A little while back, I talked about how transparency seems to have faded from our conversations both on and off social media. One of the reasons for this could be 
that we don’t really know what to look for in terms of transparency. It got me thinking. How do we know if an organization is operating in a transparent manner?
So I started a list. Here’s what I came up with:
No surprises. Not being open, particularly with regard to how money is spent, could be a dead giveaway. I’m not talking about the $4 spent on a box of staples, here. If you’re involved with an organization that has a defined process for budgeting money, selecting vendors and expense allocations, chances are you should know all about commitments to these things long before someone signs on the dotted line.
Showing respect. This can take many forms, of course. I can say my doctor has no respect for my time when he makes me wait 90 minutes to see him (hmmm . . maybe he’s not transparent). But, what I’m really talking about here is making an effort to do what’s right for the customer, employee, volunteer, etc. If an organization is just doing whatever is easiest or it appears there’s a hidden agenda behind their decisions, it’s possible they aren’t being fully transparent.
Being authentic. We all know that marketers love to sell the sizzle – build the hype. But, is all of it based on truth? After Apple released the iPhone 4G, it was reported the phone had some antenna problems. Apple’s initial claim was that it was a software issue. After a media frenzy, it was discovered that indeed it was the antenna. If you’re involved with an organization that claims to have your best interest at heart, do all of their decisions and actions support that claim?
Open communication. I’ve known organizations where their leadership team could only talk as a group – not individually. Seriously. And there are companies that have to justify their actions (spin doctoring) and almost always talk through a hired third party. If each leader in an organization can’t openly address questions or issues from their customers or employees, it’s possible they’re being less than transparent.
This isn’t an exhaustive list, of course. But it highlights some things we can all look for. Remember, we all have the power to embrace and support organizations that operate openly and show us the respect we deserve. And we also have the power to walk away from those that don’t.
How do you define transparent behavior?
Image courtesy of Public Domain Photos
1
Michael Brisciana says
Sharlyn – – – Good list. I always find it helpful when we (in HR) try to examine “what this looks like” through examples. A related question/issue is what transparency should look like in a private (family-owned) organization?
In the past, I’ve worked for private companies where the owners were deathly afraid of anyone in the company (save for the CFO) having any real understanding of our profitability. Examples: Even senior managers weren’t given full budget/expense reports for their business units; middle managers weren’t able to know what the salaries were for their direct reports; etc.
Clearly, those would be pretty good examples of the OPPOSITE of transparency — which was very uncomfortable for all concerned, as well as being unproductive and unnecessary, I would offer. At the same time, I wonder where the proper line is. I don’t think that many would expect FULL transparency from private owners . . . but I’d have to guess if there are private owners who are fully transparent, they probably run very healthy and productive workplaces.
I’d love to know if anyone has examples of such private companies.
Kevin W. Grossman says
Right on, Sharlyn. I define it as being personally responsible for the filtered and unfiltered me — in all incarnations — leading myself, my family, my team, my company…
Sharlyn Lauby says
Thanks for the comments. I believe the principles of transparency apply regardless of the size and/or ownership of the organization.
Michael adds an interesting dimension with the “need to know” concept. I’ve worked in small family owned businesses where the controller didn’t have all the payroll info. That’s not as much a transparency issue as giving people the information and tools to do their job.
Byron J. says
I agree with most points on the need for transparency in a company. I feel the open communication makes the employer seem more trustworthy and accountable for any actions taken by the employer, which is often lacking in many organizations especially those in the health-care fields.
The point I disagree with is in reference to the patient wait time in the doctor’s office. I have worked in several clinics, both public and private, and many times doctors are working hard to see patients as fast as possible. One patient’s issues are far different than another patient’s, so there is really no way to accurately account for how much time each encounter will take. I agree there should be some courtesy on the doctor’s behalf that after a certain amount of time the patient should be notified of the delay, and given the chance to reschedule if they see fit. However, this new found “transparency” may cause more harm than good for the doctor, i.e. extreme decrease in patient volume, loss of income, and a tarnished reputation, simply because the doctor is running behind schedule on more than one occasion.
This a very fine line that the physician has to walk, and often patient’s get the short end of the stick. Yet, as stated later in the discussion, it is up to the consumer to know when it is time to seek a different provider if this becomes a regular occurrence or the doctor fails to be “transparent” about why this happens & doesn’t offer some type of solution.
Sharlyn Lauby says
Thanks for the insights Byron. My doctor example isn’t about exceptions. Even the best of us have unforeseen situations that cause us to run late or miss a deadline. It’s when it happens regularly that you have to take notice.
I used to work for a company where senior management never planned any of their projects. They enjoyed the adrenaline rush of running around at the last minute to complete their work. Said it demonstrated how competent they were. The staff employees hated it. Put constant pressure on the operation that didn’t need to be there.
It’s one thing to get thrown a curve ball. We can all empathize. But it’s something different to turn the operation upside down to feed senior management’s ego – or a company’s pocketbook.