Organizational Culture

🗣️“You must be more assertive.” Last year, those five words burned into Amy’s memory. She’d walked out of her 2023 review at XYZ Global determined to “step up.” Speak more in meetings. Push harder on decisions. Stop softening her tone so she wouldn’t intimidate anyone. She did exactly that. Fast forward 12 months. Same conference room. Same 2 VPs across the table. 🔇“You’ve become too intense, need to work on softening your approach.” 😑 Amy stared at them, speechless. Wasn’t that what you asked for last year? Which version of me do you actually want? She thought about the past year: 🤔 The time she challenged a flawed budget forecast in front of the CFO, saving the company $3 million, but earning whispers that she was “abrasive.” 🤔 The time she stepped in to rescue a failing project, praised for her “grit” publicly, yet privately told she “dominated the room.” 🤔 The time she finally got invited to an executive offsite, only to overhear a VP say, “She’s great, but can be… a lot.” This is the tightrope trap senior women walk daily: • Be assertive, but not too assertive. • Be collaborative, but don’t fade into the background. • Be visible, but not “hungry.”    The same behavior praised in men (decisive, strong leader) gets women penalized as abrasive or too much. Until you set the narrative yourself, you’re trapped performing for a moving target. If you’re exhausted from balancing on a wire men don’t even see, here’s how to step off it and still rise. 1. Audit the pattern, not just the feedback • Track every piece of feedback, especially contradiction. Patterns reveal bias. If the goal keeps moving, it's not you! • Phrase to use in review: “Last year I was encouraged to increase my presence; this year I’m told to soften it. Can we clarify what success really looks like?”    2. Control the frame before the room does • Pre‑set the narrative in 1:1s and emails leading up to reviews. I.e., “This year I focused on driving results while bringing the team with me, you’ll see that reflected in project X and Y.” • This primes leadership to view your assertiveness as an intentional strategy, not a personality flaw.    3. Build echo chambers, not just results • Secure 2–3 allies who reinforce your strengths in rooms you’re not in. • Promotions happen in the absence, you need people echoing your narrative, not someone else’s. • Phrase to brief an ally: “If my leadership style comes up in review, can you speak to how I challenge decisions but still align the team?”    Women aren’t just asked to deliver results. They’re asked to perform, decode, and reframe, all while walking a wire men don’t even see. If you’re exhausted from balancing between “too soft” and “too aggressive,” stop walking the wire and start controlling the narrative. Join the waitlist of our next cohort of ⭐ From Hidden Talent to Visible Leaders ⭐ https://lnkd.in/gx7CpGGR 👊 Because leadership shouldn’t feel like an impossible balancing act.

One image just disrupted a £22 billion fashion empire more effectively than a thousand sustainability reports. 🔥 This isn't an official SHEIN campaign gone wrong. It's artist Emanuele Morelli's AI creation—a haunting visualisation showing what fast fashion's "affordability" really costs us. The image speaks volumes: a SHEIN billboard where the model's flowing dress transforms into a cascade of textile waste. Art communicating what statistics alone cannot. 5 uncomfortable truths this image forces us to confront: 1. The scale of fashion waste is staggering → 92 million tonnes of textile waste produced annually  → The equivalent of one rubbish lorry of textiles dumped every second  → Most fast fashion items designed to be worn fewer than 10 times 2. The business model depends on our amnesia → Constantly changing trends keep us buying  → Ultra-low prices remove financial friction  → Digital marketing creates artificial scarcity and FOMO  → We're trained to forget yesterday's purchases 3. The true cost isn't on the price tag → Environmental damage from production chemicals  → Microplastics shedding into water systems  → Supply chain ethics compromised for speed and cost  → Communities near production sites bearing health consequences 4. Our definition of "affordable" is broken → When clothing is cheaper than a coffee, someone else is paying  → True cost spread across communities, environments, and future generations  → Psychological cost of constant consumption never factored in 5. Solutions exist but require systemic change → Circular fashion models gaining traction  → Rental and resale markets growing rapidly  → Consumer awareness rising but needs to translate to behaviour While SHEIN isn't the only culprit in the fast fashion ecosystem, Morelli's artwork throws a spotlight on an uncomfortable reality we've normalised. What we wear reflects our values more than our taste. What is your wardrobe saying about yours? Image: Emanuele Morelli ♻️ Found this helpful? Repost to share with your network.  ⚡ Want more content like this? Hit follow Maya Moufarek.

When Mary Barra took over GM's HR department, she found a 10-page dress code policy. She replaced all 10 pages with just two words: "Dress appropriately." The HR team panicked. A senior director sent an angry email demanding more detailed rules. But Barra held firm. When the director called to complain that his team wore jeans to government meetings, she didn't cave. Instead, she told him: "Have a conversation with your team." Two weeks later, he called back excited. His team had solved it themselves...they'd keep dress pants in their lockers for important meetings. Here's what happened across GM: 1. Managers started making decisions instead of following rulebooks 2. Employee engagement improved as people felt trusted 3. Bureaucracy dropped as leaders focused on outcomes, not compliance Barra realized: "If they can't handle 'dress appropriately,' what other judgment decisions are they not making?" She built a culture where thinking mattered more than rule-following. Most companies write longer policies to avoid problems. Mary wrote shorter ones to create leaders.

Introducing the Music Tech Ownership Ouroboros, 2025 edition ✨ The music-tech sector has come of age. What started as a relatively niche investment thesis five years ago has matured into a powerhouse market segment, drawing tens of billions in capital since 2020. For five years, we at Water & Music have been mapping these shifting power dynamics through our “Music Tech Ownership Ouroboros” — a living document that traces the complex web of investments, ownership stakes, and strategic acquisitions shaping music and tech. Our latest update adds over 30 new relationships to the map, primarily from growth investments and M&A deals in 2024. The takeaway: Private equity firms and major labels are locked in a battle for control over independent music infrastructure. As indie market share keeps climbing, owning the tech backbone is becoming as valuable as owning the actual rights. Highlights from 2024 include: - Hellman & Friedman's majority stake in Global Music Rights — making GMR the third PRO owned by a private equity firm - Virgin Music Group's acquisitions of Downtown Music ($775M), [PIAS], and Outdustry - Flexpoint Ford's growth investments in Create Music Group ($165M) and Duetti ($34M) - KKR's acquisition of Superstruct Entertainment ($1.4B) and debt financing in HarbourView Equity Partners ($500M) - EQT Group and TCV's co-ownership of Believe (alongside CEO Denis Ladegaillerie), as part of taking Believe private - Vinyl Group's acquisitions of Serenade, Mediaweek Australia, Funkified Events, and Concrete Playground Link to the full interactive chart with sources is in the comments. Would love to hear what you think, and if any of these deals feel particularly standout or surprising to you! #musicbusiness #musicindustry #musictech #privateequity #musicinvestment #musicrights

Discourses of Climate Delay 🌎 Discourses of climate delay subtly undermine urgent climate action by framing it as either unnecessary, too disruptive, or impossible to achieve. These narratives don't deny climate change but instead promote inaction through complex messaging, effectively slowing progress toward meaningful environmental goals. One common approach is to redirect responsibility. This discourse suggests that the burden of action lies primarily with individuals or other entities, rather than addressing the systemic changes required from industries and governments. By focusing on personal responsibility alone, broader, impactful initiatives can be sidelined. Another tactic is to emphasize the downsides of change, portraying climate action as a source of economic hardship or social disruption. This discourages support for essential policies by highlighting potential challenges rather than long-term benefits, impeding collective progress. The push for non-transformative solutions is also prevalent. This narrative often suggests superficial fixes, like minor fossil fuel improvements, as adequate steps. By promoting incremental changes rather than systemic transformation, these approaches can delay necessary shifts in energy and resource management. Finally, surrender narratives frame climate change as an unsolvable problem, encouraging resignation rather than action. This viewpoint implies that adaptation is the only feasible response, discouraging mitigation efforts. Addressing these delay discourses requires a clear focus on accountability, transformative solutions, and sustained commitment. Recognizing these tactics is critical to advancing genuine progress in climate action. #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #climateaction

🧠 “How We Brainstorm And Choose UX Ideas” (+ Miro template) (https://lnkd.in/eN32hH2x), a practical guide by Booking.com on how to run a rapid UX ideation session with silent brainstorming and “How Might We” (HMW) statements — by clustering data points into themes, reframing each theme and then prioritizing impactful ideas. Shared by Evan Karageorgos, Tori Holmes, Alexandre Benitah. 👏🏼👏🏽👏🏾 Booking.com UX Ideation Template (Miro) https://lnkd.in/eipdgPuC (password: bookingcom) 🚫 Ideas shouldn’t come from assumptions but UX research. ✅ Study past research and conduct a new study if needed. ✅ Cluster data in user needs, business goals, competitive insights. ✅ Best ideas emerge at the intersections of these 3 pillars. ✅ Cluster all data points into themes, prioritize with colors. ✅ Reframe each theme as a “How Might We” (HMW) statement. ✅ Start with the problems (or insights) you’ve uncovered. ✅ Focus on the desired outcomes, rather than symptoms. ✅ Collect and group ideas by relevance for every theme. ✅ Prioritize and visualize ideas with visuals and storytelling. Many brainstorming sessions are an avalanche of unstructured ideas, based on hunches and assumptions. Just like in design work we need constraints to be intentional in our decisions, we need at least some structure to mold realistic and viable ideas. I absolutely love the idea of frame the perspective through the lens of ideation clusters: user needs, business problems and insights. Reframing emerging themes as “How-Might-We”-statements is a neat way to help teams focus on a specific problem at hand and a desired outcome. A simple but very helpful approach — without too much rigidity but just enough structure to generate, prioritize and eventually visualize effective ideas with the entire team. Invite non-designers in the sessions as well, and I wouldn’t be surprised how much value a 2h session might deliver. Useful resources: The Rules of Productive Brainstorming, by Slava Shestopalov https://lnkd.in/eyYZjAz3 On “How Might We” Questions, by Maria Rosala, NN/g https://lnkd.in/ejDnmsRr Ideation for Everyday Design Challenges, by Aurora Harley, NN/g https://lnkd.in/emGtnMyy Brainstorming Exercises for Introverts, by Allison Press https://lnkd.in/eta6YsFJ How To Run Successful Product Design Workshops, by Gustavs Cirulis, Cindy Chang https://lnkd.in/eMtX-xwD Useful Miro Templates For UX Designers, by yours truly https://lnkd.in/eQVxM_Nq #ux #design

Here’s 14 things that can be invisible to men in the workplace And they all involve women Men rarely notice That women are more likely To be interrupted To be on the outside of social workplace networks To be judged more harshly and punished for underperformance or mistakes To have their credentials or competence questioned or be expected to provide evidence To be promoted on previous performance rather than future potential To be negatively judged for being assertive or ambitious To be given non promotive tasks and work housework And that women are less likely To be sponsored or given similar progress opportunities To get space to contribute in meetings To be give clear, actionable feedback To be seen as deserving promotion to leadership To be given stretch projects and high profile assignments To be consider for promotive work when they are mothers To have airtime with those most senior in their organisation I can honestly say I wasn’t noticing these in my early career. A lot of my focus went on following the advice of working twice as hard, as a young Black lad from a lower socioeconomic background. My own microaggressions blurred my vision of gender biases. And if you can’t see them, and they don’t happen to you, how can you challenge them? Studies show that men’s awareness and ability to act is four times higher after they partake in allyship training which highlights gender biases and microaggressions. Suddenly they see inequity they couldn’t see before. And they can’t unsee it. The opportunities to tackle them increase, practicing the skills of allyship. Having been through that process myself I can say that taking the blindfold off is an uncomfortable reality check But it is also empowering, and makes your curious about what else you might not be seeing. A world that was black and white, suddenly was a world full of colour And this is just one of the reasons why I’m passionate about bringing allyship to organisations and stages across the country Becoming accomplices, rather than opposition Because everyone benefits when we shine a light on each others blind spots What would you add to the list?

What makes an organization worth existing? This critical question is barely asked enough and certainly not answered enough. Evaluate your organization along these 3Ps to assess its value and necessity. Many organizations are there because… yes, because of what actually? The general (capitalist) answer is that they generate employment and economic value and thereby contribute to economic prosperity. Whether we agree or disagree, it is still merely a general answer. It doesn’t tell why any particular organization should or should not exist. To get a better answer, we need to look at which aspects of an organization make it worth existing. There are three: Product, Place, and Purpose PRODUCT - The organization as product/service producer The most tangible contribution any organization makes are its products and services. It is these that create value for customers and thereby make the organization meaningful to at least a select group of people or organizations. The key question to ask here is: do the organization’s products and services make it worth existing? PLACE - The organization as working environment Organizations are not merely product and service producers. They are also a place where people come together, interact and form relationships. This makes them worth existing as well, this time not for customers, but for employees. The key question to ask here is: does the organization’s working environment make it worth existing? PURPOSE - The organization as impact maker The third source of worth is an organization’s purpose. This concerns what it aims to achieve in the world and which significant problem(s) it chooses to address. It may not be able to solve them alone, but it can make a contribution that matters.  The key question to ask here is: does the organization’s purpose make it worth existing? The most valuable organizations answer a convincing “yes!” to all three questions. Their products and services address a real need, their working environment is great for people, and they contribute to a better world as well. This means that, if you want your organization to be worth existing, the goal is to score a yes on all three aspects. It doesn’t mean your organization shouldn’t exist if it only addresses two or even one aspect. Maybe your products are not really great and you haven’t managed to create a great working space yet either. But your purpose matters a lot. Then your organization is worth existing—and you know where to improve. Or, maybe your purpose is merely making money, but your products serve a real need and you offer a great working place where people flourish and grow. Then your organization is worth existing—and you know where to improve. Now look at your own organization. Is it worth existing on all three aspects? If not yet, where’s the biggest improvement? #organizationaldevelopment #companyculture #leadershipmindset

Leaders' overreliance on "DEI programming" is one of the biggest barriers in the way of real progress toward achieving #diversity, #equity, and #inclusion. Do you know where these events came from? The lunch and learns, cultural heritage celebrations, book clubs, and the like? Historically, these were all events put on by volunteer advocates and activists from marginalized communities who had little to no access to formal power and yet were still trying to carve out spaces for themselves in hostile environments. For leaders to hire figureheads to "manage" these volunteer efforts, refuse to resource them, and then take credit for the meager impact made nonetheless is nothing short of exploitation. If your workplace's "DEI Function" is a single director-level employee with an executive assistant who spends all day trying to coax more and more events out of your employee resource groups? I'm sorry to say that you are part of the problem. Effective DEI work is change management, plain and simple. It's cross-functional by necessity, requiring the ongoing exercise of power by executive leadership across all functions, the guidance and follow-through of middle management, the insight of data analysts and communicators, and the energy and momentum of frontline workers. There is no reality where "optional fill-in-the-blank history month celebrations" organized by overworked volunteers, no matter how many or how flashy, can serve as a substitute. If your workplace actually wants to achieve DEI, resource it like you would any other organization-level goal. 🎯 Hire a C-Level executive responsible for it or add the job responsibility to an existing cross-functional executive (e.g., Chief People Officer) 🎯 Give that leader cross-functional authority, mandate, headcount, and resources to work with other executives and managers across the organization on culture, process, policy, and behavior change 🎯 Set expectations with all other leaders that DEI-related outcomes will be included in their evaluation and responsibility (e.g., every department leader is responsible for their employees' belonging scores and culture of respect in their department). 🎯 Encourage responsible boundary-setting and scoping of volunteer engagement, ensuring that if Employee Resource Groups and DEI Councils/Committees want to put on events, it is because they are energized and supported to do so—not because they feel forced to run on fumes because it's the only way any impact will be made. It's long past time for our workplaces' DEI strategies to modernize away from the volunteer exploitation of "DEI programming" toward genuine organizational transformation. What steps will your leaders take to be a part of this future?

Hard Work Doesn’t Cause Burnout.  This Does. People don’t burn out because they’re weak. They burn out because they’re at war—every single day. Not with the work. But with the culture. Most high performers can handle pressure. What drains them is the invisible combat of surviving a toxic environment: • Fighting for basic recognition. • Tiptoeing around ego-driven managers. • Navigating blurry expectations. • Absorbing blame just to keep the peace. • Working long hours—not for purpose, but for permission to belong. This isn’t hustle. This is emotional survival disguised as productivity. Burnout isn’t always from too much to do. It’s from not enough safety to be human. It’s the silence you bite back. The trust you can’t give. The energy you waste decoding office politics. And here’s the truth no one puts in the job ad: "Toxic cultures break people before the deadlines ever do." So what builds resilience? Not snacks in the break room. Not "We’re a family" posters. ✅ Clarity over chaos. ✅ Trust over fear. ✅ Leaders who listen—not just talk. When people feel safe, seen, and supported— They don’t just survive. They rise. They create. They lead. Let’s stop glamorizing burnout and start talking about the real cost of toxicity. What’s one silent culture killer you think companies need to call out—loudly? ♻️ Share this with your network if it resonates. ☝️ And follow Stuart Andrews for more insights like this.