COVID-19, the challenge of leading in times of crisis

Depending on geography and sector, companies are at different stages in the fight against the outbreak. However, regardless of this factor, the performance of CEOs must be similar when facing a crisis of this nature. We have identified five key qualities of resilient leadership that a good manager should have:

• Heart and head: a resilient leader must be empathetic and able to put themselves in the shoes of their employees and customers, but at the same time be firm and rational to protect the company’s economic performance. 
• The mission comes first: leaders must be able to stabilise their companies during the crisis and, in these extraordinary circumstances, look for new opportunities.  
• Quickness is important: a resilient leader must take decisive action in the short term.    
• Leading the narrative: it is essential to take the initiative by being transparent about the current reality while drawing a compelling future scenario that inspires and motivates workers to persevere. 
• Long-term vision: leaders must maintain a vision of the future, anticipating the new business models that are likely to emerge and looking for the innovation that will define the company of tomorrow.
• A crisis takes place in three-time frames that CEOs must take into account and allocate resources accordingly: 
• Respond: the company must deal with the current situation and manage continuity. 
• Recover: the company must learn from the experience and emerge stronger. 
• Thrive: the company prepares and shapes its new reality. 

This crisis can become an opportunity to move forward, create added value, and generate positive social impact

 with the right approach. 

Resilient leaders need to be empathetic and consider the human side of the crisis. The priority must be protecting employees, ensuring their health and safety, followed by their economic well-being. In addition, for the sake of those same employees and customers and creditors and investors, leaders must protect financial performance during the crisis by making firm, fact-based decisions.

To do so, they must:

• Centralise decision making for consistency, speed and firmness, without allowing uncertainty to paralyse us.       
• Catalogue the sources of financing available to the company, including unused credit lines, equity contributions, etc.     
• Articulate the different economic scenarios in which the organisation may be involved, ranging from mild to moderate to severe.  
• Predict the financial impact of the different scenarios on the company’s profitability and liquidity.
• Define which products, services, customer segments, business lines or employees are the most critical to cash flow, both in the current and future scenarios and should therefore be preserved.    
• Identify the company’s tools to influence financial results, such as reducing discretionary spending, hiring freezes or temporary plant closures.

Companies that already had a crisis plan in place in the face of a recession have an advantage and may only need to make some adjustments to deal with the current circumstances.

We must be clear that, during a crisis, a company’s purpose must remain steadfast. This is non-negotiable, as the purpose is where the head and the heart meet. While many organisations today have articulated a purpose beyond profit, it risks being ignored in day-to-day decisions. In a recent survey, 79% of leaders believe that an organisation’s purpose is fundamental to business success. However, 68% stated that it is not used to guide decision-making processes within their organisation.

Making decisions that align with organisational purpose is particularly important during a crisis when companies are under increasing pressure and stakeholders pay close attention to every move. When companies focus on authentic purpose, employees feel their work has meaning; customers increase their brand loyalty and power their transformation.

SOURCE: https://www2.deloitte.com/es/es/pages/about-deloitte/articles/covid19-guia-actuacion-ceo.html

Employee participation in the company

María Escat Cortés

Worker participation must be understood from two points of view:

1. Participation as motivation: it is rare for people not to feel motivated when they are consulted about actions that affect them by “taking part in the act”. Moreover, most people at the centre of an operation are knowledgeable about both the problems and their solutions. Therefore, the right form of participation produces both motivation and knowledge that is valuable to the success of the enterprise.
2. Participation as a form of recognition. It appeals to the need for affiliation and acceptance. Above all, it gives people a sense of fulfilment. Employees should be encouraged to participate in matters where they can help, and although they are listened to very carefully, it is up to them to decide in matters that require their decision.

But what are the basics of participatory management?

The first thing to note is that participation is closely related to the professional, collective and technical opportunities that the environment offers.

Effectiveness is measured in terms of the quality of the intermediaries, the wealth of information processed, the operational value of the decisions taken and their practical application. It cannot always be translated in terms of direct productivity.

People decide to take part in a joint project when they:

• They have the necessary personal means, e.g. trust towards the organisation and management, sufficient knowledge…
• They see the advantages of doing so, e.g. greater recognition, economic advantages…
• The technical structures are adapted to this in the sense that they make the operation of the project more flexible;
• The organisation allows for this. First of all, there is a criterion of size. If too many people are working on the same job, it will be useless to call for individual involvement. To encourage the participation and commitment of all members, the maximum number of people in a production unit should be around 150-250. To avoid the problem of hierarchies and level responsibilities, it will be necessary to simplify the organisation charts, for example, through job development, which is achieved by increasing the qualification of tasks or diversifying activities.

When the autonomy and participation of employees decreases, it means that the influence they have gained is not what they expected. In other words, participation fails when one wants to impose all methods and processes from above.

An appropriate balance must be maintained between mobilisation to encourage participation and the relaxation of participation.

It is also important to consider the influence of new technologies on participation:

• They have increased the complexity of work. This can only be achieved by making employees more responsible;
• New technologies have changed jobs, making them less flexible. Successive adaptations require exchanges and training courses;
• They also contribute to the autonomy of employees while developing interdependence within the organisation. Computerisation and bureaucracy facilitate networking. Other technologies increase the speed of responses to the environment and the need for interdepartmental consultation and cooperation.

Importance of employee participation in health and safety in the workplace

Every year, the European Union registers around 5600 deaths as a result of an accident at work. In addition, almost 160,000 people die as a result of work-related illnesses. While certain accidents cannot be prevented, many of the situations that lead to the death of an employee could be avoided if measures are taken to minimise risks in the workplace.

At first glance, one might think that the responsibility for keeping employees safe rests solely with the directors and managers of the company in question. This is true to a certain extent: employers are obliged to control the risks in their industry and provide adequate working conditions; however, employee involvement in these safety and health issues is extremely important.

Both parties may have different perspectives and knowledge about performing work activities more efficiently and how those activities impact them. For example, a manager has a very general idea of the particular activities that his or her employees perform. Still, the employee, who performs his or her job daily, has a better understanding of the details that could be fine-tuned to improve processes, so his or her contribution is vital to risk prevention.

In fact, studies have shown that workplaces where employees play an active role in prevention, have lower levels of occupational risks and fatalities.

The involvement of employees and companies can be reflected in the following ways:

• they share information and concerns;
• they seek to find the most appropriate solutions to problems;
• they respect and take into account each other’s views, enabling them to make decisions together;
• they discuss problems in advance and try to implement preventive measures.

Having the cooperation of employees can help prevent occupational hazards by suggesting safety techniques. In addition to having excellent opinions, their presence means early involvement in planning processes, which means a greater understanding of why certain safety measures are taken and more motivation to respect them.

How else can employees cooperate on health and safety issues?

By making proper use of the equipment, tools and products, they work with.

By following preventive measures implemented by others and, if one of the safety techniques is not working, employees should contact their superiors to let them know or propose another measure.

There is no doubt that employees are a vital part of a company’s operations, so it is of the utmost importance that they take an active part in their own and their colleagues’ safety.