Democracy in Business?

I’ll be going to Spain in July to visit the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation (MCC) and learn about how they run their business.  MCC is the largest Basque business group with 92,000 employees and has, for the most part, been able to withstand the global economic downturn with minimal layoffs.  One article I read in preparation for the trip was Rothschild’s Workers’ Cooperatives and Social Enterprise: A Forgotten Route to Social Equity and Democracy (2009).  The author suggests that if companies were run more democratically (like worker-owned cooperatives), that democratic decision-making would expand to the political arena (despite the ability to vote, many Americans don’t).

A few interesting facts to consider:

1. During the 1950s, for each dollar in federal taxes paid by U.S. households, corporations paid 80 cents.  By the 2000s, for each dollar paid by households, corporations aggregately pay 20 cents. 

2. UC Berkeley estimates that in the next decade, some 14 million white-collar jobs will be outsourced.  Furthermore, the U.S. Dept of Labor estimates that new service-sector jobs that are being created pay 25% to 50% less than the jobs being exported.  

3. The U.S. has gone through eight recessions since World War II.  According to the Economic Policy Institute, economic growth typically is strongest in the 3 years after the trough of a recession with corporate profits typically averaging 14% and wages rising 7%.  However, in the last recession that ended in 2002, the average corporate profit gain was 60% and wages fell by 1.7%.  

During my time working at a medical device company, there was a significant layoff in the fall of 2012, followed by smaller, quiet layoffs.  These layoffs made me feel uncomfortable because of the procurement activity I was supporting (outsourcing) and because of the heavy workloads I knew many of my colleagues had.  The executives were not letting people go due to lack of work, rather they were trying to make shareholders happy by reducing costs while increasing profits, and in turn improve the stock price.  Their lack of transparency about the layoffs and outsourcing activities is very different in comparison to cooperatives’ sharing of information and decision-making.  If workers had the ability to participate in decision-making, I do not believe there would be as many layoffs and disparity in salaries.  With my desire to teach and my feelings about corporations, I left the corporate world and chose to partake in the Mondragon experience.  The idea of an organization that thrives through participatory leadership and management gives me hope that capitalism is not the only way.

Rothschild presented five reasons why the cooperative model has not had a bigger presence in the U.S.:

1. American capitalism and the accumulation of wealth without shame.  The rich do not get embarrassed by the large income disparity between them and the poor.  This explains why executives don’t mind laying off workers while increasing their own pay.

2. Agency heads and deputy directors of public-sector agencies have little incentive to share decision-making authority with civil servants. 

3. The “hierarchal culture of capitalism” has become the norm in the U.S.  When talking with a co-worker and my brother about how executives treat employees, both said they would do the same thing; if one were “smart” enough to become rich, even at the expense of others, then one should do it.

4. Thanks to Taylor’s “scientific management” principles, U.S. companies are known for bureaucratic structures with each manager supervising fewer employees.  Those of us at large companies have experienced the frustrating bureaucratic red tape when trying to get decisions made.

5. In other countries, social democratic or labor parties support the development of workers’ cooperatives, but the U.S. has no such group to support cooperatives. And with capitalism the “norm” in the U.S., many look at democratic cooperatives as a strange idea.

The idea of bringing more democracy into the “economic arena,” which I agree with Rothschild should be a way of life, will not be easy.  Especially with those already in power, where there is no incentive to change.  I hope that by going into teaching and sharing ideas like those in Rothschild’s article and knowledge about organizations like Mondragon, new perspectives can be learned and change can happen. It is in this space of teaching that I find my voice and feel empowered.  In the meantime, I look forward to writing more about Mondragon and sharing what I learn.

Decisions Decisions

Another semester has finished.  Time has flown by and I apologize for not posting sooner.  But so much has changed since the last post.  I’ve accepted a graduate assistantship at my university.  I am now working for the assessment department, helping the director in assessing academic programs and student outcomes.  In layman’s terms, I help create surveys and tools to evaluate program and student performance, and with that information provide analysis and reporting to decision makers on opportunities for improvement and for accreditation purposes.

The theme for this blog entry then will be decision-making because accepting this position was a process.  And after talking with my advisor, who intuitively pointed out that I gather information from everyone (and their mother) before coming to a conclusion, I thought it fitting to explain how I came to be where I am today.

I’d been thinking about leaving my full time job in sourcing for several months, and with some financial planning and a supportive spouse, put in my notice in mid-April.  I figured some other opportunity would present itself later in the summer.  Actually, I’d been expecting a job opportunity at a public, research university, advising on sourcing processes and best practices.  Unfortunately, that opportunity was slow to come, and suddenly a week after I had put in my notice, I got a call from my private, faith-based university to interview for the assessment position.

The interview was nerve-wracking.  As soon as I arrived I was told to take a test in the computer lab.  I was handed an academic planning report and some data and asked to analyze and create a report for it in less than 25 minutes.  I was hyperventilating the first ten minutes, I’d never worked with academic data, and it was on the counseling program (which I have absolutely no experience with).  With only 15 minutes left, I decided to just approach it like I do with spend reports at work, so I looked for trends, compared it to the targets, created some charts on the data and created an executive summary of my findings.  Who knew that spend analysis was a lot like higher education assessment.  Except that spend data doesn’t yell at you because it doesn’t have time to complete a survey.

In less than 24 hours of the interview, the director called to offer me the position.  I’d done well on the test (even catching an error in the data) and my business background provided the professionalism she desired.  I was unable to accept at that moment, I needed time to think about it.  And here comes the decision-making.  My gut was jumping for joy at the opportunity to work at my university, and with faculty that would hopefully help me do more research and publish.  But my analytical brain was telling me to look at all the facts and consider the opportunity carefully.  I talked with my spouse, the other graduate assistants, my advisor, my then-coworkers, my parents, and even the hiring manager at the research university I’d be letting down if I took this assistantship.

On one hand, I had a job offer waiting for me, and on the other, an opportunity for a job, but no guarantee in writing.  The nail in the coffin was a two-minute conversation with a teacher during an action research conference I was attending. She asked me what my end game was (to become faculty), and she said consulting opportunities will always be there, but working with faculty and doing research in this capacity will not; alluding to the fact that to become faculty, one has to publish.  So after much deliberation and data collection, I went with my gut choice and accepted the job.  I’m three weeks in now and very happy.   The hilarious part of it all is that my new director and I are alike in so many ways.  The way we analyze and interpret things, our attention to detail, even the clichés we use. We also have the same people-managing style.  The main difference though is she is extroverted and I am introverted.  I can already tell that she’s going to be a great advocate for me.

So what have I learned after reflecting on this decision-making process?  That I have to make the decision that best helps me reach my goals.  It’s not about the financial impact anymore, because obviously, making money didn’t satisfy me.  It’s definitely not about trying to achieve an image someone else is projecting on me.  [I will not be anyone’s model-minority].  Also, I needed a job that wouldn’t kill me while being in school.  And I needed work-life-balance that wouldn’t have me killing my husband. (who says I’m a lot less grumpy now).

I will still describe my work experiences at prior companies (defense, medical device, and higher education).  But I will also get to write about my new job too.  And a friend of mine wants to do consulting work together on diversity for companies.  Thus, I will always be a practitioner.  So thanks for reading and stay tuned!  Year one is done!

Embracing Feedback

Giving and receiving feedback isn’t always the easiest thing to do. For some, its the hardest thing to do.  Last week in class we were discussing the purpose of critical friends. In our program, critical friends are colleagues that provide constructive feedback on our work.  It’s a necessity if we are to become better writers, presenters, etc.  Giving feedback can be difficult because 1) it takes time to give feedback and 2) it can be tricky to convey feedback in a constructive way.  Receiving feedback is also difficult because 1) it means we have to change something about ourselves and 2) it means we need to improve.

At work, when I give feedback to my team members, I try to follow Brene Brown’s checklist (DaringGreatly-EngagedFeedback).  I understand that feedback is hard to receive and can cause people to become defensive.  I am also aware that people don’t like the situation to be sugarcoated only to have a bomb of negativity get dropped on them.  So when I provide feedback I try my best to show the other person that it comes from a place of love and care.  Giving feedback through a live discussion is very helpful, especially on complex issues.  That way I can understand what the other person was thinking (which clarifies the intent) so we can find creative ways to address the issue.

As for receiving feedback, I’m fortunate to have critical friends that offer feedback in constructive ways, although the first time reading the comments is always a little tough.  And sometimes I receive feedback that feels like I was just stabbed jabbed by a knife, but I try to take each comment as an opportunity (or challenge) to improve.  I hope with time feedback gets easier, but until then, the belief that the feedback is well-intended and a new opportunity will have to do.  And maybe a box of Mocha Almond Fudge or a big glass of wine.