Undercover Boss: A Repellant Piece of Trash
 Subscribe to the Three Star Leadership Blog |
| The Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. |
| Follow me on Twitter |
| For weekly tips and resources pointers, check Wally's Three Star Leadership Letter |
| Find out more about having Wally speak to your company or convention. |
| Find out more about Wally's coaching services. |
 |
Last night a new "reality" show, titled "Undercover Boss" aired right after the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl was exciting. "Undercover Boss," by contrast, was repellent hour of television where we were asked to accept all manner of nonsense as true and flawed concepts as good ideas.
Let's begin with the basic premise. A noble senior executive will go undercover as an entry-level employee in his or her company to find out "how things really are."
If you're a senior executive, you don't need to go undercover to find out what happens on the front line. Just go out and talk to the folks on a regular basis. If you're not already doing that, you won't find out much from a single week undercover.
Oh yeah, undercover. That means those front line people won't know there's something afoot. I don't know about the people you work with, but I'm guessing that most of the folks I know would get a clue from the TV cameras that suddenly show up and follow the garbage truck and keep asking you to re-do the last conversation.
Of course, that C-suite executive is pretty clever. He disguised himself as a "real guy" with a couple of days' growth of beard. So maybe the undercover thing will work.
The other premise of the show is that no one will play to the camera. That hasn't been true in any other of the "follow people around" shows. It wasn't true here, either.
And it's all rigged in the executive's favor. He or she is the only one who knows what's really going on. So he or she can act the way they want the world to see.
And those workers? They get to be caught in the act with anything they do liable to wind up on national television. Of course, they do have the option to refuse to sign a release, but that could be risky when the CEO will be on the show.
This is a "reality" show that isn't real at all. It's rigged so that the CEO (who knows the game) looks good while it puts company workers at risk of embarrassment or worse. He or she will return to the executive dining room with tales of all the lessons learned out among the common folk, and with a burnished reputation to boot.
Wally's Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. Click here to check it out.
HI Wally,
I wouldn't worry about anyone picking up leadership lessons from this show. There has yet to be a 'reality' show on TV that wasn't complete trash and I would like to thank that most viewers have the intelligence to realize it.
If the company featured was indeed a real company (I didn't watch and don't know who it was) the big question is why would they want to take part in such a fiasco in front of millions of viewers and potential clients?
Reply to this
Thanks for that comment, Laura. I'm not too worried about people drawing "leadership lessons" from the show. My biggest problem with it is that I see it as forced participation of company workers and therefore as a form of exploitation.
As for the companies, here goes. Last night was Waste Management. Other companies are reported to be Hooters, 7-Eleven, White Castle, and Churchill Downs.
Reply to this
Wally:
I think you are right on with your comments. I took the time to watch the first few minutes and after that said another stage program for the sake of an audience.
I was hoping some lessons could be learner from the show but all I saw was 1. a senior level manager who was out of touch with the frontline employees. 2. Frontline employees who if they did not know who was out there would feel like they had been tricked.
3. There are some great people out there on the front line who do great work every day and in most cases don't get the recognition they deserve. 4. Without a great front line there would be no bottom line.
Reply to this
Those are great comments as always, Mel. For me, the money quote is the last line in your comment: "Without a great front line there would be no bottom line." It's a keeper.
Reply to this
The bigger question for me is this, "Why didn't WMI have a feedback loop in place" to expose these silent problems? C-Level execs need to know what is going on. However as I discuss in my book, I'm surprised at how little they sometimes know. This is not an asset, but a huge liability that is impacting performance and future potential.
Personally, it would have been very easy for my to put Mr. Toyoda in that same series where a "I had no idea" revelation take place. Now look what Toyota is facing.
Reply to this
Good points, Rodney. The isolation from reality is exacerbated the fact that if you don't get out to the front lines to see for yourself, you're at the mercy of your subordinates' filters when they send you info.
Reply to this
I can't help but wonder what other Waste Management employees - who work as hard (or harder) than those featured or who have even more compelling back stories - thought when those on the show were rewarded while they labor on in unappreciated anonymity.
Reply to this
That's another fascinating aspect of this Doug. Thanks for asking that question for us.
Reply to this
Wally -
How out of touch can a senior level manager be? I truly hope not knowing how a female truck driver uses the bathroom while on her route was for T.V. I was shocked and applauded, how discounted can management be? The only good thing is we probably will not have to suffer through this much longer.
Reply to this
Thanks for stopping by, Mike. In all fairness, it's easy to get out of touch as you ascend the org chart. Pretty much everything conspires to tell you that you're important work is there in the office or in meetings of some kind. It takes a real act of will and some guts to wander out into the field to see what you can see. I suspect it will always be so, alas.
Reply to this
Guess I'll delete it from my TIVO. Thanks for saving me the trouble of watching it Wally!
Reply to this
You're welcome Scott. I'm sure there's better use of your time. I might suggest "Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares" (the BBC show) as a good substitute.
Reply to this
I've always disliked the term 'reality' TV. Few things touched by cameras survive unchanged and all these shows are designed to encourage the conflicts and emotions that will drive ratings. Problem is, a lot of folks take what they see to be the real world and we are not better off for it.
Reply to this
Thanks for adding to the comments, Fred. My own experience, working with organizations that were featured on "reality" shows supports your position. Especially in our world where fame is seen as a goal by many and television exposure can be mistaken for accomplishment, the camera leaves nothing unchanged.
Reply to this
Wally (and company) –
I’ll have to respectfully and strongly disagree. I watched the entire show and loved it! I’ll be posting my leadership lessons learned each week. [Note: Dan's first post is "Leadership Lessons from Undercover Boss: Episode 1"]
The CEO from Waste Management, Larry O’Donnell, is the real deal. The employees are too. I know this for a fact, because two of them live in my hometown. Our local media did interviews with both of them after the show, and neither of them felt “exploited”. They cried after watching the episode for the first time.
Real positive changes happened at WM as a result of the show. And I predict that the show will drive positive change in executive behavior. Why is that so hard to believe or accept?
BTW, Laura – is Extreme Makeover Home Improvement Edition “a complete piece of trash”? It’s not to the communities that get involved in those projects, or the recipients of that heartfelt generosity. Oh wait – gee, those poor families are being manipulated and exploited by Sears. Damn.
Reply to this
Thanks for sharing that thoughtful (as usual) analysis, Dan. It got me to look at my own analysis again, but I'm essentially staying with it.
As you suggest, the ultimate test of the series or any individual show is whether positive, reasonably-permanent change comes from it. We won't know the answer to that for some time, but it's certainly an area where I'd love to be wrong. I don’t see any major change at WM coming from this.
The main good that I see is your lessons. They will help others, but I wonder if they'll take root in a culture where the executive needed a TV show to get him out of the office to check out the impact of productivity changes. Will he now do that regularly? I doubt it. I think a career's-worth of habit will reassert authority.
We can come back in a year to check on the results and behavior change. We can even see if the task force the woman trash collector is now on has done anything by then and whether it makes a difference.
But, even if there is positive change at WM, there's still the issue of process. Bosses tricking the people who work for them is not good, even for a good cause. The presence of cameras makes every encounter artificial. And the producers of all reality shows cut and select what they show without regard to how it affects the people in front of the camera.
Reply to this
"...but I wonder if they'll take root in a culture where the executive needed a TV show to get him out of the office to check out the impact of productivity changes."
A key point that Mr. O'Donnell needs to consider as he moves forward; why did it take a TV show to motivate him to undertake understanding the impact of his decisions on his organization?
Reply to this
Thanks for sharing that, Doug. Your phrasing is excellent because it asks a question that can lead to positive change.
Reply to this
Wally
Thanks for writing this. I was in a meeting yesterday discussing why this was a stupid premise for a stupid show. In this day and age, when e-mail, videos, town-halls are common, how is it excusable for a CEO or other senior Execs not to be recognized by their employees? How is excusable to be that out of touch with what their employees do? Who provides the front line staff with sense of mission, strategic direction, or even recognition of their role in providing value to the organization? I'm just glad it was called Undercover Boss and not "Undercover Leader".
Reply to this
You make some great points, Raymund. Thank you. I hadn't considered all the technological tools available before the reality show option. Thanks for adding that perspective.
Reply to this
Hi Wally, Thanks for the comments. I agree, reality show is an ongoing oxymoron. This one is much more watchable than the ranting bad hair CEO. It is reality that a Pres. of a $13.5bb business with 50k employees would not be in touch with what it is to be a front line employee. SR. Exec attention to people doing the work is a good thing even if contrived. The real value is national televised attention to those doing the work.
Reply to this
Thanks for adding that, Randy. I wish I could agree with you, but I can't. I don't think it will focus attention on much that's real. If Dan is right, there will be lessons learned and turned to good, either at the company being featured or elsewhere. But I don't think there will be a realistic, fair, or nuanced portrayal of the work of the front line workers or the C-suite execs. Reality shows so far have gone for the dramatic over the accurate. I don't see any indication that this show will be different.
Reply to this
Wally,
Would be interesting to hear if Waste Mgt garbage truck people have any change in customer interaction this week. I'm guessing we will all have more to say about Hooters next week. Rock on!
Reply to this
That's an interesting question. I think it would be more interesting and helpful to return in six months to evaluate if any change has come out of episode.
Reply to this
Speaking of "going out and talking to folks on a regular basis", here is an interesting pieceby [Noel W. Hinners] an Apollo lunar scientist, former director of the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum, and former director of NASA Goddard, where he relates stories about spending nights at the museum with the janitors where he learned how they removed gum from the carpet, and riding around with the snow plow drivers at Goddard. If a rocket scientist could take a break from analyzing moon rocks to scrape gum and plow snow without going "undercover", surely Mr. O'Donnell could do some "management by wandering around" without resorting to such theatrics.
Reply to this
Thanks for the pointer to that excellent resource. I think that most effective bosswork happens in the cracks in the system. It happens through informal conversation and coaching. And I think that simple techniques usually work better than sophisticated techniques with lots of moving parts. Management by Wandering Around is simple. It gets the boss out of the office and to the places where other peoples' work happens. It changes perspective on both sides of the conversation. But there are still some rules. I wrote about that in my post: "How to Wander Effectively."
Reply to this
Wally, I try really hard to have an open mind. I've failed. Reality shows are not reality at all because editing transforms reality into entertainment.
I'd be very interested to know what was really behind Lawrence O’Donnell's decision to do the show. Corporate PR? Personal PR? An honest attempt to learn seems unlikely since there were cameras everywhere. Who is totally open and honest when cameras are rolling? The exercise will at best produce a filtered version of reality and that's before the editing.
I think the entertainment could be fun but I don't see any Harvard case studies coming out of this project
Reply to this
Thanks for sharing that, Doug. I'm willing to assume that O'Donnell had good intentions here. I don't see anything that indicates otherwise. My problems lie a) with the idea that a reality show portrays reality and b) with the idea that a single "undercover" visit to the front line can actually tell you much about what's going on and c) with the idea that after a meeting all will be well and the people at Waste Management will skip off into the sunset secure in the knowledge that they are valued human beings who are part of a progressive and successful company.
Reply to this
Thanks for the reply, Wally. I am a bit cynical about people seeking or willingly stepping into the limelight. Sometimes a ham is just a ham.
Reply to this
I understand where you're coming from Doug. We sure do seem like we live in a time when we confuse celebrity with achievement. But I also believe, as I learned in my catechism class, that it's right to "put the best possible construction on everything," especially motives.
Reply to this
Hi Wally,
The whole idea of exploitation of the workers is an interesting thought. It makes me think about Jerry Springer, and how those poor people seemingly are willing to exploit themselves in exchange for being on TV.So are these workers signing off, because it gives them a chance to be on TV?
Transparency is a theme for leadership in this decade that I wish more leaders would take on.
Reply to this
Thanks, Laura. I don't know the answer to your question. The workers who appeared in the show needed to sign releases for their faces to be shown. Of course, they could be shown with their face pixilated. I do think that fame has a strong pull in our society, stronger it seems sometimes than accomplishment.
Reply to this
I also find the camera thing amusing. Do you really want people working for you who aren’t at least just a little curious about why the “new guy” is being followed around by the paparazzi? If you’ve hired people who don’t notice anything different in their environment with regard to the camera thing, maybe—just maybe, you have stumbled on to the thing that’s really wrong with your business—the boss doesn’t know how to hire curious people. D’ya think?
I saw some of the first, (and last that I’ll ever watch), episode of “Undercover Boss” last night. It showed how one of the big cheeses at White Castle Hamburgers was going to get to know the front line troops. All the employees played along, and everyone seemed sacchariney happy. Maybe Tony’s Robbins’ employees are always that chipper—but White Castle Employees? I don’t think so.
Tsar Peter the Great had it right. He too went around masquerading as a “common man” in order to get a feel for how things were going in the “common” world. The biggest difference however, is that he left the “yes men” at the Kremlin palace, and donned peasant robes and mannerisms. He went out to study specific people, (shipwrights and the military), for a specific purpose that involved the sussing out of his power base and resources. He did not go out on a self aggrandizement tour aimed at proving to himself, and his “yes men” that he was a great “Enlightened Boss.”
I thought our society was over the Great White Hunter and White Man’s Burden. Evidently not.
Reply to this
Yeah, the cameras are hard to miss.In real life, bosses who do management by wandering around do a lot of it. They don't take cameras with them, either.
Reply to this
I agree. Bosses who are to be taken seriously are always on the scene--they are NOT merely on safari. They care enough to be participants in their businesses—not just as big shot “overseers” of them. I am fortunate. My bosses are here every day, and they participate deeply in the business without micromanaging it or grandstanding about it.
Reply to this
Thanks, Bill. I really like that phrase "on safari." If it's the occasional state visit or hunting expedition, people will be skeptical of your purpose.
Reply to this
Agree this show is a piece of dogsh*t. I never before in my life seen such bogus BS. All these corporate higher ups not realizing what is going on in their company in America. That has been the problem all along her. This stupid cr*p about "Oh I didn't know that that is what entry level people go through working for wages as low as Mexican workers, boy I had no idea. Please give me a break. Start forking out a real wage treating employees right for a change. Mr. I inherited the company from my dad and I have no idea why moral is so low. Yeah I really feel sorry for these bosses, this is A typical America. Midddle class gets poorer and America's inherited companies go to sh*t.
Reply to this
Thanks for sharing your opinion. I think there are a number of people who will look at the series and see it as symptomatic of what's wrong with American business. But I think if you're going to watch the show, it makes sense to see each company/show as a separate entity.
Reply to this