there is a guard posted deep within an establishment who finds himself in a predicament. you see, this guard's company has recently received new management. if you were to ask the guard, he would tell you he personally is of the opinion that it was a hostile takeover, and is not a fan of this corporate restructuring.
why; you ask, is the guard less than enthusiastic? i will happily explain on the guard's behalf, beginning with what the guard's life was like prior to the upheaval.
for years and years, our stalwart sentry would stand at his post, and occasionally, he would be called by management to come grab a box or a stack of files to bring to the room where he stands guard. his instructions were simple. place the information in the room—it didn't matter where—and make certain no one disturbed what was inside.
this room was full of stacks and stacks of, who-knows-what, that the upper management deemed something they would address later. in all the years our loyal friend stood at his post outside the door, no one came to confront the ever-growing piles.
the sentry often wondered what he was guarding. there had been stories, of course; reports of business where management had allowed another company to overstep its bounds. questionable transactions that had been explained away, policies that had been violated but deemed isolated incidents. the devoted attendant rightly deduced that he was the keeper of the many times where management reviewed the matter just long enough to decide no immediate action was necessary, boxed up the report, and sent it downstairs for no one to visit the contents again.
who was he to judge how the establishment was conducting business? those decisions were above his pay grade, and frankly, the guard had it easy watching over stacks of boxes and paper—no matter how disorganized and cluttered that room was. and on top of that, this sentry was honored to work for an establishment that prided itself on the principles of: confidence, steadiness under pressure, discernment and intuition, strength, and dependability. the guard admired these integral principles and strived to hold to them himself.
six months ago, there was talk. talk of an upheaval in conduct. trusted fellow companies—three, to be exact—had been exposed through a pattern of repeated breaches and ethical violations that the guard's establishment could not overlook anymore. a consultant was brought in to look around with an outsider's perspective. and that was when the guard began to suspect change was imminent, which made him nervous.
the consultant asked many questions, and listened, and wandered down halls forgotten which helped the board of the establishment to see that strategic pivots would benefit the company immensely, and that would begin with management. no one in the company expected things to move as quickly as they did, and the guard keeping his post deep within the walls had not witnessed all the changes first hand, which brought an unsettled feeling. he knew from a lifetime of experience that transformation was uncomfortable without fail. he did not like change.
one of the most surprising moments for the guard was when the consultant began looking into the principles the company prided itself on. the consultant uncovered that the principles themselves were not the problem; no—the principles were worth holding onto. it was the methods management had been using to achieve them that needed to change. the consultant pointed out those methods had been far more costly to the company than anyone had realized:
- confidence was obtained when staying in control.
- steadiness under pressure was achieved by overriding distress.
- discernment and intuition were trusted so long as conclusions were not destabilizing or inconvenient.
- strength was measured by how little the company had to rely on others.
- and dependability was achieved by overriding the company's limits.
the guard watched anxiously as the board tested the consultant's findings against the company's history. to his dismay, they found the assessment held. once the board saw what the old methods had cost the establishment, they began dismantling the management structure that had relied upon them. our devoted sentry found discomfort in change. change in management meant an unsettling amount of instability. instability brought disorientation; and disorientation brought disruption, questions, and doubts. ...all of this because of change.
change in which the consultant would say was growth and development.
change in which the guard would say was chaotic disruption leading to vulnerability.
change in which the board of directors decided was going to happen nonetheless.
...thus, our loyal doorkeeper would say, was when the hostile takeover began.
the rapid pace at which everything began to shift was destabilizing to say the least. from the guard's perspective, nearly every department around him had changed policy at once. the company was undergoing a deep reorganization in how it handled pressure, conflict, responsibility, and its dealings with others.
the relations department stopped trying to regulate every interaction. the new manager began retraining staff to stop intervening in every tense exchange merely to restore immediate calm, or sacrificing the company's own ease to keep outside parties pleased.
the operations department began returning responsibility to its proper owners. New management spent time reinforcing personnel that problems caused by another's choices and actions were no longer automatically reassigned to them for cleanup. along those lines, assistance was no longer approved simply because another establishment was struggling.
the risk and compliance teams were given new standards. misconduct was not to be minimized, explained away, or filed as an isolated incident merely because confrontation would be inconvenient or full of tension. new management no longer required conditions to become intolerable before limits were imposed.
through the consultant's encouragement, the company also began listening to its long-neglected internal welfare department—a division that had been dismissed almost as thoroughly as the room the guard watched over. signals of strain, exhaustion, and distress were no longer to be overridden simply because accommodating another department or outside party seemed easier. for the first time, management was instructed to treat those signals as useful information about the condition of the company.
the guard was so unnerved by the sheer amount of change that he began to question his own standing in the newly reorganized company. at times, the upheaval felt so profound that our committed sentry could almost swear the very ground was shaking beneath him and the walls themselves had begun to tremble. what if, like the old management, the company eventually decided there was no longer a place for him either?
he found he did not have long to wait before finding out. new management and the consultant eventually made their way into the depths of the establishment where the guard remained faithfully at his post.
after surveying the room, the consultant recommended that the accumulated boxes and files be removed. most had been sent there after management decided that addressing the matter directly would create more disruption than accommodating it. once enough time had passed, reopening the issue felt increasingly difficult, and so the files remained—unresolved and accumulating. new management and the board agreed that this could no longer be the company's method.
the guard could hardly make sense of the instruction. for years, his orders had been remarkably clear: keep others out. protect what had been placed inside. do not allow the contents to be disturbed.
...and now?
open the door.
a removal crew was brought in, and one by one, the stacks he had spent a lifetime guarding disappeared. ...were the walls and ground trembling again?
