Who sits on which chair?

As part of a benchmarking exercise with other companies, I was invited to participate in a site visit to a large beverage bottling company on the African continent. Little did I realise at the time that a small observation would cause me to reflect whilst on my flight home and consequently write this article. 

After a session of information sharing amongst the participants, we were equipped with personal protective clothing and entered the production area for a three-hour site visit. We were accompanied by the plant manager, production manager, and several safety department members.

The chairs of shame

I have a bias towards considering the vast number of issues that contribute to developing a company’s desired culture. Therefore, when conducting a site visit to any company or facility, I focus not only on traditional safety elements, but also on psychological and cultural issues. This visit was no different.

During the site visit, we toured the production areas, logistics, and finished goods warehouse. I noticed a sign indicating the canteen area, so I asked the plant manager whether he would mind if we had a look at the canteen as well as the hygiene facilities. When entering the canteen, I noticed that at one end of the table there was a chair in total disrepair. The backrest was missing and the seat section was torn, with foam rubber exposed. The plant manager noticed me looking at the chair, but gave no reaction.

We moved on with the site tour and ended up in the maintenance workshop, where we were discussing a drill press. Out of the corner of my eye, I noticed a chair and a small table – obviously where the team had their coffee breaks, as there was a kettle (in terrible condition), coffee, and sugar on the table. Once again, the chair was in a poor state of repair. Upon closer inspection, one of the legs had been welded a couple of times, and the seat had been secured with twisted wire.

After the visit, I returned my visitor’s badge to the security office at the site entrance. I was talking to the security officer when – yes, you guessed it – there against the back wall of the office was another chair with torn fabric and exposed foam rubber. What was left of the chair looked like a dog had taken a bite out of it.

One might question why I was so focused on these damaged chairs. After some discussion and many explanations as to why they were there, we moved on and returned to the meeting room. My guess was that the chairs I had seen had been on site for many years, had been repaired a couple of times, and had (literally) become part of the furniture – accepted in their state of disrepair.

When I mentioned these chairs in my site feedback discussion with the management team, the managing director was visibly embarrassed. You could hear a pin drop in the room as he glanced over to his management team and asked one question: “Why?”

The flight back home

I had boarded my long flight back home to Austria, and as the plane’s jet engines revved up and it accelerated along the runway, I fitted my headphones, grabbed my journal, and reflected on the week that had passed. As always, this was my time – on my own, noise silenced, with time to reflect on what had gone well, how I had engaged with others, and whether there were any lessons to be learned. 

My mind kept going back to those chairs in the canteen, workshop, and security office. I thought about the employees who – taking a well-deserved break from the noisy production line or their maintenance tasks – must sit on these dirty, damaged, and uncomfortable chairs. In the case of the security officers, they were using the chair in their office continuously.

These three chairs triggered my thoughts about who sits on which chair, and how chairs can send numerous messages. Messages – both conscious and unconscious – of care, power dynamics, culture and sub-cultures, and more, whether through the chair’s shape, height, position, comfort, or condition.

I looked around the plane and noticed the difference in the various seats. There was First Class at the front of the plane, followed by Business, Economy Plus, and finally Economy Class. I was seated in an aisle seat, and sitting in the window seat next to me was a young lady. We had introduced ourselves earlier when boarding the plane, so I felt comfortable asking her for her opinion on the seats. I asked her what her impression was of the different seats on the plane. She mentioned that First Class is for the wealthy and Business Class for people who are travelling mostly on business, adding: “Economy Plus and Economy are for those who have less money to spare.”

I thanked her for her opinion, and then it dawned on me that as humans, we sometimes categorise or stereotype people according to the chair they sit in. Even the seating of the crew members on the plane seems to be set according to hierarchy, with the captain always in the left seat, the first officer on the right on the flight deck, and the purser in the seat next to the front door of the plane.

My reflection then went back to a training session I had conducted some weeks prior to my trip to the bottling company. I reflected on the setup of the training room in which I had conducted the training. Before the training began, I had arranged the room so that the candidates were sitting in groups of five at each of the round tables. There were 21 people in the room: 20 participants and myself as the trainer.

The Australian First Nations believe that sitting in a circle promotes continuous communication. So, the position of the chairs in training is important. When arriving at the venue, my chair and table were at the front of the training room. I immediately moved them to the back, because sitting in the front facing the rest often gives off a sense of power. At the time I had moved the chair without even thinking about it, but now, as I reflected on those three battered chairs, it brought my unconscious actions to my conscious thoughts, leading me to write this article.

Developing care develops trust, which develops culture

Developing the desired cultures and sub-cultures in an organisation entails many aspects, but a key element is the reflection of care by leaders towards their employees and their respective teams. Once care is shown and practised – and is genuine, not just a “tick box” exercise – trust starts to develop in the company between employees and their leaders. Care develops trust, and trust contributes to the development of the desired culture.

Having a broken chair in the canteen, or any other area of a company, does not reflect any care – employees are aware of how they are treated by leadership. Can you imagine any company leadership being willing to have damaged, torn, and dirty chairs placed in their main meeting rooms? This would never happen. The chairs in meeting rooms, as well as administrative office areas, are usually of good quality, in good condition, and support ergonomic requirements to make them as comfortable as possible for the person using them.

So why do some leaders expect the employees and contractors on the shop floor and in workshops, security rooms, gate houses, production halls, and other areas to sit on the type of chairs that I noticed during that shop floor tour?

During the site feedback meeting with the leadership team of the bottling company, some leaders mentioned that the discussions around the chair had made them think, agreeing that the observations had made them reflect and take action.

THE POWER OF CHAIR LOCATION

In risk and safety, as well as leadership, we should be cognisant of the power of a chair’s location. For example, after an incident investigation it is common for witnesses and injured persons to be interviewed – either in a meeting room, in the manager’s office, or in the safety manager’s office. These areas alone can place fear and nervousness in the minds of those being interviewed. It is much better to conduct interviews in a neutral location and, if possible, without a table between the parties.

Some years ago, I conducted an investigation into a serious incident in a coffee room with chairs positioned in a circular shape. This promoted open discussion and engagement, and was much better than previous experiences of investigations being handled in a more formal setting.

Summary

My reflection on those three simple chairs definitely triggered my thoughts, and hopefully it has done the same for you, the reader. Things that are measurable by leaders aren’t always the most important; those that can’t be measured are often just as significant to people.

Those “three simple chairs” were designed and built to measurements – things that were important to ensure good-looking chairs that provided good comfort and were marketable for people to buy. At the time of placing them in the various areas, they were initially provided for the comfort of those using them and were, more than likely, appreciated. That appreciation is an example of an emotion that cannot be measured, but I am sure it was a positive emotion at the time. 

Over time, the state of these three chairs deteriorated until they no longer looked anything like they had when they were new. Now, the comfort is non-existent, and I am sure that the emotions the employees feel are negative – probably leaning toward feeling discriminated against and disrespected. All of these feelings cannot be measured but are important, as they negatively influence thoughts and culture. 

As leaders and readers of this article, I urge you to reflect on those three simple chairs. Take a walk around your sites and assess how leaders treat their employees and contractors. Have a look at the condition of the chairs, the hygiene facilities – toilets, showers, canteens, and kitchens. Compare the conditions in these facilities with those in the administrative areas. If there is a difference, it is an indication that there is probably mistrust of leadership.

Remember, good leadership understands the importance of care, and care leads to trust. Only then can a company think about developing the desired culture.