Do CEOs need to be kept engaged too?

Yesterday,The Times newspaper ran an article on depression among CEOs, which threw up lots of questions in my mind about employee communication and engagement.

The article was about Phillip Burguieres, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of EMC Holdings, LLC who quit his previous £450,000-a-year job at because of clinical depression. He even contemplated suicide. Fortunately he rose above his problems but he says that depression is rife among business leaders and the problem escalates because of the stigma that it carries. Leaders are expected to be the best at dealing with the pressure of the business world - that's why they're leaders - right?

(There’s a great article in the latest Strategic HR Review by Ros Taylor titled What makes leaders tick? In which she identifies key common characteristics of 18 CEOs of companies like Conde Nast, Channel 4 and Rocco Forte Hotels.)

But of course they're human too! And this reminded me of a recent discussion on the Communicators Network around the definition and actual reality of engaged employees, in particular Melcrum’s managing editor, Graeme Ginsberg's point:

“The vast majority of the time, people don’t go to work, to work, they go because they have to. They may have pockets of work satisfaction, but this is at best, and the regularity will depend on the nature of the work they do. For example, a miner is unlikely to feel much job satisfaction, while an engineer working on a ground-breaking project might feel more. The latter employee might actually skip to work sometimes and not think at all on occasion about the paycheck. But even that very stimulated engineer will not always be happy with the nature of their work. Even company directors daydream about not having to go to work.”

So, my first thought is, do CEOs need to be kept “engaged” as well as employees? We all know that a good salary and holding a high and respected position are certainly contribute largely to engagement but we also know that it doesn’t stop there. So, should CEOs be included in engagement programs? From what I’ve seen, CEOs are often either loved or hated, if it’s the latter this must be pretty demoralising. If employees want respect and trust from the CEO shouldn’t there be initiatives to encourage the same in the other direction too?

Also, does engagement depend on personality type? Are there certain types of people that are more likely to be engaged than others? Are optimistic, secure and relaxed people more likely to feel engaged with an organization and their work than those who have negative dispositions, insecurities and are more prone to stress? While having this conversation in the office, a colleague pointed out that this touches on the idea of employing people for attitude rather than skills. Shreesh Sarvagya of Reliance Industries Ltd says that the founder chairman of Reliance, one of India's largest conglomerates, stood by this motto, and employee engagement is at impressive levels within the organization. Shreesh said in his Comms Network posting that engagement begins with HR, who should look for an “organizational fit” in potential employees.

New role for Internal Comms?
And does all this add yet another responsibility to internal communicators - if they act as morale lifters for employees, should it be their job to lift the CEO’s morale too? Of course I realize that few internal communicators are lucky enough to have a five-minute conversation with the CEO, let alone get close enough to lift morale when they’re having an off day. And could this be one of the things the CEO would like from the internal comms function?

Well, Melcrum is currently carrying out interviews with some top CEOs to find out what they expect and want from the internal communication function. Darren Briggs of The Company Agency reveals some early findings of this research in his regular column on leadership communication in Strategic Communication Management. You'll have to sit and wait for another month or so to read the full report - and whether CEOs want internal comms around on their bad days…

Since going public with his difficulties and illness, Phillip Burguieres says he receives calls twice a week on average from other CEOs feeling like they may be going through the same thing. In fact he believes that 25% of CEOs have and will go through depression at some point in their lives. He also points out cultural differences around the stigmatization of depression in the workplace. He says it’s less of a problem in the UK because eccentricity – which is said to be a subconscious way of coping with depression - is more accepted in the UK than in the US where, according to Burguieres, if you're eccentric “you’re considered a nutter!”.

So apologies for the mammoth sized blog and the mix of topics, but I’m eagerly awaiting responses to my (perhaps somewhat naïve?) questions….

Sona

Comments

[Annie Waite]

Perhaps he's depressed because he's pictured within a signed photo of Bush?! And I'm surprised by the comments about how eccentricity in the US means you're automatically labelled a nutter. I mean, when I was at the IABC conference and skipped around dressed as a chicken noone batted an eyelid...

Seriously though, you raise so many interesting points but I wanted to touch upon whether internal communicators should be responsible for lifting the morale of the CEO. My gut feeling would be to say no, as the CEO him/herself "should" be able to deal with the complexities, and weigh up the pros and cons of whatever the situation leading to low morale might be - that sort of judgement call being the reason they're the CEO in the first place.

And whatever the size of the company, you'd hope the other board members or those who work closely with the CEO would be observant enough to spot if anything was wrong and take appropriate action if necessary, not make it a "task" that one area/person within the business takes responsibility for.

[Sue Dewhurst]

Interesting post Sona. In my book, CEOs are human beings just in the same way as the rest of us, and they have just the same need to feel engaged at work. And, like anyone else, I'm sure they do a better job if they are. I've worked with some CEOs that I've liked and respected immensely, and I really cared that they were successful.

As to the question of should we be responsible for 'lifting a CEO's morale',I don't like the tag because it suggests we're kind of like 'make people happy' people. But if it equates to 'should we have a trusted relationship with the CEO so they feel able to talk things through and be themselves', yes, I'd like that to be me, although I'm with Annie that I'd expect a few more of the top team to have that kind of a relationship too.

It must be fairly lonely at the top, and I've worked with MDs before that have asked me to go events with them that are nothing to do with me, just because they wanted a bit of support and a friendly face nearby. It's a privileged place to be. I wouldn't want their job for all the tea in China, but if I had to, I'd want some support mechanisms around me.

[Sona Hathi]

Thanks for the responses. I had a feeling they'd be along those lines!

[Keir Bosley]

CEOs are just human beings too! But it must be harder for them to admit to any problem - especially if their company share price takes a dive in consequence.

No wonder fewer of us want to be in the top seat. What then for succession planning?