How a Secret From the 1960s Can Prevent “The Great Resignation” From Affecting Your Organization

Did you know that the #1 reason people quit their jobs and the #1 reason company goals don’t get accomplished are the same reason?

In almost every workplace survey and study done in the last 20 years, communication issues are cited as the biggest problem related to productivity and personnel churn.

In this article, we’re going to unpack how the results of an electrocution experiment from the 1960s can help you communicate better and become a more effective leader, making “The Great Resignation” less likely to impact your company as a result.

Let’s Dive In!

In 1961, social psychologist Dr. Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment at Yale University exploring the dynamics of authority, communication, and obedience. The findings of Dr. Milgram’s experiment were first published in 1963, and his expanded conclusions were released in his book Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View in 1974.

In this experiment, pairs of volunteers were brought in and introduced to each other by an individual that self-identified as “The Experimenter”.

What one of the volunteers didn’t know is that the other volunteer they just met was one of Milgram’s research assistants and the Experimenter introducing them was actually a professional actor in a lab coat.

The two volunteers drew straws to see which role each would play: Learner or Teacher. The “random draw” was set up so that Milgram’s research assistant was always the Learner and the actual volunteers were always selected as the Teacher.

The Experimenter took both “volunteers” into a room and strapped the Learner into an electroshock chair. Then, the Experimenter and the Teacher went into an adjacent room where the Teacher could no longer see the Learner.

The Teacher was instructed to sit down in front of an electric shock control panel with 30 electric shock settings that increased sequentially from 15V (Slight) on one side through 300V (Danger: Severe Shock!) to 450V (XXX) on the opposite side.

The Learner was given a list of words organized into pairs and told to memorize the pairs of words. The Teacher would then state one of the words and ask the Learner to state the other word in the pair from memory.

Every time the Learner made a mistake, the Experimenter had the Teacher administer an electric shock and move the electric panel switch to the next higher voltage.

Milgram’s assistant, the Learner, purposefully gave mostly wrong answers. Even though the control panel wasn’t actually connected to electrocution equipment and the Learner wasn’t getting electrocuted, the assistant still shouted and screamed whenever the Teacher administered what they thought was increasing shocks of electricity.

Whenever the teacher got to the point where they didn’t want to administer any more electric shocks, the Experimenter sitting behind the Teacher simply stated the experiment required them to continue.

Ultimately, 100% of the Teachers administered shocks up to the 300V (Danger: Severe Shock!) level, and two-thirds of them maxed out the voltage at 450V (XXX) simply because they were told that it was what they were supposed to do.

Why Does This Matter to Me As a Leader?

When you become insulated or removed from the people your decisions affect as a leader, you start heading down a dangerous path of skewed perspective and justification.

As a leader, you should build it into your weekly schedule to have at least one touchpoint with both your clients and team members to activate a feedback loop about decisions you have made that affect them.

Leadership never happens in a vacuum, and neither should the decisions in your business.

How Do I Actually Apply This?

Legitimate authority (as a base of power) naturally causes people on your team to “do what they’re told” unless you create a culture that encourages disciplined initiative and ownership.

If your team feels like they don’t have the option to say “No” when they think that the current guidance or “status quo” may be harmful or counterproductive, you have a serious communication problem on your team.

To address this, define for your team what feedback loops look like for you as the leader. How do you want your team members to bring things to you when they are concerned that activity can harm the team or your clients?

Do a “temperature check” with your team to see how open your lines of communication currently are. Ask you team members the following questions:

• Is there anything in your regular work flow that you would be uncomfortable or unwilling to talk to me about? What is it? Why are you reluctant to bring that to me?
• What are you likely to do if you notice something in the way we do business that could end up damaging trust on our team, or with our clients? Why is that your “go to” response?
• Has anything negative happened recently that you didn’t bring to my attention? What happened? How did it affect our team? How did it affect our clients?
• What can I do as a leader to empower you and help you feel more confident and comfortable bringing concerns to my attention?

On a key side note, if you don’t have a culture of trust built on your team yet, your team members will probably just shrug and say they can’t think of anything to tell you.

If this is the case, you are better off using a free tool like Google Forms to create an anonymous survey. This creates a “safe” way for people to tell you what they really think without the stress and confrontation of an in-person conversation with someone they may not fully trust yet.

REMEMBER: Everyone deserves exceptional leadership, and you can be that leader.

Benjamin R. Lueck
Nashville, Tennessee, USA