The Power of Positive Thinking

Ed. Note-I am on Spring Break this week and the Two Tough Cookies graciously agreed to provide a week of guest posts.

Wrapping up this week’s communication series, I am reminded of my own personal flaws… and I can be my own worst enemy. Nothing you’ve read these past few days should be surprising to you, but I hope they have served as a reminder on some easy things you can do to improve your communications within your organization. You need to be a “trusted resource” within your organization to be an effective change agent. Even if you aren’t leading the change efforts, just reinforcing the concepts for your organizational leaders makes you an important part of the change underway. How you present yourself to the larger organization goes a long way to reinforcing your credentials as a “trusted resource” and gives you the staying power to ride the tide of change.

Take this short quiz, and recognize your thought patterns from your answers:

• You’ve been dieting for a while and you just lost 10 pounds. You think:
  1. This diet is taking so long I’m never going to look good in that suit for my brother’s wedding
  2. I’m proud of the self-control I’ve had so far
• You miss your flight, and have to wait for a later one. You think:
  1. No matter what I do, something always makes me late
  2. I should have looked at the gap between connecting flights and given myself more time to change gates
• Work rolls out a new computer app for you to use, and you are still struggling to get the hang of it. You think:
  1. I’ll embarrass myself if I ask for help
  2. I’m going to ask for help with this

In all three scenarios above, answer B is “positive thinking” because they

• Give credit for positive outcomes
• Identify strengths that make success possible
• “Failures” are “foot faults” and not a personal flaw

Answer A, on the other hand, demonstrates negative thinking because

• Success is due to luck or external factors
• Success is random and had nothing to do with hard work
• There’s assumption of failure and not success, and
• Failure comes as no surprise

Circling back to Appreciative Inquiry, we already know to focus on what success looks like to you and your organization. Emotional Intelligence has you presenting yourself in the most positive way possible through the use of understanding and working with your emotions, knowing that the power to control your reactions goes a long way to controlling the outcome of your interactions with others in the workplace. Both these disciplines focus on the positives, and the Power of Positive Thinking takes it to the next level. As Gandhi is quoted as saying:

Watch your thoughts, for they become your words… Watch your words, for they become your actions…. Watch your actions, for they become your habits… Watch your habits, for they become your values…. And understand your values, for they become your destiny.

Positive thinkers are better at coping with workplace challenges. They are more resilient, they look to be part of the solution and not the problem, are more likely to ask for help, and function better in a crisis. They also tend to have an increased capacity for joy, are kinder, and less likely to feel the negative effects of stress, because they focus on what they can change. As compliance professionals, we work in a world ripe with stress of all kinds.     So how does positive thinking help us cope with workplace challenges? Here’s an example that I hope you can derive some useful tips from….

I was faced with a situation in a manufacturing plant where one worker hated another with a vengeance, and the Helpline had multiple calls from her over the course of a couple weeks, precipitating an “intervention.” The HR manager, new to the plant (but not new to HR), had thrown his hands up and said “I can’t deal with these two!” so I offered to personally come, hear them out, and help him work through a solution.

We sat the two down in a joint session, and I set some simple ground rules. Each would get 10 minutes to “present” their case and “air” their concerns, with another 5 minutes to rebut once the other had finished talking. First instance of interruption would take a minute off their “air time,” second interruption, two minutes, third interruption would and so on. Both agreed to the terms, and I tossed a coin for who would go first. The first, who had “seniority” in the plant, argued her case, and insisted that the other be reassigned to second shift so she wouldn’t have to see her face every day. The other worker stated she’d been given a hard time since day one, and learned it was because the complainant wanted her friend (who worked second shift) to get the job on first shift instead so they could have more friend time together. She then told us that first shift was important to her, because her husband worked second shift, and this meant they didn’t have to worry about day care for their kids. What was critical was that neither party had a performance issue, nor an attendance issue. It was clear to both myself and the HR manager it simply a matter of the complainant wanting her friend to get the first shift slot instead.

We “recessed” before rebuttal, and I told the HR manager that I had an idea, if he wouldn’t mind me trying something. So, using the power of positive thinking, I invited the complainant to speak with us privately, to rebut what the other employee had to say. Giving us no new “evidence” of misbehavior, after she finished speaking the “dialogue” ensued as follows:

Q: So, you’re unhappy about Employee X working the day shift, correct?
A: Yes
Q: So, you want to have a different shift than Employee X, correct?
A: Yes
Q: And you are suggesting that we move Employee X to second shift, correct?
A: Yes
Q: Are you willing to pay for day care for Employee X’s kids while she works?
A: What?
Q: I asked, are you willing to pay for day care for Employee X to have her kids watched while she works second shift?
A: You crazy or what? That’s not my responsibility! That’s her problem!
Q: Okay, but it wasn’t her problem until you insisted we change her shift. We need help figuring out how to solve this new problem if we do as you ask. Ultimately, you want her to work a different shift than you, right? That’s what you want?
A: That’s right! So she needs to be moved to second shift!
Q: Or, you can be moved to second shift, right? I mean, that will do as you ask, won’t it? You don’t have any kids at home (focus on her “strength”), so it’s what will create the least hardship for everyone, isn’t it (focus on success)? She won’t have to get day care, you won’t have to pay for her day care (win-win), you’ll get to be with your friend, you’ll have what you want (another win-win), right? So, the way I see it we have three choices in front of us: 1) we leave things alone and you leave her alone (best choice), 2) we move her to second shift and you pay her day care (worst choice for complainant and definitely not what she anticipated), or 3) you move to second shift to be with your friend (unlikely, but “accountable” choice). What do you suggest we do from those three options? The choice is yours, all you have to do is tell us what you want us to do, and there’s really no wrong answer here from those three options (all options = success) ….

The silence in the room was deafening. The HR manager later pulled me aside and told me it took everything he had to keep a straight face, and he never in his life saw such an awestruck look on a factory worker’s face. He then thanked me for helping “document” the real issue, and giving him the insight to deal with that worker going forward. I was an instant hero for Employee X, too, as a result, and the HR manager confirmed that there were no more complaints coming from the complainant.

By simply shifting the focus of the problem a little bit, I “helped” the HR manager deal with the stressful complainant, and helped each focus on what they could change and resolve the conflict at work. By intervening on his behalf, I also took on the role of “bad cop” and he was able to preserve his “good cop” image at the plant while also successfully resolving the conflict. Further more, he was able to point to the experience any time other personal conflicts arose, and offered to bring me back anytime to work through the conflicts with the employees. No one took him up on the offer, and I still chuckle when I think back on that episode.

Our brains mimic what we see, so when we spread positivity, and show people alternative ways of thinking through problems, magic happens. I had fun with the exercise above, because it gave me the opportunity to show the complainant how her negative thinking was bringing everyone around her down, when the solution to her “problem” was really simple – I empowered her to think in terms of the hardships she was presenting to others (negativity) and gave her the tools to arrive at a positive outcome, if she was willing to take on some personal accountability in the process. Instead of thinking to myself “this woman is impossible to deal with” I thought instead “how can I empower her to solve this problem herself?” Another priceless leadership moment that I will take with me forever.

So how do you manage your thoughts to ensure positive outcomes? Like any leadership exercise, it’s a marathon, not a sprint. You have to be aware of what you’re doing (that’s where EQ comes in), and examine the triggers that send you into negativity. Change the critical thoughts into goals. Think about your values, and determine what it is you want to be. You don’t have to be positive all the time, nor should you – negative thinking can help you prepare, can also help you see the lighter side of things… It’s the yin to your yang, and helps you aim for balance. But practice your positivity, ask for help (go ahead, guys, ask for directions, it won’t hurt you), have a sense of humor, and enjoy yourself. And remember one thing if nothing else: You cannot be what you cannot see.

The Two Tough Cookies will be publishing a book of their tales shortly, under the title “You Can Not Be What You Can Not See” – look for it from Corporate Compliance Insights, coming soon. 

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the authors. The authors are not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. 

Emotional Intelligence and Mindfulness

Ed. Note-I am on Spring Break this week. The Two Tough Cookies graciously agreed to once again provide a week of guest posts. 

Remember when I said many “leaders” either aren’t aware, or don’t care, to take a few extra precautions to communicate authentically and in a manner that is meaningful, relevant, and targeted for specific results? That’s where emotional intelligence plays a big part in how you communicate. First and foremost, understand the root origin of the word “Emotion” is “to motivate.” So consider the following: When asked, how do you respond to questions like “How are you” or “How’s Things?” If you answer anything other than “fine” or “great” (or any quirky response you might deploy to illicit a chuckle), know that your response will adversely impact your effectiveness and trust in the organization. People really don’t want to know how sick your kids are, or how awful your commute was. They don’t want facts. They want nice. Drawing from what we just wrote about Appreciative Inquiry, people with a high EQ understand the importance of positivity in getting results. You must understand how your emotional state drives your performance in terms of being effective, being “trusted” and being well-received by others. So learn well how to distance yourself a bit from your reaction “in the moment,” and pay attention to what emotion group your reactions tend to fall into: Pleasant (caring, upbeat, happy), Neutral (anticipation, real interest, surprise), or Unpleasant (anger, disgust, fear). Once you master this, you will be demonstrating effective levels of “Professional Intimacy.”

The truth is, our emotions provide a wealth of information about our state of mind in any given situation. It’s our “feedback loop” which we can’t, and shouldn’t, ignore. That sinking pit in your stomach when advised of a pending issue is something that is hard-wired into your brain? You can try to hide your reservations about proceeding, but emotions show even in the most seasoned communicator – we each have our little ‘tells.’ Yale University even has developed a mood meter for your iPhone, and I frequently fondle a “Tensometer” that I have at my desk, a token given to me by a former HR colleague as a joke that tells me, much like a mood ring, if I am tense, or chilled out. I take immense satisfaction knowing that I register most often in the blue and green scales (chilled) and only rarely register in the black and red scales (freaked out). The very act of checking my mood would make me testy if it registered otherwise!

Our emotions serve to motivate us, yes indeed they do. Fight or flight responses are served up based on our emotions. Are we afraid (negative emotion) of the outcome? If so, we might go into avoidance mode (flight). If we are interested in something (neutral emotion) we might try to engage others to explore and learn more. If we are happy about something (like being told you just did a great job on a project), we will strive to repeat that performance (fight), because we like to feel good about ourselves (as we just demonstrated, AI focuses on the positive changes the “pleasant” emotions can elicit).

So what happens when we feel emotions? The brain has two minds – the emotional mind and the rational mind – and unfortunately for many of us (myself included, thanks to my “latin” heritage), the emotional mind responds more quickly than the rational mind. Emotional Intelligence is an exercise in impulse control in favor of the thinking/rational mind to ensure that we don’t allow the emotional mind to hijack the rational mind.  So slow down, step back, when you notice a strong impulse taking over. Pause, be mindful of the moment, take your time. Recognize the effects your emotions may have on your effectiveness as a leader and communicator. A common tip people recommend is to count to 10, but darn, that can be awkward in a meeting. Instead, reach for a glass of water, and take a long, slow draught. While you are swallowing, you can reset the pace of your beating heart, collect your thoughts and emotions, and formulate your response. And remember too – you cannot cry and drink at the same time (just try it, and I promise you won’t be disappointed). That trusty glass of water has saved me on many occasions, and I never go to a meeting without something to drink, just in case I have to check my emotions at the door.

EQ as a communication tool helps you develop the emotional and social skills to establish how well we

• Perceive and express ourselves
• Perceive others reactions to ourselves
• Develop and maintain appropriate social relationships
• Cope with challenges
• And use emotional information in an effective and meaningful way.

When deployed successfully, EQ can aid you in self-perception – understanding your emotional triggers and developing coping skills to let the rational mind emerge triumphant. By doing so, you develop adaptive behaviors that aid you in properly expressing your emotions, develop and maintain better personal relationships, and make better decisions as a result. With a strong sense of identity, you begin to develop the tools to accept and respect yourself, which helps you appreciate perceived positives, as well as develop inner strength, self-assuredness, and self-confidence. And it will glow off of you…

Please don’t confuse emotional control with emotional intelligence, however. People with strong emotional control but without EQ often come across as uncaring, cold, unfeeling. Conversely, people with little emotional control come across as too “touchy feely,” or “unstable” or, my personal favorite, a “loose cannon.” Neither extreme make for leaders worth following when trying to effect a positive organizational shift in culture, because neither comes across as trustworthy or authentic. What’s prescribed is a balance of appropriate distance paired with professional intimacy.   People with a high EQ have mastered the art of instilling a sense of caring, while motivating others to act in ways that suit their purpose, never crossing the line of familiarity that breeds contempt.

Another trap to avoid at all costs is passive aggressiveness. I am ashamed to admit I have been guilty of it on many occasions, and didn’t even know it, until someone used the term describing someone else and I had the temerity to finally look it up. To my surprise, I saw myself described, writ large and crystal clear on the pages of Wikipedia. I was decidedly NOT guilty of passive resistance to expected work requirements, opposition, stubbornness, and negative attitudes in response to requirements for normal performance levels expected of others. Definitely not me. I am a renowned overachiever, and but for my one run-in at my previous employer, I have always received high performance ratings. What I was guilty of, however, was conflict avoidance, rarely saying what I truly felt whenever I felt a disservice had been done to me, or my colleagues. I had a hard time asking for what I felt was right, and as a result, did not come across as powerfully as I could have or should have, given my role. I have since learned my lesson that you can’t get what you want if you don’t ask for it, and there is a proper way to express your feelings and not alienate the world, but boy, it took me a LONG time to get there.

So how does one get started with EQ? There are gobs of resources on the internet – just search ‘emotional intelligence’ (with quotes to narrow your results), and you are on your way. Take this EQ test to determine your EQ at home. But while you are at it, I suggest you look at “mindfulness” as well, as an EQ companion primer to help you practice impulse control, which will serve you well when you want your rational mind to speak first.

Worksheet in Two Tough Cookies Guest Posts-Spring Break 2015

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the authors. The authors are not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. 

Trust in the Balance

Ed. Note-I am on Spring Break this week. The Two Tough Cookies graciously agreed to once again provide a week of guest posts. 

This tough Cookie is grateful to have been asked to submit some articles for Tom Fox while he visits with his daughter during Spring Break. When I pondered what would be an appropriate topic for the week, immediately ‘communication’ came to mind. After all, it seems that an utter lack of integrity in an organization is attributable, in large part, to what, and how, management communicates to the larger organization. So it is fitting to dwell on this topic for a little bit, but given I just spent the greater part of a week surrounded by the largest gathering of privacy professionals in the world, I thought I’d start with a very specific type of communication – confidential communications. It is the nature of confidentiality that emboldens people to speak up and be heard, such as through whistleblowing schemes. Posting anonymously has emboldened the Two Tough Cookies to share with you our Tales from the Crypt last spring and summer. The cloak of secrecy has its value insofar as it peels back the protective filters we ordinarily engage in our everyday communications, and allows us to speak freely without fear of retaliation. This freedom that confidentiality and privacy gives us is a powerful tool, that can be used for the better, or for the worse, depending on your intent.

The opening remarks at this gathering of privacy pros were given by two very prominent figures in the world of privacy. The first who spoke was Glenn Greenwald, journalist for The Guardian who blew the Edward Snowden story wide open. Mr. Greenwald’s talk focused on what hasn’t, and has, changed since the Snowden expose came to light. What hasn’t changed is the law, surprisingly enough. Many Americans believe we have a fundamental right to privacy, much like our first amendment right to free speech. But as Mr. Greenwald was quick to point out, Congress has not enacted one single piece of legislation to protect our personal privacy since Snowden’s expose. Yes, we have a hodgepodge of laws that protect certain types of information (mostly financial and/or health info), and most states (47 at last count) have enacted complementary laws to ensure they can swiftly act to protect its citizens in the event of a breach or what have you. But our constitution and our federal legislature is remarkably silent with respect to a citizen’s right to be left well alone. Wake up America. You most certainly do not have a right to privacy. In fact, there is a bill that just passed (March 14) in a closed door session of the Senate Committee on Intelligence that, if enacted, would serve as carte blanche authorization to search your on-line history across the nation … Notably missing from the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015? Why, privacy protections for US citizens, of course!

Greenwald reminded us all of the immense personal sacrifice embraced by Snowden when he made the decision to blow the whistle on the US government. I am not here to defend him, just explain him in plain English. Call him a traitor, send him off to Gitmo, hate him, adore him, do what you must.   But like many whistleblowers before him, Snowden analyzed the situation, weighed the risk to his own personal freedom, and notwithstanding the overwhelming odds he’d be branded a criminal, he spoke up. He felt, simply put, betrayed by his country. The expectation of privacy which we all shared up to that point was a mere cloak of invisibility that would not withstand even the slightest scrutiny. The thought that innocent people could not happily surf the internet, or email, or enter into e-commerce, without someone watching their every move, did not sit well with Mr. Snowden. It was tantamount, in his mind, to a warrantless search with no probable cause. And for that, he was willing to rot in jail for the rest of his life to ensure that this “lawlessness” on the part of the US government was reined in, so to speak.

What has changed, according to Mr. Greenwald, is technology. Startled by the piercing blast of Snowden’s whistle, tech companies scrambled to close back doors, reinforce firewalls, patch vulnerabilities, and offer consumers free tools to encrypt anything and everything in response to one man’s cry. Snowden succeeded where many congressmen have failed. While we may not have a single uniform law to grant us that elusive right to privacy (yet), the tech companies have effectively (up to now) shuttered the lens of our government’s spying eyes with a liberal dose of encryption. That, however, may erode away if the full Congress passes the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015.

I first understood the importance of encryption early on, and it was the number one reason I went to law school. I wanted to be a spy – or a counter spy. Whatever you want to call it, I wanted to catch bad guys, plain and simple. I was infected by the bug well before terrorism took root on US soil. It was, you could say, in my DNA. My grandfather had been an “intelligence officer” with the OSS during the 40’s and 50’s, monitoring the whereabouts of German “expatriots” in Latin America, using the cover of his father-in-law’s radio station to send coded messages back to the States. His brother, my great uncle, encrypted and decrypted messages sent and received by my grandfather, then moved over to the NSA when it was formed to eventually retire as a master cryptographer. My dad was in naval intelligence, as was my mother’s brother. I even wrote my upper level paper in law school on the implications of remote sensing on a citizen’s right to due process, and whether or not intelligence gleaned from such surveillance would be admissible in court without a search warrant (this was long before 9/11, when those satellites could only give you 3 meters resolution – today, it’s a far scarier prospect than many of us realize with satellite imaging resolution reduced to mere inches). But like many others, life got in the way of my career ambitions and I ended up on another path. I still get to go after bad guys, just not for my country.

The next speaker was an equally prominent figure, Professor Michael Sandel, who teaches Justice, Harvard University’s most popular course in its esteemed history. Sandel led his captive audience on a journey of discovery, exploring the morality of what I will term “compromised privacy.” Sandel probed for answers as to whether or not it was okay to bargain away pieces of your privacy in exchange for preferred pricing, or shared benefits. Why not exchange bits and bytes of data about yourself, if it’s going to customize your online experience “for the better” or perhaps get you deals you otherwise wouldn’t otherwise get? Or maybe use your data to enhance your health, improve your well-being? There were folks on both sides of the fence, until an audience member named Brad spoke up. Aside from being creepy, Brad pointed out that people change their behaviors when they know they are being observed, for better or for worse, and that not all change was necessarily good.

What came to mind as Brad and Professor Sandel were jockeying about was George Orwell’s 1984, with Big Brother watching every move of every citizen, who in turn suppressed every impulse to fit the expected norm. The premise of Brad’s position is that as people’s behaviors change, so do societal norms. These evolving norms can either serve to reinforce the moral compass, or erode it, dislodging our True North. It is beyond our capacity to foresee which direction compromised privacy will lead us, for the better, or for the worse. Given recent trends on social media, this Tough Cookie is decidedly of the mind that things are not looking for the better….

As leaders in corporate America, we too can influence the “social norm” of our organizations, as we are being observed daily by those we lead. Like the lesson to be drawn from Brad’s astute insight, we know we are being watched, and we know we should put filters on our communications. The truth is, many “leaders” either aren’t aware, or don’t care, to take a few extra precautions to communicate authentically and in a manner that is meaningful, relevant, and targeted for specific results. The Tough Cookie Tales from the Crypt have given you plenty of examples to prove that point. If you’ve taken the time to assess the culture of your organization, and have some data points that indicate there are some gaps that need filling, we suggest you go ahead and poke the bear. The goal, remember, is to influence your organization’s societal norms, and our hope is the tools and insights we’ll give in the next few postings will help you do so for the better.

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the authors. The authors are not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. 

Tales from the Crypt-Rule No. 10-Rule – There is no “I(ntegrity)” in Team-Part II

Ed. Note-today we conclude a two-part series from the Two Tough Cookies about some of the toughest choices a compliance practitioner may face. As important as this message is for the compliance practitioner, I hope that this series will be read by senior management as well….As Part I was concluded, the Tough Cookie had just been terminated.

Unfortunately for me, there’s no employment law preventing discrimination based on bullying, jealously or insecurity; no law against termination for simply not liking your subordinate or the subordinate’s ability to garner respect.   The hostile work environment I suffered through the entire prior year was due to her insecurity around me, and not based on any protected class. I simply got the shaft for speaking up and expressing the concerns of the team.   Her mistake? She gave me nothing left to lose.

I’ve had a few weeks to cool down since that initial rush of anger, and revenge is best when served with cold, hard logic, and irrefutable facts. Throwing caution to the wind (well, not entirely), I made the ultimate act of moral courage, and sent a letter to executive management, asking that they review the character of the person that they were entrusting the reputation of the company with. For the first time in my career, I was a whistleblower, one of the “one percenters” I used to joke about that throttled the hotline with endless unsubstantiated complaints of “he said, she said.” Now, I am totally sympathetic to the courage it takes to step up to the plate, stand apart from the crowd, and speak up in the hopes of being an earnest agent for positive change.

When asked what resolution looked like for me,   I replied that I was satisfied that the company took my complaint seriously, that this investigation was taking place. I also asked the investigator to thank the company for taking me seriously. I was asked on several occasions “You want her fired, don’t you?!?” and not once did I say yes, even though I wished for it desperately. My response was merely “I just want the company to be aware of the character and qualifications of the person in this most important role, and that appropriate actions be taken when all is said and done.” I did mention it would be nice to have a job again, but that I had little hope of returning.

What did I expect as an outcome? Nothing. What did I get as a reward for that final act of moral courage? Boatloads. First, and foremost, by taking my time, and reducing my concerns from 20 pages of emotional ranting to less than a handful of concise, fact-laden pages, I came across as legitimate. Second, my patience and due diligence paid off – by taking my time to sort through my emotions and only give a factual account of events, and seeking out someone in authority to hear my case, I ensured that my voice would be heard. The company listened. An investigation ensued. The circumstances were weighed, measured, and she was found wanting.

Being in the integrity department is a tough spot to be in – you are supposed to represent the even hand of justice, you are supposed to be the unbiased, objective observer who gathers facts and makes recommendations, when someone behaves badly towards another. No one EVER stops to think who you can call if you are the one on the receiving end of misconduct, or if you become aware of an issue and confidentiality provisions silence your voice (such as in the case of the dual duty corporate counsel and compliance pro) and hobble your effectiveness to effect positive change. If you find yourself in a dilemma such as mine, circle the wagons, but as Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, “Trust, then verify.” Always remember, Integrity and Compliance is not a team function – it is most often singular acts of moral courage taken by brave individuals that override personal risk and reward. High Integrity often demands that you be willing to risk everything for the sake of integrity, to be labeled a pariah, to be shunned, to be shown the door for voicing the unpopular decision. But many times what is said is what is needed to be said. Just don’t let the situation take you by surprise like I did, or for heaven’s sake, don’t wait an unreasonable time for something to change. When I first suffered demoralizing behavior at her hands and got no relief, I should have escalated the matter, going directly to the TOP of HR, to the TOP of legal, and outlined my concerns to insulate myself from retaliation months earlier. I did not. Instead, I chose to simply wait for the change I had been promised, reluctant to make waves, fearful of establishing a reputation as a “whiner” instead of a “winner.” While my intentions were good, the outcome for me, clearly, was not. Here, the compliance leaders were too inexperienced to understand or appreciate the adverse repercussions from both their actions and inaction.

While I still am searching for that high integrity organization that will recognize and appreciate the value I bring, the insights I can share, and the wealth of experiences that have shaped who I am today, I usually sleep well at night, knowing that I have done no wrong. I have left no casualties behind, and I have always treated people with respect, sometimes more than they deserved.   I understand my former boss is no longer in a role where she manages people, which is a good thing.    In fact, I hear she may be getting a dose of her own medicine, but I sincerely hope not – no one deserves the relentless bullying and belittling, facing each work day fearful of the outcome.  If, through each of life’s trials, we can see the lesson, then we can move forward. I know I am a better person for it, even though I still am suffering the consequences of an extended unemployment.   I daily struggle with the choice of telling the truth about why I left that company (retaliated against for reporting a violation), and opting for a more benign “reason for leaving” (departmental reorganization). The stigma of being perceived as an “undesirable” candidate if I am honest about blowing the whistle is a real concern of mine, and I have been passed over in favor of other candidates because such a short stint at my level does not come across well to potential employers. I don’t want to be caught in a lie, because recovery from that route is nearly impossible when you claim to be an “Integrity” professional. I face a real Hobson’s choice, and it is the one thing that keeps me up at night since whichever path I choose can have lasting negative implications for me both professionally, and personally. I am hopeful for the future – the eternal optimist in me, I guess. I do not relish the prospect of either having to live with a lie, or an interminable time of unemployment and the risk of losing my home and my livelihood for taking the high road – the very dear price of moral courage.

Who are the Two Tough Cookies?

Tough Cookie 1 has spent the more than half of her 20+ legal career working in the Integrity and Compliance field, and has been the architect of award-winning and effective ethics and compliance programs at both publicly traded and privately held companies. Tough Cookie 2 is a Certified Internal Auditor and CPA who has faced ethical and compliance challenges in a variety of industries and geographies and recently led a global internal audit team. Their series “Tales from the Crypt: Tough Choices for Tough Cookies” are drawn largely from real life experiences on the front line of working in Integrity & Compliance, and personal details have been scrubbed to protect, well, you know, just about everyone…

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the authors. The authors are not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The authors, their affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Authors give their permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the authors.

 

 

Tales from the Crypt-Rule No. 10 – There is no “I(ntegrity)” in Team-Part I

Ed. Note-today we begin a two-part series from the Two Tough Cookies about some of the toughest choices a compliance practitioner may face. As important as this message is for the compliance practitioner, I hope that this series will be read by senior management as well….

Oh, how’d I’d LOVE to make her suffer. I am consumed by it… really consumed by it. I have never in my life felt so “needing” revenge, and it scares the heck out of me. It’s twisted my usual good humor into a never-ending pity party, and I want to feel whole again, gosh darn it! From that woman’s singular act of self-preservation, I knew the fear of want. I knew first-hand the anguish and despair, and how quickly those sentiments evolved into red-rimmed fury. The sheer malevolence of her calm, detached demeanor as she asked me to hand over my badge revealed the underbelly of my chosen profession as an integrity professional – the constant battle against the dark side of humanity. Here I was, the victim instead of the advocate, feeling the blood drain from my face while she calmly called security to escort me out of the building like a common criminal, all the while inured to the suffering she would bring upon me, my family, and more importantly, the other team members in the compliance function.

This Tale from our Crypt highlights the very real risk of being a “team player” whatever the consequences, and the pitfalls of choosing the path less traveled for the sake of Integrity. I was just ushered out of my job by my boss, who was so lacking in experience she’d openly admit to anyone who listened “I have no clue what I’m doing” and then laugh as though it was something to take lightly. Instead of instilling confidence, she was singlehandedly making a laughingstock out of the entire team. The echoes in the halls as I made my final trip through that revolving door were “they just let go of the wrong person….” In her eagerness to get rid of me, she gave me no severance, even though there admittedly was no misconduct. She gave me nothing to lose but my dignity, but that had disappeared a long time ago, as I suffered her daily bullying and belittling comments in front of my team members, stunned into silence by her abject disregard for my experience.

I spent the last two decades running compliance programs, won local and national awards, and regulatory approval for my programs. I am darn good at what I do. I have earned the right to be confident in my field, having seen, and done it all, with a great measure of success. I have had my moments of insecurity – chilling moments of doubt, born on the wings of fleeting glimpses of the dark underbelly of corporate America, while over-eager executives trampled over lesser beings while they competitively climbed to the top, dealing with the inevitable fallout as gatekeeper to the company’s hotline. My repertoire of workplace investigations run the gambit from disparagement, discrimination, harassment, rape, poor management, bomb threats, workplace violence, extramarital affairs (and their illegitimate progeny), embezzlement, theft, drug dealing, child pornography, prostitution, bribes, corruption, plant explosions, accidental death and dismemberment, suicide – the list goes on.

The profession of Integrity & Compliance is littered with individuals who suffer insularity gladly, compelled to resist lemming-like congeniality, always watching, weighing-in, bracing ourselves against the tide, distanced from the malice and ill will that is the hallmark of competitive corporate America. We are a rare breed, delicately balancing professional intimacy with objectivity, keeping even our closest workplace “friends” at arms’ length, humbled by the very good chance that these friends might very well be victims of management override at some point in your career, and that you will have the difficult task of telling them their time is up. When things turn for the worse, we often feel powerless, uncertain who can be taken in confidence to help you sleuth through the “who dunnits” that are part and parcel of hotline investigations. You find yourself hoping against hope that the Human Resources partners you rely upon would get it right, would take the high road, and offer resistance to management when the fault lay at management’s door. Mostly, they do, but sometimes, not. It was those times when HR didn’t offer resistance, didn’t take the unpopular stand, that will stay with me forever, scarring my tender soul, leaving an open, festering wound that will never harden with cynicism, leaving me hopelessly optimistic that what I do for a living, but more importantly, how I go about doing it, has meaning, makes a difference, makes things better for someone, anyone…. And that festering wound had just been ripped wide open by this person who had yet to understand how important her job was to others.

I had been “downsized” out of two organizations already during the recent economic recession, and had intentionally stepped back to get out of the hot seat, not wanting to suffer yet another upheaval in my career. I kept reminding myself of the conversation I had had with my doctor the year prior, when he told me that eventually I was going to have to choose between my heavy international travel schedule and my desire to shed some pounds for health reasons. So I sought out a more limited role with little to no travel, and just spent the last year of my life, swallowing my pride, while my emotional well-being was in rapid decline thanks to this person’s  belittling behaviors towards me in front of others.   I was unnerved as no good deed I could possibly do went unpunished, one way or another. I put every ounce of effort I could muster into making it work, but I never thought I’d be subject to the hostility that oozed out of this person on a daily basis.   Her venom towards me was wearing down my defenses – my civility and professionalism were wearing thin.

I inwardly cringed each time she stumbled her way through a meeting, shuddered at every misspelled word, every grammatical error she published in the company newsletter. I kept my mouth shut, I really did, until I was asked by the CCO to rate her performance as part of a 360◦ review, and I was honest in my assessment, laying out first her high level of skills in some areas, but objectively critical of her shortcomings as well. The CCO confided I was not the first to observe her shortcomings that I so carefully articulated, and assured me that management was aware of the issues, and action would be taken. I patiently waited months for positive change to occur within the function. I honestly believed it was only a matter of time when things would change, hopefully for the better. When the CCO was promoted, his replacement (an internal hire) was left to handle the issue.

When the new CCO advised me that he was going to do nothing for the first ninety days, I quickly realized that the best outcome for me would be to either move my role out of the compliance organization, or find another job.   The company actively promoted from within, so I started to look for opportunities elsewhere where I could shine. I also worked closely with my company-appointed mentor to develop the case for moving my particular role into the business, where I felt it would be more effective. When my boss realized my year anniversary was only a week away, freeing me up for transfer within the company without her permission, she decided to have a “counseling” session with me. Favoring candor over deception, I let her know that I was considering another opportunity within the company that I was qualified for. I also let her know that I was mulling over perhaps exploring the option of moving my role over to the business side, to be more effective and secure that all-important “seat at the table” when critical business decisions were being made.  Her reply was, “Yes, I think you’d be good in the business. I have been hearing good things about you from the business partners you work with.”

My mistake? I had no idea how vindictive she was. After all, this was the home of Integrity & Compliance, the “speak up, speak out” department, the “no retaliation” champions!!! Instead of engaging in a productive dialogue to determine what would be best for the company, she then took it upon herself to “counsel” me about speaking with anyone about any concerns I had with her or the compliance function. Her exact words were “you are not to speak with anyone.”  A seasoned integrity and compliance pro knows what those words mean.   All my senses on high alert, I knew immediately that I was “at risk” for disclosing my desire to be considered for another role in the company. Confiding in one of my colleagues in the department about the discussion with our boss, she let me know that she, too, had been counseled not to speak up about the problems she was having working in that ‘team’ environment, as had another team member who had confided in her.  I was not alone, and our “team” was facing a crisis of unprecedented proportions – the hotline, and every other door for expressing concerns, were slamming shut in our faces. We could “go with the flow” and keep our mouths shut as we had been instructed, or stand out, speak up. I offered to speak up on behalf of the team to the new CCO, and they readily accepted.

I scheduled the meeting, and opened it with the statement that the team wished for me to speak with him on their behalf about a concern we were facing in the department. I let the CCO know I felt I was “at risk” for speaking up, but the matter was too important to leave unspoken, as the entire team’s morale was in a downward spiral. I then told him that our boss had issued a gag order against us, which we believed was a violation of the Code of Conduct. The CCO reiterated that he wasn’t going to do anything for at least 90 days. The following week, I was terminated with the excuse that I was “unable to work in the compliance function.” Huh?!? I still don’t know what that means…

In Part 2 tomorrow, the Tough Cookie tells us what happened next and the (sometimes) price of moral courage. Same Bat Time, Same Bat Channel

Who are the Two Tough Cookies?

Tough Cookie 1 has spent the more than half of her 20+ legal career working in the Integrity and Compliance field, and has been the architect of award-winning and effective ethics and compliance programs at both publicly traded and privately held companies. Tough Cookie 2 is a Certified Internal Auditor and CPA who has faced ethical and compliance challenges in a variety of industries and geographies and recently led a global internal audit team. Their series “Tales from the Crypt: Tough Choices for Tough Cookies” are drawn largely from real life experiences on the front line of working in Integrity & Compliance, and personal details have been scrubbed to protect, well, you know, just about everyone…

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the author. The author is not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author.