Culture = Results
The real impacts of working with good people
“Which do you think is the more suitable choice, working in a company which you feel builds skills valuable to your industry or one where you feel passionate about what you’re working on?”
The question I was asked by a friend of mine is a good and sensible one, however I felt strongly about the route to both of those avenues.
“Honestly? I’d rank something higher than either of those, I think the best way to obtain either is to prioritise working with good people”
It seems obvious that working with good people is good for your career however working culture is not measurable empirically - it is nebulous when compared to criteria with numerical characterisation like compensation, annual leave and share options.
In the following article we’ll cover:
What is culture?
Cultures of honesty
Wartime vs Peacetime
Impacts on Career Progression
Minimising Burnout
Minimising Churn
What is Culture?
An environment with a good working culture can be easily stereotyped as one that has perks such as:
Free snacks
Regular team socials
Slides (see “Why Did Steven Bartlett Buy A £13K Blue Slide For His Office?”)
Perks like these can make people comfortable at work and can be by-products of leadership that care about their team.
They can also be quick-to-implement perks to give the illusion of leadership that puts their teams first.
One way to define good culture, is describing the team as:
Low ego
Honest
Authentically caring about their colleagues
In high-urgency environments like startups, things go wrong, people make mistakes and breakthroughs feel critical, therefore a good way to identify a good team is by asking:
Are people honest about their mistakes?
Are people critical of mistakes?
Do people take responsibility and ownership for their work?
Do people acknowledge their colleagues for good work?
Are colleagues supportive?
Cultures of Honesty
When I was 21 I worked as an engineering intern at a large manufacturing company, where during my induction I was taught about the “no-blame culture” of the company.
Colleagues of all levels of seniority would regularly refer to this no-blame culture, which I naturally felt reassured by.
Until it became clear that the culture of honesty, was in-fact enforced messaging as a result of a culture where everyone blamed each other.
Opportunities in Error
Fast-paced environments with different multidisciplinary domains are always at risk of work not going to plan. Naturally, those in leadership positions will feel frustrated and sometimes let down.
Startups are examples of fast-paced environments which lack the processes built by larger established companies.
An example of a mistake an electronics engineering team can make is ordering printed circuit board assemblies where a critical specification (e.g. board thickness) is not according to specification and cannot be rectified.
The route forward is therefore to reorder the batch, accept that the original order is a sunk cost, and delay the project by several weeks.
Of course context is important here, perhaps the person who made the mistake has a history of being careless, however each mistake is an opportunity to implement relevant processes.
An improvement to processes can be as simple as:
Implementing a checklist before kicking off manufacturing runs
Being clear on requirements at the beginning of a project/sprint/deliverable, and checking in on them regularly
Having someone else check-over critical work before submissions
Instead of implementing processes and systems for the sake of them, mistakes are opportunities to test and verify which are needed, improving efficiencies across the board.
Black Box Mentalities
For everything startup teams have going against them, agility is not one of them.
A culture where colleagues or managers criticise errors in a way that is unprofessional, personal and toxic will disincentivising team members to be honest about what’s gone right or wrong.
In turn, a large amount of potential to improve as a team is lost when unconstructive feedback is normalised.
Pressure Makes Diamonds
The right types of pressure can allow some people to thrive in a high-urgency environment.
The pressure to not make mistakes or make deadlines however, must be handled correctly.
In technical teams where stakes are high and what is being built is technically very complex, it should be accepted that as humans mistakes can happen.
A good manager has to accept the reality that increasing the wrong types of pressure on team members will only:
Increase the likelihood of more mistakes happening and deadlines being missed
Increase the time taken for mistakes to be reported
Decrease the appetite for risk in the team
The wrong type of pressure could come from someone feeling like the consequences of carrying out a task could have an impact on them personally.
It is important as manages to ensure feedback is constructive and objective to the task. Personal feedback is important, but it must be handled appropriately and remain professional.
For example, if a team member spent more hours troubleshooting a bug than a manager felt was necessary they could:
Question if they have been overloaded with tasks, for them to work less productively
Ask if they need more support
Accept that mistakes happen
This route forward lets the manager exercise responsibility, rather than distributing blame.
How managers and leaders respond to mistakes from the team sets the tone for how work is completed.
Wartime vs Peacetime
When evaluating team culture, observe how people behave in good vs tough times.
It’s evident that maintaining a comfortable environment is easier when deadlines aren’t pressing aggressively and people’s backs are not against the wall.
When finding out how managers and leaders behave in less ideal scenarios, questions to ask are:
Is blaming more common than taking responsibility
Does frustration ever lead to unprofessional comments and behaviour
How is overtime handled? Are managers acknowledging it? Do they offer time-off in lieu?
It’s totally natural to observe frustration in tough times, but in low-ego environments managers will:
Avoid accusations when things go wrong
Remain respectful and professional
Fairly acknowledge additional time and effort spent by the team
Impacts on Career Progression
Going back to the question of what to look for in a team you want to grow professionally in, good people in a team will support you in:
Working on tasks that give you professional growth
Being involved in projects and deliverables you feel passionate about
Taking on responsibilities that are new to you, ensuring you’re given appropriate guidance
Finding an environment where people can support each others’ growth is easier said than done.
For example, politics can come into play with larger corporate environments while startups thrive when their teams want to pick up responsibilities new to them.
Minimising Burnout
There are several accounts of people reaching burnout, and although each scenario requires individual context, in my experience it’s heavily influenced by:
How intense a project is
What type of pressure the project is under
How supported you feel
The type of pressure, as mentioned earlier can come down to how personal you feel the consequences of not achieving the results are.
I’ve been a part of trials and product launches where as much as I worked overtime, the team felt united and the only pressure I felt was to deliver as part of a team I loved working in.
It’s not to say there would have been no consequences to working overtime consistently in a team you enjoy working in, but “burning out” in my opinion is at a much higher risk when the type of pressure feels more personal.
Minimising Churn
If there is one incentive for managers to intentionally create a culture that people enjoy working in, it is to minimise good people leaving.
It is easy for managers, particularly those who are founders, to think everyone in their team is as vested in their vision of the project as they are.
Although some non-founders can be fully committed to a project, when growth is limited and burnout has either happened or is imminent, it cannot be a surprise to anyone when they consider alternative options.
I’ve been in teams that I consider to have great culture - one in particular allowed team members to:
Carry out tasks outside of their technical domain
Have professional endeavours outside of the company (so long as the company took priority)
Some managers may feel like this level of freedom would pose a threat to people leaving, but it resulted in people staying at the company for several years.
It should be noted that other factors came into play with regards to having a positive team culture, such as good communication and reacting empathetically to mistakes.
There are several well known disadvantages to having team members leave for avoidable reasons, such as:
Time spent rehiring
Time spent onboarding new team members
Money spent rehiring
A more overlooked disadvantage is how much the risk of delay increases when new hires inherite and take over predecessors’ work.
Even well executed handovers can leave gaps in information, and not every important piece of context around a technical piece of work makes it into documentation.
The best managers understand the psychology of their team, what motivates each of them and how to give feedback.
The irony is that managers who feel empathy and fostering a good culture is a waste of time, will waste the most time.