This year, the Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC) is reaching a major milestone – 75 years of providing valuable research, development and demonstration to Saskatchewan industry and beyond. SRC is focused on providing services that support the province’s key economic sectors, such as mining, minerals, energy, oil and gas, agriculture and biotechnology, as well as meeting the environmental needs of industry.
Throughout its history, SRC has been a part of many important firsts for the province. In the 1970s, SRC was a leader in energy efficient housing research and its work formed the basis for the development of the R-2000 standard for energy efficient homes. In the 1980s, SRC played a large role assisting the Saskatchewan energy industry by enabling the implementation of horizontal wells in and the use of carbon dioxide (CO2) for enhanced oil recovery.
SRC Geoanalytical Laboratories’ ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accredited secure diamond laboratory was established in the early 2000s and is now the largest such facility in the world. SRC’s Rare Earth Processing Facility, supported with $31 million in funding from the Government of Saskatchewan, will be the first-of-its-kind in North America as it comes online early in 2023.
Today, SRC’s environmental remediation work in northern Saskatchewan also leads industry with its community engagement, project management and environmental practices, some of which have translated to other government programs like the Ministry of Energy and Resources’ Accelerated Site Closure Program (ASCP).
These are just a few examples of how SRC has pioneered initiatives that benefit Saskatchewan over the past 75 years. Going forward, SRC is strongly committed to continuing to create positive impacts for the province while it supports government and industry in new and emerging strategic areas including the energy transition and critical minerals.
SRC is Canada’s second largest research and technology organization. With nearly 300 employees, $137 million in annual revenue and 75 years of experience, SRC provides services and products to its 1,500 clients in 27 countries around the world.
The Western Canadian Roadbuilders & Heavy Construction Association (WCR&HCA) are heading to Waikiki, Feb. 5–9, 2023 for the Stronger Together Conference. Joined by hundreds of delegates from across Western Canada, the conference offers industry speakers, education and an array of networking events. Don’t miss out on this opportunity to connect!
Click here for more information about the conference; we hope to see SHCA members there!
Infrastructure needs its champions, and the Saskatchewan Heavy Construction Association is proud to be one of them.
Recently, our chair and some of our board members had the opportunity to attend a dinner meeting in Saskatoon sponsored, in part, by the SHCA.
The Canada West Foundation, which released the Shovel Ready to Shovel Worthy report last month, was in Saskatchewan for its board meeting, bringing together those who understand what Western Canada offers the world.
Trade infrastructure is how we make sure that what provinces like Saskatchewan produce can be transported from here to everywhere that buys what we sell. The SHCA champions for long-term investment into trade infrastructure through its relationships with the Western Canadian Roadbuilders as well as the Civil Infrastructure Council among others, such as the Canada West Foundation.
These relationships are how reports such as the Shovel Ready to Shovel Worthy report are produced and promoted. A report like that creates the narrative for industries like ours to have the conversation with elected officials, and industry leaders at all levels about working together to capitalize investment into trade corridors.
A report like Shovel Ready to Shovel Worthy is where compelling data is pulled together and presented to prove our case. A report with such data is at the core of our collaboration on coordinated campaigns that target the federal government to carve out explicit funds for trade-related infrastructure.
The contents of the report will be discussed at meetings with Saskatchewan’s new Minister of Highways, Jeremy Cockrill, as well as the new chief of staff, Brayden Fox, who I am excited to work with going forward.
It is the focus of messages our industry and association send out to the public through radio, social media and publications to get people thinking about the value Saskatchewan’s trade infrastructure brings to our economy and the people of this province.
It is what we bring forward to conversations with groups such as the City of Regina, the City of Saskatoon, SUMA, SARM, the Saskatchewan Trucking Association and chambers of commerce. We encourage municipally elected officials, business owners and administration to recognize how trade benefits from this infrastructure and to echo our message about investment in it.
If you can’t move it, you can’t sell it. That’s a message that resonates with everyone.
Between opportunity and crisis, Saskatchewan and Canada face a choice. We have opportunity but we need a plan to capitalize on it over the long term to rebuild this country’s trading reputation.
Helping those who make decisions about funding trade infrastructure to recognize that opportunity and choose to support strategic investment that betters this country is why SHCA works with other champions.
The rise of social media and access to the Internet has enabled people to connect and share information, opinions and beliefs with one another in an unprecedented manner. Individuals can document activities and post content virtually instantly. In many ways, this enhanced connectivity is positive; however, it can also create an uncomfortable situation for employers who may not always agree with their employees’ social media activity. Employers are increasingly faced with public scrutiny and pressure to act when their employees post offensive content or engage in offensive conduct that becomes public. Employers must deal with the unenviable task of balancing public scrutiny and pressure on the one hand, with their duties and obligations to their employees on the other. Determining what to do can be a difficult task.
Off-duty conduct, including off-duty public comments, can warrant discipline up to and including termination under the right circumstances. The primary consideration is whether the employee’s off-duty conduct or comments had a negative effect on the company’s reputation or its ability to operate effectively. When relying on reputational harm to ground discipline, the employer must establish a real and material connection between the conduct and the workplace, and the harm caused must be substantial.
Comments or conduct that are offensive to some, but that are not otherwise tied to the workplace, are not necessarily sufficient to ground just cause for termination.
Importantly, it is not necessarily the risk of reputational harm or harm to business, but actual harm that is most relevant.
In wrongful dismissal disputes involving terminations for off-duty conduct, in addition to the key considerations of harm to reputation and business, adjudicators will also consider whether:
The employee’s conduct renders them unable to perform their duties satisfactorily;
The employee’s conduct results in a refusal, reluctance or inability of other employees to work with them; or
Whether the employee has been found guilty of a serious breach of the Criminal Code such that the conduct is injurious to the general reputation of the employer and its employees.
Negative or offensive public comments by employees about co-workers, superiors and the employer have grounded just cause for termination under the right circumstances. These types of comments are more likely to have a sufficient connection to the workplace and are more likely to harm the employer’s reputation or business interests.
Comments or conduct that are offensive to some, but that are not otherwise tied to the workplace, are not necessarily sufficient to ground just cause for termination in the absence of extenuating circumstances, such as a history of progressive discipline, particularly when associated with similar conduct or proof of actual harm to the employer’s reputation or business interests.
An employer may establish a sufficient connection to the workplace if the employee makes a comment on a personal social media platform that references their employment with the employer, or where their conduct or comment draws substantial public attention. Of course, sufficient connection may not be enough on its own in the absence of actual harm to the employer.
Further, labour and employment law favours progressive discipline. Employers should consider whether alternatives to termination exist that would adequately address the employee’s conduct. Labour and employment adjudicators will consider an employee’s disciplinary history in considering whether termination is justified.
In every case, an employer must be able to show that the discipline engaged in is proportionate to the misconduct in question. Termination for cause is understood to be the “capital punishment” of employment law. An employer choosing to terminate an employee for cause for their off-duty conduct or comment must demonstrate a balance between the severity of the misconduct and the sanction imposed.
In a non-unionized workplace, employers are generally entitled to terminate employees without cause, subject to the specific terms of the employment agreement. This is not the case in unionized workplaces, where the collective agreement generally requires cause for termination. The ability to terminate without cause provides more leeway to employers to terminate an employee for off-duty conduct or public comments because the employer is not required to justify the termination. Employers in the non-unionized environment who cannot establish just cause but fear that future harm may occur as a result of their employee’s off-duty conduct or comment may consider terminating the employee without cause.
Although the employer is not required to provide a reason for the termination, they are required to provide adequate notice of the termination, or pay in lieu of notice. Employers in the non-unionized context are well-advised to include a clause in their employment contracts limiting the employee’s notice to that offered in the relevant employment standards legislation. Failure to do so may result in liability to the employee for additional pay in lieu of notice, depending on the circumstances.
Employers concerned about an employee’s off-duty conduct would be wise to not act rashly. Even where an employee’s conduct or comment is highly publicized, the employer must consider whether there is actual damage to its business interests or significant damage to its reputation, and whether the conduct in question is sufficiently connected to the employment relationship. An employer seeking to terminate an employee for cause should conduct a thorough investigation to satisfy itself that the relevant criteria are met before proceeding with terminating for cause.
Employers must also consider whether the conduct resulting in discipline is related to a protected ground under relevant human rights legislation. Discipline for off-duty conduct that is associated with a protected ground may result in a finding that the employer has discriminated against the employee.
In all circumstances, employers can help protect themselves by establishing clear policies outlining the type of conduct that is prohibited and the form of discipline employees will face if they breach the policy. Social media and other public comment policies have become commonplace.
When in doubt, employers should contact a lawyer for advice on how to proceed and how to mitigate their risks.
Miller Thomson has a reputation for providing practical, timely and responsible advice and services to its clients. For inquiries about the subject matter covered in this article, contact Danny Alcorn, an associate in the Saskatoon office at dalcorn@millerthomson.com.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided as an information service and may include items reported from other sources. We do not warrant its accuracy. This information is not meant as legal opinion or advice.
For companies operating in the construction, mining and energy sectors, community engagement is an important component of many projects and sites, from exploration through operation to remediation. A key to success is the integration of local knowledge into operational and closure plans. However, before this knowledge can be integrated, local trust and project understanding must be established. This can only be developed through a principle-centred approach to a shared project vision, two-way communication of knowledge, alignment of project goals, and understanding the local needs early in the project. Once community confidence is obtained, this local trust and project understanding must be maintained throughout the entirety of the project.
An important principle of this approach is to co-generate plans and activities with communities and not just develop them on the communities’ behalf. During exploration and environmental assessment phases, integration of local knowledge can include: the development and implementation of land use surveys to determine realistic travel and occupancy needs, specific traditional knowledge and land use studies to develop a detailed working knowledge of local land use, resource utilization, country food intake and human history of the site(s). The local knowledge gained during the assessment process is invaluable as it provides the information required to support project planning, such as: valued ecosystem components, human trophic utilization, length of site occupancy, cultural value assessment and future land use considerations. This approach requires an open planning method that requires the proponent to not only communicate with local communities but be open and prepared to adjust the project planning to accommodate the direction provided through these processes. For meaningful dialogue to take place, a relationship of trust and joint understanding must be built. Building trust through community presence and open communication is very easy to say, but very hard to do and takes a lot of time and effort. Gaining trust means you have the social license needed to work in the region. Not only is it important to gain trust, but it also takes work to maintain it.
Gaining trust means you have the social license needed to work in the region. Not only is it important to gain trust, but it also takes work to maintain it.
The role SRC is playing
The Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC) is managing Project CLEANS (Cleanup of Abandoned Northern Sites) – a multi-year, multimilliondollar project aimed at assessing and reclaiming the Gunnar mine and mill site, Lorado mill and 35 satellite mine sites in northern Saskatchewan near Lake Athabasca. The project is funded by the Governments of Saskatchewan and Canada. Uranium from these sites was mined by private companies from the early 1950s to the mid-1960s. When the mines and mills were abandoned, there was very little decommissioning completed. Because of this, the sites pose potential risks to the surrounding communities and environment. SRC has been working since 2006 to safely reduce these risks through extensive decommissioning, remediation and monitoring work. Engagement of local communities has been key as SRC’s Project CLEANS team maintains working relationships with local residents and their leadership within the communities. SRC holds regular community meetings to provide updates and receive feedback from northern residents. Key concerns addressed through this engagement process include human and environmental health, employment and business opportunities, remediation options and potential site end-uses. SRC holds regular community meetings to provide updates and receive feedback from northern residents.
The way forward
SRC developed an adaptive and open process to engage local communities that continues to evolve as community leadership changes, local expectations increase with project success, and the project parameters progress and change. Although SRC’s approach to the development of communications, trust, and traditional knowledge integration has been specifically applied to Project CLEANS, the approach and concept is applicable through the entirety of the mining cycle (exploration, assessment, construction, operations, remediation and divestment) in any geographic region.
By Joanne Venderheyden, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
After everything Canadians have been through in the last few years, they deserve a recovery they can see and feel in their daily lives. Rural communities have a key role to play in that. With a strong and united municipal voice, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) is advocating for the tools needed to strengthen communities.
Municipalities own 60 per cent of the core infrastructure in our country. Rural communities know that our infrastructure renewal needs often outstrip the 10 cents of Canada’s tax dollar that we receive. The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) has done a great job raising awareness of the need for more support for rural roads and bridges, and beyond that many SARM members also have responsibilities related to infrastructure for wastewater, solid waste management, broadband connectivity and local facilities.
Investments in core infrastructure have long been recognized as a cornerstone of economic stimulus. Even after projects are built, they have an ongoing benefit to local industries and residents. Rural communities in Saskatchewan have been seeing a growing need for exporting key commodities from the agriculture, energy and manufacturing sectors. Meeting that need requires reliable infrastructure that benefits our local and national economies.
In 2019 and again in 2021, the FCM welcomed the federal government’s one-year doubling of the Canada Community-Building Fund (CCBF, formerly the federal Gas Tax Fund). These investments were in direct response to FCM’s relentless advocacy. They’ve meant an additional $62,571,380 for municipal infrastructure in Saskatchewan last year alone.
The fund name was changed to better reflect the program’s evolution over time (it has long been delinked from fuel taxes), but the objectives and administration remain the same. The CCBF is the permanent, predictable federal funding tool that empowers municipalities of all sizes to renew core infrastructure. It works because its flexibility leverages the expertise of local leaders – the ones closest to people’s daily lives.
Investments in core infrastructure have long been recognized as a cornerstone of economic stimulus. Even after projects are built, they have an ongoing benefit to local industries and residents.
In Saskatchewan, the fund is heavily used for work on rural roads and bridges, but we’ve also seen communities make good use of the funding to expand and upgrade facilities like the Ormiston Community Hall kitchen (R.M. of Excel No. 71). The R.M. of Chesterfield No. 261 used it to install water pumping sites for rural residents to obtain clean drinking water. And the R.M. of Willowdale No. 153 put the fund to work retrofitting the municipal office to reduce annual energy usage.
As we look towards economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, FCM, along with our provincial partners like SARM, is calling for the federal government to permanently grow this
tool, increasing the annual transfer in 2022–23 to $4.6 billion – and boosting its annual growth index from 2.0 to 3.5 percent to reflect construction inflation realities. This will directly empower local leaders to create jobs and build better lives.
We’re also calling for targeted new investments to water/wastewater infrastructure and rural and northern infrastructure, recognizing there are significant unmet needs in these areas. Small communities in particular are looking for predictability for infrastructure solutions that can’t be fully funded through other federal programs.
Small communities in particular are looking for predictability for infrastructure solutions that can’t be fully funded through other federal programs.
There are a couple of things you can do to support this advocacy ahead of the upcoming 2022 federal budget and to raise overall awareness of the importance of predictable funding for core infrastructure renewal. The first thing you can do is reach out to your local MP to let them know that you’re looking to see funding for rural infrastructure in future budgets. Let them know what you’d be able to do with a bit of extra support and how that work would benefit your mutual constituents. Second, I want to urge you to take time to promote the work you do with the CCBF. Something like resurfacing a stretch of road might seem unremarkable but it’s vitally important. Sharing your CCBF success stories with your residents and MPs goes a long way to helping us make the case for more funding in Ottawa.
Let me conclude by thanking the many Saskatchewan members who have already taken these steps. Your voice has real influence.
Joanne Vanderheyden is the president of the FCM and mayor of Strathroy-Caradoc, Ont. She’s also a councillor for Middlesex County, Ont. FCM is the national voice of Canada’s local governments, with more than 2,000 members representing 90 per cent of Canadians.
This article originally appeared in the Spring 2022 edition of Rural Councillor magazine, the official publication of the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities. It is reprinted with permission.
A shared responsibility between the employer and employee
By Lisa Kopochinski
Long hours and hard, physical work are the norm for many working in Canada’s construction industry. However, if not properly managed, these conditions can lead to worker fatigue, resulting in unsafe working conditions. This is why companies need to take stronger measures to prevent fatigue.
What is fatigue management?
“Basically, [fatigue management] recognizes that fatigue compromises a person’s ability to function both physically and mentally, and even affects our emotional state,” said Mike Harnett, owner and president of Solaris Fatigue Management, a British Columbia-based firm that supplies innovative and effective fatigue risk management strategies.
“The consequences of that are that we cannot continue to function at a level that we need to function at to do the job safely,” she said. “This means more injuries, more incidents, more errors and even more mental health issues.”
While many jobs have hazards attached to them, it is important for companies to take a closer look at how much riskier construction jobs are if the worker is tired.
“The earlier they can become involved, the better,” said Harnett . “At the beginning of the project life cycle, we need to start looking at wherever there is a human interaction, and we need to examine that interaction for hazards. So, if they are looking at where workers are [working], what are the performance requirements that have to be done?”
Fatigue is normal
What happens if a tired person is placed in line with the hazards of their job? How much riskier do those projects become?
“We need to start looking at our jobs through a fatigue lens,” said Harnett . “Fatigue is part of the normal human condition and it’s not something we are going to eliminate from the worksite. We’re not going to stop people from showing up tired for a variety of reasons, but we can manage it. We have to look at how we design work and manage the risks in order to get them down as low as possible.”
“Fatigue is part of the normal human condition and it’s not something we are going to eliminate from the worksite.”
– Mike Harnett, Solaris Fatigue Management
Shared responsibility
Many may think that fatigue management on a worksite is solely the responsibility of the construction company. The reality is that it is a shared responsibility between the employer and employee.
“On the worker’s side, it’s about showing up fit for work,” said Harnett. “This means employees need to get the sleep they require to fully restore themselves. They have to manage any medical conditions and anything lifestyle-related that could affect their ability to do their jobs.”
On the organizational side, the company’s responsibility is to ensure that the work fits the worker, that workloads don’t create excessive fatigue, that work schedules are well-designed and that the work designs look for fatigue-related factors; even the work culture plays a role as all of these contribute to fatigue-related issues.
“Fatigue is also a physical risk factor as fatigue impairment can lead to incidents, injuries and – in extreme cases – fatalities.”
– Ben Snyman, SafetyVantage
“For example, if a project is running behind and there is a heavy workload schedule, or the company is short-staffed and they need overtime, this can impact the available sleep time for the employees,” said Harnett. “If an employee puts in a 14- to 16-hour day, how much time will they have to get the sleep they require? Every adult requires seven to nine hours of recuperative sleep daily to fully restore their brain and body. But if they put in 16 hours, that only leaves them eight hours to commute, eat, shower and do all their other responsibilities. What are they going to be cutting back on? It will be their sleep because the schedule is dictating this.”
Ben Snyman is CEO and founder of SafetyVantage, a company based in Calgary, that promotes health and safety in the workplace through online occupational health and safety (OHS) training. With more than four decades of combined experience, SafetyVantage has delivered online training to more than 5,000 organizations and over 100,000 individuals across Canada.
He says fatigue management in “layman’s terms” – within the context of OHS – is the management and control of risks that can result in fatigue-related workplace incidents.
“It spans over psychosocial and physical health and safety in the workplace. Fatigue can result in psychosocial risks – including anxiety and depression – which lead to both absenteeism (short-term disability) and presenteeism (present, but not productive at work). It can also lead to workplace violence (if someone is tired and, as a result, is short with others or shows physical aggression). Fatigue is also a physical risk factor as fatigue impairment can lead to incidents, injuries and – in extreme cases – fatalities. For example, a tired worker is less likely to operate heavy machinery with full focus and attention, which can very quickly lead to an incident,” said Snyman.
While he says everyone is legally responsible, there may be factors which management or supervisors are not aware of.
“Ultimately the employer is accountable to ensure all fatigue-related risks are identified and appropriately controlled,” he said. “However, every worker also has the responsibility to prevent workplace incidents by reporting any risks or incidents that may result due to fatigue to a supervisor or manager.”
The implications of hiding fatigue
What about employees who don’t want to rock the boat and try to hide their fatigue? How should this be addressed?
“Well, it’s the whole concept of fit to work,” said Harnett. “They’re supposed to show up in a fit state. If they aren’t, then the organization has to take responsibility. That means companies need to know how to recognize those employees who are tired.”
She says that if a company does not have a strategy in place, they are making supervisors “fly by the seat of their pants.”
“One supervisor may tell a struggling employee to go have a nap in their truck for 30 minutes. Another supervisor may look at that same employee and […] tell them to leave the site.”
She adds that without having any policies in place or strategies for supervisors to identify whether a person is fatigued or not, it can be very difficult to manage the situation.
“There are two levels of intervention. For example, if someone shows up for work and is a great employee, but seems to be struggling that day, the supervisor can ask how they are doing. If the worker responds that the baby kept them up last night, this is understandable. We call that acute fatigue. You might handle this differently compared to the employee who shows up every day consistently tired. This could be chronic fatigue. In this situation, there may be a different procedure to follow, such as a referral to a medical practitioner to rule out anything else that could be contributing to their fatigue,” said Harnett.
Snyman adds that every organization/employer in Canada must provide and take reasonable steps to ensure a healthy and safe workplace. This will include appropriate controls to prevent damage and incidents due to employee fatigue.
“There are three basic rights that every employee has. First is the right to know about workplace hazards and to have access to basic health and safety information. Second is the right to participate in health and safety discussions and health and safety committees. That is, what can be done to prevent and control the risk of workplace fatigue? And, thirdly, the right to refuse dangerous work and know that you’re protected from reprisal. Workplace fatigue can be viewed similar to an employee being impaired.”
While many jobs have hazards attached to them, it is important for companies to take a closer look at how much riskier construction jobs are if the worker is tired.
Large companies versus small companies
“There are a lot of things small employers have on their plate from an occupational health and safety perspective. And many just don’t have the resources to address it. If you are the prime contractor and are setting up a fatigue management program, you want to ensure that all your subs are falling underneath those policies and procedures as well and getting the support that they need,” said Harnett.
She adds that larger companies are beginning to recognize fatigue management and how it is handled.
“With the construction industry, we look historically at the type of injuries, incidents and errors, and then start comparing them against how much time workers had been putting in prior to this event happening. But it’s not just at work that risk goes up. For example, if a worker is up for 17 hours and then drives home, this is equivalent to having a blood-alcohol level of 0.05. And, if they are working for 20 hours and drive home, this is equivalent to 0.08,” said Harnett, adding that only British Columbia and Saskatchewan have addressed fatigue in their regulations.
“In B.C., as a worker, you are required to tell your employer if your ability to perform any of your assignments is impaired for any reason. That includes being impaired by fatigue. As an employer, you are not allowed to assign any impaired worker to activities where fatigue or any other impairment creates undue risk. Employers are responsible for managing the health and safety risks in the workplace and that includes fatigue. In other provinces, ‘fatigue’ has not been brought up, but they will use ‘impairment,’ but fatigue is, in fact, an impairment,” she said.
This article was originally published in Issue 2 2022 of Piling Canada magazine. It is reprinted with permission.
Mike Harnett is the owner of Solaris Fatigue Management. Ben Snyman is the CEO and founder of SafetyVantage.
For the past decade, I have worked internally with leaders from some of Saskatchewan’s largest organizations and engaged in countless discussions on the topic of leadership. Each conversation has been fulfilling and unique and left me increasingly curious about how we can continue to develop our collective leadership capability. Yet, despite all the unique perspectives, several common themes have emerged that have shaped my core beliefs about leadership. These beliefs guide my messaging in my new role as an HR consultant and leadership speaker and reflect the contributions of the amazing leaders I have had the benefit of connecting with over my career.
When our values aren’t clear, we are vulnerable to being thrown off centre by external forces outside our control.
1. Leadership is about personal empowerment
There are thousands of definitions of leadership, and I have spent far too much time (and drank far too many cups of coffee) seeking the perfect definition. At one point I had the hubris of thinking I could create my own, before giving up entirely on the task and simply focusing on the actions and behaviours of leaders that have inspired me the most. And upon that reflection, what become clear is that the most impactful leaders I have encountered lead from a place of personal empowerment.
My favourite definition of empowerment comes from Bob Anderson, founder and CEO of the Leadership Circle. He simply defines empowerment as “learning how to create what matters most in our life through our work.” What I appreciate most about this definition is that it encourages me to embrace the perspective that it is our responsibility to create what matters in our lives. So often I find leaders thrown off centre and feeling victim to external circumstances. Running from one fire to another, exhausted and joyless. Yet, our rational selves understand that the only thing we can truly control is our own actions and choices. The best leaders find the resiliency and strength, regardless of their circumstance, to regain control over their capacity to bring a desired future to life.
2. Culture change doesn’t have to be complicated
If you work for an organization for any reasonable length of time, you inevitably will have experienced some kind of “cultural transformation” effort by the organization. Perhaps it was the unveiling of new corporate values, a new leadership competency model or maybe a shift in organizational strategy. At the heart of these efforts is a change management strategy (or, in many cases, an absence of one), which is focused on changing the culture of the organization. And in almost every case, these culture change efforts fail.
Why do culture change efforts often fail? Through my discussions with leaders, I would argue that we make culture change out to be far more complicated than it needs to be. The most commonly quoted definition of culture is simply, “The way we do things around here.” Culture is the collective actions and behaviours of the people within it. In theory, if we want to change the culture, it starts by changing ourselves.
The problem is that we often focus on factors outside of our control, such as other people’s behaviour, judgements on executive leadership decisions, or generally anything that absolves us of the responsibility to take ownership over our own contributions to the culture. Coming back to the first point on empowerment, leadership is all about taking responsibility for how our actions and behaviours influence our outcomes. To this day, I have yet to meet an influential leader who didn’t take full responsibility for how their actions and behaviours contribute to the current state of an organization’s culture. Ultimately, our actions and behaviours are the only things we can control. Take ownership and accountability over your actions and behaviours, and just watch as the organization begins to shift around you. It is truly a powerful thing.
3. It all comes down to values
We seem to be living in the age of authenticity, with countless amounts of new content emerging on the topic. Authenticity seems to be the emerging leadership development topic trend, based on a positive shift to improve cultures of inclusivity, psychological safety and personal belonging. However, I seldom see practical guidance on how people can develop the ability to show up more authentically in their work environments. To me, this is where personal values come in.
At the heart of my purpose is helping people gain clarity over their personal values, which results in people gaining a sense of empowerment over their lives. I am a big believer in personal values, as I see them as our personal criteria which guides our actions and decisions. Consider your personal values your blueprint for authenticity. Yet, most people haven’t taken the time or haven’t known how to gain clarity over their personal values. When our values aren’t clear, we are vulnerable to being thrown off centre by external forces outside our control. It might be production demands, a toxic co-worker, an overly demanding boss or any number of factors. The reality is that there will always be things pressuring us to show up incongruent to our values, and if we haven’t taken the time to clearly identify who we are at our best, we can easily show up inauthentic to who we truly are. Therefore, if you want to be more authentic, start by defining your values.
I also believe organizations can, and should, play a meaningful role in facilitating processes for people to gain clarity over their personal values. The best organizations reverse the trend of attempting to assimilate people to a set of generic organizational values. Instead, they facilitate a process for people to identify their personal values first and then connect them to the collective values of the organization. In doing so, organizations demonstrate a deep respect for the individuality of each unique person, while aligning collectively on a shared purpose.
Think about the best leaders you know – the ones who have made an immeasurable impact on your life. I am willing to bet at the heart of their leadership is a strong sense of personal empowerment, responsibility over their behaviours and clear personal values guiding their actions. These are just a few of the lessons I have been grateful to learn from the amazing leaders across the province of Saskatchewan that continue to guide how I show up in support of others.
Brett Elmgren, CPHR is the president of Axom Leadership Inc. and can be reached at brett.elmgren@axomleadership.com. This article was originally printed in the Fall/Winter 2021 edition of HR Saskatchewan magazine, published by the Chartered Professionals of Human Resources (CPHR) Saskatchewan. It is reprinted with permission.
