Is Your Leadership Cultivating Willful Blindness?

If you follow the news in the UK, you’ll be aware of the scandal surrounding the Post Office.

If not, here is a brief explanation.

In 1999, the UK’s Post Office awarded a contract to Fujitsu to develop a nationwide IT accounting system, called Horizon.

All Subpostmasters – the people managing the Post Offices on a self-employed basis - had to install the system and had to sign a contract accepting their personal liability for any losses.

Unfortunately, the software was faulty and randomly generated losses in the Subpostmasters’ accounts.

Between 1999 and 2015, nine hundred Subpostmasters were prosecuted – some were falsely imprisoned, others pressured into a confession, whilst others who were taken to court and lost their case, were ordered to pay the losses generated in the Horizon system as well as the Post Office’s legal fees.

Some Subpostmasters, due to the pressure of being wrongly accused of a crime and the loss of their livelihoods, committed suicide.

Many falsely convicted Subpostmasters are still waiting to have their wrongful convictions overturned.

According to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), ‘this is the most widespread miscarriage of justice the CCRC has ever seen and represents the biggest single series of wrongful convictions in British legal history.’

For more information on the background and current status of this scandal, scroll to the end of this article.

Is Leadership at the Heart of this Scandal?

How could leaders not know there was an issue with the accounting system, when:

• Hundreds of Subpostmasters raised concerns to the Post Office and to Members of Parliament (MPs) – many repeatedly called the helpline and were told ‘You’re the only one experiencing problems with Horizon.’
• Media reports appeared highlighting the issues with the Horizon IT system. Computer Weekly first published an article in 2009
• MPs repeatedly raised concerns in the Houses of Parliament and the House of Lords in an array of videos.
• Subpostmasters contacted144 MPs about the issue, and James Arbuthnot, the MP best known for pushing for an Inquiry into this matter, accused the Post Office of rejecting 90% of applications for mediation.
• Forensic accountants, appointed by the Post Office in 2012, found that the Horizon IT system contained faults that could result in accounting discrepancies.

Is this a Case of Willful Blindness?

Willful Blindness involves a person intentionally keeping themselves unaware of the facts or truth – in order to maintain their ignorance of the facts, should something amiss arise.

In February 2015, Paula Vennells, the CEO of the Post Office, was summoned to give evidence before a Government Select Committee. The Committee was investigating the wrongful criminal proceedings brought against Subpostmasters and the role of the Post Office in this, and by extension, Fujitsu’s Horizon system.

Vennells wrote an email in which she asked whether it was possible to access the Horizon system remotely.

Her intent seems clear.

‘I need to say that it is not possible,’ she wrote.

She then told the Committee, ‘we have no evidence of that [miscarriages of justice].’

Imagine if she and her leadership team had taken note of the multiple signals and investigated the many complaints.

Perhaps the potential downsides of unearthing wrongdoing and systemic failures seemed too overwhelming to handle at the time.

Fast forward nine years – I wonder if they are easier to handle now?

Another Case of Willful Blindness

You’ve probably heard of the Deepwater Horizon disaster – the 2010 explosion on a BP oil rig that killed 11 people, caused over 2,000 tonnes of oil to pollute the sea and coastline of the US, harming animal and plant life and ruining the livelihoods of many people.

But I imagine you haven’t heard of the Texas City Refinery explosion in 2005.

There, 15 people died and 180 people were injured in an explosion at the BP owned refinery.

According to Margaret Heffernan in her excellent book, Willful Blindness, there was a culture at BP that promoted willful blindness.

Prior to the Texas City Refinery disaster, there had been numerous complaints and at least two reports highlighting safety issues at the refinery.

An audit of 2004 stated:

‘Texas City is in complete decline… The condition of infrastructure and assets is poor.’

An internal 2002 BP PowerPoint presentation emphasized:

‘If we do not achieve a significant improvement [in] safety performance at the Texas City refinery, one of our co workers or a contract employee will be killed.’

During the investigation that followed the disaster, senior executives said they weren’t aware of any safety disasters.

The Group Chief Executive of Refining and Marketing, Joe Manzoni said, ‘Someone would have told me if something was wrong.’

Ironically, people already had.

Imagine if someone had taken the audit, reports and employee complaints seriously, investigated them and acted upon them.

The lack of investment seems to have been in large part a reaction to a 1998 edict from the CEO, Lord Browne, mandating that all fixed costs be cut by 25%.

I wonder how much money that saved for the company? More than the over $1.5 billion BP paid in compensation to the many victims of Deepwater Horizon?

Are You Cultivating a Culture of Willful Blindness?

Why am I sharing these events?

To provoke reflection on your leadership. To what extent are your actions promoting transparency, or contributing to opaqueness?

Recently, a client was explaining how her boss, the CEO, asked all his executive team for honest feedback. They should raise any issues with him and give him feedback on how he was performing as a leader.

It soon transpired that any honest feedback on how he could improve - based on observed evidence - was not welcomed. If people valued their positions, they stopped offering any feedback, other than the effusive, reinforcing kind.

Is that an effective way to foster a culture of trust, transparency and growth?

As a leader, you know that people quickly pick up – and act on - the signals you send.

If they sense you don’t appreciate their ‘how to improve’ feedback, they’ll very quickly stop offering it – or any other ‘bad news’ they sense you don’t want to be privy to.

Are You Exercising Your EQ?

EQ – the blending of thinking and feeling skills – helps you make smarter decisions.

We’ve already seen how neither emotional nor rational data seem to have been fully explored in the case of the Post Office scandal, or the Texas Refinery explosion.

Could leaders have paused to examine emotional and rational data evident in these cases?

From a rational data perspective:

• Why would hundreds of diligent, honest Subpostmasters suddenly start swindling the Post Office after the installation of an IT accounting system?
• ?Why would workers in a highly dangerous environment raise issues about safety, if there were not significant risks of fatalities?
• Why would a CEO blindly accept all was well with a vendor installation if trusted pillars of the community – the Subpostmasters – were questioning its accuracy?

Imagine the emotions the leaders felt at different stages of the Post Office scandal.

• Initially, possibly pride in having discovered corrupt Subpostmasters?
• Later, perhaps confusion at why so many Subpostmasters were complaining about the system?
• Finally, maybe anxiety at the thought of being humiliated when it came to light that the Horizon software contained bugs – and leaders – possibly at both the Post Office and Fujitsu - weren’t aware of this?

What lay beneath these emotions - an dhow could they best act on that data?

At any stage, could any of these leaders have paused and analyzed the data across the whole system? The data in their emotions and the rational data in the facts - or lack of facts?

Process Failure

Why is Singapore Airlines regularly cited as an organization with excellent service? A large part of its success is down to the excellence of its processes. Excellent processes serve as the foundation for service excellence. It’s not the only reason – SIA also focuses on personalization to deliver an additional wow for customers – but it’s a critical reason for their success.

I’m wondering where the Post Office’s processes fell down.

• How could it be that Subpostmaster feedback around job satisfaction or suggestions for service and process improvement was not measured – or when multiple complaints arose – not investigated exhaustively?
• How could the CEO not know that the Horizon accounting system was remotely accessible, had major bugs, and as the inquiry found – was simply not fit for purpose? ?
• How could the Post Office’s legal processes not have flagged apparently onerous terms and conditions in the Horizon contract?
• Or if we consider the Texas City Refinery - What flaw in the processes around reviews and audit mechanisms caused the life-endangering safety issues not to be raised among decision makers at BP?

When questioned, and clearly with the benefit of hindsight, without having a process in place to confirm this, the invariable answer the Post Office gave regarding the Horizon software was that it was ‘robust.’

How robust are the processes that you and your organization have in place to ensure your organization operates ethically and sustainably?

Is Willful Blindness a Valid Excuse?

You’ve probably heard the phrase, ‘The buck stops here.’

If leaders accept that ‘the buck stops here’, can willful blindness ever be a valid defense?

As a leader, do you accept that your actions shape culture, as culture is overwhelmingly driven top-down?

And if yes, what is the culture you’ve nurtured – and how does it serve your stakeholders and the long-term success of your business?

?

?

?

For further information on the Post Office Scandal.

Current Status of the Post Office Scandal

For updates on the current status of the plight of the Subpostmasters, visit the website Justice for Subpostmaster Alliance, which was started by Alan Bates, a Subpostmaster whose contract with the Post Office was terminated in 2003 after he refused to sign the Horizon documents and comply with Post Office policy.

Actors in the Post Office Horizon Scandal

The UK Government owns the Post Office, via the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and UK Government Investments.

Over the years, many MPs, and particularly, James Arbuthnot, challenged the treatment of the Subpostmasters and championed their cause.

Fujitsu is a multinational corporation headquartered in Japan. It is the largest IT company in Japan and the sixth largest globally.

UK Taxpayers

Not only did UK taxpayers presumably contribute to the cost of investigating and prosecuting innocent Subpostmasters, given the Post Office is Government-owned, they likely also helped fund the monetary rewards and bonuses for the executives associated with prosecutions by the Post Office team – the investigations that culminated in the many legal proceedings.

What is certain is that now,?UK taxpayers will be footing the bill for the compensation of the wrongfully accused and imprisoned Subpostmasters.

The Post Office has said it cannot afford the huge clean-up bill.

Andrea Stone is an Executive Coach and Leadership Consultant, working with leaders and their teams to improve performance and create sustainable success.

? Andrea Stone, Stone Leadership