By Thomas R. Schori, Ph.D., and Michael L. Garee, Principals, Millennium Marketing Research, 808 E. Ironwood, Normal, IL 61761-5239.
If there is one thing most companies, large, medium and small alike, seem to value quite highly it’s conformity among employees. Those employees who are perceived by management as "wave makers" typically can end up paying a very high price for their "non-conformist," "aberrant" behavior. And, certainly, that’s a shame because we’ve always believed¾as apparently does management from the genuine world-class companies¾that if someone within an organization isn’t periodically "making waves," there may be no one actually "rowing the boat," either!
Now, we hasten to point out that the type of employee we’re talking about is not the constant complainer, the one who sees only the negative in any situation. No, the type of employee we’re talking about is the one who, within accepted cultural norms of the organization, periodically dares to question the validity of the body of "common knowledge" evident in virtually every organization and industry. This type of employee also may be one who has the uncanny ability to look out at the market landscape and see opportunities that others simply cannot (or will not) see¾and then have the "audacity" to point out these opportunities, usually to a legion of skeptics!
Who are these "wave makers" and where are they typically found in most organizations? Actually, they can be found virtually anywhere within an organization and serving in a wide variety of job functions, from accounting to advertising. One thing these employees do have in common, however, is that most can accurately be described as being among the more creative people within the organization.
By definition, "creative" people are those who have the unique ability to take known elements, refashion or rearrange them, and create something entirely new! Sometimes these "creations," i.e., ideas, suggestions or interpretations, are "masterpieces," and sometimes they are, well, considerably less than masterpieces. Still, stifling the efforts¾and the imagination¾of these creative types simply for the sake of conformity can result in substantial loss for the organization.
How, then, can an organization nurture these "wave makers," without unduly impinging upon the morale of the vast majority of other employees who feel far more comfortable in the more traditional conformist role? Here are a few things to consider in that regard:
Certainly, we realize that many, if not most, organizations¾particularly, the larger ones¾ would be hard pressed to make all of these "concessions," in order to accommodate the "wave makers" in their midst. As a matter of fact, we know instinctively that most organizations don’t now recognize the potential value of "wave makers," and they are not likely to do so in the foreseeable future, either. It’s just too threatening to some members of company management. Still, that doesn’t alter the fact that such companies may ultimately find the price of maintaining absolute conformity quite cost prohibitive.
Is there any proof for such a statement? You bet. Consider, for example, where IBM might be today if the company hadn’t gone outside the organization and hired a "wave maker," Chief Executive Officer Lou Gerstner. Apple, though certainly not yet "out of the woods," undoubtedly would long ago have been history, if Steve Jobs, Apple co-founder and notorious "wave-maker" during the John Sculley era, hadn’t been "resurrected." (You’ll recall that Sculley pushed Jobs out of the company, principally because he made too many "waves.") And, certainly, there are far less heralded examples in American business where "wave makers" have not only survived but prevailed.
The point is this: while diligently maintaining the status quo may be the most comfortable thing for most organizations (and for most people making up these organizations!) to do, ultimately, it will be the undoing of most organizations. Things change, constantly and often rapidly, whether we want them to or not. The "wave makers" among us usually are the first to notice and then point out these changes, although few of these people are met with anything other than fear, suspicion and oftentimes derision. Ample evidence suggests that this could be "the kiss of death" for an organization, no matter the size, annual earnings or position among the Fortune 500.