by Peter A. Arthur-Smith, Leadership Solutions, Inc.®

“We always pointed out the human is in control of the machine, not the other way around. We’d say, ‘This is not the Lucille Ball episode where she’s on the chocolate line.’” Quoted from, Mick Mountz, former owner of Kiva Systems (robotics), before it was acquired by Amazon: as reported by Christopher Mims in his Wall Street Journal article, September 2021, entitled ‘The Bezos School of Management is Changing the Way We Work.’

Management is most certainly the school Jeff Bezos has chosen. In fact, as you read further, you’ll likely realize that you could be reading something resembling a Charles Dickens’ novel from more than 100 years ago. Mims, the journalist, instead called it “Bezosism.”  We labeled it “management” more than leadership because it closely follows our workplace CIGFAM management acronym rather than our leadership PEACAM one: where C=Competition, I=Incentives, G=Goals, F=Fear, A=Accountability, M=Measurement. 

By studying Mim’s excellent article, we can equate Bezosism with CIGFAM by drawing upon his commentary as follows:

 » Competition – “A floating ‘rate’ also pits all workers at a facility against one another, says Tyler Hamiliton, a worker at an Amazon fulfillment center…”

» Incentives – “…the coffee is free out of the machines…and aspirin,” continues Hamilton, “…there are people who take tons of coffee and tons of energy drinks to go faster.”

» Goals – “We don’t set unreasonable performance goals,” Mr. Bezos wrote in an April shareholder newsletter.

» Fear – “Knowing that if you don’t make ‘rate’ you’ll get a warning…” said Austin Morreale a former quoted employee.

» Accountability – “…millions of hours of video captured from the video cameras that watch every station at Amazon’s centers.”

» Measurement – “At Amazon, the ‘rate’ is the purest expression of the company’s goals.”

NOTE: (1) It would seem that the only major difference between Bezosism and what workers experienced 50- 100 years ago is its enormous use of robots as opposed to Henry Ford’s “pairs-of-hands.”

(2) These six CIGFAM characteristics are further reinforced by our earlier five curses – bureaucracy, hierarchy, efficiency, politics and corruption. Both sets depend upon each other, which is why we will need significant determination to pour antidotes on both of them.

Such CIGFAM environments; according to Mims’ prime human example, Austin Morreale, who worked as an Amazon “stower”; caused many of the people he trained with to quit within their first two weeks on the job. He lasted six weeks. He developed carpel tunnel syndrome, which subsided after he left. Amazon apparently requires workers to perform the same repetitive tasks for their entire 10 hour shifts, with only a half-hour for lunch and two 15-minute rest breaks. Does this sound much different from 50 or 100 years ago?

But this writer’s question is: Does it have to be the Amazon way? Or as, again, Mims calls it Bezosism. Let’s assume that Amazon is sincere about its intention to: “…strive to be the earth’s best employer.”  By giving it the benefit of the doubt, it would then have to switch from a conventional management CIGFAM obsession to an enlightened leadership PEACAM focus. Where PEACAM, as our prescribed antidote to CIGFAM, is comprised of: P= compelling Purpose; E= Equality in treatment; A= sense of Accomplishment; C= feeling of all-around Camaraderie; A= Autonomy in mindset through a feeling of empowerment and trust; and M= Mastery in know-how to complete required tasks…all well-known innate human desires.

Now let’s apply these to a re-imagined Amazon fulfillment center. They would then translate as follows:

» Purpose (P) – Suppose Amazon really did live up to its “…strive to be the earth’s best employer” intention. It would instead start off by dividing its work related tasks between “effective” and “efficient” ones. Effective ones require brainpower in the form of innovation and breakthroughs – small or large, while efficient ones are about repetitive, precision tasks at the lowest cost. Consequently, Amazon humans would be focused on its “effectiveness” assignments and its robots would be doing all the “efficient” fulfillment tasks.

» Equality (E) –Relative to their innate talents, Amazon’s people could help decide if they were best suited to high-powered breakthrough teams, improvement teams, or monitoring teams. They would be empowered to organize a reasonable number of breaks along with one decent meal interval during their shift; as long as there was always coverage and their milestones were being met. Their constructive opinions and advice would be sought on a regular basis and they would be remunerated in a respectful manner…likely more as teams rather than individuals.

» Accomplishment (A) –Amazon would largely utilize “pairs” as among its most productive team sizes –  “pairing” is a preferred natural human phenomenon anyway – so colleagues can mentor and stand-in for each other where appropriate. Ongoing accomplishments would be met by regular, prudent celebrations to encourage each “pair” to sustain enthusiasm and commitment…such celebrations would be organized by “pairs” rather than their team leaders. Their entire fulfillment center would have monthly, quarterly and annual prudent jamborees – scaled accordingly – to recognize special “pair” or team efforts, breakthroughs, and other accomplishments related to their “purpose-journey.”

» Camaraderie (C) – Instead of having supervisors – in-charge people required to monitor their every move,  Amazon people would have team leaders – individuals interested in coaching and inspiring them. Those same team leaders would be focused on “making it possible for their people to succeed” rather than “pushing them to meet their ‘rate’.” They would have faith in their people and would encourage them to meet their full potential.

» Autonomy (A) – Once “pairs” or teams are properly briefed, with the opportunity to ask related questions, they would be assigned and trusted to fulfill their responsibilities. They wouldn’t need cameras to monitor their every move. Particular successes would be regularly recognized and they would be encouraged to keep their team leaders up to speed on progress. If errors occur, as they always do from time to time, they would be utilized as learning experiences rather than something to fear. If milestones are missed, as sometimes happens, team leaders would orchestrate mentoring sessions to discover how to meet the situation next time around.

» Mastery (M) – Regular timeouts either weekly, two-weekly or monthly could be organized as “In-Team Discovery” sessions, where “pairs” could lead pertinent focus groups to bone-up on any needed latest skills, assignments or breakthroughs. Team members would be recognized as either competent, expert or masters within their assigned roles and be rewarded and recognized accordingly. “Experts” would team-up with “newbies” to bring them up to speed before being assigned to a particular “pairing.” Masters would orchestrate regular sessions with their “expert” colleagues to mentor them in turn. Masters would also be utilized by their overall team leaders to lead specific breakthrough teams or resolve ongoing fulfillment issues.

Just imagine how much more enjoyable, stimulating and motivating it would be to work in such a fulfillment center? It certainly wouldn’t be like working within a sweat shop. Bezosism is just one step-up from the production lines of 50-100 years ago; in that it operates with scores of computers and robots instead of relying upon “bodies” or “pairs-of-hands.” People would instead be assigned toward where they can contribute the most, so they can be part of their venture that “…strives to be the earth’s best employer.”

We should also seriously consider changing our language terms to inspire the behavior we seek: or regard it as leadership rather than conventional management speak.

Instead of being regarded as Bezosism, it would be termed enlightened leadership. Amazon would have highly productive and enjoyable fulfillment centers rather than apparent sweat-shops… Mims’ Austin Morreale ended up with sharing that: “But at the end of the shift, I was drenched in sweat and aching…” We would also have work environments where people really do “count,” versus remain as “pairs-of-hands” to be counted. 

Ultimately this highly relevant article shows that enlightened leadership can be applied to large organizations just as much as to start-ups and growing ventures. It just needs a shift in mindset to fully embrace people or humans as highly valuable resources rather than as “bodies,” “headcount” or “pairs-of-hands.” As you can discern for yourself; these are not abstract or pie-in-the-sky approaches. They are real practical modes that can be adopted wherever there is a genuine will to change your work environments to fully capture your people’s full potential. It’s not your workplace people that have to change but rather that you discern a different manner by which they are led…rather than managed.

Most people don’t wish to be managed: they prefer to be led. Management is not a panacea, neither is leadership; although the right combination can produce surprising, outstanding performance. To achieve that, however, executives will have to understand leadership in a much more focused and fundamental way.