Words always come back like a boomerang
The boomerang of words
The president who loses the most trust is not the one who makes mistakes.
It is the president who steps on their own words.
At one company, there is a top executive who excessively uses the phrase "as a person."
In meetings,
at morning assemblies,
in interviews,
they say it at every opportunity.
"There are things that are important as a person."
"Do not forget your dignity as a person."
"As a person, is that really okay?"
With the intensity of an ethics professor,
or perhaps the editor-in-chief of a moral textbook,
they go around preaching the way of humanity to their subordinates.
If you only take what they are saying, it is probably correct.
Greetings are important.
Sincerity is important.
Responsibility is important.
Respect for others is also important.
The problem is that those words draw such a beautiful parabola and come right back to the person themselves.
The accuracy of the boomerang is abnormally high.
"As a person,"the next sentence,
for some reason, was like something out of the manga Ushijima the Loan Shark.
Strangely enough,
the words that come out right after saying "as a person"
are sometimes the furthest thing from being human.
They preach politeness.
But their tone is harsh.
They preach respect.
But they do not listen to the other party's circumstances.
They preach responsibility.
But they do not explain their own decisions.
They preach dignity.
But the atmosphere in the room freezes in an instant.
The manga "Ushijima the Loan Shark" is fiction.
But when you are subjected to similar pressure in a real-life meeting room, you cannot laugh.
Boomerangs exist in real-life meeting rooms.
The phrase "as a person" is convenient.
When used to blame someone else, it allows you to stand on the side of justice.
However, if you use it without examining your own behavior, that phrase instantly becomes a weapon.
As a person.
While saying that, it is often the person saying it who is most being questioned about what it means to be a person.
When it gets to this point, "as a person" starts to look less like a lesson and more like a trick to silence others.
Because the person is unaware of this, it is all the more malicious.
A person who preaches about greetings, but doesn't greet others. And then, the next morning.
The person who preached, "What kind of professional doesn't even know how to greet others?" passes an employee in the hallway.
The employee greets them. But the other person's gaze is fixed on some distant point in the void.
There is no voice. No nod. No reaction.
There is only nothingness.
The subordinates are once again greeting someone who isn't really there.
This is not a one-time occurrence. These small moments pile up within the company.
The person does not follow the things they strongly demand of others. They do not apply the standards they demand of others to themselves.
In that moment, the employees do not talk back. But they are watching. They are watching quite calmly.
--
The boomerang is not just one
If this were just about a personal character flaw, it might still be a laughing matter.
Everyone has days when they are in a bad mood.
Everyone has moments when they are stretched thin.
Even business owners are not perfect.
The problem is that it doesn't end with just one time.
Boomerangs are mass-produced.
They are harsh with others.
But they do not hold themselves to the same standard.
They demand accountability from the staff.
But they offer no explanation for their own decisions.
They demand speed from employees.
But things stop when they have to review them.
They say, "Take responsibility."
But they don't grant the authority needed to take that responsibility.
They say, "Your reporting is slow."
But when you do report, their response is slow.
They say, "Think more about it."
But when you bring them the results of your thinking, they end up overturning it based on their mood.
They say, "Act for the sake of the company."
But from the employees' perspective, it looks like the president is the one most focused on protecting themselves rather than the company.
Just to be clear, the person in question likely doesn't think they are using a double standard.
Rules only function when there is a side that makes them and a side that follows them.
They are on the side that makes them.
The employees are on the side that follows them.
I think that is the premise.
I see, it is consistent.
However, not in a company, but perhaps in a completely different genre of worldview.
The employees are not laughing. They are grading you.
The president thinks they are watching the employees.
But in reality, the employees are also watching the president.
Does this person keep their own word?
Do they run away when things get inconvenient?
Do they apply the standards they demand of others to themselves?
When they fail, who do they blame?
How much of what they promised do they actually remember?
The employees are watching quite calmly.
They don't say anything out loud.
They nod in meetings.
They reply "Understood" in chats.
They put on a serious face during morning assemblies.
However, in our hearts, we are making judgments.
How much can I trust this person's words?
And once you are seen as
"someone who is lenient with themselves but strict with others,"
your words will no longer reach anyone.
Even if you say the right thing, it won't resonate.
It is because, before the content, trust in the speaker has dropped.
This is quite serious.
A manager's words do not reach people just because they are logical.
Who is saying it?
Does the person themselves uphold it?
Do they act by the same standards even when things are difficult?
Employees are listening, taking all of that into account.
--
The front lines lose interest before they even push back.
"I want you to act more proactively."
Before saying that, have you crushed those who did act proactively?
"I want you to have a sense of responsibility."
Before saying that, have you given them the authority to be responsible?
"I want you to be thorough with reporting, communicating, and consulting."
Before saying that, do you react in a way that makes them want to report?
"I want you to be obsessed with the numbers."
Before saying that, do you explain your own decision-making with numbers?
"I want you to think from the company's perspective."
Before saying that, are you making decisions from the company's perspective yourself?
If you skip all of this and demand high standards only from your employees, the front lines will lose interest.
It's not just people who push back.
In fact, many people just go silent.
They go silent and distance themselves.
They go silent and stop expecting anything.
They go silent and start doing only the bare minimum.
And the president says.
"Lately, everyone lacks passion."
That is wrong.
It is not that they lack passion.
It is that there is no trust left to direct that passion toward.
--
The president's contradictions become the company's contradictions
The president's double standards do not end as a problem of the president's individual character.
They become the culture of the entire company.
Rules that the top does not follow will not be followed by those below.
In a company where the top does not explain, the staff will stop explaining too.
In a company where the top makes responsibilities ambiguous, people will start shifting blame onto each other.
In a company where the top changes standards to suit themselves, the staff will start hiding their true intentions.
The contradictions of management are copied throughout the organization.
Even if the president thinks they are the only exception, the employees do not see it that way.
"In the end, that kind of thing is allowed in this company."
That is how they interpret it.
That is why the gap between the president's words and actions carries such weight.
Each one may seem small.
Not returning a greeting.
Slow to respond.
Not explaining.
Changing things based on mood.
Passing on responsibility without passing on authority.
But when they pile up, they erode the organization's balance of trust.
And when that balance of trust is exhausted, employees do not start a loud rebellion.
They simply, quietly, stop expecting anything.
The scariest thing for a company is not an angry employee.
It is an employee who no longer expects anything at all.
--
Just one last thing.
"As a person."
Somewhere today, those words are drawing a beautiful parabola.
I think the person saying them probably believes they are saying the right thing.
In fact, if you look only at the words, they are correct.
But for a leader, correctness alone is not enough.
Only when they apply to you as well do they reach the organization.
People follow consistency, not words.
In a company where all of the president's words come back like a boomerang, it is only natural for employees to lose their passion.
The problem is not the employees' level of enthusiasm.
It is that there is no reason left for them to believe.
Words do not reach people through status.
They only reach an organization when there is consistency.
If you have ever seen management where what they say and what they do are out of sync, please leave a like.
I will continue to articulate the sense of discomfort in these kinds of companies through their structure.
How did I create a strategy after the company fell apart?
I wrote about that story here.
"Because I didn't die, I was able to create a strategy"