I work for a large bank and work in the technology part of that bank. I am trying to put a presentation together with the aim of trying to highlight ways of changing the culture within the technology part of the bank.
Currently I work in a sterile, dreary office. We have to wear suits. We are bogged down by process and the people I work with have ideas, good ideas, but have not got the time or inclination to do anything with those ideas.
I want to change this. I know that is an almost impossible task but I have read various articles across the web on why people enjoy working where they do and how they promote a culture that promotes collaboration, idea generation, a culture that is non corporate.
Do any of you work for corporate companies and witnessed a changing culture? Do any of you work for non corporates and are able to explain why you enjoy working where you do?
In my mind there is no reason why just because I work for a bank that the technology part of the bank can't operate a similiar culture to web startups and leading tech companies like Google, Apple etc.
Any help you can give would be great!
Thanks in advance..
Suits and a sterile office are not the problem. They are the symptom; and more than that, they are the signal and the filter for the type of people that work there (so I can see you having just as much problem getting your comrades-in-arms to agree to "collaboration, idea generation and non-corporatism" as your managers.)
(I've written this assuming you're not a manager. If you are, great, it'll be easier to do either of these options and you can probably shave a couple of years of the timeline!)
The best advice I can think of (other than give up, obviously) is to first prove technical competence, in the form a high-level executive understands (I saved us X million dollars on Y different occasions) and then get them to support you in setting up a team (which you will lead and will almost certainly need to recruit from outside to fill — quick, who's the first person you phone?) that will do the projects you want to do (quick, what can you do that might add a billion the bank's bottom line?) and provide the political cover to do what you want. It'll take 5-10 years, it's risky and it requires political skill.
An alternative tactic would be to think of the best technical practice that your office doesn't use that you could introduce via your co-workers, without threatening your manager, and start trying to do that. It's low key but if its an effective practice you could see payoffs quicker than the above plan. It won't get rid of the suits on its own though.
Anyway, good luck! I just really hope you weren't thinking of standing up and saying "I wish we had more foosball, fewer suits and daily pushes to our online banking app (which we are gonna rewrite in Ruby)."
(edit to add: The "How to Manage Geeks" current on the front page is also quite good, but doesn't really help you. http://www.wikihow.com/Manage-Geeks. I also recommend: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/management http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/08/managing_older_managers_a_gu... http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/cat_management.html)
Wouldn't this imply that their current process works since it allows saving huge amounts already?
* Not only must change absolutely come from the top, but so must the attitude. This may require getting new management, takes __money__, and time, and full support from your board. I really want to point to this one article by FC [1] but it's half link bait. None the less this list has characteristics (most of them, not all) of desired change (when you read it, remove 'social'). Sometimes, you may need to get rid of board members. The ones that say "If it ain't broke why fix it?" (because you found out it was never fixed in the first place, or it's broke cause customers don't exist anymore).
* Attitude must be filtered down from the top to the lowest of ranks. This takes time, and may require getting rid of dead weight _just like Silicon valley companies_. [2][3]
* Moving fast means just that. A large amount of people grew up with 'process', love to feel important, is all they know, and firmly believe there is nothing better. (Wish I could site some psychology papers on this with related research in 'process engineering'/'re-engineering' but I don't follow the field anymore and can't remember off the top of my head any...). Even for getting rid of people there is a huge, long process. Microsoft is also seen as NOT moving fast enough [4] (well, in comparison to some banks and health insurance corps MS moves at light speed).
* Get rid of people rather than 're-education'. Sometimes your teams need to be reborn and you _can't_ teach everyone to be at the same level and expect them to have new enthusiasm. Especially so when you have a huge honking boat of people at your Big Corp. People are different, and most likely they were hired for different reasons from when you 'started change'. Many older people (40+) at big corps today surprisingly don't have degrees (which Doesn't matter) nor want to learn anything new (what really matters). If they can't get excited over new tools (read: programming languages, platforms) how they heck will you get them excited with what your going to build (you need passionate people, impossible to have 100% on board with your passion. It's like finding co-founders for a startup).
* Applications and process are entrenched deep so that Big Corp must rely on them. This is really FEAR. Fear of change! See my first point, and if fear still exists keep firing.
* Once you eliminate dead wood, got rid of fear, have board approval, have great teams, you'll need to engrain in to the new culture some form of 'iterative process'. Customers are always moving targets and you should always be ready - to move and catch new ones. Well, unless your a Monopoly (in which case it doesn't matter and any change means less profit on the CEOs quarterly).
* Last bit of insight, sometimes you just can't change people. You can only assemble people, so assemble the ones you need.
[1] http://www.fastcompany.com/1761924/top-ten-ways-ceo-s-must-c...
[2] http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2011/03/17/whom-should-yo...
[3] http://venturebeat.com/2010/05/05/23-insights-from-the-netfl...
[4] http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_39/b3952001....
The issue with working in FInancial Services is Corporate governance & compliance. Every single detail in a bank is monitored & regulated to the point where there are unbelievably strict rules covering every element of the business. I appreciate culture can't be controlled by rules & regulations but it does tend to cripple creativity & freedom quite significantly.
Good luck.
How did I get away with even that much and was it worth it?
To get a new technology introduced, I had to escalate my issue all the way to the CEO of the Bank. This was only possible because I was not an IT employee. I was one of the well paid financial analysts with a fair amount of clout in our area of the bank. I would not have been able to convince the bank of any change had I not worked for a profit center of the bank. As you are in IT, you are part of a cost center (accept this as a fact of life). The only way you are going to make any changes in any reasonable time frame is if someone in a profit center champions your cause. Cost center areas of the bank rarely will be able to raise their issue high enough to make any difference. Banks make money hand over fist so as long as a cost center like IT doesn't get in the way of making money, the top brass just won't care. They won't and no amount of believing that they will will make them think otherwise. Banks are large rent-seeking institutions run by people who just want to make as much money as possible to retire early or keep up with the joneses. I promise you that few if any of these people will care about your plight. They certainly don't see suits and dull dreary offices as part of the problem. Watch American Psycho. Many like the suits (because they are probably wearing Armani and Gucci suits and then spend their evenings in restaurants and bars where women notice that kind of thing). The fact that you are wearing suits will not be seen as problem for them. They may even wonder why you wouldn't want to wear a suit. I was the only financial analyst that didn't leave the bank for lunch without my suit jacket when it was 100 degrees outside and humid. They like the suits. They command power and respect.
Was it worth wasting my time on trying to change the culture at the bank? NO. NO. NO. NO. Don't bother. You'll fight tooth and nail for a year for a tiny concession if you are lucky and you'll always wish things were better. Well they can be better, but not in the bank. Go elsewhere. Go work with real engineers and tech people in a business where tech is a profit center. You will only ever be happy in a company where the job you do is part of a profit center.
Leave. Trust me. Leave.
I've been out of the bank for 3 years now and after working at two tech companies in the meantime, I'm now building my own startup with some friends and learning so much more about tech and business than a lifetime of working at a bank would have taught me. If I had stayed at the bank, I probably would be making a half million to a million dollars per year with bonus by now. I'm currently near broke and bootstrapping and could not be happier. I can't afford vacations or nice cars, but I also don't work a shit job where those are the only things in my life that I have to look forward to.
If you still decide to give it a shot, check out the links from Robin_Message's answer and the book Fearless Change, which is a pattern language book with culture change patterns to help you solve the problems you encounter. I wish I had had that book when I was trying to change things at the bank.
It's not directly related to reforming that corporate culture, but it'll probably give you some good tips if you decided that your particular ocean is taking too long to boil.
2) Start where you are. What can you do personally or within your team to make things better. Are there processes that you follow but don't really need to follow because they don't serve real goals (i.e. they're done because that's how it's done)? Are there things in your immediate reach that can be improved and how do those improvements serve the larger goals (e.g. do they save money, time, reduce tedium)?
3) It can be better to ask forgiveness than ask permission (sometimes). Are there ways you can change things that can be justified after the fact? What if you started using a different approach because the team decided it was the right thing to do and knew from experience that it would work and be an improvement. Once it was working, then present it as a 'better way' with the proof already laid out. Realize too that there's a time and a place for this and only you can know when that might be (e.g. the time to try something new might not be during a frantic push to release a new feature).
4) Find a sponsor. Is there someone higher up who you can show successes to and who would support you? Technology is not just about clean code and good technical architectures, there is also a cultural architecture that must be considered. We don't develop software or create systems in a vacuum of ideal decisions; we work with the constraints of time/demands of the larger organization. Having someone to help navigate the political ground can help accomplish your goals while also improving things. A sponsor can help build trust within the organization.
5) Be patient. Cultural change can take years. Maybe that's not what you want to be doing with your time. That's fine too. Maybe it will never happen. That's also fine. The question is are you finding satisfaction in your job and remaining flexible and vibrant while doing what needs to be done?
From my experience, it's even hard from a leader to change an existing culture, the most effective way that has worked for me is to make up a set of clever rules that reward the "correct" thinking and punishes the "wrong" thinking, instead of trying to talk people into doing things in a new way.
I mention it because of the fact that you have people coming up with ideas that then get ignored. Having somewhere were ideas can go, and get voted up could be a small shift towards making those ideas actually happen.
Incidentally, Does anyone know if there's a commercially available version of that that isn't outrageously expensive? Starbucks' seems to be custom-built with Salesforce, I could be wrong.
To answer your question about working for non-corporates - I've spent a lot of time working at marketing agencies, the jobs I enjoyed the most didn't have a dress code and allowed me the time & freedom to actually implement the ideas I came up with.
Our "achilles heel" was security. Simple deployments were a nightmare, because of approvals and need to wait for someone with top secret credentials to actually execute them.
Collaboration and idea generation only existed, if someone scheduled a meeting to do it. Really?
There's an excellent substantial podcast/interview on this subject on "software engineering radio": http://www.se-radio.net/2009/06/episode-139-fearless-change-...
Linda Rising wrote a great book about changing culture, "Fearless Change". She actually approaches this topic pragmatically using the concept of "patterns" as the tool. (http://www.amazon.com/Fearless-Change-Patterns-Introducing-I...)
IMHO, you're in for a long ride if you want to make substantial changes in culture. I think you really have to love the place and people you're working with to be able to tolerate the amount of highly cooperative effort and "politics" it will take.
People think that "saving money" will justify changes. It is not true, an organism will not destroy itself in order to become more efficient.
if that is not a strategy you want to pursue - then first change yourself! do you wear a suit? get rid of it. do you were shoes? get rid of them! so you work in a cubicle? buy a mac air and sit on the floor or at the cafeteria instead? to many meetings - for the next one wear a dress (oh, the good old times...).
first change yourself, then change the company.
Second question: how much reach do you need? Do you want to work in: (a) an environment where no one wears a suit, (b) an environment where no one has to wear a suit, (c) an environment where tech people don't have to wear suits, (d) an environment where suits aren't required but everyone seeking promotion still wears one? The more people who will have to change to suit your vision, the lower your chances of success.
Third: the problems with your work aren't abstract cultural issues. They're concrete. So focus on those, because some are very easy to fix and some are get-another-job-now intractible. What's the real problem? If you enjoy the work but hate the "sterile, dreary" office decorum, suck it up because that's a small issue. If the problem is bad management and you're a grunt, best to leave on your own terms because raising the issue could have you leaving not on your own terms. If the problem is bureaucracy, ask your manager if it's possible to hire another person to manage the bureaucracy so technology people can be more productive. Abstract cultural problems are vague and hard to specify, much less solve. Concrete problems have solutions (but the solution may be that you need to get another job.)
