Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Week #7: See With Your Heart; Whole Foods and Mackey's Leadership
An interesting quote:
"And now here is my secret, a very simple secret; it is only with
the heart that one can see rightly, what is essential is invisible
to the eye." Antoine de Saint-Exupery
What a lovely week this is - a week of seeing with your heart, which allows you to see what is invisible to the eye.
It is only when you move past seeing with just the eyes and mind that you can really see another human being at all, and can begin to be in true relationship, whether it is with another or it is with your Self.
Make sure to practice this live-with both internally and externally. Once you begin to open your heart to yourself, and your Self, you will know your deepest capacity for love and compassion.
On a very practical note, use your precise observation to see what shifts at home and at work when you see with your heart. What changes in the dynamic of your relationships? How is the 'other', whom you are seeing with your heart, changed? How does is your creativity, and the creativity that comes from your relationship, changed? Reciprocity???
We discussed an interesting and successful company built by John Mackey. Do you have any reaction to what he did? How it might what we have covered in both WL Gore and Whole Foods be useful for you in your organization?
See you on the 11th
Keep posting,
Julie & Hal
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
During our last class, we learned how Whole Foods’ culture embraces the concept of “conscious capitalism”. If you are interested in understanding more about this concept, you may be interested in reading John B. Montgomery’s book titled “Great from the Start: How Conscious Corporations Attract Success”. The author speaks from his considerable experience, citing specific situations as examples to enhance the narrative. It reads like a “how to” book - each chapter addresses an essential component of the larger picture.
ReplyDeleteThis live-with came at just the right time. We had another offsite this week. A few weeks earlier we were asked to submit a baby picture of ourselves, along with 3 facts that nobody knew. The idea was that we had to guess who was who. Initially I wasn't so enthusiastic about this activity and thought it was a bit childish, but it turned out to be a huge success and it changed the dynamics of the people involved. I felt that the activity increased the level of empathy for one another. All kids are cute and lovable, and looking at all the pictures of your colleagues as kids makes you realize that we're all the same. We all have our vulnerabilities, insecurities, hopes, and dreams. If you had any issues with anyone, they became irrelevant. I noticed that everyone was genuinely kind to each other. The activity created an atmosphere of warmth, openness and trust. It brought people closer together.
ReplyDeleteIt might also help to develop more loving kindness for yourself by looking at a picture of yourself from your childhood. Somehow it's easier to be nice to children than to ourselves as grown-ups, but realizing that we are still that same person might help us love ourselves more now that we are older.
Another great example of compassion: one of our coworkers has a sister with a rare form of cancer, for which there is no cure as of yet. He organized a concert for her this week for "compassion and assistance". None of us had met his sister, but we were so moved by her situation and how her brother wanted to help, that we went to the concert. Afterwards, our coworker said that there were many people that his sister didn't even know. They all had come to show her their compassion and support. It also brought our coworker and us closer together, as he can now talk more openly about his sister and their struggles.
As for John Mackey and Whole Foods, he thought a lot about the meaning and purpose of his life, and realized that what we eat can affect how we feel. He started Whole Foods not out of self-interest, but to do good for the community. He was interested in the happiness of others and wanted others to feel better by eating healthy foods.
He even cared about the well-being of animals and developed Animal Compassionate Standards for animal products. This is interesting, as he initially walked away when he was criticized by an animal rights activist. He started educating himself on the issue and understood and even agreed with the activist, which he had initially perceived as his "enemy". He hired her and became a vegan.
He mentioned that "everyone is really looking for a mother and that Whole Foods assumes the responsibility of taking care of you in a somewhat maternal way." That to me is a great example of compassion. Another quote of his is "love is the only reality", which not many other CEOs would say. Many businesses focus primarily on profits.
Both W.L. Gore and Whole Foods wanted to add value to society. Both companies believed in decentralization and employee empowerment, passion and commitment. There were no assignments, but employees could choose what to work on. Another similarity is that new employees were chosen by the teams. a lot of emphasis was on whether they would fit in the team. Whole Foods also made sure that during acquisitions, they incorporated strategies that had made the acquired company popular.
What could be useful for my organization is more employee empowerment. It's already better than it was, but it can be improved more. I liked the "appreciation" ritual that Whole Foods uses. It shows respect and helps motivate people.
Your post resonated because I have been through that baby photo exercise as well and had the same initial reaction. I suppose there is a lesson in here about "no expectations" as well. I enjoyed reading your blog.
DeleteI love the baby picture example! I suspect that my organisation would have a similar reaction, but I think I may look to push those boundaries in the future
DeleteThanks for both your comments. @Kathryn, you're right, there is a lesson about "no expectations". I guess also initially my VOJ was at work, trying to limit the experience.
Delete@Gail, hope you get to do the exercise with your coworkers. My coworkers are still talking about it, so it had an impact.
The John Mackey article has been sitting a little uncomfortably with me for the past week but hadn’t put my finger on what it was. I shop there often and I enjoy the experience; I love that if you have a question, the staff is empowered to cut into an apple to let you experience if it is as crisp as you would like, or taste the exotic vinegar to assess how it will fit with your meal. The newly opened store in the Castro is beautiful and is a good example of how they are constantly experimenting with retail principals like store and check-out configurations. They do a beautiful job of creating something just right for the very specific communities they serve. Case in point; the Castro store has a distinctly different lens than the Haight store that is less then two years old. So what has been bothering me about the article? It came to me while shopping there this weekend when a bakery attendant bent over backward to help with a selection. We do business with WF as an advertiser, the advertising agency they have hired as their local "agent" is challenging (condescending to my employees, unwilling to listen, has expectations for how they would like to be treated that are not extended to others etc.). This begs the question, to what expect does the WF "way" extend to their satellite of suppliers, agents, vendors, etc.? Should it? To what extent does WF expect any norms as a condition of doing business with them? Given their size and impact on the grocery business, it strikes me that they could have more sweeping impact on a larger group of people if they had a set of expectations that the cultural values be similar to their own. By this I mean that they have the means and scale to be selective about partners and the cache to clarify their expectations as a condition for becoming or remaining a "partner"). Every organization has their individual culture, and I am clear on the fact that it may be counter-value for a leader like Mackey to be paternalistic about culture. That said, given that the culture and leadership has been such a significant part of their success, I wonder to what extent there is risk (or at least depletion in value) in them NOT attempting to ensure that people's experience with WF is similar throughout the various touch points. I would be interested to know if there are other case studies where a company attempted (and succeed or failed) to have a more satellite impact through asking/requiring that vendors and partners to adhere to a certain set of minimums with respect to their own core values.
ReplyDeleteRegarding seeing with heart, I am struck by how much I have heard some variation of this in yoga classes and from my mother (she’s a world-class woman) and yet, in the context of business, I had somehow compartmentalized the advice right out. In applying it in a few situations this week, I was taken aback by how this change of lens can serve to neutralize conflict and accelerate positive resolution. The comment that most resonates for me is the one about respecting that everyone has something they are trying to accomplish and their own aspirations. In one situation, I felt so far away from another, that I simply asked what she was attempting to accomplish, not just in the moment but in the larger context. It was a dumb question. The question was so unexpected on her part that she actually stared to laugh. We both shared what we were attempting to do and found that in the transparency, a better, third option emerged. What each of us has been advocating resulted in a zero-sum solution. Seeing from my heart and asking a dumb question resulted in the catalyst we needed to arrive at a value add solution. As usual, I should have listened to mom!
Kathryn, I really like your point about the need to expand the culture of the company past the staff members. I've had several debates this week with those who work with - not for - major tech giants. There was a strong feeling that the values that the companies espouse were 'just marketing' and that the real drive was always profit. This didn't resonate with the conversations I had had with employees who genuinely (I believe) feel they are working for other reasons. How can such companies/ organisations make sure that the culture is understood outside of their offices? Can we learn lessons from how some clothing companies (ie Nike) have started to manage the supply chain to minimise environmental and human impact? Or are we all too cynical?
DeleteStanford
ReplyDeleteI love this live-with! I really like to work in human resources in a bank in Brazil but I confess I hate corporative environment. Unfortunately the business world is ambitious and cruel because the companies need to get their goals and objectives to keep themselves safe and competitives, but myself doesn't fit in it.
In business it's almost impossible to hear the heart's voice and ignore the brain's voice. We must be rational and choose the right decisions all the time or the corporative environment will cut heads off.
When I need to be rational a lot of doubts and fears come in my mind, many times it gets me confused, stressed and insecure to decide which decision I should choose.
It would be awesome if the business world was more tolerant to let me hear and do what my heart says.
I already open and listen my heart when I'm not at work because myself prefers to behavior this way. I'm completely emotional than rational and I feel more relaxed and free being this way. It is wonderful when I can just do what I think is right and don't need to worry and think about all of the possibilities may happen. It gives me back more tranquility and peace.
I found the live with both challenging and enjoyable. Challenging because I often had to stop myself at a conference this week making judgements about other people the minute I met them, instead I had to look at them with compassion. Even with the 'no judgement' live-with, I hadn't noticed just how quick I am to judge on meeting people for the first time. Instead I had focused on not pre-judging the statements or actions of those that I know or think that I know. Being in a mindful state on first encounter proves to be more difficult! The live with was enjoyable because I learnt I could enjoy meeting people and learning about them, without having to see every interaction as a business task where I had to put on my 'business persona'. This enabled me to understand that 'working' can just be 'being'. This feels like a major breakthrough...
ReplyDeleteWhich lead me nicely to the articles about women in leadership. I would love a break through on this! I enjoyed the 'How Women Decide' article, but would like to read a corresponding 'How Men Decide' article. The premise was that we already know how men work and make decisions, but I often feel in the dark on this, probably making as many assumptions about men as they make about women.
On the other hand, I did not warm towards the "Women, the Vision Thing" article. Women were only judged to not be visionary by their male peers, not by everyone in the company. Two issues - both buried in the article - rang out for me: women were more inclined to produce a corporate or collective vision than claim individual authorship; and women did not have the automatic assumption of competence that men had, and had to simultaneously prove competence and vision, which is incredibly difficult, if not impossible. Both of these issues were addressed as problems for women to address, rather than challenges for companies. This seemed to be another article that espoused a view that in order to succeed you have to emulate male leaders.
Looking forward to discussing all of this further tonight.
This week's Live With provided me with a nice shift in perspective. At work, I have a colleague who's personality and leadership approach to projects seem to clash drastically with mine at times. This often makes it hard for me to collaborate effectively with the individual.
ReplyDeleteIn seeing the person with my heart, I came to a few realizations. We're both humans, each with our own set of ambitions, needs, and modes of expressing ourselves. Also, we're both very aligned to our organization's mission even if the style of our approaches varied. In addition to seeing how we were connected, and how pretty disagreements and differences in style were so trivial and irrelevant, I also found that by looking that the colleague as another human that I can feel compassion for, weeding away all of the extra negative emotions, clarified the person's needs. And from that, it was easy to see what types of communication and planning would best support their project management style. Ultimately, I was able to interact more effectively with the person, as I put aside each of the idiosyncrasies that did not matter.
Hi Helena,
ReplyDeleteI'm really glad you had this exercise with your employees. The fact that you initially had some doubts, but listened to your gut feeling is a great example of decision-making led by intuition. More than a week after the picture exercise I can notice a change in attitude with the people on the team. We had a good team in the first place, but it shifted something.