Dispatch 4: The SEO* Starts Digging: Exploring the “Cracks” Within the Company and Beyond

“If you want to work on the Big stuff, sweat the small stuff.”

 MEMO

 From: Paola, Senior VP of Sustainability and Engagement* (“SEO”)

 To: Joe, CEO, The Granger Group of Companies

 That was an excellent meeting we had last week, Joe. You gave me a very good introduction to the company, your concerns, your vision, and what you hoped I might contribute in this new role.

I appreciated the description of the situation you had asked the head of communications to develop for you (www.glennsigurdson.com/dispatches ).

I studied it carefully. It is very revealing, vividly demonstrating the challenges. It powerfully illustrates how everybody’s doing what they thought they should be doing resulted in a very complicated situation with potentially serious implications.

Roger’s bold initiative should be applauded in hindsight. But it also raises the much bigger question of how we can build a framework and culture that would enable these kinds of unconventional choices and actions to stimulate innovative responses.

I’m glad you added the word “Engagement” to my title. The more I reflected on this scenario, the more I realized that it needed to be a core focus of my efforts, internally and externally.

 This will be helpful in our conversation when we meet again next week. I’ve considered one or two further memos I may well send before that. High on my priority list is reviewing the Sustainability Reports for the last few years.

Given the information on this situation, it will be interesting to see how the question of integration and alignment is reported, if at all, and if there is an ESG ranking.

At the end, I have listed some “Take Away Challenges” from the Scenario. Let’s talk these through at your meeting, as that will be very helpful in beginning to frame the recommendation to the Board.

I’m excited about working with you and the team and this role.

Cheers

Paola

Framing the Analysis

The Granger Valley scenario highlights how well-intentioned decisions can have unintended consequences when misalignment exists across business units. Internal cracks rippled outward, creating significant risks and missed opportunities.

Ask Yourself these questions.

1. Did each participant act in a way that was consistent with what they understood was their obligation and for which they would be held accountable?
2. Would this scenario have unfolded differently if each participant “owned” sustainability and considered their decisions’ external and operational context?
3. Could sustainability as a corporate culture strengthen alignment internally and grow relationships externally?
4. Should relationships be characterized as assets? If so, how can they be valued? Do they provide the company and the community an opportunity for mutual value creation?
5. Would you have made the same choice as Roger in similar circumstances?

1. The Cracks in Alignment

If sustainability is adopted and internalized as part of the corporate culture, will alignment be strengthened across business units?

Key Misalignments

• Mine manager: Acted locally to resolve tensions with the Indigenous community, unwittingly creating a conflict with global sourcing mandates.
• Operations VP: Prioritized short-term stability by “a buying time” response, revealing the lack of a process and his uncertainty about reconciling competing priorities.
• Purchasing VP: Enforced cost-cutting directives without taking into account possible implications for localized relationships or operational risks,
• The Board: Directed cost-cutting measures without considering downstream consequences for relationships and operations.

 Interpersonal Dynamics

The manager’s bold decision to escalate the issue to the CEO, while risky, ultimately alleviated tensions across the organization:

• The VP of Purchasing, constrained by a mandate he couldn’t independently alter, benefited from the CEO’s ability to negotiate directly with Exxon.
• The VP of Operations felt relieved when the issue was moved to the CEO’s desk, allowing him to focus on other priorities.
• The CEO received a platform to address systemic misalignments and strengthen internal and external relationships.

Key Insight

Internal cracks—misaligned priorities and a lack of integration—can be mitigated when bold action transforms risk into opportunity, resolving challenges for multiple stakeholders.

2.  The Gaps in Perception

Would this scenario have unfolded differently if the company’s culture had required choices and actions that could have external implications to be considered through a “how will this be seen”  lens?

Corporate View

• Dust: An operational inevitability.
• Hit dog: An unfortunate, isolated event.

 Community View

• Health and Safety: Dust represents a significant aggravation, a potential health hazard, and a safety risk.
• Flashpoint: The hit dog, particularly involving an elder, signalled broader neglect for community concerns.

Key Insight

Perception gaps between internal assumptions and external realities amplify tensions. What seems minor to the company resonates profoundly with the community, underscoring the importance of bridging these gaps.

3. Relationships as Assets

Should relationships be characterized as assets? If so, how can they be valued?

 Internal Relationships

• Misalignment across the Board, Purchasing VP, Operations VP, and mine manager reflect systemic fragmentation.
• The manager’s action helped reframe a difficult situation, creating alignment opportunities – a calculated but potentially risky choice personally.

External Relationships

• The manager’s agreement to source fuel locally was a practical step to defuse a difficult situation and a good first step in rebuilding the relationship.
• By escalating the issue to the CEO, the manager made an  “unwise choice,” flying in the face of conventional wisdom without fully appreciating the positive outcomes that would result in sought.

Key Insight

Relationships are not costs but assets that require deliberate investment. Strong relationships enable alignment internally and resilience externally.

4.  The Courage to Escalate: Risk Meets Opportunity

The mine manager’s decision to escalate the issue directly to the CEO was pivotal:

For the Organization:

• It alleviated the Purchasing VP’s constraints, enabling the CEO to negotiate beyond the VP’s capacity.
• It allowed the Operations VP to move the issue off his desk without conflict escalation.
• It allowed the CEO to address systemic misalignments and strengthen relationships internally and externally.

For the Manager:

• His courage to act outside traditional structures elevated his organizational profile.
• He preserved his relationship with the community, assuming the CEO negotiated an accommodation with Exxon—a highly likely outcome.

Key Insight

The manager’s bold move exemplifies how risk and opportunity are intertwined. Inevitably, there is tension between bold moves and dumb decisions, and providing a structure to manage that tension is a challenge that must be met.

Conclusion: Some of the Take-Away Challenges

1. Integrated Decision-Making: Aligning priorities across business units to reduce internal cracks and their external consequences.
2. Bridging Perception Gaps: Understanding community concerns to build trust and mitigate symbolic flashpoints.
3. Investing in Relationships: Treating relationships as assets that facilitate resource access, sustain operational stability and create long-term value.
4. Sustainability as a Tool: Understanding sustainability can help assess and assist in aligning internal goals, building external trust, and fostering resilience and adaptability.
5. Creating Flexibility Within Rigid Structures: Developing ways of managing the tension between hierarchical structures and innovative ideas.
6. Recognizing Leadership Opportunities: Opening pathways that make it safe to encourage and reward our management team and employees to bring critical issues and missed opportunities to light.