The Head Office Christmas Lunch was not a success...
If you in the Hague on Wednesday you probably attended the Christmas lunch. Oh dear. It was not a success. Of course many people have been anxious to learn their fate this week so there was always going to be tension. But we arrived to find soft drinks only, no choir, little sign of effort...and no food. Now, I am not the best party host in the world, but I can learn a bit from Napolean's words about soldiers and realise that filling stomachs early and well is a good plan. Here, we could put up with the polystyrene trays, the plastic forks, even the poor food, but the wait? No. The starters, such as they were, had long gone when I arrived, and then started a prolonged game of tracking down servers of food. As soon as someone bearing a tray emerged from a crevice, they were mobbed by hungry staff, who grabbed all they had within seconds and metres of their starting point. Unedifying. Now, the conversation was always going to a bit dark this Christmas. But the result of the misorganisation was that in an hour of talking to group after group, person after person, all I witnessed was bleak and anti-Shell. What an own goal. References to knives not being on offer in case senior leaders might be stabbed. Comparisons to soup kitchens and refugee camps. Stories of how this or that communication had been so badly handled.
Not a good party. But of course so easy to see how it happened. Some hastily convened committee took time off from endless matching panels to agree a budget. Spend lavishly and everyone will complain of waste while people are being made redundant. Cancel and you get simmering bitterness and a message that Shell may be in trouble or bowing to pressure from outside. So do it half cock. Catch 22. Fair enough. But still, some food would have been nice. Why not just make the regular canteen free for a day and lay on music and decorations? Half the cost, none of the anger. If you were the senior leader who arranged this, maybe an apology would be an idea? Not one just issued anonymously via Lieke Mekking either.
But then? What right have we to expect a Christmas lunch anyway? The refugee camp and soup kitchen analogies struck home to me, as we all milled around our warm building before going home to our affluent homes. There are real soup kitchens in The Hague, and real refugee camps in countries Shell operates. Let's keep some perspective. I heard an expression this week - an expectation is a premeditated resentment. Nice, eh? I've blogged on entitlement already in 2009. We'll get through our lives easier if we can avoid too many resentments, and a good way is to go easy on the expectations.
And on the lack of booze I'm 100% with Shell. For years I've seen double standards on this and rarely received a straight answer from a boss, for example getting advice about whether a lunchtime bottle of wine between six at a leaving do was OK. It was catch 22. Don't ask or you'll get a bad answer or no answer, so take the risk personally. At last that one is solved. Life saving rule. No booze if you are going back to work. Have your leaving do at 4pm. Clear. Good. There are many catch 22 situations. A good one at home at this time of year is about whether to buy a card or present for a former partner. No good answer I'm afraid - pain will result whatever choice is made.
An obvious catch 22 at work now is the old chestnut about whether to make people redundnat before Christmas or afterwards. Before and you ruin the holiday, and after and people have spent all their money. Catch 22. On that I think it is clear by the way, we have a duty to pass on information as soon as available, even if that is the day before Christmas.
At work, many catch 22's are like the alcohol one, about choosing whether to ask a question or just take a personal risk. I try to remember to ask myself what answers I might receive and what they will imply before asking a question. My favourite one was about the mandates for Global Solutions in the third party arenas. Staff demanded clarity all the time, and fair enough really. But we fudged it, right to the end, and I know why - it was because it was a catch 22. By asking the question clearly, we would open a can of worms with a worse outcome (for clear decisions, for GS and for Shell) than struggling on in ambiguity would offer. So we didn't ask the question, or at least we were very careful what questions we asked in what way to whom. Not being devious either, just smart. Greg and many others took personal risk as a result -I guess you can call that leadership. Remember that next time you are tempted to ask for clarity. Catch 22.
I'm off for a break now. I've enjoyed blogging in 2009, and get lot of inspiration, learning and fulfillment from all the resulting feedback, however it comes. Have a good rest, especially if you have just received unwelcome news at work. Things will seem easier after a break, and you'll move forward better if you allow yourself some time. But do lean on others for support, especially family and true friends. That one is the opposite of catch 22. The more you are open, sharing and asking, the more you will receive, and you'll help others in the process.
No comments:
Post a Comment