The Lockdown E9 Michelle Nettles

I'm doing well, quite frankly. The sun is shining here in Wisconsin, and sunshine makes a huge difference. I will say that I'm fortunate that we have enough space that my husband and I are not killing each other. This time together actually has been really good because it allows us to spend at least the evenings together. We cook most often time together, and we spend that time kind of refreshing but also digesting the full day of Zoom and Teams and Blue Jeans and Google—all the online ways in which we are connecting and still socializing but also working. All in all, really good. Have a routine of getting up, working out, getting that shower in. Early on I was missing showers, and like, how does that happen? So you gotta plan it in order for it to happen. But it's been pretty good, personally.

I don't have a chart up, but we send out a global leadership note every week, and this week will be the 12th, so 12 weeks. I probably learned a bit more about myself than I thought. I've compared myself to my husband. We've often said we're both introverts. He actually needs to be in the office a little more than I do. I'm quite comfortable working from wherever, and as long as I can connect with individuals via phone, via technology, I'm usually pleased with that. So I've enjoyed the time a bit more than I thought I would.

I think the big one is solidarity. By and large, we've all identified a common enemy in the virus, and we're all eager to overcome that. I think that is what is fundamental about human beings. I think also though is that we are very tactile and we don't appreciate that, and we take it for granted. And I think this is an awakening for all of us that the need for human connection is important. And while technology can connect us, it's still not the same. You want to touch, you want to feel, you want to get a sense of the essence of the environment—to be at a café in Paris or in Milan and hearing the noise and the bustle that gives you energy, that gives you power. And we miss that; we all miss that. So those are things that I see are very, very human. The things that I see emerging that are heartbreaking is the nationalism. And when you think about where we are as a global economy, it's really important that we stay connected. You think about supply chains and the importance of them—just getting medical equipment or providing services. We must push into being a global economy and the responsibility that that requires. And when you see nationalism emerge and that starts getting to a place of how do we continue to reimagine as individuals, as countries, in ways that's not beneficial in the long term for the broader global economy?

I think we are very much proving that we can adapt, and we can adapt rapidly. And by and large, it's something that people have been wanting. I mean, when it comes to remote working, we know through research that employees have been asking for that, workers have been asking for it. It's been the leaders—usually old folks—who are less inclined to provide it and who thought it couldn't happen. And overnight, with the flick of a switch, many companies went to working remotely, and they've seen how their people have responded to it. So I think when you put trust in your workers, you empower them. I think they show up. And that's the beauty of human beings. If you really unleash that potential, that potential shows up.

Well, I don't see us getting better at healthcare and being a healthcare provider. We know where to find those, and we will source for those individuals. But what I do see are the CHROs who were already very authentic and very human-focused in their approach. I see them rising to the top. And I see that when you lead from a human perspective and not just from a mechanistic approach, then you see incredible opportunity. And you see those organizations really rally behind people. It's emerging in how they provide funds to support their people, how they get creative around their own policies and what they offer, and how they measure what good looks like, what productivity looks like. You see a bunch of rethinking and reimagining of what could happen. But that is mostly from organizations that were already doing that, and that's because the CHROs were often leading not just as a strategic partner but really where the social justice lens or human capability, human potential ends. And so I think what you will see with HR increasingly is becoming not just the desire to be strategic partner, but really to be that strategic counselor: what's the soul, what's the culture of the organization? And that's what's emerging. I would say that was already in flight, and COVID has only accelerated it. And so for those CHROs or those HR organizations who were not in that, they will be left behind, and their employees will vote with their feet; their workers will tell them. And I think what you will also see is how leadership is being redefined. Leaders who lead from a top-down versus empowering from the bottom up and learning through different experiences—those leaders will fail very, very quickly. I know CHROs; I was on a call yesterday, and we were literally talking about succession for the C-suite and how do you redefine what's required. And how in crisis, you really see the characteristics of a leader. And it makes you think: do I want to follow this person? Is this person good for this company not just for yielding profits but really yielding social impact, yielding a human lens to the work? So lots of things being redefined, but all with the lens of authenticity and human capability and social justice.

And I will not profess that I have all the answers. First and foremost, it is truly: COVID has proven one size fits one. So when you think about an employee, you think about a manager, you think about a leader, you think about a function, you think about a company, it's one size fits one. And for a company, obviously you have to lead with your values. And what are your values to drive what you do? That may still mean that your culture evolves. And it's one of the things that I think here at ManpowerGroup that we need to modernize. And it's an opportunity to modernize our culture and step back and reflect on what we need in order to really transform our journey and achieve our strategic objectives, and how much our culture plays a role in that. The second is our leaders. Are our leaders fit to lead in the new culture? That new culture is very much the glue to get us to our strategic destination. So really, are our leaders fit to lead in that? And what works? What we're seeing and hearing from employees and leaders is that those who are not agile, you're seeing that resistance and the need to coach them. You're also seeing leaders who took nine months to make some decisions prior, and now they're doing it immediately. So you're seeing that agility emerge. But you're seeing empathy, you're seeing a demonstration of vulnerability, seeing collaboration. Here at ManpowerGroup, we're seeing people work across not just functions but countries, and that's a huge growth opportunity that we must continue to inspire. But what I would say the other piece—the third element—is always the worker. And the voice of the worker is powerful, and it is only going to get more powerful. We saw a lot of that emerging before COVID. So when you look at what was happening in France, when you look at what was happening with Google, you see those voices of the employees emerging. And a lot of CHROs at this time, as it relates to returning back to work, ask the employees: What are their preferences? Understand what they need. When you know child care, caregiving is going to be a difficult challenge. When you know public transportation is going to be a difficult challenge, pushing someone back to work will only marginalize their productivity and their effectiveness, and it says to them that you don't care about me, employer. And in a current market, they probably can go find a job somewhere else. So you have to start with your values. Make certain your culture is fit for purpose to drive your strategy, but for the time, make certain your leaders are capable to lead in that, and then use your employees always to get insight, to learn, to grow, to pivot, to modify. The voice of the employee is important during this time.

I think flexibility will be here, and it will stay. How it will manifest will differ from person to person, company to company, job to job. But flexibility will be here, and it will likely increase. With that, companies have to step back and look at investment in real estate, investment in technology, and what are the trade-offs? You can't do all at one time. And ramping up technology to empower flexible working while ramping down real estate space—that's a hard one, and it's a cost-benefit analysis that has to happen. With that flexibility, leadership—back to redefining what leadership is. Remote working and flexibility are different. Remote working simply says you can take your laptop and go and work the same hours somewhere else. Flexibility says it's actually the employee's choice in how they deliver their output. So that requires a leader to be very clear on what the output requirements are. And some leaders are not clear on that. Part of being in the office is 'butts in seats' and presence rules, and the first one in and people get credit—no points for that from a lawyer by training. Early on you have to be in the office as a young associate, and that's absolutely insane as a measure of productivity, but it's so valued in our culture regardless. From the US to Asia to Europe, you see it very pervasive in the culture. Butts in seats, first in last out—you will not get the same points and rewards for that going forward. So that will for sure go away. With that going away, I also think formality will go away or will forever change. So dress for your day will become increasingly common. People go to the office like they're dressed for Zoom at home—so underwear or shorts? Crossing the line there. But leggings, those things are still not permitted for the workplace, but I think there's power in dressing for your day. When you think about the stigmatism that a lot of people carry: do they look well? How well are they dressed? The amount of money women spend on dressing for business attire, how long it takes for women to get dressed—I think these are barriers that we've long wanted to break down, and COVID will help accelerate breaking down. Dress for your day will become increasingly more common. So I'm not saying ties will go away 100%, but the use of them will decline significantly.

I think there's first the need to listen and observe. You're not in a room, so it's really important that you are hearing what your employees are saying. The word choices will make a difference. And then after that listening, how do you inquire? You ask the right questions, being mindful not to intrude. And when you do, because employees will let you know—either in their body language or they will verbalize it very quickly—how do you apologize and be vulnerable in real time and say, 'Hey, I overstepped. Apologies. I'm clear now, and I recognize that I'm learning.' Your employees will give you grace and forgiveness if you demonstrate that level of vulnerability. But also recognize that you are probably going to have similar experiences. I was on a conference call and my husband came in. He didn't appreciate that I was on camera, and while he had his shorts on, he was not dressed up top at all. He was talking, and if I would have moved, you would have seen his shorts, and it wouldn't necessarily have been something he wanted to be on camera. In real-time, as a leader or a manager, I have those same challenges. So I want to step back and put myself in the shoes of my employees as much as possible. So listening, being vulnerable, empathizing—those are things that I would say managers must do. And then ask for forgiveness when it happens. Really, really important. And then the last one is exercising judgment. So just thinking about whether you would want someone asking you that question, whether you would want someone invading your space that way. And just because work is now at home doesn't mean that home is open to work. We need to be cautious of that. Managers are always viewed as evaluating, and employees are already sensitive to a manager. Now to have a manager invade their home space—managers need to be very sensitive and acutely aware that it will vary from employee to employee. So one-on-one is really important. Managers must exercise judgment and must be thinking about what comes out of their mouth.

Exactly. I was on a call and someone asked, 'Do you require your employees to dress for a Zoom call?' I kind of roll my eyes like, are you freaking kidding me? But then I had the conversation with my husband, and he said, 'For certain cases you may need it.' And I said, 'But that gets to dress for your day. You don't need to put a litmus test out there that you're constantly judging employees.' Especially now, when employees are acting as teachers, caregivers, Uber, doing way more laundry than they ever imagined they would, all while still trying to be productive. Common sense is very much needed.

That's a hard one, because I think sadly it's going to become more fractured in multiple ways. Let's start with the good. For those managers who are able to demonstrate empathy, vulnerability, common sense, I think they have a real opportunity to expand their learning. How do you learn what the experiences of your employees are, and how do you build actual stronger relationships? Because you're in the homes of your employees, and if you're listening, it's a way to build stronger rapport. You can learn simple things. My team—the PNC team, global team—we have one or two meetings a week. One is strictly about—we call it 'Serial PJs and Crying Babies'—and we are learning about each other. I showed art. We were all supposed to talk about a country that we visit, and I displayed art. That started opening up questions, and I was comfortable with those questions, and vice versa. So you use the moment. You can increase your learnability and increase the rapport and relationship one-on-one, but also the collective as a team. But it will very quickly, in some cases, employees may not be willing to share. There may be a sense of shame around their economic conditions, or a sense of privacy—this is my home, and I really don't want to share more with you. Managers have to be mindful of that and not just isolate individuals because of that. For inclusion, that's going to be a hard one to break through if those individuals are not willing to share. But when you think about it at a macro level, what I'm cautious of are the reimaginings of existing marginalized populations. One of the powerful things about the future of work is it's an opportunity to bring in talent that we've not seen before—historically disenfranchised individuals. With COVID, you see a new group being defined: the underlying health conditions. I've heard terms like 'weak,' I've heard terms like 'fragile,' and laypersons defining what underlying health conditions are. So obesity, for example. Do you know what that really is? Just because someone is heavier than you, does that mean they have an underlying health condition? That they're not fit to work or likely to be a carrier of the virus? Then you're elderly. That was already a protected group in the US, but even more now, you're cautious around their ability to actively engage in the work environment. And I heard the term '6-feet.' I'm someone who suffers from seasonal allergies, so you're likely to see me sneeze or cough at least once a day. Think about the fear that causes in other employees. Then do I have my own kind of caution and bias around myself and others emerge? So I think your diversity and inclusion will become more fragmented because you're adding more elements to an already challenging place. Intersectionality becomes even more difficult to unpack and understand unless you actually experience it. So it goes back to: leaders must be prepared to listen, must be empathetic, must exercise common sense, must also be vulnerable to share. Because in the absence of that, you will not necessarily understand, but you will easily—we as human beings put people in categories to function and deal with them.

Yeah, but it's interesting because even those essential workers—they're often lower paid, lower skill, and they're more at risk. So even though we see them as essential, these essential workers have been with us forever, but every day we passed them and didn't recognize they are essential. It's like saying, 'Okay, we're elevating your status for now, but then you go back to your old status.' And it's one of the things I would be mindful of. Back to automation: what are the things that we move into touchless, and as a society we get more comfortable with? So those essential jobs that we see today—how quickly will some of them become automated? The new social norm and social contract is that you don't have a server pouring water for you; you go to a machine and grab it. How do you think about that differently and the impact on those essential workers?

I think we've regressed in totality. This is coming with more of a US lens than a global lens, but even when I think globally—religion, country, back to nationalism—you see regression happening. There is a McKinsey study some time ago about the difficulty of optimizing diversity and inclusion across all groups, gender and race in particular. Most companies struggle with doing multiple groups at once. Gender became the easiest one for obvious reasons: we all have a mother, we may have a sister, spouse, friend. So gender became the easiest because it's a point of connection we all have. From a racial standpoint, it's still very hard. And then back to those essential workers—you disproportionately see in the States a large group of those individuals being people of color, or you see them being migrant workers. Those are areas where you wrestle with: will they be marginalized and exposed to health risk but not have the income to advance, so they have to risk their lives every day to go to work and risk their family lives? So I think back to diversity inclusion becoming more fragmented. That's an example of how it will continue to hit the most vulnerable individuals in the US, but you see that manifesting globally. So I don't think the practice of DNI has really progressed. It's just based on what's current and what group is the most needed or easiest to attract. But with COVID, you saw the increase in disability and the need—because you're looking at neurodisabilities and the benefits of that. When you see autistic individuals and their ability in the new AI environment, that becomes much more popular. So you see this emerging from people of color to gender to disability. It's a hard one to get our arms around, and I think it will always be a hard one. Because as human beings, we're tribal by nature.

I think we'll still see it. You see investors very clear—BlackRock is very prominent and clear about the importance. So on the ESG front, there's still going to be a mandate for it, without a doubt. And when you think about the resiliency of supply chain in a global supply chain, it requires you to look across different cultures, across different countries, have skills to adapt, communicate, engage. So diversity and inclusion is actually going to be more important to the global economy. How it actually manifests is still very much difficult, and it will be company to company, manager to employee, employee to employee. It's still going to be on a one-on-one basis. But all the more important in a global economy. Companies will still struggle with it and wrestle with it very, very much.

Well, I think so much of diversity and inclusion is also about 'where's our diverse?' At the end of the day, even if you're a B2B company, you're generally providing services in some form that impacts a consumer. B2C companies—I won't say they're all great at it, but they fundamentally get it. Consumers are increasingly more diverse and increasingly comfortable showing their diversity. We date back to the 1970s or the '80s, definitely the '60s, there was much more around assimilating versus embracing your differences. So consumers are demanding. When you have consumer choice, companies, organizations must modify. If they don't, they will be left behind. We saw that post-COVID, and you'll continue to see that. We saw that pre-COVID, and you'll continue to see that post-COVID.

Thank you.