Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

I’m a big believer in the power of storytelling, which will come as no surprise given the time I spend weekly hosting the UNSCRIPTED podcast. But you don’t need to take my word for it; there’s ample evidence of the importance of storytelling in business.

According to UC Berkely Executive Education, stories increase trust and engagement: “Stories engage people on a personal, values-based level. They can also help “humanize” a brand (people connect with other 'people,' not faceless factories), increasing trust and compelling customers and employees to become brand advocates.”

This Forbes article explains that “storytelling refers to the art of crafting narratives that capture the essence of your brand and appeal to your audience. It also involves communicating narratives in a way that is both relatable and memorable.”

Entrepreneur lists 5 Compelling Reasons Storytelling is Crucial to Business Success, including making your brand memorable, differentiating from the competition, and establishing thought leadership.

In the service world, a story is told every time we have an encounter with our customers – whether through words or simply through the actions of what we deliver. I wrote an article a while back prompting our audience to consider, what story is your service telling? But while the experiences we provide tell their own story, leaders (and teams) more and more need to embrace the importance of storytelling and hone the skill.

This is increasingly important because the influence and impact of leaders with employees, and with teams and customers, depends more and more on the ability to truly connect and appeal to a person’s emotions, not just intellect. Being adept at creating those connections is something not every leader has historically had to do; there was more emphasis on exercising control versus fostering trust and creating connections. And with customers, particularly in today’s outcomes-based landscape, the engagement, trust, and differentiation that storytelling nurture are crucial for expanding relationships, evolving business models, and growing revenue.

So, I suppose the first major misstep would be overlooking the importance of storytelling as a crucial skill. But for the sake of this article, let’s assume you understand its importance. Then where do things go awry? Well, like many of the nuanced topics we discuss, this is one of those skills or artforms that sounds simpler than it really is.

In my interactions, conversations with leaders, and personal experiences, there are some missteps I’ve picked up on that seem to surface over and over again.

#1: Speaking without listening first. Does this sound obvious? Well, yes! But believe me, this is a bigger issue in both internal and external interactions than people want to accept. And there are many reasons why – for instance, we know that knowing our audience is important, but we think we do. Truly, and well (spoiler alert: no, you probably don’t – at least not as well, or as currently, as you think or need to). We know it’s important to listen first, but we don’t have time! We have an initiative to roll out or a number to it, and we just have to do our best with the information we have. There are many complexities that make investing the time to understand your team members or customers as intimately as you need to, but I promise you none are worth skipping or rushing this step. Understanding what’s important to your audience is fundamental to storytelling success.

#2: Using internal narrative externally. This is a trap that is all too easy to fall into; we fail to recognize the ways in which our audience may not find our messaging relatable and tailor it to their viewpoint. Let’s consider a couple of examples. First, when you are leading a change internally – you relay the companywide “why” to your team and expect them to understand the reasoning and accept the change without hesitation. But does that companywide why relate to them in any way? Is it personalized into a story that will help them see how the change helps or is important to them? Or with a customer, you get excited about an innovation or investment you’ve made to help serve them better and then excitedly tell the story, in an internal narrative. “We’ve invested in IoT, and it’s so exciting because we’ll have X, Y, and Z data about your equipment!” How does this benefit them? “We’ve put new technology in place to be able to help predict failures on your equipment and eliminate downtime.” Much better. Same story, but from the perspective of two different audiences. It’s so important!

#3: You lack authenticity. Storytelling is meant to prompt an emotional connection, but if you’re disconnected from the “story,” it’s really information sharing versus storytelling. If you want to appeal to someone’s humanity, share something that sparks not only interest but emotion, or helps build trust, you have to be willing to get personal. You must genuinely care about whatever it is you’re communicating, otherwise your efforts will fall flat. If you find yourself robotically telling a “story,” you need to do some self-reflection on why that is and find a way to either create your own personal connection to what you’re sharing or determine if you can delegate the task to someone who can be more authentic in their delivery.

#4: Your message is boring. I couldn’t think of a nicer way to articulate this, really. Part of the art of storytelling is the energy, the “pizazz.” Simply regurgitating a company message to your employee isn’t storytelling, nor is sharing a blanket company message with zero personality with your customers. Storytelling is more. It’s creative, it’s exciting, it’s emotional. Sometimes boring stems from a lack of interest, which I’d tie back to the previous point on authenticity. And sometimes boring stems from delivery, which can be a factor of feeling like you don’t have enough creative freedom to storytell in your own way, or because storytelling is a skill that you might need to practice or put some effort into. If you aren’t receiving the response you’d like, dig into some further insights around storytelling and see if you can find some areas to work on.

#5: Your delivery is one-dimensional. We have to keep in mind with storytelling that different audiences may prefer to receive messages in different ways. You might be very skilled at a one-to-one, face-to-face delivery, but manage a fully remote team. That’s an issue! Storytelling can be written, it can be verbal, video, and more – and chances are, depending on the message you’re trying to convey, you may need to branch out from just one format. If you’re creating a new offering, yes you need to be able to articulate it well, but you also could likely benefit from some really strong copy on a landing page and some video testimonials to support your messaging.

#6: Your story isn’t appropriately backed by data, evidence, or resources. While the person delivering the story may not be the same person to execute all the follow-through, there’s a real problem when we don’t have actions in place to back up the words we are saying. Consider a change initiative; you tell a good story to get employees bought in, but when they ask what the plans are for training, you don’t have the information. Or with a customer, you position a next-generation capability that piques their interest and then when they ask what use cases are in existence or what a commercial agreement might look like, you have nada. We don’t have to have the final conclusion in mind when we start sharing the prologue, but there does have to be enough meat to the story that we don’t hook our audience in and then leave them hanging. That, unfortunately, can deteriorate trust rather than build it.

I’m sure there are many more missteps we could cover; these are just the few that quickly came to mind. What would you add to the list? And how do you feel about the topic of storytelling in business overall? I’d love to hear!

At the end of February, I had the opportunity to deliver a keynote address on the future of outcomes-based service at Lely’s North American Care Conference. Lely provides agricultural automation systems, including robotic feeding, milking, and grazing solutions for dairy farms, and I remember the first time I spoke with them about their service transformation journey, I was intrigued by a world of robotics I’d never before been exposed to.

Leaving the conference perhaps I simply had robotics on my mind, but I took note of numerous headlines about how the technology is being used in a wide variety of industries. I even happened upon a story about a robot dog that can do backflips off a skateboard! If that’s a story featured in TechCrunch, isn’t it telling that we should be thinking more about the applications in field service?

Robotics systems of all kinds – humanoid, dog-shaped, and R2D2-style rolling units – have rapidly advanced and are continuing to do so. Robots have become a regular feature of many manufacturing plants, warehouses, and even retail stores. I distinctly remember recording a podcast last year in the United Club in some city being distracted by the robotic table bussing system wheeling around.

Historically, when field service organizations have considered robotics, it has generally been in the context of servicing more complex robotic equipment. Manufacturing plants have deployed increasingly advanced robots on production lines, and companies like Amazon and UPS are designing distribution centers around them, and of course those systems require service at times.

But robots are also starting to pop up in field service environments, including inspection and maintenance applications, begging the question to what degree the autonomous technology will progress in use. Here are some examples of service applications emerging in the robotics space:

The University of Houston has launched a micro-credential course to help professionals understand how robotics and artificial intelligence can be combined for energy infrastructure maintenance. Specifically, AI-powered robots could be used to inspect large and remote energy assets. Inspecting these systems can be dangerous and costly, but a robot equipped with sensors and some decision-making capabilities could quickly spot issues that might need additional human intervention.

Companies in the pest control and landscape management space already use drones for inspecting difficult-to-reach areas, and it seems like autonomous drones could not only be useful in these types of applications, but also in other inspection scenarios. Sending a robot ahead into challenging environments could help service organizations gather information on what repairs or parts will be necessary before sending out a technician, for example.

A company called Gecko Robotics is working with the U.S. Navy to determine how they could leverage robots for ship inspection and maintenance, another application where the size of the job and the dangerous environment seem like the sweet spot for robotic interventions.

Supply chain and staffing issues have made it very difficult for the Navy to roll out a systematic way of planning and scheduling maintenance for ship readiness purposes. Gecko has developed a program called Shipview that uses sensors, LIDAR, and robots to help identify and prioritize maintenance tasks. The Naval Research Lab is also testing robotic dogs to take on maintenance tasks in dangerous or difficult-to-access areas of a ship, and even help with fire prevention and control.

But what about using robots to perform service tasks or repairs? There are fewer examples of robots actually fixing things, but they do exist. There are two companies right now that have created AI-powered robots to wash windows on the world's tallest skyscrapers. While this isn’t applicable to the broad field service category of course, the general concept – an intelligent robot tackling a necessary but dangerous task in a risky environment – certainly is. One system, from Genosar, is a Roomba-like device that suctions onto the window and uses sensors for cleaning. Skyline Robotics, on the other hand, has a system that uses mechanical arms to clean windows. Window cleaning (like service) faces a labor crunch because of an aging and retiring workforce. Robots can address the labor shortage, while also reducing risk and saving money.

In the UK, the University of Liverpool and Hertfordshire County Council are testing an autonomous vehicle that can automatically repair potholes.

Considering Change Management

Those two examples may induce some anxiety among field technicians since they seem designed specifically to replace employees. Field service technicians, however, are unlikely to be replaced by robots because of the mix of flexible decision making, technical skills, unique service situations, and in-person customer service required for the job. That doesn't mean that robots cannot be used for inspection, or to help automate repetitive or dangerous elements of the job. Potential use of robotics, as with any new technology, will require change management and reassurance that tools like AI and robotics aren’t intended simply to replace workers, but to offload work that’s either menial or unsafe. In an industry where talent is in shortage, there shouldn’t be too much angst as there is plenty of work to go around, but don’t take for granted that employees feel secure.

There is at least one potential application, however, where a robot might be doing fairly complex repair work. We all know how expensive a service truck roll is (in the thousands of dollars, depending on the industry). Imagine if you had to send your technician 250 miles – into space? Fixing satellites or parts on the International Space Station is extremely costly, both because of the lack of handy repair parts and the risk involved in sending an astronaut out for a space walk.

This is a big deal for companies and universities that launch minisatellites, which fail at a fairly high rate. So researchers at the University of Sydney are trying to design a robotics system that can repair these satellites in orbit. The system would likely involve sensors, LIDAR, AI, and potentially 3D parts printing. NASA is already in the design review stage for its own robotic repair and refueling system, OSAM-1.

We are only at the early stages of seeing how the integration of AI and advanced robotics is going to play out. I would love to hear your thoughts on how you see robotics playing a role in the future of work in field service. Feel free to email me here.

We sincerely hope you enjoyed our month-long focus on covering themes relevant to International Women’s Day 2024 and Women’s History Month. As we started the month, we asked the opinions of the Future of Field Service LinkedIn community on the current state of diversity in their organizations, and here’s what they shared:

Q: How strong do you feel the diversity in your organization currently is?

Very – 47%
Good, but could improve – 24%
Mediocre – 18%
We’re really struggling – 12%

On one hand, these numbers show that almost half of respondents feel their organization is very diverse – and that’s great! Another 24% would categorize their company’s diversity as “good but could improve.” This may well reflect that companies are making strides in the actions that help create a more diverse workforce.

On the other hand, while we can’t see who responded to this poll in particular, if you look at the overall makeup of the Future of Field Service audience, it tends to be male-dominant. So, could it be, if that representation held true in the responses here, that the perception could be skewed? Perhaps respondents view their companies as very diverse, but in reality – are they? And does that persist throughout various categories and all roles? No way to know the answer, but it’s an important point to reflect on.

Another important point, as we close out our March focus, is that the importance of gender equity – and all diversity – should be a focus year-round. We should all be looking for ways to elevate diverse voices and support our under-represented team members each and every day.

To help us in considering how to support women at work all year long, I’m excited to share the insights of Ellen Connelly Taaffe, who is a Clinical Associate Professor at the Kellogg School of Management, where she teaches Personal Leadership Insights and is the Director of Women's Leadership Programming. Prior to her academic career, Ellen spent 25 years with Fortune 500 companies holding the top brand management post at divisions of PepsiCo, Royal Caribbean, and Whirlpool Corporation.

Outside of Kellogg, Ellen serves as an independent board director for two public and one private company boards, runs a leadership advisory consulting, speaking, and coaching business, and is a TEDx speaker. She shares her insights on leadership, careers, and advancing women and inclusion through her writing and speaking, having been featured in media such as Harvard Business Review, Forbes, Business Insider, and more. She’s also authored the book, The Mirrored Door: Break Through the Hidden Barrier that Locks Successful Women in Place, to use her vast experience to help women understand and navigate through internal and external obstacles to create the future career they desire.

Future of Field Service: Despite huge gains, 73% of women continue to experience microaggressions and everyday comments rooted in bias. Can you explain why microaggressions matter so much?

Ellen: Microaggressions matter so much because they add up. One brief comment that questions a woman’s credibility, ideas, or ability might be overlooked in the moment. When it happens repeatedly and comes from multiple people in an organization, it becomes exhausting, frustrating, and wears women down. It can lead to less engagement, lower belonging, and can seed an interest in new opportunities outside of the company for a better culture. Whether women experience or only observe these slights, it could lead them to question whether they can truly succeed in their organization.

Future of Field Service: Could you share three key strategies for employers to champion their female workforce all year-round?

Ellen: Employers can champion women by solving the issues they face, coaching their development and potential, and creating an empowering culture.

Analyze the numbers to celebrate progress and fix the pain points. The best employers review employee data to see what levels and at what intersections the pipeline narrows. For example, the numbers may show that there have been huge gains in parity at junior levels but a big drop off at the Director level and further narrowing at VP. Deeper analysis could uncover the whys behind the gaps to be fixed to target solutions.
Train and incent people leaders to giver better feedback especially to women, who research shows receive more vague and subjective feedback. This includes acknowledging their career potential, providing specific guidance to build their skills, and understanding of the promotion process, and sharing a caring yet candid perspective on how they can grow their influence and careers.
Build a psychologically safe culture where everyone is empowered, encouraged, and see a level playing field. This includes stamping out microaggressions by modeling a “see something, say something” approach. It prioritizes a learning culture where people grow from successes and failures to enable the company to become more innovative and deliver against the goals.

Future of Field Service: As a mom who struggled so deeply when my kids were little to make it work because I worked for a company that didn’t create a supportive culture, how do organizations cancel the ‘motherhood penalty’ and support women’s career trajectories?

Ellen: Employees’ child raising years have become increasingly difficult due to cost and availability of day care, the need for dual incomes and career trajectories, and the complexities of changing workplace flexibility. Adding the motherhood penalty adds more difficulty to this normal stage of life impacting both women and their companies.

This biased mindset impacts recruitment, return to work, retention, and promotion practices. Companies that hold pregnancy or parenting against women will eventually lose the war for talent as they limit engagement, compensation, and careers along with their own reputation.

Today’s strongest organizations understand employees’ challenges, make a commitment to pay and promotional transparency, and create cultures that provide flexibility and the belief that one can both parent and deliver results in ways that fit both individual and team needs. Forward-looking companies develop policies and practices that support working moms through their return-to-work, embrace parental leaves that lead to shared work at home, and ensure equitable practices that remove the biases that limit job offers, pay, and promotions.

Future of Field Service: It’s important to understand that better workplaces for women mean better workplaces for all. Can you share how so?

Ellen: Women want to be valued, have purpose in what they do, feel they belong for who they are, and believe they have a fair shot at joining, developing, having an impact, and succeeding in an organization. Workplaces that are better for women do all these things well and everyone benefits.

Regardless of gender, today’s employees want a culture that values them as human beings and enables them to thrive in work and life. This is especially true with Gen Z. Biases against those not in the majority along with outdated workplace practices built for another time prevent that from happening. The opportunity companies have is to make work workable for all.

Future of Field Service: For a woman who is struggling with feeling unsupported in any way in their workplace, what advice can you give for moving beyond self-doubt and taking action?

Ellen: In my book, The Mirrored Door: Break Through the Hidden Barrier that Locks Successful Women in Place, I’ve identified a dynamic that many women feel. It’s when faced with an opportunity like raising our hands or posting for a promotion, we think we aren’t ready or worthy enough then hesitate. Frequently, this is a distorted view from the conditioned assumption that we can’t move forward unless with do it perfectly with 100% certainty and no risks to reputation or relationships. In reality, we are more ready than we realize.

My advice is to:

1) reflect realistically about your performance, career potential, and real risk in sharing an idea or going for a new job.

2) Seek out people who have seen you in action to gain feedback on how you are doing and what you could do in the future developmentally.

3) Identify that doubting message inside you and create a counter balancing message to disrupt it. When that doubt creeps in, remind yourself of the opposite. Imagine you believe that new message vs. that harsh critic. If so, what is the next best action you could take? Tap into your courage and take that small courageous step into action as you open the mirrored door.

I can’t think of a better note to leave off our month of focused content and discussion. Huge thanks to Ellen and the others who have contributed! If you missed any of our earlier articles or podcasts, here’s the list with links:

AI’s Unique Opportunity to Shape a More Inclusive Future: Q&A with Angel Vossough, CEO and Co-Founder of BetterAI
A Look Back at 32 Years as a Woman in Service – Podcast with Dot Mynahan, recently retired from Otis Elevator
Article – The Pressure for Women to “Have it All” is Alive and Well – Is the Possibility?
Equity is Everyone’s Responsibility – Podcast with Daniel Trabel of Thermo Fisher Scientific
Article – 6 Actions that Have Spurred One Company’s Success in Hiring More Women into Field Service
A Multifaceted Approach to Creating Sustainable Service – Podcast with Sarah McKay of Concentrix

If you missed last week’s podcast with Daniel Trabel, Director of Field Service for EMEA at Thermo Fisher Scientific, I urge you to go have a listen now. He speaks passionately about why diversity matters to him, personally as a dad to twin daughters and professionally because he realizes the importance and value it brings. But in field service, a longtime male-dominated field, many companies have struggled to achieve success in hiring more diverse talent, particularly in attracting women to field technician roles.

Daniel has combined is passion for this focus area with a commitment to action that has yielded real results. Reflecting back on our conversation, I can pick up on six actions I believe led to the success that others can (and should) take note of.

#1: Define Your Why

The reality is, far too many companies’ diversity “initiatives” are rooted in the wrong why. Either they feel they “have to” do more in this area, or they’re looking at it solely from the perspective of reaching a bigger talent pool. Both of those things are partial truths, but if your efforts aren’t centered around actually valuing diversity because you believe how it benefits a business, those efforts will almost inevitably fall short.

Daniel, who has spent 20 years in field service, is familiar with the realities of the male-centric history and feels committed to making change, because he believes in its importance. “There is a saying, I think Albert Einstein said, ‘An evening where everybody has the same meaning is a lost evening.’ And that happens when you have a team where everybody has the same background, the same character and everything is the same. We need to have diversity to have high performing teams,” he says.

In field service, this means recognizing the value of diversity is more than the benefit of the comfort of the status quo. “Especially in service, there was a male environment, and it was easy for males to network because everybody speaks the same language, has similar thoughts. But that has to change, because with that, you can't develop further without any input from a set of fresh ideas. We need to change our thoughts and we also need to, in leadership positions, to push the importance. Otherwise, it's difficult to drive the necessary behavior change.”

#2: Get Creative – Really Creative

Where Thermo Fisher succeeded but many companies get stuck is in their willingness to truly get creative in seeking a solution. Even companies who have defined their why can find themselves feeling that the how just “doesn’t work.” Thermo Fisher proves that isn’t at all true, but this mindset can occur for a variety of reasons – some because the company truly doesn’t want to put in the effort it takes to change or step outside of their comfort zone, and some because despite the desire to they find themselves too embedded in their own bias or narrow thinking.

Like many field service organizations, Thermo Fisher company grappled with talent challenges. “That was our starting point. We had a problem to fill roles; few applicants who were not at all qualified for those positions. That’s a big cost for a company like ours. I have an organization of 500 people; if you have an attrition of 5%, imagine how many jobs we have always open. It's a cost, while on the other hand, it's a missing revenue,” he explains. “So, there is a desperate need of having those roles filled as soon as possible. We began having a discussion around the reasons of why we have an all-male environment. We believed as a leadership team that we need to have more women in the organization, and we knew that if we could attract more women, we could create a bigger pool of talents for those open roles.”

To me, this is where Daniel’s story becomes so impressive – because that recognition alone isn’t unique, but the action the company took from that point is. “We really explored the reasons behind why we weren’t attracting female applicants and identified the barriers in the entry expectations of those roles. Typically, what we were looking for is engineers with long experience in the field, electronic skills, all of characteristics of an ‘ideal’ hire,” says Daniel. “We thought about how we could change and how we could create a new kind of entry role to our organization that would fit the business needs. We developed the PIQ engineer role, which is preventative maintenance installation qualification. Because we are in a qualified environment for most of our instruments, this new role cut off the expectations of repair skills and instead focused on first-level support and maintenance aspects, allowing us to get new hires into roles more easily.”

Not only did the creation of this new role reduce the barriers around prior experience for applicants, but it lowered expectations of travel which can deter some candidates. “With the PIQ role we identified hot areas with a smaller radius of travel and less overnight stays. This allowed us to offer more flexibility and a better work-life balance as a result, but interestingly also gave us the opportunity to increase the response time SLA,” Daniel says. Thermo Fisher created six PIQ roles and was successful hiring women to fill four of the six.

To ensure the importance of this initiative was widely accepted, and to incorporate as much creativity as possible, Thermo Fisher involved a variety of stakeholders in the process. “We need to ensure that if we change something which also has an influence on the team, that we include the team in this conversation. Especially those engineers which are already working in the organization. They have some fears that if they only focus on corrective maintenance, that they need to travel longer distances because they don't have the nearby PMs anymore to cover. There were definitely talking points and risks we surfaced and worked through,” Daniel explains. “We also included talent acquisition because they have the conversations up front with the applicants, and HR to understand also from a non-male environment what they think we should think about because, to be honest, in my leadership team at that time, there was only men.”

The exercise Thermo Fisher went through, in truly reflecting on the barriers that were present, really stepping outside of the boundaries of what has been to determine what was possible and involving a group of stakeholders representing different functions and views to ensure as broad of thinking as possible, is commendable. It’s easy to acknowledge an area that needs to change, but far harder to put in the work to make change happen.

As Daniel says, it’s important to focus less on the problem and more on the solution. “It's important to ensure that you understand that you need to change something and really think about how to find a solution. For example, one of our issues in the beginning was around electrical safety; we’d required an electronics background because of guidelines we have to follow, but ultimately decided we could create an internal program to provide that certification with safety officers. There is always a solution. It's important to really step aside, take a step back and say, ‘Okay, that's my problem, but what should my solution looks like and how can I get to that point?’”

How do you know if you’re being creative enough? One measure is that if it feels safe or comfortable, you likely are not. “Maybe you're disruptive and you take a risk. But when you don't change, you will fail from the very beginning,” Daniel cautions. “If you want to change, you must consider there's always a risk. But you need to take the risk. That's absolutely key.”

#3: Enlist External, Objective Input

Even with a genuine belief in the need for change, unconscious bias is a real variable and something you need to consider and prepare to take proactive measures to counter. Enlisting outside help and objective input is essential, and there are many options available for how to do this.

You could hire a consultant, you could leverage technology that helps assess job postings and hiring processes to remove bias, you could poll the participants of an ERG to vet your thinking, and so many more. At Thermo Fisher, they used an external tool to analyze their job ads in the early phases of assessing what was limiting the pool of applicants or what could be off-putting to certain candidates.

“We looked at our job ads because we thought that the jobs were pretty male buzzword-centric,” Daniel says. “So, we used an external tool to analyze those job ads and think of how we can change that in a more human attractive way. And we found words like support, mentor, advocacy, recognition, flexibility, and really try to bring those and also reduce the expectation, the entry expectation. Even if we might have high expectation, we just didn't write that in the job ad. And what's quite interesting because of the results, we had a lot more applicants also from women. That was good.”

Of course, when working to incorporate more diversity, you want to be sure you check bias not only in the job posting and criteria, but in the interview process as well.

#4: Attract More Diverse Candidates; Hire for Fit

Which brings us to the next point – while a genuine objective to improve diversity and actions to attract more candidates are commendable, making “diversity hires” for the sake of achieving some pre-defined targets is not. The goal should be to truly reflect on what barriers are present in your existing processes that are inhibiting diversity and remove those barriers, as well as working to welcome a broader pool of applicants so that your chances to build diverse teams increases. All of that being said, you should be ultimately hiring based on candidates’ skills, abilities, and fit for your organization – not to check a box.

Now, again, where this can derail is if “fit for your organization” is impossible because your organization is refusing to move beyond boxes that exclude certain candidates. But if you are doing the work to change, like Thermo Fisher did, then you hire based on fit from the broader pool of candidates you are attracting.

“We got feedback also on the fact that, let's say, male might apply for a position if there is only 50% criteria they can match with, while women say, no, I'm not able to do this,” Daniels says. “That’s one reason we lowered the entry expectations advertised. We really found great talent and we not just selected the women we did because we were looking for them, they really stood out against the other applicants and they had a strong presentation and a strong background, which fit perfectly into the role as expected.”

While Thermo Fisher set out to intentionally redefine requirements in order to attract more women to apply for field service roles, the benefit of reflecting on what criteria may be restricting your pool of potential candidates is simply attracting a more diverse pool of talent overall. When companies move beyond hiring based on experience, which will deliver a fairly homogenous pool of potential, to instead listing the skills or characteristics sought for entry level, the result is a broader set of backgrounds, experiences, and traits which brings valuable depth of perspective to the organization.

#5: Consider the Experience of New Employees

It’s important that to recognize that your efforts aren’t complete once you achieve success in hiring more diverse employees. In fact, what comes next in many ways is more important – because otherwise your efforts won’t be rewarded by seeing that talent flourish and remain.

When you’ve had a male-centric workforce historically, or minimally diverse in any way, you have to consider what the experiences of the new employees coming into that dynamic will be. Are the existing workers welcoming? Are there toxic aspects of or dynamics to the culture? Are there inadvertent ways a new candidate may feel uncomfortable, such as a woman technician not having the option of a woman’s uniform? From things seemingly small to big, the need to reflect on how to make new candidates feel welcome, included, and valued is imperative.

For Thermo Fisher, the first hurdle was in the way the creation of a new role was perceived by some team members. “In the beginning, there was a bit of a bias from one or the other team members and it took a while to get this digested,” Daniel says. “Because the role was not as seen as a ‘normal’ field service engineer role, it was seen as let’s say second class in some way or another. It took a while to overcome that bias.”

Don’t shirk away from navigating negative emotions or challenging outdated thinking, because this will allow problems to fester that will undoubtedly cause a negative impact on the experiences of your new hires. “In a small team that has a woman as part of it for the first time, there’s going to be some phases of team building to work through,” Daniel shares. “It's the responsibility of the line managers to take care that every friction identified is dealt with and it’s important that the whole management team stand behind this program. That's why we included them in the very beginning. At the end, the whole team appreciates the diversity we have. While this was new for field service, as a company, we embrace employees for inclusion and diversity and have a corporate program where we share success stories and so on. Field service works closely with the sales department and with application support, where we have a lot of women in the organization. We also have ERGs to allow employees to connect with one another. So, there are a lot of touch points, even for a woman in a male-dominated team, to ensure they feel a sense of belonging.”

#6: Focus on Diversity at All Levels

Another often overlooked area of DEI initiatives can be ensuring that diversity is reflected at all levels of the business. For field service, while the focus may be on brining in more frontline candidates to fill roles, those candidates need to be given ample opportunity for career progression.

This is important not only for the development of those individuals and their own fulfillment, but in reflecting the company’s value of diversity of thought by making sure it isn’t concentrated at any one level or in any one function. For Daniel’s team, this happened quite organically – but it’s important to note that in some situations it may require a more intentional approach.

“Of those six new positions, you have people relatively new to the business that are already progressing into leadership roles. This is important because we need to think about not just how do we bring more diversity into the business, but how do we support and enable that progression, right? So that's one of the challenges we see is because bringing in frontline workers is an acute need for the business, it’s easy to focus all of the efforts there. But ultimately, you want to have diversity reflected in all layers of the business, right? And so, the fact that the people you're bringing in are already progressing through, I think, is really impressive. It’s also interesting to share that our German team is now led by a woman – so the more than 100 engineers are now led by a woman and that’s a massive change. It’s really good to see that.”

Remember What’s at Stake

If I’m being honest, what Daniel sharing Thermo Fisher’s story made me thing is that they’ve been willing to do what many companies find excuses not to – and that’s yielded results. There are all sorts of things people start pointing to – time, effort, cost, what hasn’t worked – to defend their decision to avoid doing the reflection and creative redesign that Thermo has proven pays off.

The companies eluding putting in the effort now are only doing themselves a disservice. While they spend time defending the status quo and accepting minute incremental improvements in hiring, companies like Thermo Fisher are breaking through bias and previously “unmovable” barriers to create roles to attract diverse talent and to develop a culture where that talent can thrive.

I ended the interview asking Daniel: What would you say to the people who are unwilling to get creative with this issue, or maybe don't even yet recognize the importance of it?

“In the end, I think they will fail because they can't unleash the power of people and they can't unleash the power of diversity, which is necessary to be successful,” he says. “When we talk about STEM, there's only a handful of people who can cover open positions and everybody is keen to get someone from somewhere. But if there is no someone, then there is no somewhere. And that's why I think we need to open up the talent pool. If you don't do that, if you are not thinking of changing your plans and your strategy, you will fail. That's my clear statement here.”

I couldn’t agree more.

By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service

I came across a post in a working mom’s group I’m in where someone shared this article about former Xerox CEO Ursula Burns, who became the first Black female CEO of a Fortune 500 company in 2009, discussing the realities of what it took in her role as a mom to advance to the levels she did in her career. She says, “I would not be able to be CEO of the company unless I outsourced the caring for my kids. I was not a believer that you had to go to all your kids’ games. I just don’t understand what that’s all about. We did what we had to do.”

By outsourcing, Ursula is referring to relying on her late husband Lloyd to take care of their two children and she credits her career success to this strategy. Now, this interview took place in 2022, but the comments on the post from other moms in the group are of the present and show some very mixed emotions on Ursula’s stance. Here are some highlights:

“I can’t believe she refers to Dad taking care of the kids as outsourcing.”
“I think this is the unfortunate truth; you can’t have it all. It’s not talked about enough and women run themselves ratted trying to do it all because we’re told it’s possible.”
“My boss used to send me all the ‘you can’t have it all’ articles after I had my first baby. It was so toxic. I was promoted to her equivalent position when he was 15 months old. The fact of the matter is, I’m not going to take advice from a 60-something year old woman when parenting today is so vastly different. I don’t aspire to be the CEO of a large company, but I think you can have it all if what you want is a healthy career and to be present for your children. It’s not easy, but it’s totally possible.”
“I guess it depends on your definition of ‘having it all.’ I suppose what I mean is having a career that I’m satisfied with, being there for my kid’s activities/events, and doing things for myself as an individual and spouse. I’m doing all of that.”
“I believe the term ‘Supermom’ is so toxic. It disrespects every mom that is out here giving 100% every day just to be made to feel they should be doing more.”
“This article made me sad because I clicked the link thinking she was going to say that you don’t have to make every meeting, sometimes family comes first. But she didn’t and I think that’s unfortunate.”
“I’ve worked for moms like this and have always felt so inadequate. It’s almost a ‘if I can work this hard as a parent, so can you’ vibe, but disregarding what an absolute privilege it is to have a village like what’s mentioned here.”
“We need to STOP treating our working moms like they have to work a job as if they are single with no children, while at the same time expecting them to act like parents without a full-time job. It’s 2024. Why is it not acceptable to do – and be great at – both?”
“I think it’s crap that choosing my family should set me back in my career when it would be praised if a man did it.”
“I’m so grateful to have a job that supports working Moms. I am in executive leadership and regularly attend events for my child, do school pick up, and more and encourage my team to do the same.”

Choice, Circumstances, and Culture

It goes without saying that when we surface issues that working moms are navigating, there’s not a one-size-fits all. Not all, or even many, of us are aspiring to a role like Ursula had. And when it comes to service, some roles we discuss often – like field technicians – have certain considerations to weigh on what’s truly possible to accommodate.

But I’ll share this from my personal experience – I always wanted to both be a mom and have a career. When I had my boys and they were very small, I worked for a company that did not value or put effort into creating a culture that aligned with what it would take to do both well (and maintain my sanity). It was a very inflexible environment, and I remember with emotion many mornings that I had to weigh the choice of leaving one of my children crying at drop off or be late and be asked to take a quarter day of vacation time. My direct supervisor even asked me when pregnant with my second why I wouldn’t just decide to stay home.

When I transitioned to my role leading Future of Field Service for IFS, a huge weight was lifted – which was magnified in significance when Evan’s Type 1 diabetes diagnosis happened just three months in. Now I am in an environment where I work very hard but in a way where it’s possible to do that and be present for my children in the ways I feel are important. Part of this is flexibility, part of it is ethos; it’s understood I’m human and accepted that family is important to me.

This acceptance is a huge barrier to overcome, regardless of industry or role. I am a firm believer that moms bring unique value to organizations. For the organization to benefit from that value, it’s necessary to determine how to support those individuals (all parents) in balancing the ability contribute sacrificing their role as a parent. For some this is a flexible schedule, the normalization of attending school events or taking kids to doctor’s appointments, a supportive culture where it’s OK to be dealing with real-life, outside-of-work circumstances, among other things.

To be clear, creating a culture that supports working parents isn’t important for women alone. In fact, the impact that can be had by men in leadership roles taking a more active role in illustrating how parenting plays a part in their work-life blend goes so far in diminishing the weight working Moms feel on being judged for never being enough in either role. And the more both parents have support to care for children when sick, attend school events, adjust schedules to drop off and pick up times, and so on, the fairer the distribution of responsibility so that the conversation becomes less about supporting working moms and more about supporting parents.

In the world of field service where we strive to create more gender diversity, the default excuse becomes the inflexibility of the environment in which service is delivered. Coming up in this week’s podcast, I welcome Daniel Trabel of Thermo-Fisher Scientific to challenge those excuses by sharing an inside look at how his team has made changes to bring more women field technicians on board. Don’t miss it!

By Sarah Nicastro and Angel Vossough, CEO and Co-Founder of BetterAI

Amid Women’s History Month our month-long focus on the International Women’s Day theme of inspiring inclusion, it’s important to challenge ourselves to think creatively about all the ways we can make greater progress in gender parity, equity, and inclusion. This includes evaluating how today’s technological capabilities, like AI, can help us to mitigate bias, improve recruiting and hiring practices, and provide new opportunities for women seeking personal development and career growth.

On this topic, we’re excited to share the perspective of Angel Vossough, CEO and Co-Founder of BetterAI, a Silicon Valley-based AI service provider. Angel, a technology leader and serial entrepreneur, holds dual bachelor’s degrees in mathematics and computer engineering, as well as master’s degrees in software engineering from San Jose State University and data science from UC Berkeley.

Angel was previously a Senior Network Engineer at Cisco Systems, specializing in Network Architecture for major telecommunications companies including Verizon Wireless. She subsequently founded DiverseUp, a public-benefit corporation building a professional community for technical and scientific women and is also Co-Founder & Managing Partner at Caspian Capital, an early-stage investment firm focusing on deep tech, biotech, and AI.

It's inspiring to see AI company helmed by a female data scientist CEO and it's the perfect time to discuss how women's career platforms like BetterAI’s DiverseUp can play a role in the progression of not only women’s individual careers but in greater gender equality in the workplace. The DiverseUp platform anonymously collects data focused on gender-equality practices from current and past employees and aggregates it to provide a holistic view on how female-friendly specific employers are. Its intelligent matchmaking algorithm then pairs prospective female employees with potential employers to help increase retention. The company aims to bring transparency to workplace practices, measure policies’ effectiveness, and help the tech sector retain female talent

Future of Field Service: How do you feel AI can play a role in advancing gender equality in the workplace?

Angel: AI has the potential to significantly advance gender equality in the workplace by offering unbiased data analysis and decision-making processes. For platforms like DiverseUp, AI can analyze vast amounts of data regarding corporate policies, culture, and practices to identify biases and recommend improvements. More than 50 percent of women in tech leave their positions mid-career, making retention of female talent one of the big challenges for tech companies. AI can assist in developing more equitable hiring practices, identifying gender pay gaps, and suggesting corrective actions. AI can also help in creating personalized career development plans for women, taking into account their unique circumstances and preferences, thereby promoting a more inclusive workplace environment and increasing retention.

Future of Field Service: How can women use AI in their career search to help make wise selections?

Angel: Women can leverage AI in their career search by using AI-powered job recommendation engines that align with their career goals, personal values, and work-life balance needs. AI can analyze their profiles, skills, and preferences against job listings to recommend the best fits. Additionally, AI can provide insights into company cultures and practices, helping women choose employers based on their personal preferences, such as flexible working hours, maternity leave, and career development programs. AI can empower women to make informed decisions when it comes to career choices.

Future of Field Service: What are some of the ways women could be leveraging AI for personal/career development and growth?

Angel: AI can offer personalized learning and development recommendations, identify skill gaps, and help with upskilling or reskilling in their chosen field. It can suggest courses, workshops, or assignments to bridge these gaps. It can also help with networking by connecting women with mentors, peers, and professional communities that can support their career advancement, using matching algorithms to find the best mentor-mentee relationships.

Future of Field Service: How can organizations use AI to help ensure their recruiting practices are equitable?

Angel: AI-driven analytics can help organizations identify patterns in hiring and turnover, and predict shortcomings in their recruitment processes, enabling them to make data-driven adjustments. Organizations can employ AI to design job descriptions that are neutral and appealing to all genders, analyze resume data without bias, and standardize interviews. However, post-recruitment retention of female employees is as important as recruitment and is a challenge for tech companies. For example, unlike men, women display a pattern called “returnship,” where they leave their careers to focus on family life and return to the workforce a few years later. These qualified candidates are often overlooked by recruiters because of this gap in work history. By training AI on this known pattern, AI can identify and target these potential employees for recruitment and retraining.

Future of Field Service: What do you think the next five years holds in terms of the increasing impact AI and other technologies will have on women in the workplace?

Angel: In the next five years, the impact of AI and technology on women in the workplace is likely to increase significantly. We can expect more sophisticated AI tools for career development, networking, and mentorship, specifically designed with women's needs in mind. AI will also play an important role in eliminating biases from recruiting processes, which can help more women enter tech roles. Furthermore, as remote and flexible working becomes more prevalent, AI will help women balance their professional and personal lives more effectively.

Future of Field Service: What else related to this topic is important for us to keep in mind?

Angel: It's essential to approach AI with a critical eye, recognizing its potential to both challenge and reinforce societal biases. As we integrate AI into the workplace, continuous efforts must be made to make sure these technologies are designed and implemented in a way that promotes equity. This includes diverse teams in AI development, transparent AI models, and ongoing assessment of AI's impact on workplace equality. Through thoughtful application of AI, we have a unique opportunity to shape a more inclusive future for all.

By Sarah Nicastro and Scott De Long, Ph.D, author of I Thought I Was a Leader: A Journey to Building Trust, Leading Teams & Inspiring Change

I have a lot of respect for people who prioritize continual learning and personal development rather than reaching a point where they relish in the complacency that even success brings.

When you consider how the talent landscape has evolved in service, and across many other industries, it requires leaders to reflect on what it takes to lead well in today’s circumstances – not those of yesteryear. Whether this is navigating external challenges, like COVID or the economy, redefining traditional roles based on the modern possibilities of technology, or simply balancing the needs of an increasingly diverse team; leaders are being called to level up.

Scott De Long, Ph.D, author of I Thought I Was a Leader: A Journey to Building Trust, Leading Teams & Inspiring Change, wrote his book to reflect on his approach to leadership. Scott is a speaker, educator, and serial entrepreneur with three successful company exits and a doctorate in leadership studies. He teaches practical applications at the university level and, as CEO of Lead2Goals, he provides coaching for growth-oriented organizations. Additionally, he co-hosts The CEO Podcast, discussing pivotal topics for business leaders.

In this Q&A, Scott weighs in on what he feels is helpful in leading a multi-generational workforce.

Future of Field Service: Gen Z often receives negative labels or reputation. What does this perception say about how our thinking needs to evolve?

Scott: The negative perception is that they won't stay long at a company, and that they really don't want to work. Where we can change this is by providing the type of environment and leadership that fosters their desire to stay. They are seeking organizations that prioritize environmental sustainability, diversity, and offer ample opportunities for personal and professional growth. Leadership must actively listen to their concerns, rather than ignoring or dismissing them, if we aim to cultivate a thriving workplace.

Future of Field Service: What do leaders know about the differences in communication style among generations?

Scott: Millennials and Gen Z are generally more comfortable with technology, having grown up with devices at their fingertips and communicating through text-based platforms. There's often a perception among them that older generations have not fully embraced technology, leading to a divide. This is an area where older individuals can play a crucial role in emphasizing the value of face-to-face communication. It's important to recognize that digital communication may not effectively handle conflicts or differences of opinion; such interactions are better suited for face-to-face discussions or phone calls. Therefore, it's our responsibility to educate rather than simply expect them to adapt.

Future of Field Service: What should leaders keep in mind about what each generation is motivated by?

Scott: It's tempting to categorize generations and make predetermined assumptions about what motivates them. However, the reality is that leaders must invest time in understanding the unique needs and values of each individual under their guidance. While this approach requires patience, the rewards of treating people as individuals and actively listening to them are invaluable. Building such relationships fosters longer-term loyalty to the organization and stronger interpersonal connections, ultimately leading to increased productivity and a more robust organizational culture.

Future of Field Service: Mental health is an important topic in the workplace today – how do the needs differ among generations?

Scott: Again, if we were to generalize, we might observe that Gen Z and even millennials tend to experience feelings of being "overwhelmed" more frequently compared to older generations who were often instructed to simply "deal with it." While there may be assumptions about the greater resilience of older generations, I don't necessarily subscribe to that belief. Older generations were often taught to suppress emotions, whereas younger generations tend to express their emotions more openly. I believe everyone faces challenges, and it's crucial for us to strive to understand the needs of our people. It's akin to therapy for businesses. By engaging in open conversations, actively listening to our employees, and seeking to understand their perspectives, we can mitigate the impact of the mental health crisis by helping individuals navigate through their struggles.

Future of Field Service: What advice do you have for leaders on how best to meet the diverse needs of a multi-generational team?

Scott: Similar to the previous point, the first step for leaders is to comprehend the issues faced by our team members. This requires empathetic listening—asking insightful questions, attentively listening to responses, and striving to understand their perspectives. Only then can we discern how best to support them. However, I contend that empathic listening itself constitutes a significant portion of that support. People need to feel heard in order for solutions to be effective.

Future of Field Service: What works in terms of fostering collaboration and a sense of camaraderie among teams with multiple generations?

Scott: Spending more time together, even if it's virtual, is crucial for fostering collaboration and a sense of camaraderie among teams with multiple generations. This time should be dedicated to getting to know each other as individuals rather than just focusing on job functions. Every meeting should serve a purpose, and I believe that purpose can include allowing time for team members to see each other and actively listen to one another. This approach is essential for meeting them where they are and building stronger connections across generations.

If you’d like to hear more from Scott, visit http://scottdelong.net or catch Scott’s show Lead2Goals and TheCEOpodcast on YouTube. You can also stay updated with Scott on Instagram @scottdelongphd.

By Sarah Nicastro

Countless companies have turned to employee engagement initiatives to help boost morale, reduce burnout and improve retention. And, in my opinion, rightly so. It’s high-time we put proper emphasis on the crucial role our frontline teams play in the customer experience and company objectives. The question is, what’s the right way to track employee engagement?

I was interested in the findings of a recent Marketresearch.biz report on the growing market for employee engagement software. According to the report, revenue is going to reach $4.4 billion by 2033 with a compound annual growth rate of 16%. The software not only gathers employee feedback, but also evaluates performance and provides tools to encourage specific behaviors and improve engagement. These can include things like mobile learning portals, onboarding/training, streamlined communication tools, and recognition/reward solutions.

When it comes to the capabilities of AI-driven tools, though, what’s the proper balance between wanting to assess employee engagement without breaching employee privacy? I came across a write-up recently in The Hustle titled “How Companies are Using AI to Spy on Slack,” which was exploring news of how companies like Walmart, Delta, Chevron and Starbucks are using an AI tool called Aware to monitor employee messages.

While the premise of Aware and similar tools is positioned around gaining knowledge about employee sentiment (as well as monitoring for certain risks), it’s hard to determine how much tracking becomes counterintuitive to the reasons employee engagement is so important today – which is to make employees feel more valued and empowered.

We know that engagement is going to remain a critical topic moving forward in field service. In the most recent IFS State of Service report, the second-highest top concern of service organizations was dealing with a lack of skilled workers and high employee turnover. Efforts to improve engagement can help relieve some of the staffing pressure. Where should those efforts be focused? The Service Councils annual Voice of the Field Service Engineer survey provides some guidance.

That survey found that 45% of service engineers either were not planning to remain in the industry or were not sure; only 28% of those planning on leaving were retiring.

The Service Council report also digs into some areas where technicians are not satisfied with their jobs. Roughly a quarter were dissatisfied with career opportunities, mentoring/guidance, and learning and development opportunities. The survey also found that 43% of engineers did not feel like they were recognized for their results, and 42% felt they were not coached on areas where they could improve.

The Potential for Progress in Employee Engagement is Huge

What I wonder is, would those metrics be far better if not for these two: Just half of respondents agreed that their company prioritized employee engagement, cared about their personal development, or was interested in collecting technician feedback. And only around a third agreed that their employer directly addressed their concerns/feedback or rewarded them on feedback that improved processes or business outcomes.

So regardless of where you stand on the best ways to track employee engagement, the more prominent issue in my mind are the companies failing to recognize the need to do so. As I have pointed out numerous times, and others have emphasized during our podcast interviews, technician engagement is critical for pretty much every program, initiative, or technology deployment. They are not just the face of your company during service interactions, they are also the eyes and ears – they have insights you can't get anywhere else.

Software may be part of your solution, whether that’s in the form of surveys or something like the Aware tool discussed above. But it certainly isn’t the whole answer – employee engagement initiatives need to be more holistic and include not only a mechanism for taking the pulse of your workforce’s feelings and feedback, but also for providing quality training and enablement, strong leadership, career growth opportunities, and more. You also need processes in place to respond to technician feedback and show, through action, that their voice matters.

The benefits here extend beyond HR-related concerns of high turnover. Engaged, energized technicians provide better service, can help spot new revenue opportunities, and play a critical role in the success of things like digital transformation initiatives.

Have you had an experience or success with employee engagement software? I would love to hear about it; email me here.

In last week’s podcast, I welcomed back Roy Dockery, VP of Field Operations at Flock Safety for what was his fourth appearance on the podcast (making him the most repeated guest!). His insights were featured way back in episode 2, discussing the need for organizations to take ownership of the talent gap. Next in episode 147, with a fresh take on the same topic – this time with the hope leaders were more ready to listen. Again in episode 243, where he actually interviewed me about my 2023 predictions. And last week, where we had a conversation around his new book, The Art of Leading: Truth, Love and Empathy in Action.

After reading an early copy of the book, I asked Roy to speak to some of the points that stood out most to me. One of the biggest is the very first chapter of the book, where he talks about how love is imperative to impactful leadership. He says love is “a fundamental element that can empower you to excel in leadership and drive remarkable outcomes. I don’t disagree, especially if you read his explanation on why and how, but I did tell him I feel this is a bit of a “hot take.”

In services especially, there are a lot of leaders in place who might cringe, laugh, or roll their eyes at the statement that love is essential to good leadership. I think those reactions could stem from a number of things that I won’t delve into here, but I also think those reactions are what prompted me to state in my 2024 predictions that I believe this year we’ll see more and more “old-school” leaders ousted. My point in that prediction has nothing to do with age and everything to do with mentality – including the outdated beliefs that leaders who are caring, vulnerable and empathetic are “soft” and not as effective.

There’s a growing realization of course that those beliefs are, frankly, bullshit – supported by plenty of evidence on how characteristics like vulnerability and empathy actually improve leadership influence and create cultures where overall performance rises.

One point Roy made in his book that we discussed on the podcast, though, is one I hadn’t heard framed in this way before. This is the connection between love in leadership and equity in the workplace. He says, “Equity has become a popular term, but I truly believe that love is the only true path to equity. Tolerance and inclusion can easily become prisons for those in the outgroup because to be given access without true consideration is a cruel illusion.”

This was probably the statement from his book that will stay with me most – and it’s one I think we can’t reflect on too much or too often. We have so many discussions around increasing diversity, creating more inclusion, reaching equity – but are we considering how unlikely it is to really reach those goals without coming from a place of love? It’s such an important point.

Honesty, Accountability Factor In

For anyone reading along thinking, wow – this guy must be all peace/love/feelings, there’s more to the conversation than the importance of love. Roy also discusses how “love without accountability becomes enabling; honestly without tact, empathy or maturity is damaging” and gives some very specific examples of not only accountability but even harder conversations like termination, through a lens of love. While the book shares Roy’s conviction around the importance of characteristics like love, empathy, and authenticity in leaders, it’s also full of real-world examples of what these traits look like in practice, even under challenging circumstances.

So, to answer the question posed in the title of this article – is there a place for love in leadership? Yes, there is – and I believe leaders who don’t find their own authentic way to lean into that reality will struggle to connect with employees in the coming years in a way that will allow them to be successful, in their purpose or their ability to drive productivity.

Roy’s book is well worth checking out! It’s officially available the 20^th, but you can pre-order on Amazon now.

A colleague recently shared a YouTube video of Wes Roth reviewing Microsoft’s 2023 Future of Work report. I was intrigued to see what Roth had to say about the report’s contents, but after watching I found myself even more intrigued reading through the comments on the video and thinking about what I feel we need to take away from them.

The video starts with Bill Gates commenting on why everyone needs to be paying attention to AI, “AI is going to raise productivity generally and you should all pay attention because it’s so dramatic how it improves white collar productivity and later with the robotics, not yet, but blue collar productivity. People sometimes lose sight of the fact that this is the biggest productivity advance in our lifetimes.”

With the emphasis on productivity here, it makes sense why many of the comments are rooted in fear or cynicism. And I think this is a point we need to keep in mind when introducing AI-based change into our organizations – focusing too narrowly on the benefit of productivity gains (especially through the lens of the company wanting/needing more productivity) paints AI into a category of technology workers will be more inclined to resist.

I’m not suggesting we don’t have transparency around both the need for productivity gains and the ways in which AI will help us achieve that. What I am saying is that we need to temper this reality with the reassurance for employees that they are still needed, their contributions matter, and we aren’t valuing productivity at all cost.

Roth goes on in his video to emphasize a number of points that provide a more holistic view than the opening productivity comments, such as that people with access to co-pilot found the task to be 58% less draining (around 4:10). There’s discussion around how AI helps highly skilled workers become more efficient through automation, but also how it helps lower skilled workers through democratization of and access to knowledge.

Then later in the video (around 9:26) the statement is made that, “Skill like leading, dealing with critical situations, navigating interpersonal trust issues, and demonstrating emotional intelligence will be very important – until we all get outsourced to AI and then there will be no more critical social situations, trust issues, and emotional intelligence of any sort.”

While I take this (mostly) in jest, do workers consuming content who fear for their jobs, don’t feel valued by their organizations, or don’t feel supported in upskilling or reskilling as AI takes hold within their industries?

Why Fuel Fear Within a Strained Talent Landcape?

Perhaps one day this fear will become more real and acute for us all, but that day isn’t on our immediate horizon. What is, however, is the realities of a talent landscape that is already challenging without the introduction of further doubt and uncertainty fueled by the focus on how AI can or will “take jobs.” Sure, really manual, repetitive roles may be consumed by AI capabilities – but with our current challenges to fill open roles and retain talent, can we not find other areas of more value-added work for these employees to take on?

Reading through the comments on Roth’s video brings to life the fear that exists in people’s minds around the topic of AI. A few examples:

@ariesmarsexpress – “Raises productivity" is business code for we are going to layoff pretty much everyone, including ourselves, at some point.
@RogueAI – Worker: "I'm now getting twice as much work done with AI. How about a raise boss? " Boss: "Great! We're gonna fire John and give you his work. And since you're so productive we'll even throw in a 5% raise."
@xanders-game – The reality is this is going to allow corps to push fewer workers harder, with minimal pay increases to keep up with inflation. If one worker can do more than another with the technology, they are incentivized to lay off the least productive employees to preserve profits.
@christophercelmer405 – F productivity. We are humans with our own desires. Mine is not to slave away for someone else for a pittance constantly in a state of precarity so more people will work even harder or be abandoned once they are no longer needed.

To be fair, I left out some of the more extreme negative comments but there are also plenty who are taking a more positive view of these advancements. These ones speak to me, though, because they feel actionable.

What if we take the approach of honesty, but through the lens of how we augment and improve the work (and roles of employees) versus how we automate and replace?

Yes, this lens puts more onus on the company to consider what non-automated work does matter most and how to map the skills of existing workers to that work, with upskilling and reskilling as necessary. But I don’t see a short-term situation where the need for people simply disappears, and I think we need to put more focus on how we’re communicating that fact to our employees in a way that quells some of the distress they feel around their personal futures in relation to the AI wave.

What do you think of all this? How are you communicating with your employees about plans for AI in their future of work? I’d love to hear from you!

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Q&A: A Kellogg Professor Weighs in on How to Support Women in the Workplace Every Day of the Year

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

A Data-Driven Approach to Field Service Success

Are Robots in Field Service on the Rise?

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Q&A: A Kellogg Professor Weighs in on How to Support Women in the Workplace Every Day of the Year

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

A Data-Driven Approach to Field Service Success

Are Robots in Field Service on the Rise?

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Q&A: A Kellogg Professor Weighs in on How to Support Women in the Workplace Every Day of the Year

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share

By Sarah Nicastro and Angel Vossough, CEO and Co-Founder of BetterAI

Future of Field Service: How do you feel AI can play a role in advancing gender equality in the workplace?

Future of Field Service: How can women use AI in their career search to help make wise selections?

Future of Field Service: What are some of the ways women could be leveraging AI for personal/career development and growth?

Future of Field Service: How can organizations use AI to help ensure their recruiting practices are equitable?

Future of Field Service: What do you think the next five years holds in terms of the increasing impact AI and other technologies will have on women in the workplace?

Future of Field Service: What else related to this topic is important for us to keep in mind?

Stay Connected

Related Content

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Q&A: A Kellogg Professor Weighs in on How to Support Women in the Workplace Every Day of the Year

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share

By Sarah Nicastro and Scott De Long, Ph.D, author of I Thought I Was a Leader: A Journey to Building Trust, Leading Teams & Inspiring Change

In this Q&A, Scott weighs in on what he feels is helpful in leading a multi-generational workforce.

Stay Connected

Related Content

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Q&A: A Kellogg Professor Weighs in on How to Support Women in the Workplace Every Day of the Year

Most Recent

Service Transformation: Lessons Learned and Opportunities Ahead

Six Storytelling Missteps That Risk Your Relevance to Employees & Customers

Creating CX That Fuels Business Growth

Share