I have seen many different variations of a four-box grid that seek to clarify some aspect of human interaction and or performance. Some are incredibly useful, such as the Johari Window, Covey’s time management grid (7 Habits of Highly Effective People), or Edmondson’s psychological safety matrix (Fearless Organization), to name some examples. Please pardon me if I burden you with another one. This one I’ve labeled the Production Matrix. As you can tell, I borrowed from other sources for the scales.
While I have drawn useful information from all of the above-mentioned research and much more besides, the connection, and dare I say correlation, between the environment of Trust that exists in the workplace and the level of Urgency that is present is one that seems obvious but is often ignored, and one that is incredibly important.
The scales in this matrix are between Complacency and Urgency (vertical), and Distrust and Trust (horizontal). Each scale has a tangible “feel” within the organization, while at the same time being nebulous and difficult to pin down. Even more, the variation on the scale can vary from department to department within the organization and sometimes even from individual to individual. In a general sense, the extreme boundaries of each scale paint a picture of the best or worst case scenario, one that never quite exists, so there is a range on both scales which affect production.
Essentially, Complacency can be perceived as a lack of motivation to excel. For the complacent person/department/organization, “good enough” is actually pretty darn good and anything more than that would be too much work. Urgency, on the other hand, expresses the emotions of caring about succeeding. Healthy urgency connects that care with a sense of succeeding with the mission and vision of the organization. Urgency carries the connotation of consequence, both positive and negative. The consequence will vary but the resultant mindset is to desire the positive consequence and avoid the negative. This generates a passion to win, as John Kotter says in his books. Perhaps that is a workable analogy for this scale; those who play to win (with a sense of urgency), and those who just don’t seem to care if they win or lose (with a sense of complacency).
Psychological Safety is such an interesting topic. Amy Edmondson’s, and others, work in this area has been quite revealing of the importance of cultivating an environment of psychological safety for the best production to occur. Whether this is in the organization, department, or even at home, the freedom to speak up without fear of negative consequences unleashes the best dynamic of human interaction. When the environment is one of distrust and suspicion it can be virtually impossible to focus on the task at hand. Worry is the dominant emotion and it can be so overwhelming that it brings a type of paralysis at the farthest extreme. At the other end of the scale is an environment of trust. Trust is the currency of integrity and emotional health. David Horsager, the Trust Edge, and others have expounded on the absolute necessity of having and building trust. Combine that with the work on psychological safety and you can easily see in your mind the dichotomy between these two extremes.
Now let’s discuss each of the blocks in the Production Matrix.
The Fool. Those organizations/departments/individuals that fall into this block are experiencing a high degree of complacency and distrust. The goal for employees in this block is not production but mere survival. No one is happy, everyone is bickering and distrustful of each other. Anxiety is the norm. Little gets accomplished and what does get done is usually of low quality. When things reach this state the usual outcome is closure or radical change of leadership, which often includes major staff changes as well. When everything rises and falls on leadership, the existence of an environment where this is the state of affairs speaks volumes about the lack of competence of the leader.
Complacency coupled with the fear that a complete lack of trust brings is the result of inflexible, dominating leadership that is more concerned with blame and policy than people and mission. In my experience, it is often the leader who has been promoted too quickly who finds themselves in this situation. They do not have the depth of leadership knowledge or experience and find themselves pitted against their employees when they need to be working together.
The Jerk. This is a nice word for this kind of leader. In this block of the matrix, the focus has moved from complacency to having a sense of urgency. But it is an unhealthy urgency that is based on quota and appearing busy. It would be fair to say this is a dog-eat-dog environment where everyone is looking out for number one (themselves). The presence of urgency has changed the production dynamic, definitely increasing production, but also bringing with it some baggage. That baggage primarily takes the form of threat. Whereas in the Fool box there was disgruntlement, which has now been replaced with fear and genuine dread. Leadership is heavily invested in production AT ALL COSTS. If that means staff turnover, so be it. This of course impacts production, making it better or worse as the employees are either going out the door or are being on-boarded, often the same employee within the same month or week. Leadership here looks like the stereotype of the taskmaster. Whipping the employees to keep them working but caring nothing for their true value to the organization is how the leader functions. The Leader’s opinion of the employees is low, believing they will not give their fullest unless they are heavily monitored and policies are strictly enforced. Sadly, these types of leaders come about because of their own personal competence (which is usually high) and a lack of faith in others. They see themselves as the smartest people in the room and everyone else as inferior or lacking commitment.
Mediocrity. This block of the organization/department/individual is the block to be in if you are just working for a paycheck. The leader values the people in the organization but can’t quite bring things into focus around the mission. There is a high degree of trust between the employees and management. Everyone is contented and gets along. At the same time, there is little urgency, which means no one really cares if much gets done. The attitude is, “What gets done, is what gets done.” Apathy is the reigning emotion.
There is a hidden trap in this block, much like Ulysses experienced on the island of the Lotus Eaters. No urgency and high trust are a recipe for a slide into oblivion. For the organization, it is an unstainable model that insures eventual closure, but at least everyone is happy until that happens. For the individual, the long-term effect is a disconnect from purpose which is integral for human fulfillment.
The Star. This block brings together the best in relationships and urgency. The leader of this organization values the employees and understands the importance of getting things done, i.e. urgency. I am connecting urgency with mission and purpose. If I believe in the mission and am committed to that mission then I am operating with a sense of purpose and purpose: it literally cannot easily be separated from urgency. As I described urgency above, urgency carries with it the possibility of consequence. If I am operating with purpose, then my goal will be to seek the positive consequences of fulfilling that purpose. This is passion. Passion when employed in an environment of trust will always blossom into individual meaning for the participants and high production for the organization.
Production exists because of people. How those people work together and understand urgency determines the level of production and their personal fulfillment. This requires leadership that will embrace the tension between these two different scales and purposefully work to bring each to the right balance within the organization.