Nemawashi (根回し) Laying the Foundation

In some recent reading and studying I was doing on the topic of engagement, I came across the Japanese concept of nemawashi- or the laying of the foundation. Given my interests in the whole area of engaging organizations I found this concept especially compelling.

Nemawashi (根回し) in Japanese culture is an informal process of quietly laying the foundation for some proposed change or project, by talking to the people concerned, gathering support and feedback, and so forth. It is considered an important element in any major change, before any formal steps are taken, and successful nemawashi enables changes to be carried out with the consent of all sides.

In the reading I have been doing about creating truly engaged cultures, although this foundation is mentioned, it is not something that we spend a tremendous amount of time on. We tend to talk instead about systems and processes and technology.

At its most simplistic I see in the concept of nemawashi many elements that would appear to me to be fundamental to both leadership and management. You might recall that in previous blogs I have talked about building the foundation for engagement and the skills and attributes associated with it- I ventured that skill sets like:

• Setting clear expectations
• Giving and receiving feedback constructively
• Taking appropriate corrective action
• Recognizing positive results
• The ability to coach

are all critical as foundational to effective management and I wondered whether or not these elements have a degree of universal applicability. Others pointed out to me quite appropriately that in order to be highly effective management skills must be accompanied by leadership attributes:

• Clarity of vision
• Integrity and honesty
• The ability to execute
• Charisma or presence

I agree with them. The interesting area was the amount of agreement I got that these skills are not being taught consistently, nor are these "attributes" being cultivated in any kind of a systemic way in most organizations. Most companies still rely on some form of corporate "social Darwinism" for leaders to "emerge". What is our opportunity cost for that kind of a model? When we don't implement coaching models until mid-career or later what did we give up in turnover, lost productivity, and just general dis-engagement? I suspect rather a lot.

As we watch the financial markets "melt down" and Congress reject the bailout plan it seems to me that this "foundation" is clearly shaken. People point out that theoretically at least the CEO's and leaders running these organizations were the "best and brightest" with advanced degrees from some of the finest schools in the country if not the world. It would seem to me that as I read the blogs and watch the news embedded in a lot of the anger and the losses people are experiencing is most profoundly the loss of trust and faith in our financial and government institutions and our leadership. It will take something very different to get it back.

Perhaps now is the time to examine our Nemawashi and begin to rebuild our own organizations on an old fashioned foundation of mutual respect, trust, information, and clarity.

I wonder, now would seem to be a very good time.....

Building A Foundation of Trust

Over the last few months I have had an opportunity to "virtually meet" some brilliant and amazing people using LinkedIn and other social networks. I have gotten to explore some interesting topics of my own and respond to a number from others.
I have long believed that people need to be managed "holistically", that is we need to appreciate and try to understand them in their entirety rather than just their "work" persona to effectively engage them.
I have also pondered throughout my career how we expected to create customer engagement without first creating engagement with our employees. I have read volumes about measuring engagement and increasing shareholder/stakeholder value, but not nearly as much about building those relationships with our employees. I have to ask myself why we think we can leave them (employees) out of the equation? It is also interesting to me that although much of management practice is based on withholding trust by retaining control, limiting information flow, etc.; we expect trust to flow our way by virtue of our role or status.

Two of my colleagues that have particularly made a profound impression on me have both emigrated to the U.S. from different cultures. They have learned a new language and a new way of interacting to be successful in this market. Both are very committed to building a bridge across cultures, not as a commercial enterprise, but as a moral obligation. While they don't know each other, they both resonate with a similar value structure.

We have started to work together to use engagement as a leadership model and as a vehicle to build that bridge. We have also discussed that the foundation for engagement is trust based relationships.
In my mind trust based relationships share some common characteristics:

• Mutual respect for others as people
• Clear and honest feedback
• A view of plenty rather than scarcity when it comes to success and rewards
• An absence of fear in the work environment
• Information that flows freely and efficiently
• Integrity
• Leadership by example

I recognize that my list isn't all inclusive, but I like to think that the major elements are there. I would be curious to get your feedback on two things:

• Is true engagement our opportunity to build sustained cross cultural collaboration?
• What is missing from my foundation?

I look forward to your thoughts.