Here’s a little thought experiment. Say you are a board member in the boardroom. There’s two proposals being put on the table. One proposal is going to make a return of 7% and it involves sacking 1000 people somewhere, closing down a location perhaps.
Another proposal on the table which is going to make a return to 3% and it doesn’t involve sacking those people or closing the plant. Which one gets the vote?
In my experience, it’ll be the 7%. It’s my experience in corporate that profit has to be maximised at all costs, in fact, at any cost almost.
.
So try this variation then. Same two proposals. Now, some of the board members know people amongst those 1000 – their family and close friends are going ti get sacked. They will no income, the plant will close and they might possibly even lose their homes. The 3% proposal involves leaving that plant alone.
Now, it is such a clear cut decision? Is there some debate, argument even?
Which one would you vote for if the knew the people who would be impacted?
For me, it completely changes the calculation, because now there’s heart involved in it. Suddenly, you know the people who are going to get impacted by this decision.
In my view, business can and should run with much more compassion for the people who are impacted by decisions. The impact on employees of workload, headcount reductions, sick leave and the work still has to be done, work from home and many more.
I’m interested to hear your thoughts. Which proposal would you vote for? Why?
