When leaders treat their staff like clients, they are actively damaging the organization as a whole. A growing problem in American small business is that leaders, specifically within small businesses focused on new technology, use the same language across internal and external settings. More often than not, this language is meant to entice audiences to purchase something and contains hyperbole and vague phrasing. While it may be effective for bringing in revenue, it goes against their role as a organizational leader and will inevitably create a rift between management and staff.
In an increasingly competitive technological landscape, young tech companies, particularly in the social space, have to be “always-on” with their marketing. Regardless of their product, revenue, social interest, or investor status, CEOs have to walk into every room with their head up high and say with unfaltering confidence, “we are the best at what we do, and we are going to change the world.” This is great, as long as they’re facing outward.
When leaders fail to pause their rhetoric when communicating internally, they hurt their personal image and damage the trust built between them and their subordinates. This ultimately damages the strength of the organization. The more significant the role, the more drastic the effects (i.e. a CEO will affect an organization more significantly than a VP of Sales). This isn’t just because more people look up to the offender as a superior, or role model, but because their behavior, language, and mannerisms trickle down to the rest of upper-level management. It rarely cascades to the lowest levels of staff as they can’t utilize or benefit social tricks meant for subordinates.
A lot of these issues stem from the recent overuse of trendy buzzwords and empty statements used for marketing (eg “disrupt”, “change the world”, “passion”). Between new tech and shifting interests in workplace methodologies, it feels like there’s a new phrase needing your intimate understanding and support at the drop of a hat. As a result, a hazard of today’s young professional landscape is that widely used words and phrases lose distinct meaning as public-facing authority figures want to become seen as thought leaders by redefining buzzwords to fit their personal interpretations.
Unfortunately, the desire to be seen as a game-changer often goes far beyond the use of buzzwords: philosophies and workplace methodologies are getting a similar treatment, where a popular concept is redefined to fit the short-term needs of an organization. If we only have blue, we will call it purple because there was a need for red. This isn’t just the case with hyperbole: it goes far deeper, into fundamental mindsets and workplace methodologies, which can be considerable more destructive to internal communication, team cohesiveness, and even mental health.
It feels like we have an innate need to try to improve things that don’t need improving. Innovation is one thing, but it often comes across as a twist on confirmation bias. In the tech space, there’s no longer a concept of “if it ain’t broke”. Two stand-out examples from recent years are “hustle” and “kaizen”.
Hustle has traditionally meant to “sell or promote with energy” and young marketers, drawn to the cool urban interpretation of the word, redefined it to act as a motivator for simply doing your job, or making particularly mundane or unpleasant work more appealing. These days, hustle has replaced crunch time, an arguably less cool and far less motivating expression. This shift, however, is far more dangerous than one would expect. It’s often used to take advantage of staff and is outright dangerous to mental health. The dangerousness of hustle doesn’t come from the fact that it masks a well-known synonym for “work harder”, but that it removes any allusion to a limited time frame. Crunch time implies that there are other times for not crunching. Hustle is a state of being. Hustle is no longer about being cool, it’s about working harder, for more than normal hours, and rarely for additional compensation.
Ironically, those suggesting you hustle in the workplace are often hustlers themselves: misleading others into making tough working conditions seem fun and exciting. It’s unfair to assume every instance of “hustle” is meant to mislead, but as soon as it’s blatantly misused, the offender will lose the trust and respect of anyone they tried to manipulate.
Kaizen is another great example of terminological manipulation, but is far more complicated. Because of cultural differences and 20th century business trends, it honestly deserves a post dedicated to taking a closer look. Here’s a parting thought to sti on: if your organization has suddenly and enthusiastically embraced Kaizen in the workplace, ask yourself why. Keep an eye on what’s discussed in sessions, what actually changes, and who those changes ultimately benefit. Don’t be too quick to don the tin foil hat, but as always, be wary of rhetoric and hyperbole.
If reading this reminds you of your workplace, where you aren’t in a position of power, the most respectful approach is the safest. However, if you are in a position of power, thank you for taking the time to think about difficult problems that often go unaddressed.
To be clear, actively and intentionally avoiding honest language isn’t the same as restraining one’s self from divulging sensitive information to employees who have no practical use for it. Breaking down the motives behind terminating business relationships with existing clientele is something worth sharing within the organization because it clarifies the current priorities and goals of the company. Approaching sensitive topics with vague phrasing like “their vision wasn’t aligned with ours, but it’s okay because we’re about to hustle with some awesome new work” is simply deflective and demeaning.
While transparency is feasible at varying levels depending on your industry and organization, from my person experience it would more that appropriate for the worst offenders: technology startups involved, in some degree, with the social space. As more and companies emphasize building communities and offline engagement, this seemingly specific identifier will soon encompass the majority, if not all, of the services you use.
It makes sense: small organization built around rapid adaptation to social trends need to keep their marketing hats on 24/7, and it’s not fair to assume every silver-tongued CEO is out to get you. Tin foil hats are a great way to ruin your professional career (but relentless trust will certainly let others take advantage of you).
As a leader, remind yourself that your employees are your greatest assets and strongest allies, but only if you treat them with genuine respect and transparency. They are not stupid; you hired them for a reason. If you resort to hype and buzzwords to convey serious information, you won’t be able to maintain your status as a leader and simply become “the boss”. Leaders are more than their position of power: Leaders succeed because their teams respect and follow them. If you believe in the effectiveness of Kaizen, then give your organization the information and materials they need to operate autonomously.
As staff, you need to prove you’re worth sharing information with. It’s hard to create a solution when it relies on someone else to make the first move. Broadcasting your opinion can be dangerous, as poor timing or phrasing can permanently brand you as a negative or disruptive employee. When opportunity arises, offer an actionable and measurable strategy when given sensitive information. If you think a direct approach would be too risky, begin by establishing a reputation from leading by example: avoid using ambiguous buzzwords and when used, ask for clarification. Manipulative tactics are broken down when questioned. Confrontation hurts both parties, but it will undoubtedly hurt those in power far less. If you can, try sitting down with a manager or lead and simply ask questions. “Who can I talk to to better understand how we’re doing?” By incorporating third parties, they run the risk of potentially sensitive material becoming a game of telephone. Even if it’s just a little transparency, they are more likely to share something new than put the pressure on another lead, knowing it could come back to them down the line. “Why are you telling the staff to ask me for performance metrics?”
This is your foot in the door, but just because you’re through the door doesn’t mean you’re welcome in the home. Information is guarded by rhetoric for a reason, and that shield should be respected. By demonstrating you value honesty and transparency with actively changing your behavior, they will be more inclined to approach you with no-spin conversation.
If you manage to get a self-serving CEO to admit his “best content strategy guidelines” were actually taken from a competitor’s free e-book, demonstrate that you understand the importance of that by keeping it to yourself and privately offering specific assistance when appropriate. Share information and resources that may help to address issues or challenges that aren’t publicly known within the company. Make an effort to show you don’t just appreciate the information, but know what to do with it.
Ultimately, what’s the worst that can happen if a small company is all on the same page? If everyone understands that information is valuable and coordinates efforts for mutual success, the company and all those within it will benefit. But in all honesty, there’s no way to be certain. As stated earlier, it really depends on the industry, the size of the organization, and the existing relationship between upper management and staff.
Some leaders may not understand that this is an issue because they genuinely believe their use of hyperbole isn’t causing any harm. They likely even don’t recognize it as hyperbole. Others may not be able to cope with the idea that their organization isn’t as perfect or exciting as they advertise, or that making themselves personally vulnerable will benefit the company. It’s not their fault, they’re only human. If widespread use of vague language and hyperbole is a chronic issue in your organization and existing leaders are unable to change or address it, weigh your options. Protect your career, but more importantly protect yourself.
Key takeaways:
-Using hyperbole, ambiguous phrasing, or arbitrary buzzwords is great when you want to sell to third parties, but can be incredibly destructive when aimed at parties within your organization.
-Internal transparency will not hurt your business when information met with mutual respect.
-If you are in upper management, the biggest challenge you will face is knowingly making yourself vulnerable.
-If you are staff, the biggest challenge you will face is proving that you’re worth sharing information with.
-Treat information with respect.