This one might be too familiar…

In last week’s blog, we visited a company that was a paragon of high performance - Culture Centric Solutions. This time, we’re going somewhere a little different - and perhaps familiar to many readers…

We pull up in front of the offices of BioHealth Technologies (BHT for short). The website tells a compelling story of innovation, their research truly is cutting edge, and their scientific leaders represent some of the best minds in the field. Externally, much is said, but inside the company, not a lot gets done. Beyond the snappy tagline on the investor presentation, there’s no real vision or direction, so it’s hard to connect the day to day activity to an overall objective or goal. Absent a big picture, each team works differently with no unified standards or practices - unspoken norms based on “the way we’ve always done it” tend to get in the way of people’s efforts, rather than enabling them.

At BHT, there’s constant turnover. Hiring’s never-ending, and almost as frequent is firing people who “don’t fit”. The interview process is a shambles, expectations are low and the quality of hires seems to be on a downward trajectory. Each round of recruitment damages the company’s employer brand, so attracting great people is next to impossible. Average tenure is low, so managers are continually starting over, trying to build institutional knowledge in the face of severe retention issues. The leadership team bemoan their hiring challenges, blaming all of their problems on not being able to find the right people.

For those who do stick around, work becomes menial and meaningless. Any important decisions are made right at the top of the organisation, and those doing the work are expected to follow orders, unclear on why what they do matters. There’s no emphasis on or commitment to developing people, so learning is non-existent, and mistakes are met with retribution. Everyone stays firmly in their comfort zone as a result. It’s “dead man’s shoes” in terms of career progression and even when positions open up, the communication gap between management and the rest of the business is so vast that no-one steps forward. Driven by a lack of trust in their staff, managers are distant, formal and cold, and just don’t seem to care. This extends to the rest of the team, who share a lack of accountability, resulting in poor quality of work, missed deadlines and an extremely negative atmosphere.

Now imagine being a bright young scientist joining BHT, passionate about the impact you’re going to have on the world and excited by what you think is groundbreaking technology. Heading into the bleak environment we’ve envisioned, how long would it take for you to lose your spark? A year? Six months? Six weeks?

I’ve seen this happen first hand. Years ago, I took an internal transfer at a company I’d been with for some time. The overall culture of the organisation was pretty good - not without its challenges, but it worked. Unfortunately, when I was moving back to London from a stint in New York, I inadvertently joined an office where the environment was genuinely toxic. The interesting thing was, each individual was well-intentioned, but leadership of the office was split between three people, all at the same level and jockeying for position. Without a leader deliberately shaping the culture, it had descended into politics and bickering. I watched as we hired people full of drive and ambition, only to see them just weeks later adopt the characteristics of those around them. The performance of the division was poor, which compounded the negative atmosphere, and the narrative was that all the other offices got preferential treatment. It was incredibly difficult to show up with a positive outlook each morning.

In that kind of setting, imagine trying to do something as complex as developing new drugs, bringing diagnostic technologies to healthcare providers, or leveraging AI to improve the performance of businesses. Successful innovation requires healthy debate, respect for the opinions and expertise of others and openness to good ideas, no matter where they come from. It necessitates a shared mission, clear goals and strong communication. In a pursuit that already has a low probability of success, a poor culture makes the challenge even greater.

We’ve seen two companies in the last two entries, with two very different cultures. Which is more likely to be successful?

More importantly, which is your company most like?

(P.S. If you know someone who needs to read this today, send it to them and encourage them to subscribe to the Versapiens blog. If you haven’t subscribed yet, come join us on our journey through the intersection between culture, technology and business.)