Sharing Vs Secrecy

Where do you draw the line?

Being a small company has one big advantage. There is zero information gap. Everyone fits in a room. Everyone knows everything. Everyone has full context. 

But as you grow, and as more than one layer gets inserted between you and those on the ground, the problem of context asymmetry compounds.  And that’s a big problem. Why?

Because as you delegate more and more decision making, you assume that people will make the right decisions. But how can they make the right decision, if they don’t have full context?

And here’s the thing about context. You can never tell what context is relevant and what isn’t. You may think that knowing about what’s happening in supply chain isn’t relevant for the marketing guy, or knowing what’s brewing in R&D ain’t relevant for finance or design, but how can you be sure?

Think about it. What do you do as CEO?

You connect dots. You see the entire organisation and draw connections no one else sees. In small part this is because you are awesome. But in large part it’s because you have most context. And hence, you know that context can’t come with boundaries. The only way is to share everything. And then let people process and utilise it as best they can. 

At least that’s how we’ve always operated at TWT. We share everything. In fact I’d say we overshare. 

Once a month, we do an all hands townhall. And we tell everyone everything. Finance, SCM, R&D, Marketing, Sales, Operations, HP - all updates are shared with everyone. And anyone can ask anything. Not just in the townhall. But everyday.

Full transparency. Full context.

But there are two problems with this approach. 

One is, not everyone cares. And honestly, even if they do, not everyone has the ability (or intent) to follow and absorb all conversations. 

Sales and marketing updates are exciting. It’s revenue and reels and reviews and run rates. This everyone gets. But when it comes to more technical stuff like working capital and fill rates and logistics cost reduction programs, I see people’s eyes glaze over. Phones come out. Side conversations start. Many just zone out. No wonder then, I find near zero recall for these updates in the next Townhall. 

The second, bigger problem, is confidentiality. 

As I said, we share everything. Our numbers. Our product pipeline. Our entire P&L. With everyone. Designation, location, even probation - no bar. I firmly believe we cannot be The Whole Truth externally, if we can’t be The Whole Truth internally. 

But this does make us vulnerable to leaks. Strategy, future projects, profitability (or lack of) - it’s all being broadcast to a team of 150 and growing. And more than half are not even in the room. 

The threat that this reaches the open market is very real. And in an increasingly competitive world, this information can be used against us. And it has. 

One example was when we were about to launch India’s (and perhaps the world’s) first date-sweetened chocolates, news got to a competitor and they started telling retailers that they are launching a date sweetened chocolate before us. They even made a pre-launch post on Instagram. Of course, the chocolate never came. But the angst and heartburn it cause us and our business partners was immense. 

So sometimes, one does wonder. Why take all this risk? Especially when you know, perhaps 70% people are not even absorbing 70% of what you are saying? Is the upside really worth the potential downside?

Every time I feel we should reduce sharing or introduce walls, I have to remind myself of the real reason we do this. Trust. 

Sharing fully, being fully vulnerable, giving our people the most sensitive information and believing they will handle it maturely (half the room is under 24 mind you) - I don’t know of a better way to say - we trust you. 

And we really do. I fundamentally believe that 90% of our people bleed TWT and treat this place like their home and family. If I treat them as outsiders, then it shall be a self-fulfilling philosophy. It starts with me. Sounds pompous, but founders and founding teams have an outsized impact on company culture. Company culture is largely a reflection of our behaviours. So we choose to start with trust.

But question is, what do you do when trust is broken? When you’re taken for a ride? When you feel betrayed?

Primal instinct is to close down. To cover and protect. But I try and remember that one person broke trust. If I clamp down, I’ll send a signal to the other 149 who didn’t. Who am I optimising for? Which cohort matters?

So every townhall, as we again go through out entire P&L threadbare, and as again this fear rises in me - who is that one person today who will take this information and misuse it - I remind myself to snap out and view the entire room. To see the 149 who won’t. And also the 20 who’ll  absorb this and use it to make great decisions tomorrow. And in making these decisions, will become the future leaders who will lead this company on the 100 year journey we’ve embarked upon. 

I remind myself to see them. And to build policies and processes for them. Bad people and bad things get disproportionate focus in our minds. Because we’ve evolved to spot danger and survive. But good things (led by good people) happen to us all the time. And we keep ignoring them or taking them for granted. We won’t be that company. 

So we overshare and will continue to do so. It’s our way of telling the good people, we see you. And we’re in this for (and with) you. 

PS: Exactly the same story plays out on social media too. A post will have 5000 likes and 1000 shares and 300 positive comments. But the 10 negative comments will make me lose sleep. Because that’s the danger. And that eclipses all that good. 

PPS: It is also true that miscreants and troublemakers are loud, while good people remain silent. Which is as it should be in most cases. Good people are busy doing good things. They have no time to bring others down. But there comes a time when good people must speak up. Lest lies being shouted from rooftops start seeming like the truth. More on this in a future post.