Navigating the VUCA World: Managing Risk and Employee Input

Last week, Mary-Frances Winters kicked off our feature series on navigating our Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous world.  

One of the greatest challenges organizations are currently facing in the context of this world is loss of talent, in the broader context of employees feeling newly motivated to prioritize their well-being and resigning from jobs they are finding to be unsustainable. It is my firm belief, informed by interactions with organizations in many different industries, that the posture with which leaders respond to this challenge will set their organizations on a trajectory to either survive and thrive, or continue to struggle, and perhaps even fail. 

An essential part of organizational leadership is managing risk. There is much risk that remains out of the control of organizational leaders as it relates to volatility, uncertainty, and complexity… and today, I would like to zero in on one element that can be situated more firmly in leaders’ sphere of influence: minimizing ambiguity, and the risk associated with it.  

To put a fine point on it: many organizations are experiencing an unprecedented rate of turnover, and with it, losing money, institutional knowledge, and in some cases, reputation as former employees share openly outside the organization about harm they experienced there. This can create a “snowball effect” as current employees process their departed colleagues’ experiences, and prospective hires consider whether or not they want to join the organization.  

The truth is, many of these losses could be pre-empted by tuning into a resource you probably already have available: input from employees. Input comes in many forms, from surveys and focus groups, to exit interviews, to anecdotes shared in meetings and priorities lifted up by employee resource groups. Together, these employee inputs can support you in developing a more complete understanding of what is not working for employees and taking steps to address these challenges in support of retention. 

My top piece of advice to organizational leaders in this unique moment: Don’t allow employee frustrations to fester. As we work with organizations on their DEIJ journeys, we see this happening in several ways: 

1. Failure to seek out employee input, or seeking only general input through broad forms that treat the organization as a monolith, rather than identifying or centering the needs of those most impacted or harmed. Furthermore, addressing the needs of those most harmed by racism and other inequitable systems will support everyone. 
    
2. Failure to listen. This can come in several forms, but the most common is responding with defensiveness. No one is immune from the very human tendency to take things personally… and it is critical for leaders in this moment to push past this tendency, lean into discomfort, and view constructive input as – not the source of risk – but an opportunity to mitigate it.
      
3. Placing value judgements on how people choose to provide input. One employee may feel comfortable sharing openly and in conversation, while another may choose to share feedback anonymously. This is likely indicative of how safe people feel sharing about challenges and problems – psychological safety. While I have seen leaders brush off anonymous input because they cannot attach a face to it, I would argue that it may be even more critical to attend to those “feedforwards” that come to you anonymously. They likely indicate perspectives of employees experiencing most harm – yet still willing to share their needs in hopes that things might change. This is tremendously valuable.
   
   
4. Failure to respond. This also comes in several forms, including but not limited to: immediately doubling down on impracticality of change rather than bringing a posture of curiosity and openness to input; and soliciting input but never acting. A caution here: avoid falling into the trap of manufactured ambiguity: “we need more information before we can act.” There may be times that this is true, but often this approach ends up delaying action that could support retention of employees now. Failure to respond also erodes trust and makes it less likely that employees will be inspired to share their experiences in the future. 

More organizations than not are struggling with different sorts of dysfunction that are normalized through dominant culture and history (“We’ve always done it this way!”) What will set some organizations apart from others in this time is how open and responsive they are to employee concerns. Those that prioritize fostering trust and accountability are likely to succeed, while those unwilling to lean into discomfort are likely to revert to “familiar dysfunction” – a particularly unsustainable path in the context of a culture increasingly focused on well-being and accountability. 

In today’s volatile, uncertain, and complex world, genuine listening and transparency can pave a sustainable path forward. This represents a significant shift in approach to how many businesses have functioned historically, so it will take some adjustment and unlearning. If you don’t currently have the skills to feel confident soliciting, understanding, and addressing employee feedback, it is especially critical to find a partner to support you in this work by bringing a lens of correcting harm and building trust.  

I strongly encourage leaders and organizations to establish ongoing channels for employees to share feedback, including anonymously – recognizing it takes time to build trust and psychological safety, and many organizations do not have the luxury to sit in ambiguity about employee experiences while they strive for this goal. Knowledge is power, while avoidance creates risk. Employee input offers a direct path past ambiguity and is a gift for leaders seeking to stabilize and retain their workforces.