have played a major role in the crash of KAL 801 and as a result, Korean Air spent a lot of time changing their culture so that speaking up was more acceptable.
So, all things considered, should you speak up?
I am really loth to answer this question with a resounding “Yes”. Retaliation, though often not allowed, is definitely a thing. Companies have rules against retaliation and some countries even have laws against it, but retaliation definitely happens and can be so subtle that it is impossible to prove. And even if you are right and manage to escape official retaliation, you might suddenly be much less popular and that is in itself a punishment of sorts because we all need favors to get by. I know this is not a particularly satisfying answer, but that is how it is. In general I advise everyone to always be goal-oriented in their communication. In some cases that might mean that you have to be the one to speak up because other people cannot, but it can also mean that you decide that, all things considered, it is not worth it.
To get back to G.W’s other question: “Have we seen more of this in recent years?”
Personally I don’t think so; this is evolutionary learned behavior that goes back uncounted years to the stone age and before. What I think is happening is that G.W. is getting more senior and is now more able to recognize more and less obvious cases where things are clearly going in the wrong direction and he’s now wondering why nobody is saying something. I predict that as he’ll get even more senior, he’ll be less surprised.
Speaking for myself: When I was young, I spoke up because I didn’t know any better . These days, I speak up because I don’t care anymore. I am looking forward to my retirement day when I will give a large “no bridge left unburned” talk and then leave my badge at the door on the way out…
Thank you for writing this, Jos! Sadly, I think you are absolutely right with regards to the punishment / reward setup for speaking up for most people in the corporate world. I think it is fascinating how strange this setup is: the company would last (a lot) longer if it listened to people and made changes, but some of those in power would lose their positions (or some of the rewards) in the short term, so they do everything possible to maintain the status quo. So, maybe we are giving people too much power and/or paying them too much? Maybe this is just a variant of Peter’s principle: people get promoted to the level where all of their energy is focused on keeping their job (and no energy is left for doing anything actually positive)?
I have seen a couple of exceptions of very senior individual contributors who get away with speaking up. They are usually connected all the way to the top and are untouchable because of the value they bring. These people’s reward system is different: they are neither rewarded or punished for speaking up. They do get “feedback” from people/teams/orgs whose flaws/mistakes they point out, so they are feared and disliked behind the scenes by many. Most people who achieve such status become political and drive their own agenda or just keep their head down and hold on to their chair. If you are lucky to come across somebody who is focused on the company mission for real, they can bring a lot of value to the organization.
Will stay here even if just for the no bridges talk ;-)