Part of my job is mentoring one-on-one exceptional CEOs and heads of foundations. I am often humbled by the talent, productivity and sheer drive these people possess. At the same time, I am often puzzled by how little power they feel they have in one respect: using their own ethical principles to influence and change the culture of their organization.
At the strategic level, CEOs want their philanthropy to be systemic and their corporate social responsibility meaningful, but they feel like that would be acting against the wishes of the donors, the shareholders or the employees. Within the institution, they know that a few policies on diversity and sexual harassment don’t suffice to put those matters to rest, but sometimes don’t put their whole weight behind enforcement out of fear of overstepping their mandate.
Yet, it is the leader’s job to lead change, even if in doing so he or she comes across as too forceful at times. The organizational inertia pulling on the other direction is invariably very strong. And the risk for an organization losing its moral compass can be catastrophic.
An international organization, best not to be named, was founded about sixty years ago, in order to maximize the trade, development and investment benefits for the poorest countries. It soon became bureaucratic beyond management, and the founding Secretary-General resigned in 1969, having become disillusioned by the organization’s failures.
Many years later, as I was just starting out professionally, I got a short-term job with the very same organization, ignorant of its unfortunate history. I was young, eager and starry-eyed.
On my first day, I attended a meeting with the Deputy Secretary-General (DSG) and a dozen directors. They were coordinating the organization’s presence at a conference taking place the subsequent week. Discussion revolved around how many tons of paper publications each of the divisions was allowed to take along, to give to their counterparts.
Even the most minute matters were put to the DSG for input and decision. He seemed completely uninterested, fiddling with his phone throughout. Among the directors, tensions were high. My impression was that I was watching people meeting each other for the first time. In fact, according to the minutes it was the twelfth preparatory meeting specifically dedicated to the upcoming conference.
The event came and went, the paperwork was shipped and subsequently shredded since few partners were interested in physical copies of items they could download. The conference turned out to be pretty inconsequential for the goals of the organization.
When I came back from it, confused, an experienced colleague called me into his office and said, “All this organization exists for is paying our salaries. Whenever you knock on someone’s door, know that behind it there’s a person who’s afraid for their job, unqualified to do it, and unable to find another one on the market.”
I was taken aback by the cynicism of someone who’d devoted three decades of their life to the organization. But seeing things through his glasses somehow made things make sense. The pointless publications and the disorganized meetings all of a sudden had a meaning as time-structuring busy work.
I quit my job soon thereafter. By then, I had found out that the Special Advisor to the Secretary-General had openly sexually harassed people and that the human resources director had been videotaped stealing in a shop; no charges were filed. The organization continues its zombie-like existence to this day.
People stayed in a place like that, despite all the anomie and the stress, because they felt trapped with the perks (paid private education for children) and saw no job options elsewhere.
But not everyone did. Over the years, I have watched former colleagues leave the institution, some after just a few months of working for it, others after many years. Some of those people have become an inspiration for me.
One colleague went on to work for a more relevant organization, devoting her career to improving the conditions in the prisons in Central America. Early on, she would go to prisons on her own to perform inspections and do interviews with inmates about their treatment and living conditions. At times she was the only female in the compound, surrounded with thousands of male prisoners; that never deterred her and she knew no fear. She afterwards served in her national government and has recently retired.
Another colleague who, ironically, was told that there was no place for her anymore on the Gender team, went on to be one of the key people behind Women’s March in the United States Yet another left to join a health-tech startup that has since gone public. Yet another is having a successful career in contemporary art.
All those people refused to be complicit and chose to leave, and created something better for themselves and the world. If they had choice and power then so do CEOs.
Since 2000, at least 55 superhero live-action movies have premiered. The rest of the film production seems to have been the biopics of famous people. Celebrity biographies are regular bestsellers. Clearly, in our age we are particularly drawn to the idea of extraordinary people and achievements. What do people whom we admire do? They stay true to themselves and keep a firm moral stance come hell or high water.
We are provided with a daily opportunity to rise to this challenge. Because leading cultural change is, make no mistake, a heroic undertaking. And behind each of our critical decisions are possible futures, just like there were for the original Secretary-General of the unnamed organization in 1969. He simply chose to leave, and I often think of what would have happened if he had dug in his heels and refused to give in.
As it stands, the institution spent the next half-century failing in its mission. The staff paid for that through permanent anxiety and occasional abuse. The people around the world, whom they were supposed to serve, paid with more poverty and hunger than should have been the case. Ask yourself what the bad possible futures of your organization are if you fail in your mission to change it, and your course of action will immediately become clear, your personal qualms and fears irrelevant.
Stay up to date with news and research from the Altruist League.
© The Altruist League 2015-2021
The Altruist League uses its unmatched global analyst network and cutting edge artificial intelligence model to craft for its members the best strategies for ESG reporting, sustainable investing and philanthropy with impact. Contact us to find out more.
