Beyond Workplace Toxicity: Sue Mann on Transforming Culture

Life happens, and not always the way we expect it to. Every single day we face change, stress, and uncertainty. What if you could learn to thrive no matter what life throws your way? Resilience expert Adam Markell and his inspiring guests explore breakthrough strategies to fully embrace change and build the resilience required to become change.

Proof.

Welcome back to another episode of the Change Proof podcast. I'm your host, Adam Markell. I'm so happy that you guys are here with me today. I want to share a little bit about my guest and then get right into this great interview. Her name is Sue Mann. From being the only female head of a top rated South African diplomatic mission in the Middle east and literally coming under fire through a 30 year career as a consultant, organizational leader and advisor to the federal government, sue compassionately speaks truth to power to support leaders in shifting from a destructive, abrasive style to a constructive one. Sue's expertise in the area of management consulting and how it is that you create truly epic leadership cultures that embrace people, that nurture people as opposed to extracting everything from them and leaving them often empty as a result. This is really something I'm so passionate about myself. And to find another leader, somebody who's really made a difference in the world, sharing her philosophy and working at the core level directly with these leaders that often have styles of leadership that are not warm and fuzzy and don't necessarily contribute something very positive to the organizational culture. This lady, she's got quite a number of unique answers and perspectives and we're going to dive into that right now. So sit back and enjoy my conversation with Sue Mann. Jump right into on the Road to Jericho, which is the title of your book, and how that book relates to the workplace and to the workforce and what people are dealing with today. And that's just a broad introduction, but I want to maybe let's start with what the book is about and we can get into that, how it informs your view of the work world and even your work in the world, let's say.

Thanks for that, Adam. Yeah, the opening scene of the book gets right to it. Somebody who is so devastated by a workplace experience that they don't even know that they're going to make it home. And another person who feels completely righteous in what they've done. And it's an exploration of how these two people landed in that place and the stories, you know, without turning one into a victim and the other into an evil bastard, treating them in all their complex humanity, because that is who we're dealing with in workplaces complex, messy human beings who have histories. But I think so often we don't see that in workplaces. We just see widgets, bodies, people who need to do tasks rather than this whole thing. And that's a huge part of the work that I do in the world.

Why do you think it is that? Maybe this is not even a question. That's. It's almost obvious on some level. But I do want to get your thoughts on why do you think people are seen the way they are seen in the workplace and have been for a long, long time? Any thoughts on that? Any research to.

How long do we have?

I know.

I think it's many, many reasons, Adam. I don't think there's a simple reason. I think it's part of the way our workplaces are structured. It's how we're socialized and cultured. You know, the culture that we come into. It's around what gets rewarded and what doesn't, around profit and profit requirements. And therefore, do we see people. I mean, we call them resources or what do we do with resources? We mine them. We extract them to get the most value out of them. But human beings are not gold to be extracted from the earth. Although on that note, there's an absolutely beautiful quote from Andrew Carnegie that people are developed the same way gold is mined. In the process, several tons of dirt might be excavated. But you don't go in looking for the dirt. You go in looking for the gold. And, you know, I think it starts there. What is work? What is it about? How are organizations structured? And then just the language we use that we land up seeing, you know, there's so many comparisons between people and sort of trying to compare them to computers, you know, streamline, optimize, get greater, greater efficiency out of them. It's like just in that language alone, we're dehumanizing people just a little bit, and we're objectifying them just a little bit. And that just starts the process. I mean, I'm not saying it's.

I think the language. I'm just gonna jump in for a second here on that because. So I don't forget, actually, even though I'm writing notes as we're speaking, language is really important, and I appreciate very much you pointing that out. And human resources. There's an interesting history around this I find intriguing. And I want to. I want to ask you. Well, before I get into the little history, what. What do you think of the. The term? I mean, you've already indicated with respect to resources that we mine Them, we extract them.

I'd rather just call what it is.

Is it an appropriate term today in this day and age to call the group of folks that work human resources?

They're just people.

So it used to be this. I guess this'll be the dive into the history. People used to be called personnel at work. They were referred to as personnel. It was a personnel department. So some of us might be even recall when that was the case. But in the early 80s, it shifted from sort of personnel or personnel department to human resources. And I'm just curious what. Any thoughts? I. We didn't prepare for this, so just getting your off the cuff opinion of it, but you think one term is.

Evolve our language and we should. But is that.

I guess that's my question. Is this an evolution? Because evolution to me is about growth. And the opposite is devolution or entropy or whatever you want to call it. But so is. Is there. Are we at a point where the term human resources might not be the best term to move forward? I suspect that when we went, when we moved from personnel or personnel department as a way to, you know, seems very cold and, and you know, it's not, it's not. It doesn't feel like really embracing the people aspect of it. So when we move to human resources as a term, as a way to describe the function and the like, I think perhaps there were some folks thinking that that that was warmer and fuzzier, that that was more inclusive, that that would be more empowering to the, to workers. And yet I agree with you. I think that the terminology human resources implies that people are assets and things that you can extract something from. And I'm asking in your thought, in this day and age, in 2024, is it potentially time to pivot away from human resources as a term to describe our workforce and potentially be referring to that group differently?

I think we're already seeing it. Adam. There are many organizations that now refer to, you know, the people department or the chief people, the chief people Officer, the cpo as opposed to the chro. There are many organizations that are already doing this. I think it's starting to happen already. And yes, I mean language evolves.

I'm seeing those roles, these sort of the titles for roles change and embrace, like you say at cpo. I haven't seen any departments that have been renamed from hr. HR is really well embedded in our. In the culture.

Yeah, it's absolutely become the shorthand. And I think we're, we're at the messy change. I think we're at a, you know, a messy, inflection, changeover point. Some things are changing, some words stay, and where will we be in the next 20 years? Who knows? That's a good thing, I think. But I think that we are starting to see this happen because I think what we're seeing more and more is like people are saying, see me as the human being that I am.

Right. So let's dive in. You have this book that is telling a story. It's fictional, Right.

Heavily based on lived experience.

Okay.

So you could almost call it creative nonfiction.

I don't want you to give away the book, but I certainly want people to want to engage, read and learn, et cetera. So what can you tell us about this road to Jericho as a metaphor, if that's what it is? What can you tell us about these two tales of both sort of person who's been harmed and perhaps the person who's perpetuated or perpetrated the harm? What can you tell us there as it relates to what you see in the workforce in your day to day experiences as a consultant to organizations that are looking to improve the experience of working?

The title comes from the ancient parable which many people might know, that Jesus tells about the Samaritan who was robbed on the road. It's literally called on the road to Jericho. I have literally walked that road. Parts of it still exist. It's a Roman road. Back then it was actually known as the Way of the Blood. It was that dangerous. And so that parable, for those who don't know it, is of a Samaritan who is one of the peoples of the Palestine Israel area of that time who is robbed and is left beaten and dead on the side of the road. And then people walk by. Specifically, Jesus names a Levite who's a type of Jewish priest, and another type of Jewish priest. I need to correct myself. It's not the Samaritan who's robbed. It's a regular person, a regular Jewish person who is robbed. And then a Levite walks by, doesn't do anything. Another priest, another Jewish priest walks by, doesn't do anything. And then a Samaritan walks by. And the Samaritans and the Israelites didn't agree on anything at that point. They were pretty much mortal enemies at this point. They were two separate kingdoms. Samaria. They lived in Samaria, and Jewish people lived in Judea. And it was the Samaritan who saw this man broken, beaten on the side of the road, even although he's of a different faith, picks him up, puts him on his donkey, takes him down to Jericho, gets him a room, gets him care, pays for all of that. And the parable that Jesus. Because the whole how this all comes about is someone asks Jesus, who is your neighbor? And he tells the story, and then he asks the question at the end. Well, who is the neighbor and the lawyer? Who is the one who asked Jesus this question? Sort of reluctantly, mumbles the Samaritan. And so the idea behind the parable is that a neighbor is anyone who sees and cares for another human being. What does that mean for my story? Workplaces? It's what we've just been talking about. I think so often when we hear that parable, we wonder, would we be the Samaritan? Or either we. It's the original bystander story, you know, idea, the bystander effect of those. Of those who know it. Who do we identify with? Are we the person who walks on by and we see someone hurting? Why do we intervene? Why do we not intervene? There are good reasons sometimes where people don't intervene. They're afraid too. Like I said, this road was called the Way of the Blood. If I'm seen as intervening, am I putting myself at risk? Could I be robbed now? But then are we the someone who helps? I think what we ask of ourselves a little less in any context of our lives, of when have we been the robber and when have we been the person who's been robbed? And so the book is really a way of exploring how any of us can have. Can inhabit all four of those roles. We can be the victim, we can be the bystander, we can be the upstander, and we can be the robber in any context. In our lives, at work, at home, in our social lives, all of us have those capacities inside of us. Different situations and contexts will bring one out rather than the other. And what are the consequences to us and to others when we're inhabiting any one of those roles?

Yes. So in the workplace, what are you seeing that is either represented in that book or how does this. In fact. Because this is not part of our conversation just yet, but it's part of what we discussed before we even started to record. That's why I'm asking you, how does this book or what that journey is? And again, don't want to give. Give away the entire book. I just want to understand how does this relate to your work in the world as a consultant advising organizations and leaders, how to better take care of those that are in their midst?

I got into the Work I do because of. I went through an experience of workplace bullying. And so in this context, we have the robber and we have the victim. It was an absolutely devastating experience. And it almost seems, it's almost too easy to cast them into these simplistic roles. But it's what got me into coaching. I am now someone who coaches these abrasive leaders. It's part of the work that I do. They are not evil bastards. Everyone likes to think that they are. Some of them are, I mean, but relatively few of them. What we see is that our workplaces we talked about at the very beginning, they socialize us in certain ways. And one of the ways they socialize us is into thinking that we need to be aggressive, assertive, dominant, task focused, controlling in order to, you know, extract value from people. But when I work with these people, what you really find is no one has shown them a better way. They themselves are highly stressed out human beings under huge pressures to demand and perform. And they are taking their stress out on other human beings. Hurtful, harmful, unhelpful, all of that. Not excusing the behavior, not in any way. But can we see that they too are struggling humans? Because when we see them also as struggling humans, then what do we bring them? What do we need to bring them to help them learn a better way to do things? Then of course, we have all of those bystanders where we see these toxic dynamics at work. But do we say anything? Do we intervene? Because it's very scary to do so. We know our jobs could be on the line. We know it risks a backlash. We risk retaliation. Especially when they're power dynamics. So yes, this very much plays out. It's the whole. And then how, how do we become the upstander? How do we move from being the bystander to the upstander? Again, recognizing humanity, not telling people, oh, you just need to, you know, put your big girl pants on and say what needs to be said.

You know, upstander. Because that, that's language. I think that might be new for some people. Bystander, we've heard. But upstander, not so much. So you know, I just want.

The upstander is the someone who says, who sees something that is not good and chooses to say something, intervene, stand up for someone. In other words, they are putting themselves at risk in some way. It's generally better in workplace dynamics if there's not a sole upstander, if it's a group. The way when there's a power over dynamic, you need power with. In Order to be able to. Because going up against someone with power who is in a much more scarcity based mindset of I need to control, I need to dominate, that's a suicide mission. That's where. So there's, there's safety in numbers very much kind of idea. But I see there is. And if you spend any time on LinkedIn, you see this out there. There is so much demonizing of the people who are engaged in these hurtful and unharmed and harmful behaviors. And I don't find that helpful either because then we just perpetuating that cycle that we start that we talked about at the beginning. They are also human beings. I don't want to gaslight anyone's experience. I've been there. I know what it's like. These are some of the most traumatic experiences people go through in their lives. I was literally just talking with someone about that this morning. It's like until it's sort of like it's destructive at the cellular level because you start to question every part of who you are. This is how it like it messes with our psyche. These experiences at work, when they're truly that toxic.

Sure.

So I want. So that is true. But I don't find that we solve the problem by then just demonizing people.

What are some of the solutions then to the problem? Because I think there, there are, there's bad behavior at work has, has that has not changed. It's been the way, you know that.

If anything it's escalating.

Adam, you think it's escalating as well? Yeah. So that's.

People are more and more stressed out.

So let's talk about what solutions do look like. Given the fact that let's say everybody can have a reference point for bad behavior at work or someone that's managing other people that may be not doing a great job of, of mentoring those people, managing, nurturing those people, caretaking those people rather they're, they're extracting from them or in the worst cases bullying them, et cetera. So what, what are some of the solutions that you, you're typically giving, giving people access to? What does that look like?

There are two levels of solutions. One is coaching and support for the individual, leadership development, developmental coaching, whatever that might be. But then there's systems level change, company culture and the systems and processes because the two are always reinforcing each other. Because what happens is that if you have a healthy workplace environment that where respect is the norm and required and incentivized and valued and recognized and uplifted Then when someone acts in a disrespectful way, it's going to be nipped in the bud. It's going to be, yeah, no, we don't do that here. And so they might come in, you know, they learn from previous workplaces, what have you, and they learn, oh, okay, all right, don't do it that way here. When an organization doesn't have those norms, then they reinforce each other. You know, it's like in some organizations, it's the exact opposite. They are very dog eat dog organizational cultures. And then that really brings that out. So, you know, we don't have a problem with the organizations that know how to manage for both performance and conduct. We have a problem where organizations are managing performance, but not for conduct. And that's really what we try. What organizations need to do here. If you want to cultivate a healthy organizational culture, then you do need to manage for both performance and conduct. And that's not something most of us are taught how to do. And certainly most of our performance management and evaluation systems are not making. Like if you say your values of an organization are this, how are those values represented in your performance management system in the kinds of goals you set, in the kind of leadership development training you provide or don't provide? Are you equipping people to know how to give feedback in a way that doesn't just sound. Because it is. To give constructive feedback, well, is a true skill. And most of us it is.

It's an art for sure.

It's a true art. And it is. If you, if you give, if you don't have second thoughts about giving constructive feedback, then you probably don't really know how to give constructive feedback. Because, you know, if you need to tell somebody something that you know that might be hurtful, if you're, if you're not having a sense of that, then yeah, your feedback is probably going to generate a reaction. And I've needed to give constructive feedback. And I remember one situation really well. It's like, I knew this feedback was going to be hard for someone to hear, so I didn't expect them to take it well. But could I hold them with compassion and kindness even as I. That's the radical candor idea, right? I could hold them with compassion and kindness even as I had to say, this was not okay. It really wasn't okay. How can I support you so that that doesn't happen again? Because if that happens again, I'm going to need to say, you can't be part of this group because that compromised the entire safety of the group. And then what happened after that was sort of like I followed that up. You know, how are you doing? I knew it was going to take time to process through. How can I support you checking in with her? And she went through all the cycles. And so I'm going in tangents here, but I think it comes back to you asked, how do we change this? There's the individual and there's the culture systems piece where organizations need to take a really hard look at what are they truly incentivizing because you get more of what you measure and you reward and you pay attention to.

Yeah, I mean, I think you broke it down as I was listening and writing and thinking about it myself, that managing for performance and managing for conduct are two very different things. And they reinforce one another. They. They support one another. So it's. Or they detract from one another. So. And you mentioned feedback, of course. I mean, I think with our work, we often are delivering, developing content to help people to understand in an experiential way how to actually provide feedback to other people because they've had very little practice doing it. And I think ultimately it's the difference between providing someone with your thoughts, you know, sort of these crucial conversations, if you will, where you're being truthful with someone without being brutal, you know, sort of truthful with compassion. Your truth, but rooted, coming from a place of love, if I could use that word.

And also humility, like some things coming.

From a place of judgment. And I think that's. Those are. That's the distinction for me is are the statements that you're making is what you're about to communicate to somebody rooted in some form of judgment about them. Like, oh, they're lazy, they don't keep their deadlines, their word means nothing. They're, you know, they're soft. What. You know, what. Whatever it might be, that is a judgment of them and their performance. Or is it coming from a place that, again, using the word love here in, you know, the sense of. I see the potential in this person. This person clearly can do really great work and there are. Would, you know, there's so many aspects of that person that are a great fit in our organization. If we could, you know, get that person to work in this area, focus in this area, develop themselves in this area, then they would be an exponential benefit to all those around them. That's a different place to start your conversation from than the place I wonder.

If I'm gonna have to do. You see the gold or do you see the dirt feedback coming from the place of you see the gold, let's bring out more of the gold just lands so differently than feedback that comes from the place that's only focused on the dirt and doesn't see the gold at all. And just, you know, coming back to the book, you know, I knew I'd hit on the right editor when she sort of like her pithy way of saying with this was, I don't think you need to punch the baby in order to get it to grow up. Because you know, our books, they feel like our babies, right? You've written a book, you know what it's like. But they need work. We absolutely need our editors to give us constructive feedback. All the ways that we've sort of like not told the story or not being coherent or clear or whatever it is, do we go in, do we see the gold and do we help develop that gold or. And I think that's part of, you know, a huge part of what makes Feedback land or not land so well. And it's like it's.

There anything?

Is there anything else?

Oh, yes, of course. I mean, in working inside these organizations, as you have been embedded there, are there other things that you're seeing as part of the culture? Like what can you say? Here's a direct question. Has the culture changed between what existed before the pandemic and now, you know, the pandemic being in our rearview mirror, but people still really having been affected by it, still feeling the effects of it, but we're on the other side of it. Have you seen any change in organizational culture pre and post?

Yes and no. The good organizations got better, bad organizations got worse. I think what I've seen is those who already had a glimmer around some of this stuff and culture and the importance of people and that creating environments where people do feel that sort of psychological safety, which doesn't mean by that so many people think psychological safety doesn't mean we have hard conversations. That's not at all what psychological safety means. Psychological safety absolutely means we have the hard conversations, but we have them how we've been talking about, they've paid more attention to it. And organizations that have always thought well, might have had this feeling. This is a bunch of touchy feely woo woo nonsense. It's like business fundamentals, baby. I don't have time for any of this. This is just going soft. Then the pandemic sort of seemed to make them go, okay, well, I'll grudgingly do this thing for now. But Then as soon as sort of that started to scale back, it came back, they came back almost in some ways harder on, well, this is what we need to pay attention to. And my answer to that is it's not one or the other. They're at the neurobiological level. When people are in a state of stress, they are using some parts of their brains and not others. When we are in a state of feeling what we call safe and social, we are using other parts of our brains, much more of what we call our prefrontal cortex. When we are in that safe and social state, it turns out our prefrontal cortex, this is the home of our executive function, is where all our best thinking happens. It's where our most innovative solution comes from. It's where our ability to not just get tunnel vision and to think more holistically and brainstorm and idiote and come up with better ideas that literally we come up with better ideas, better solutions to opportunity, to challenges, when we are not in this oh my God, I'm going to die state. And so it is better for businesses, it shows up in the bottom line. So there doesn't need to be a trade off between it's business results or it's treating people like human beings. It's like you treat people like human beings, they do better work, they do become more productive, more efficient, more creative because you haven't whipped them into doing it. And then you don't have the burnout, you don't have the turnover. So it really just makes business sense. And a lot of some of what HR practitioners, there's that term again. I think part of what I do is I sometimes help them make the business case. People want to make the moral case. And I get it, that's completely right, they're not wrong. But it's not enough. Businesses are businesses, you do need to respect that, make the business case, show them the consequences of. And some businesses just see a certain amount of turnover as just part of the business. And yes, that's true to a certain extent, but it's also not true in other cases. So it's sort of like, do the work, do the numbers, do the math to surface what this is really costing. And when businesses actually see the numbers on the insurance policies, on the number of sick days, on the number of medical leaves of absence, on revolving doors in certain departments, on turnover between different departments, then they start to see, oh, no, this just makes business sense now. And so I don't want to make the case of, oh, this is just, you know the right thing to do. It is the right thing to do, but it's also the right business thing to do.

Yep. I think it's very powerfully stated. Thank you for stating it just that way. I think you just for me, nailed it. That it's more than just making the moral case for treating people well or for wanting people to do well and thrive and all that. There's a business case and numbers case and business is about numbers and we can't ever lose sight of that. Not if you're in business.

The business is in business. There are no jobs to be had.

So almost without goes without saying. But we have to state it. It's obvious. But again, the contrast between making the moral case and the business case and really it's both.

Exactly. But the moral case is the business case. I think that's what I'm saying. But people stop at making the moral case and then they, then they get themselves all in a high dudgeon about the fact that business leaders don't care. It's like, no, but you haven't shown them why they should care. So the moral case is the business case, but you actually need to state the business case.

So my last question for you, just because I've loved where we've taken the conversation, I would recommend I'm going to get a hold of your book, your brand new book and others I'm sure will as well. The Road to Jericho. I want to. I want to see how that story ends. Now I'm very curious. I would like to know if you had a crystal ball or maybe you do. To what degree are you seeing things in regard to the future of work that you'd like to share with us. Things to do with culture that could be a recommendation or it could be just something you see on the horizon that maybe some of us aren't seeing or aren't focusing on.

I'm really seeing and celebrating and uplifting. The people who keep on talking about these are human beings. And I think the more we frame that and understand that and acknowledge that then the more the other things come. And readers if they want to find the book, I am publishing it a non traditional way, they will find it on substack. So it's not. Don't look for it on Amazon or something. So if they just need to go to ontheroadtojerika.substack.com and that's where the book.

Is and it'll be part of our show notes. So the folks that are regularly consuming the content Here know that they can get all the, all those links and things in the show notes. So we'll have that there as well for you all. Again, Sue, I so appreciate your insights today and your time and I loved where our conversation took us and I'm excited to see the evolution that you were describing where we're finding that there's not a distinction between that, the moral case and the business case for taking better care of those folks. We like to refer to that as creating a got your back culture versus a CYA culture, which is a very different animal. But for today, anyway, again, that's the.

Difference between bystander and upstander. Right? The got your back, I'm the upstander. The CYA is like, I'm going to protect myself first.

Indeed.

Beautiful.

Thank you so much, Sue. Well, I hope you enjoyed my conversation with Sue Mann today. Really, I thought covered some interesting things starting out with her book on the Road to Jericho and that particular example of how it is that we treat one another and then looking at that through a different lens and seeing where these things show up in the workplace. It's obviously a very difficult job to manage performance and manage conduct and often that difficult task, and sometimes an untenable task sits in the lap of the person that is in the human resources department, those HR professionals, as well as people that are in organizational development and training and development, and anyone who's a people leader. We are constantly sort of faced with these competing priorities. And what I loved about Sue's descriptions of things today and the language that she used and the way she described even the moral case and the business case for really taking better care and nurturing our talent in a better and more effective way, but taking care of them, having their backs, as we like to call it, the got your back environment and culture even versus the CYA culture that we're all or many of us are familiar with, we talked today about how it is that we, that we can better serve our communities, our workforce in general, by leaning into these principles, learning how to provide valuable feedback, crucial conversations that come from a place of love versus a place of judgment as an example. And if we can help people to understand, not just in, in sort of principle or on, on a philosophical level what that looks like, but actually give them practical, experiential moments to practice giving and communicating feedback to other people in a, in a way that builds them, that fills them, that doesn't steal from or take something from them, but rather allows them to, to be filled up so that what overflows is valuable to them and valuable to all the people that are impacted by their work in the world. I think we're really, we're tracking something that's better. We're on an evolved path versus in a way just sort of repeating the mistakes of the past. So great, great insight from sue, so thank her for her time in her presence today. Hope this was also enlightening in some way for you to think about where it is that you are are engaged in in conversations about these types of subjects and recommend that you you check out more of Sue's work in the world as well as this amazing book on the Road to Jericho. I'm going to get myself a copy from Substack and as she mentioned, that will be in the show notes. The link will be there for you, so check that out for now. Anyway, I just want to say thank you again for being a part of this ever expanding community. Work well with sponsors. The Change Proof podcast is growing in some really beautiful ways, so we're very happy to have that community continue to itself to evolve its consciousness. And in many ways that's the result of you all providing your feedback to us. So please let us know what you thought of this episode. Please let us know if you have any questions for myself or for Sue. You can go to AdamMarkel.com podcast to leave a direct comment question. And please, if you can provide a rating for the show on the platform that you consumed it. Five stars is always great, but whatever feedback you provide is really appreciated again and we just love the fact that you're, you're a part of what we're up to. So thanks again and we'll see you on the other side.

Thanks for listening everyone. We hope you now have even more tools and greater insights to build resilience and become change Proofs. Help us inspire others by sharing this episode and leaving your comments over@adammarkel.com podcast for more resilience tips and strategies, including support for building change proof teams, visit adammarkel. Com becomechangeproop.