Lifeboat

Navigating Unexpected Career Change and Disruption

Maggie Craddock

• Publisher: New World Library
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781608686858
• Topic: Persönliche Entwicklung
• Subtopic: Persönlicher Erfolg

Today's hardworking professionals are navigating sudden waves of financial stress, management shakeups, and downsizing. Using the experiences of Titanic survivors as a powerful metaphor, executive coach Maggie Craddock offers lessons for a transformative approach to our professional lives, one that recognizes that "every man for himself" doesn't work long-term. Lifeboat is organized as a series of key questions we all need to ask ourselves when facing unexpected career disruption or difficult changes at our existing jobs. These questions help readers clarify their authentic priorities, assess the group energy that guides a particular workplace, and identify the type of job that will help them reach their true potential.

Lifeboat Question #1

IS THIS SHIP SAFE?

The first question we ask before boarding any ship is “Is it safe?” We also ask this same question, in a variety of ways, before joining a company: Is this a good job that I can depend on? Can I succeed at this job, and will it help grow my career? Is this a stable, well-run company? Will it stay in business? Are there dangers or warning signs?

Of course, we can’t predict what will happen in any job, company, or sea voyage, but we try to make the smartest, safest choice possible based on what we can know. When it comes to navigating career and workplace challenges, the start of the Lifeboat Process is awareness: What kind of company are you employed by, and what is your situation? Are you in an organization that’s operating with a Big Ship mindset?

Let’s clarify something important at the start. What defines a “Big Ship” isn’t necessarily size. It’s the culture, the organizational mindset. While some large companies certainly fall prey to the Big Ship mindset, as we shall see, some don’t. It’s important to bear in mind that any size firm can be susceptible. This mindset was perfectly embodied by the Titanic as it set sail.

Titanic: The “Unsinkable” Ship

Who doesn’t want to be transported by a larger-than-life fantasy? Who doesn’t secretly long to be part of something greater than ourselves? Whether the solicitation is being made to sea travelers or job seekers, the basic urge to be part of something exciting often tempts people to get on board a “big ship.”

Many of the early advertisements heralding the maiden voyage of the Titanic were presented to the public via vibrantly illustrated travel posters designed to compel people walking by to stop, look, and get excited. These posters, many of which are impressive examples of the way a powerful image can create brand advertising, are quite valuable today due to the fact that the White Star Line pulled down and destroyed as many of them as possible after the Titanic sank.

Following this tragedy, the source of the widespread belief that the Titanic was “unsinkable” was debated both in a formal inquiry and in the press. It was discovered that this claim was never explicitly made. The earliest roots of it have been traced back to a special edition of a London trade publication called The Shipbuilder. In 1911, this quarterly journal released a special edition featuring interior photos of the Titanic’s private promenade and first-class accommodations. This article proved to be strategic because, even though the bulk of prospective Titanic passengers were of humble means seeking a better life, this glimpse of opulence filled a vital psychological craving. The Titanic wasn’t just a vessel that would transport you to another continent, this voyage could transport you to another state of being!

The actual claim made in the 1911 article was: “As far as it was possible to do so, these two wonderful vessels [Titanic and its sister ship, Olympic] are designed to be unsinkable.” In practical terms, this claim was based on the construction of the Titanic’s hull, which was subdivided into a series of sixteen supposedly watertight compartments. The theory was that, even if the hull was punctured, any water that flooded into the ship could be sealed off in the specific compartments that had been breached. Theoretically, this meant that the ship could stay afloat long enough for all of the people on board to be rescued. Sadly, because the designers at Harland and Wolff didn’t want to interfere with the spacious passenger areas higher in the ship, the walls of these watertight compartments were not made high enough. As a result, the ship ended up flooding and sinking before help could arrive.

Looking back, it’s clear that if the focus on safety hadn’t been dwarfed by the wave of enthusiasm for the sheer luxury that Titanic represented, any claims about the ship’s invulnerability would have been recognized as overblown. No ship is greater than the ocean and its power.

But it wasn’t just publicity and public enthusiasm. The people central to Titanic’s conception, construction, and operation also made choices that contributed to the tragedy, and these decisions reflected the “Big Ship mindset” this chapter examines. Learning to spot this mindset is vital to making sure whatever ship you board and the company you work for is safe.

In fact, the Titanic was plagued with troubles before it ever left port. During the week prior to its maiden voyage, the Titanic was berthed in Southampton, and all the final arrangements were being rushed. There was a scramble to finalize all of the details in first class to meet everyone’s high expectations. Then, thanks to a coal strike in Britain, crew members were instructed to take coal out of other liners to gather the six thousand tons of coal Titanic required for this voyage — the show must go on! To cap this off, the ship was being inspected by the Board of Trade. Without getting a certificate of clearance from the Board of Trade surveyor, the whole spectacle would come to a grinding halt. While the world watched and the international elite packed their finest, the Titanic was almost not granted clearance to sail.

Here’s why: Crew members had discovered a coal fire in the bottom of bunker #6 on the Titanic that had been there since the ship had completed its brief sea trials in Belfast. They couldn’t put this fire out. This presented a significant risk because bunker #6 was close to the Titanic’s hull, and a fire here could potentially weaken the hull’s structure. If something struck this particular spot while the ship was at sea, the integrity of the vessel would be compromised.

According to the documentary Titanic Arrogance, if the surveyor from the Board of Trade had known about the fire in bunker #6, the Titanic never would have been granted clearance to set sail in the first place. Of course, the ship somehow did manage to pass its inspection, but we don’t know why.

There’s a good chance, however, that the bunker fire was kept hidden, and that this decision was made by the people at the top: Thomas Andrews, a Harland and Wolff designer; Captain E.J. Smith; and Bruce Ismay, head of the White Star Line. They knew about the coal fire and that acknowledging it would cause a world of problems. How long would it delay the launch? Would they have to refund everyone’s money?

Ultimately, they chose to take a calculated risk that turned out badly. The maiden voyage took place on schedule while the coal fire continued burning. The precise details of how the Titanic passed its inspection remain one of history’s unsolved mysteries.

Further, after the remains of the Titanic were discovered on the ocean floor, historians noted that the place where the iceberg sideswiped the ship is eerily close to a black spot on the hull near bunker #6 where that uncontrollable fire was blazing. What are the odds?

But finger-pointing isn’t the goal. Rather, the decision to set sail despite problems — while violating official regulations and putting others in harm’s way — reflects the same type of flawed thought process that still operates in the business world today. Anyone who invested with Bernie Madoff, worked at Enron, or went down with the ship at Arthur Andersen can attest to that! By learning to spot this type of flawed decision-making, we can be better prepared when we are faced with tough professional choices. This type of awareness not only saves our careers, it can make our departments and firms safer places to work.

Let’s take a closer look at these three men to clarify what may have been driving their thought process under pressure.

First, Thomas Andrews was the head of the drafting department for the Harland and Wolff shipbuilding company. Andrews was in charge of the team that chose to make the doors on those watertight compartments too short. Andrews was aboard Titanic, and after the iceberg was hit, Andrews was the guy who did the calculations to figure out how quickly the Titanic would sink and who informed Captain Smith.

As for Captain Smith, he had a colorful track record of accidents and near misses at sea. His peers described him as “a bit of a chancer.” That said, he was extremely popular with the millionaire elite — and the White Star Line considered catering to this crowd vital to the venture’s success. To his credit, Captain Smith acted heroically in the final hours of his life; he saved as many people as possible and then went down with the ship. But he also made several “calculated gambles” — like ignoring the bunker fire — that led directly to the tragedy.

Finally, the head of the White Star Line, Bruce Ismay, was considered a captain of industry. He had negotiated the joint venture with Harland and Wolff that had led to the creation of the Titanic and its sister ship, Olympic. Ismay was also aboard during Titanic’s maiden voyage, and he apparently tried to convince Captain Smith and the ship’s chief engineer, Joseph Bell, to do a speed test. Ismay’s input was one of the key reasons the ship maintained full speed in spite of the ice warnings that were being received the night the ship sank. Ultimately, unlike Andrews and Smith, Ismay managed to save himself and survive the tragedy. In the final moments, he boarded collapsible Lifeboat C and was later picked up by the Carpathia along with the rest of the survivors. Afterward, Ismay was vilified in the press for saving himself instead of following the “women and children first” principle. In spite of being officially cleared of blame after the disaster, Ismay spent the rest of his life plagued by a deep depression from which he never fully recovered.

The actions of all three men embody what the Big Ship mindset represents. They appeared to be so caught up in the story that had been created about their ship that they became unable to fully acknowledge and assess risks and to respond appropriately to changing circumstances. This mindset can influence both individual behavior and an organization’s overall culture.

Titanic historians tend to agree that Andrews, Smith, and Ismay all displayed behavior prior to the Titanic’s maiden voyage that indicated a sense of personal invulnerability. Perhaps this is because they had internalized the narrative that Titanic was unsinkable, and so they began to feel indestructible themselves. This would help explain why all three men traveled on the ship in spite of the risks they knew of and were hiding from others. They didn’t think their lives were in peril, since they fully believed that the ship they had created could get through anything. This would also explain why they evaded official safety regulations. From their perspective, these regulations were pesky details that could easily be dismissed in the service of a voyage that was going to make history. Similarly, the warnings about icebergs weren’t taken seriously enough to incent them to slow down. They rationalized jeopardizing everyone’s lives, including their own, because all three believed the story about Titanic, which they had helped script. They weren’t just hiding the risks involved — they were denying them.

The Big Ship mindset often promotes a grandiose attitude, in which the ends justify the means, and people can lose touch with the value, and vulnerability, of human life.

In the corporate world, once this attitude takes root in a firm’s culture, people stop paying attention to details, listening to feedback, and looking for risks. If people don’t believe there are any dangers that can harm them, they stop looking for dangers. When people become attached to beliefs in their own greatness, they ignore, minimize, and reject any criticisms, since they feel they are beyond criticism. When this type of thinking goes unquestioned for a prolonged period, it can lead to catastrophic failures that result in many people going down with the ship. Learning how this mindset takes root can prepare you to make wise career decisions — particularly under pressure.

When it comes to your career, you want to get on ...