Some comments on organizational culture
Photo by Mario Gogh on Unsplash
Whether you are a graduate student or postdoctoral fellow entering a new lab, a new assistant professor just starting your own research lab, or a more senior researcher moving into a leadership role at your institution, one factor that will have a lasting impact on your future success (or lack of it) is organizational culture. In academia, we often talk about culture, we will gossip about toxic departments or colleagues, but we don’t talk enough about creating culture, about how to establish an appropriate culture within our labs, or how to contribute positively to the broader culture of our organizations. In fact, as we’re coming up through graduate school, we don’t typically learn much of anything regarding leadership and organizational culture. Now, some may think that the culture within our labs and our institutions is out of our control, not that big of a deal, or shouldn’t be the priority After all, there’s already so much research, teaching, and service work to be done; why add something else? But there are considerable costs incurred when we neglect to set the culture, and even greater benefits to be gained by ensuring that the culture remains positive and supportive. These are the ones that have stuck out for me over the years.
First the costs to ignoring the culture around you:
1. You may actually be setting a culture you don’t want. Choosing not to pay attention to the culture around you is actually a choice. And the consequences of that choice may not be all that palatable. If you’re not actively setting the culture, someone else in your sphere probably is, whether they mean to or not, with words or actions that go unchecked. As an example, if a member of your team is a bit of a bully (well-intentioned or not), that could encourage fear or avoidance in other team members. This could stifle voices that might otherwise make useful contributions, or worse, send the signal that bullying behaviour is how one gets ahead.
2. You may pick the wrong people. We always want the best and brightest on our projects, in our labs, or as colleagues. But that doesn’t mean they will contribute positively to the culture; the best and brightest person could be manipulative, mean to their peers, or known to be obstructive and competitive. That could then have a cascading effect, changing the environment and behaviour of others around them, as encapsulated by the proverb “one bad apple spoils the whole barrel”.
3. The people—and their work—could suffer. It’s no secret that people’s mental health deteriorates when they are in toxic, unsupportive, or otherwise stressful work environments. Consequently, those same people may end up exhausted, burned out, and at risk for illness or injury. None of that is conducive for producing great work.
4. You could lose your best people. No one enjoys working in a negative environment, and people are aware now more than ever that they don’t need to stay in such environments. Your best people will have plenty of options available to them and likely won’t hesitate to find someplace better.
5. You may be putting the science at risk. A work culture that encourages competition and winning at all costs may unwittingly create a situation in which people may engage in research misconduct—fabricating data, plagiarizing another colleague’s work funds—to get ahead. A culture that doesn’t tolerate mistakes may result in a purposeful lack of communication that doesn’t allow mistakes to be detected or fixed.
By paying attention to the culture, you won’t just mitigate the costs; there are benefits to being mindful of the culture:
1. Others may model your example. When you explicitly identify the features of the culture you want your team to experience, and exemplify that very behaviour, your team will understand that this type of culture is the standard that will be expected of them as well. Their behaviours may then continually align with the culture you want to promote.
2. You have the best team for the environment you want. If your stated culture doesn’t fit with how some team members want to work—for instance, maybe you prioritize a collaborative culture, but they don’t want to spend the time helping others—they may decide to search for other work options. That’s ok. The people you recruit and the people who stay should be the ones who actively uphold and promote the culture standard even when you are not around.
3. Your people thrive. By creating, or contributing to, a positive culture in your work environment, you are helping others feel safe and secure. As a result, they may be more productive and creative, be willing to make mistakes and grow, and in general, feel and be healthier.
4. Better retention. People want to stay in work environments where they are thriving and feel happy.
5. The science gets better. Environments that foster wellness and creativity allow new ideas to flourish. Environments that don’t punish mistakes or failures will encourage people to communicate, ask for help, and to take risks. This leads to greater trust in the accuracy of the work and may also inspire the next great innovation.
Culture is an important feature of our workplace, even if, as academics, we may never have been directly taught to consider it. I would challenge you to take a moment to reflect on the culture that you have set for your team, your lab, or your institution—whether that culture was set intentionally or not. If you need help refining your current culture to ensure it remains strong, or if you need help overhauling it completely, book a call with me here. I would be happy to talk you through small changes you can make today to change your culture for the better.
Additional resources for creating your team culture:
Why are we here? Creating a workplace culture everyone wants by Jennifer Moss
The Culture Codeby Daniel Coyle
Next week: Communication in science
