We live in a culture that feeds on victimization.
That’s an uncomfortable sentence. It risks sounding dismissive in a moment where many people are, in fact, navigating real constraints. Upbringing matters. Systems matter. Leadership decisions matter. Privilege is real. I believe this to be true. But something has shifted in our culture.
More and more, people are using those realities to define our position. We could be using them to understand our experience but for many; instead they are becoming our identity. And identity, when organized around what has happened to us, changes how we show up. You can feel it in the language of us vs them language at work.
“They didn’t give us clarity.”
“They didn’t execute the strategy.”
“They don’t understand what’s happening on the ground.”
“They don’t understand what it takes to run this business.”
Maybe they don’t. But the moment “they” enters the lingo, something else leaves: ownership. Because “they” implies distance. It suggests that the outcomes we’re experiencing are being determined somewhere else, by someone else, outside of our influence. And once that belief takes hold, behavior follows. Accountability diffuses.
The irony is that in most organizations, “they” doesn’t actually exist in the way we use it. The system people are frustrated with is made up of individuals making tradeoffs under pressure, navigating imperfect information, just like everyone else. We are they. The separation is more psychological than structural. And that psychological separation costs real dollars! It creates cultures that are highly attuned to what’s wrong, but increasingly ineffective at activating change.
To be clear, there is a stage where naming what has happened to you is essential. It builds awareness. At an individual level, at a societal level, and within organizations, this stage matters. But it is not the final stage. Because if you stay there, something unintended happens. Your sense of identity becomes organized around what you’ve experienced, not what you’re here to create.
The most effective cultures name reality. Then they move from explanation to responsibility. They ask, “Why did this happen?” and then they ask “Given that it did, what about that can I control?” Understanding what happened can bring clarity. It can even bring relief. But if we live there it can keep us stuck because it doesn’t create movement. Movement begins the moment someone decides to act from where they are.
The path is not equally easy for all of us. But it is still the path.
Elsewhere in Culture
Responsibility vs. Accountability (with Anne Arlinghaus) Leaders can assign responsibility, but accountability shows up when people feel true ownership over the outcome. KKR’s model works because employees have a real stake in value creation, which naturally aligns behavior with results. The takeaway is practical. Share information openly, build the financial and business acumen to understand it, and create space for employees to contribute meaningfully. That’s how ownership becomes part of the culture instead of something leaders try to enforce. Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ceo-daily-brief-with-dr-jessica-kriegel/id1725350421?i=1000762371424 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7tXGB1NHojM3dAl2bTuiAQ?si=18c4b409d0024173
Transparency vs. Fear We talked about layoffs and the way they are typically handled behind closed doors, followed by a single moment that lands hard across the organization. In this case, leadership chose transparency earlier in the process. Some employees decided to leave on their own terms, while others became more committed. The experience changed because people had context and clarity, which shaped how they responded and how the organization moved forward. Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ceo-daily-brief-with-dr-jessica-kriegel/id1725350421?i=1000762613097 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4cHhG6G93B9imIuP8ymJop?si=4b5dbbf1862f48a2
When the CEO Becomes the Brand We looked at what happens when a leader becomes closely tied to the company’s identity, using Elon Musk as the example. Public perception can split along personal lines, which impacts demand in different ways. What stood out is that product improvements still drove overall growth. Strong execution has a way of bringing customers back, even when opinions about leadership vary. Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ceo-daily-brief-with-dr-jessica-kriegel/id1725350421?i=1000763028896 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2ErvkT9NM42L25KZuRRD1d?si=838ed8a48b52424f
And in case you missed it…
Last week we kept coming back to one idea that’s a little uncomfortable. Goals can make things worse. Once an outcome gets turned into a number, behavior starts to bend toward the number. You see teams checking the box, hitting targets, staying busy. At the same time, the original intent gets diluted. The work looks productive on paper but doesn’t always move the business forward.
In my conversation with Claire (Billenness) Ward, we got into the tension behind that. Organizations are still measuring outputs. Employees are trying to create outcomes. That disconnect shows up everywhere once you start looking for it.
This is how you leverage that.
I’ll be speaking at the SPS Connected Workplace Experience, hosted with Amazon Web Services in Midtown Manhattan on June 4.
If that tension feels familiar, this is the kind of conversation worth being in. We’re getting into how workplace experience, data, and technology actually connect to results, and where most teams lose the thread.
Thursday, June 4 | Amazon, 12 W. 39th Street, NYC
Register here: https://www.spsglobal.com/en/events/us-connected-workplace-experience
And hear my conversations with Claire Ward on CEO Daily Brief:
The Productivity Paradox:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7b0Hadv1rrJKfyQYcPEpMM?si=8d8c98806f974880
Changing What We Measure:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/27gqNdEaLWZtLYLwyQNHig?si=4722a1884bb94455