To Promote True Advocacy, Don’t Be an Ally: Be an Accomplice

BY Willie Jackson | December 10, 2019

This essay was first published on Forge, Medium's new channel on personal development.

I sometimes introduce myself as a “professional African American” when I travel the country to give ally skills workshops — often while looking out at a sea of white faces.

It’s a joke, of course, but the point is serious. I’m using humor to disarm my audience, and to make some difficult and personal topics more accessible.

I recognize that every person walks into the room with a different set of experiences and point of view. Many folks have had uncomfortable and even traumatizing experiences talking about race, gender, sexuality, and other forms of marginalization. And many of the companies I work with have had conversations about bias go sideways. So a part of the learning experience in my workshops is making it safe for people to be present, both physically and emotionally.

Of course, most of the people who sign up for an ally skills workshop already consider themselves an “ally.” Which is what exactly? An ally, in this context, is simply someone who isn’t part of a marginalized group but who supports that group actively.

Given the pervasive experiences of bias that many numerically underrepresented minorities report at work, the impulse toward allyship by majority group folks is encouraging. But putting this impulse into action can get tricky. As I caution folks, the very notion of allyship is rejected on its face by some folks who have been harmed by the ham-fisted efforts of well-intentioned, self-proclaimed “allies.”

The ally skills framework that I developed in partnership with Dr. Kim Tran, and I teach as a consultant at the diversity strategy firm ReadySet, asks a provocative question: It’s great that you see yourself as an ally, but what does putting that into action look like?

Be an accomplice, not an ally

It comes as a surprise to some of my ally skills workshop attendees, but I encourage folks to move from the frame of “ally” to “accomplice.” Here’s why I prefer this term.

Without context, most folks would consider “ally” to be positive and “accomplice” to be negative. But bringing history into focus means recognizing that many of the liberties we now enjoy — civil rights for black folks and gay marriage, for example — were but a dream not long ago, and required major disruption of the status quo to happen. Disruption isn’t easy or polite.

What I’m hoping to impress upon folks is that this work — the work of being an accomplice — might cost you something. Perhaps your comfort or social standing, or maybe even your safety. Real advocacy and comfort rarely go hand in hand.

Accomplices try to “care more”

For some people, the growth opportunity might involve slowing down, taking up less space in conversations across difference, and becoming a more active listener. For others, it might mean admitting when they’ve made a mistake and offering a genuine apology to the person harmed. For others still, growth might look like having the courage to speak up and communicate the impact of an unfortunate altercation.

Willie Jackson will be speaking at From Day One's conferences in Los Angeles on Dec. 11 and Seattle on Jan. 28

I once had a boss advise me, “It’s okay to care more.” I didn’t fully appreciate it at the time, but the phrase and invitation has stuck with me over the years. In my experience, many audiences exist on a continuum of caring, from withdrawn skepticism to card-carrying social justice warrior.

But caring is personal, and doesn’t need to conform to accepted tropes. Some of the most committed agents of institutional change decline to publicly advertise their commitment. They just do the work. I often cite as an example the actress Jessica Chastain, whose pledge to her fellow movie star, Octavia Spencer, to negotiate for pay as a unit leveraged her privilege as a successful white Hollywood star to demand equity.

I can’t tell you what to care about or how to express it, but I’m confident that everyone — regardless of identity — can put their caring into action a bit more.

Accomplices understand that marginalization isn’t always obvious or visible

My way of being in the world and my anchor in this work is deeply grounded in my identity as an African American man: the descendant of enslaved folks and the grandson of sharecroppers. I’m not shy about bringing this identity into the room and naming it. But this stance doesn’t require anyone to make themselves smaller in my presence. In fact, I invite others to bring more of themselves into the room as well.

One of the greatest shortcomings of our cultural discourse is the refusal to explore our complicated shared history in America. I don’t mean simply dwelling on the brutality inflicted on indigenous and enslaved folks, although we shouldn’t be shy to acknowledge historical truths. What I mean is that our shared history is more complicated and interdependent than we tend to discuss.

That sea of white faces I encounter in a workshop might well include more diversity and marginalized identities than it appears to at first: Many attendees have told me that while they pass for white, they identify ethnically in a multiplicity of ways. Many white-passing folks find themselves in conversations that “other” them or make them feel conflicted, invisible, and resentful. Many people of Italian, Irish, and Jewish heritage have ancestors who suffered from and fled persecution. And of course there are other less obvious identities in these rooms: LGBTQ+, differently abled, and neuroatypical folks, to name just a few.

In rooms of visible ethnic and racial minorities, expression of those experiences is often muted. It can be seen as insensitive and disingenuous for white and white-passing folks to claim a marginalized historical identity.

As a black-white binary pushes important nuance into the shadows, I’m passionate about creating spaces where all this can be discussed more expansively. I don’t think it serves us to expect people we think of as white to take up less space, and for the people we think of as black to take up more space, based solely on our perception of their proximity to oppression.

Similarly, it’s important to acknowledge privilege that may coexist with marginalization. Despite my historically and systemically marginalized racial identity, for example, the privileges afforded me by dint of being an educated, straight, able-bodied male are significant.

We all contain multitudes, and the space to bear witness to someone else's story can be sacred and affirming.

Accomplices don’t have all the answers

Admitting (and, frankly, learning) what we don’t know is a crucial starting point. I haven’t always had the analysis I now hold around race and identity in the United States. In fact, the whitewashed formal education I received was woefully deficient in preparing me for the realities of moving through the world with the identity I have. I learned my history — and in many ways what it means to be a black man in America — as an adult.

Despite our best intentions, our liberal enclaves, our high-minded ideals, we all have more learning to do. There’s something comforting in this universal growth opportunity: None of us have it all figured out.

As an accomplice, the goal isn’t to avoid stressful conversations or situations where we risk saying or doing the wrong thing; we actually need to spend more time in them, and learn to lean into our values when we feel emotionally triggered. That’s not easy:The physiological impact of conflict and stress prompts the brain to release cortisol and adrenaline into the bloodstream, putting the body into a fight, flight, or freeze response. In this state, we are biologically primed to respond to imminent danger — not to do complex thinking or bring our social graces to bear.

Put another way: We don’t rise to the level of our hopes and values, and we sink to the level of our basest instincts and our training. This is why it’s vital to train ourselves — to practice how we’ll intervene where necessary, and how we’ll respond when we’re embarrassed, ashamed, or called out.

And it’s why we need to breathe and reflect as we do the work of preparation — and when we can, maybe even laugh.

Willie Jackson is a diversity, equity, & inclusion (DEI) speaker, consultant and facilitator who makes waves at the intersection of event production, behavior change, and leadership development. He’s the founder of an online magazine for black men called Abernathy, and an advisor to authors, startups, and executives across a range of industries.


RELATED STORIES

The Roots of the Rage Against the Healthcare Machine

Most of us, sad to say, realized last week that we can comprehend the anger that drove 26-year-old Luigi Mangione—a privileged Penn grad and tech whiz—to allegedly murder Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, as the executive walked alone to an annual investors meeting in Manhattan.UnitedHealthcare, part of United Healthcare Group, which ranks No. 4 on the Fortune 500, is what’s known in the industry as a payer. That’s a term that might enrage a lot of people, especially anyone whose claim has been turned down for any of seemingly a million reasons and therefore is on the hook for medical costs. The payers are even using AI to process claims and make denials, taking humanity out of the process of caring for humans. Doctors say they are fed up with fighting insurance companies about providing needed medical treatments to their patients. In a manifesto found in his backpack after he was arrested, Mangione proclaimed: “These parasites had it coming.”The source of the shooter’s motivation is complicated. A product of a wealthy, well-connected Maryland family, a computer-engineering graduate with a master’s from Penn, he was social, and loved playing computer games and designing them. But he also suffered from spinal problems and severe pain that had led to spinal-fusion surgery. His reading list included anti-corporate tomes, including Unabomber Ted Kaczynski’s screed. Six months prior to the shooting, he cut himself off from family and friends. They begged him to get in touch but he apparently went someplace very dark instead. He emerged a murderer, police say.The coldblooded killing of a corporate executive triggered a similarly coldblooded wave of public vitriol directed toward Thompson and his company. Yelp reviews from hell itself. Wanted posters with pictures of health-insurance executives began popping up on Manhattan lamp posts.We know the drivers of this heartlessness toward Thompson and his peers. Healthcare bills are a leading cause of personal bankruptcy. And our money does not buy healthiness, which Mangione noted in papers found in his backpack. The U.S. spends more per capita on healthcare than any other nation, yet in medical outcomes we are not even in the top 10. In a recent Gallup poll, the segment of Americans who rated healthcare quality as “good” or “excellent” dropped 10 percentage points since 2020, to 44%. Not surprisingly, respondents rated healthcare insurance coverage even worse: 28% rate coverage as excellent or good as opposed to 41% in 2012, the high point, says Gallup.One winner in all of this: UHG, which earned a net profit of about $6 billion. That was in the third quarter alone.The vicious response to Mangione’s alleged actions reflects both the state of social media and the state of corporate America. The former allows anonymous individuals to display the most vile aspects of human nature—and then amplifies them. The latter reflects industry concentration that leaves consumers with fewer choices, and to some degree, powerless and voiceless. And angry about it.That’s true whether you are buying eggs or chickens in the supermarket—and remember that food-price inflation helped drive voters to Donald Trump—cell-phone service or health insurance. The McDonald’s in Altoona, Pa., where Mangione was arrested after an employee called the cops on him was flooded with negative reviews, as if a fast-food chain was part of the corporate conspiracy to suppress consumer discontent. Et tu, Mickie D?The UnitedHealthcare headquarters in Minnetonka, Minn., lowered its flags to half-staff last week honor of CEO Brian Thompson, who was fatally shot outside a hotel in Manhattan. (Kerem Yücel/Minnesota Public Radio via AP)Mangione spoke for many of these disenfranchised consumers, and in the worst possible way. You know this feeling of being seemingly without options. I’ve witnessed it at airports, when an angry, disgruntled—and clueless—passenger loudly informs a gate agent that “I’ll never fly this airline again.” Fat chance. You will, in fact, fly this airline again or you can drive across the country because Delta, United, American and Southwest control 80% of domestic airline traffic.This frustration is one reason that assaults on airline employees skyrocketed in the “revenge travel” period that followed the Covid pandemic. People were jammed into full flights, hit with multiple charges for seat selection, checked bags, early boarding, or whatever else the carriers could dream up. Is it any wonder that a number of them lost their shit? The problem, once limited to an occasional belligerent drunk, became so acute that the Federal Aviation Administration had to crack down on the growing number of miscreants, in some cases fining passengers $36,000 for attacking airline personnel.The frustration is everywhere and employees are feeling it. Recently I showed up at my local Hertz station in Manhattan to pick up my rental reservation; there were no cars. So I started getting agitated—and I am now practiced at this because this wasn’t the first time Hertz came up short. I was in mid-harangue when the agent pleaded: “I’m just a minion; it’s not my fault.” Fair enough. “But who else am I going to yell at?” I asked her. We’d both been through this before. Hertz had hung us both out to dry. The shooting is also a grim new chapter in our heavily armed society. We’re all too familiar with workplace shootings—going postal–in which a disgruntled employee or former employees take lethal umbrage on his boss and co-workers for whatever bad treatment or perceived slights they might have endured. But now it is seemingly the customers who are raging for revenge.This corporate assassination is raising the risks for everyone, from customer-facing employees to the big boss. But the CEOs will be able double down on their security; the front-line people will be more or less on their own. UHG’s employees, who number about 440,000, tend to like the company they work for. Until last week, the headquarters team labored in relative anonymity in Minnetonka, Minn. Now many of them feel they are under siege, likened to criminal accomplices working for a nefarious company. As one employee said. “[W]e all do the best we can to do a good job in the system we are in.”UnitedHealth, and other health insurers, have argued for years that consumers are well-served, and satisfied, by the current system. They probably have customer surveys that endorse this view. So do airlines. So what? Clearly the status quo is unsustainable. The anger that UHG’s system has generated has done what few issues in America can do: united Democrats and Republicans. Bipartisan legislation was introduced this week to break up some of the largest healthcare conglomerates by selling off their highly profitable pharmacy-benefit managers (PBMs), the drug middlemen often blamed for high prescription prices. The three biggest ones—CVS Health’s Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts and UnitedHealth’s Optum Rx—control 80% of prescriptions in the U.S. “Critics complain that the conglomerates use their size and leverage to steer patients toward their own pharmacies, increasing costs for employers and government programs while driving independent pharmacies out of business,” the New York Times pointed out. Consider that the first round.This week I happened to have a lunch scheduled with the CEO of a healthcare-related tech startup, the source for a story I’m working on. He showed up without any security, and he didn’t plan to engage any. His company isn’t a “payer.” In fact, it helps corporate clients push back against the payers to lower their employee healthcare-insurance costs. Payers such as UHG hate me, the CEO told me, because he was attacking their profit machine. And Americans, as we now know, hate the payers even more.Bill Saporito is an editor at large at Inc. magazine whose work has also appeared in the New York Times and Washington Post. Previously, he worked as an assistant managing editor at Time magazine and as a senior editor at Fortune. He has written for From Day One on the power gap among labor unions, the myth of the “woke” corporation, and the perils of getting technology and people misaligned.Featured photo, top: alleged murderer Luigi Mangione is escorted into a Pennsylvania courthouse this week (AP Photo/Gary M. Baranec)

Bill Saporito | December 14, 2024

If the Boss Wants You Back in the Office Five Days a Week, They Should Think Twice

In its heyday as the proto–Silicon Valley tech company, Hewlett-Packard innovated by what became known as the “next bench” syndrome. H-P was a company founded by engineers (Bill and Dave) for engineers and new products happened when one engineer asked a fellow practitioner sitting nearby if there might be something else the company could make that could be useful to him.While this ask-your-office buddy ideation might seem quaint—after all, innovation can and does come from anywhere—corporate America is now demanding a return of sorts to the days of white shirts and pocket protectors. After a long, pandemic-induced experiment with remote and then hybrid work, the people in the C-Suites are apparently lonely.More and more of them want your butt back in the office five days a week, and they are going to get their way, leaving some very unhappy employees to stew about it. According to a recent poll by KPMG, 79% of CEOs see all the professionals back at their office posts in the next three years–that’s up from 34% last year. This will be distressing news to people who moved away from corporate cities like Seattle to places such as Omaha, which tried to position itself as a low-cost haven for remote employees. At least companies are providing some perks for your five-day-a week return: unlimited amounts of hand sanitizer, for instance, and cleaning wipes. Maybe some more free food.Amazon CEO Andy Jassy is among the latest to announce that sitting in front of your laptop at home with your dog and your three year old no longer qualifies as getting it done. Some Amazon employees voiced outrage, even threatening to quit. “Go right ahead,” seems to be the response from HQ in what some have labeled a layoff by another name. Long before that, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon decreed that bankers and traders, who tend to operate in packs anyway, had to decamp from their Manhattan apartments and Manhasset manses to reoccupy the company’s pricey office buildings, especially its new HQ. Dimon’s argument is basically, “I’m not spending $100 a square foot to look at empty desks.” Nor does he believe that managers can lead effectively from home.Other financial industry bosses apparently concur. In Manhattan, where I work, office “busyness” rates reached 73.4% in August, a figure that compares occupancy to pre-pandemic levels of 2019. Nationwide, the rate is 60.4%, according to Avison Young, a real-estate advisory firm.What the Research ShowsFrom a productivity viewpoint, there doesn’t seem to be a compelling reason to mandate a return to the office, at least not based on academic research. The data, for the most part, points the other way. In the largest study yet of working-from-home professionals, Stanford economist Nicholas Bloom found that employees who work from home two days a week are “just as productive, likely to get promoted, and far less prone to quit.” According to the job-finding site FlexJobs, employees who work at home at least part-time can save up to $6,000 annually on commuting and other costs—a back-door raise they are loath to give up.True, Bloom’s study was limited to an experiment on 1,600 employees at Trip.com, a Chinese travel agency. And an earlier study, of which Bloom was a co-author, determined that fully remote employees were 10% less productive than their office-dwelling counterparts.  Meanwhile, yet another study from the University of Essex in England notes that, while remote workers there put in more hours–including 18% more after normal business hours—their average output didn’t change much. “Therefore,” the study concluded “productivity fell by about 20%.”What Most Workers WantAny survey of employees, however, will deliver the consensus that, while they enjoy being with their colleagues, they love a workplace that can be molded to their needs. Parents with kids need the hybrid flexibility, and Gen Z kids may need the socialization of the office. They both want a little of both.The kind of CEOs who get driven to work and have large private offices don’t necessarily see it that way. Nor do they seem particularly interested in the workplace data that supports the benefits of hybrid work. They’re focused on another data set: current economic data, which is now turning in management’s favor. That data shows that layoffs are up, quits are down, and the unemployment rate is ticking up, if ever so slightly. (Recent hurricanes will boost unemployment, temporarily.) The pending election might also be causing people to lower their appetite for risk and stay put.There could be more than executive ego at work here, too. If you’re the big boss, you want to be able to see and hear, in person, all the people you are bossing, even if you recede to your office sanctuary for most of the day.Which means that job holders and job seekers are no longer calling the shots the way they did in the roll-your-own days of the pandemic.  In my shop, our CEO just upped the ante to three days a week in the office from two, citing the need for enhanced collaboration to tackle these particularly perilous times in the publishing industry. I get that need for collaborating on site, having worked as a print magazine editor for a couple of decades. But surrendering the now comfy confines of my home office for an additional day at the office feels like a loss.And for the germaphobically inclined, it’s not as though the pandemic is in the past; companies have just chosen to treat it that way.  When I pointed out to a colleague that Covid-19 cases are rising rapidly nationwide, the response was on the order of: Yeah, but the latest wave isn’t as severe as past versions and there are now vaccines and remedies such as Paxlovid. In other words, suck it up, cowboy.The 13 million Americans employed in manufacturing might find all this contretemps about office work a bit amusing. It might be possible to say, build a transmission in your living room, but the machining noise tends to be loud. Likewise for the people working in service industries from restaurants to retail to healthcare. Sure, you can consult with a teledoc, but that’s not going to help you when you need to be pried out of your wrecked car by firefighters and  EMTs. You want a first responder, not a chatbot. Nor will your garbage be picking itself up anytime soon.The Upsides of the OfficePart of me sides with the bosses. What the productivity studies can’t measure is that a significant benefit of going to the office is being at the office. Being social. Being part of a company’s culture, which is a living breathing thing, as opposed to being merely part of its labor pool. Sharing not just the work but the human interaction that attaches. Going to lunch with office friends. And yes, the water cooler gossip, even if water coolers have been displaced by kombucha or cold-brew coffee dispensers. Need we mention, too, that office romances can hardly be undertaken sans office?(One thing that isn’t coming back to the office is any semblance of a dress code. Want to show up for that meeting in shorts, a T-shirt and Crocs? Go right ahead, and I’ll try to take you seriously.)As for the office work itself, we’ve all experienced those moments when a bunch of people thrown together suddenly connect on a breakthrough idea or solve a vexing operational problem. Indeed, the power of in-person collaboration has been likened to having a free electron floating around the room, just waiting to give the particle of a fabulous idea the positive charge that gives it energy. That spark could come from a sideways glance, a brief, post-meeting chat, or simply by running into a colleague in the elevator or parking lot.There’s also a reason why companies brag about being a great place to work. Yes, you can be employed remotely, but that’s not remotely the same experience.Why We Need to Find a Creative SolutionThis current faceoff leaves office managers and HR in a bit of a quandary when top management demands to see butts in seats. Perhaps looking at the question from an either/or perspective is the wrong way to do it. What the studies on office vs. remote work can’t control for is an individual’s performance. A high-performing employee is likely to be high performing whether they are working from home, at the office or at the beach. The most successful employers will figure out the geography that suits them best.Some companies, such as the HR platform Workday, have tried to appease bosses and workers with a sort of hybrid-hybrid. The company’s “work from anywhere” approach allows workers to spend 30 calendar days in a 12-month period working from just about anywhere. They may be on to something. Think about benefits. In most firms, there’s a benefits “menu” that allows employees to select from, say, several health insurers and within those insurers a variety of plans.Maybe we need to offer menu options with remote and hybrid work–a variety of packages to people in different life stages. The parent package could offer maximum flexibility in return for extended work hours. Take your kid to soccer, but give us those two hours back when we need them. The Gen Z package could include an exercise program near the office or lunch at Chipotle; the older workers package could include a more private workspace or a wellness program. Or something called chronowork, based on a person’s’ own body rhythms, which suits someone like me, attuned to working vampire hours. Running through all of them is the option to demand that all of the people show up at the office some of the time—on demand, even.People worked in offices for centuries because a central location was the best way to organize and run a business. The advent of computer networks altered that universe, making a central location less relevant; the pandemic then completely severed the historic relationship between work and geography. Some CEOs are now trying to redraw the management map to match the 1985 version. It’s sort of like going back to fax machines. Yes, they still function, but new technology has rendered them obsolete.  The hybrid model, which is inclusive of the vast variety of people and work styles today, is the new tech of business organization. It’s work that can work for everyone.Bill Saporito is an editor at large at Inc. magazine whose work has also appeared in the New York Times and Washington Post. Previously, he worked as an assistant managing editor at Time magazine and as a senior editor at Fortune. He has written for From Day One on the power gap among labor unions, the myth of the “woke” corporation, and the perils of getting technology and people misaligned.(Photo by Sam Edwards/iStock by Getty Images)

Bill Saporito | October 23, 2024

Why a Software Glitch Sent Delta into a Tailspin: The Perils of Getting Technology and People Misaligned

Customer-facing airline employees are some of the most remarkable people in business. How can they not be? The workers on the ground face the annoyed, the demanding, the delayed, the furious, the not-going-anywhere-today, and the inebriated. Then they get a lunch break. Those on the jets face the entitled in the front and the cramped-and-cranky in coach.My admiration for these folks has only increased over the last decade as their ranks have been thinned by technology (with a push from the pandemic) while their tasks have been made increasingly fraught by the air-travel system in which they now toil. And in which we frequently roil.We got to see this combination of imperfect technology meeting overwhelmed staffing earlier this summer during the great CrowdStrike meltdown. Until its cybersecurity upgrade blew up, CrowdStrike was a company  known mostly to sys-op jockeys and hackers. Then the company introduced a wonky software update that within hours crippled millions of servers that used Microsoft Windows and all hell broke loose.Around the world, operating systems gagged, including those of major U.S. airlines, bringing traffic to a near standstill. In the U.S., only Southwest, which seemingly still uses floppy discs to run its data systems, escaped the meltdown. With the CrowdStrike collapse, the scene soon became all too familiar: lines of people desperately trying to get somewhere, their options narrowing, their frustration widening as the hours passed. Some would be stuck for days.And among those carriers, Delta stood out for coming apart like a cheap suitcase tossed down a baggage ramp. The carrier canceled more than 5,500 flights, and at one point refused to board unaccompanied minors, creating major angst for lots of parents. Meanwhile, word got out that CEO Ed Bastian had jetted off—Ted Cruz-style—to Paris for the Olympics while his airline was frozen in place. Delta blamed CrowdStrike and Microsoft, and has threatened to sue to recover some $500 million in losses. Microsoft, in turn, blamed Delta’s outmoded technology. During the depths of the outage, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella emailed Bastian to offer assistance—talk about the ultimate Help Desk—but Microsoft says Bastian apparently didn’t respond. The carrier seemingly turned on its passengers, some of whom reported difficulty in getting hotels from Delta where they were stranded, as well as being low-balled by the refund offers being made to compensate them for lost flights and spoiled vacations. Delta’s service swoon seemed all that more severe given that the airline had reached cruising altitude in the post pandemic years, while rivals such as United and Southwest grappled more often with system freeze-ups.Using Technology to Supplant LaborYet Delta, as well as the other carriers, have been rolling the dice for years when it comes to matching people and technology. During the pandemic the carriers had to cut schedules (40% in Delta’s case) and jobs. As the nation and air travel recovered, they either didn’t—or couldn’t—rehire enough people who had left or were let go to match surging demand. (Remember “revenge travel”?) Increasingly, they relied heavily on technology to supplant labor. And they made us, the passengers, part of the labor force: encouraging carry on baggage by charging for checked bags, then introducing self-ticketing, self-check-in and self-bag-checks. Frontier even tried to eliminate its customer phone support.This latest air travel meltdown magnified an everyday incongruity that exists in the industry in that airlines are carefully configured to cope with the unpredictable—often to no avail. They try to plan for everything, from the catastrophic—a fatal crash—to the complex, such as a hurricane that threatens to spin the entire network into disarray. Then there are wars, revolutions, volcanoes, pandemics, strikes and assorted other calamities that are a regular threat to any global business, but to airlines in particular.At their vast flight operations centers, the carriers have teams ready for everything from a medical emergency on board to a rivet (or a door) coming loose on a 737 Max or a warning light on an Airbus 321 that won’t turn off. There are doctors, pilots, mechanics, meteorologists, Airbus specialists, Boeing specialists, avionics specialists, crew wranglers, airport and operations managers working 24/7 at the ops centers, and yes, people figuring out just who among us is going to get screwed when flights get delayed or canceled.Yet all of that preparation is no match for the way airlines are actually scheduled. They remain vulnerable to the phenomenon known as tight coupling, in which one unit in a system is highly dependent on the next. Cascading failure is almost a guarantee once the first fault is unleashed. Why can’t airlines prevent this from happening? The answer is that, despite the contingency planning, airlines are scheduled for optimum conditions, as though it’s always going to be sunny in Philadelphia, or Panama City or Paris. Which is not the case, of course. Worse, with load factors north of 85%, there’s little excess capacity, and little hope of a quick recovery once the system begins to implode.The contingency planning that airlines do can be undone by what they regularly come up against. Weather is by definition chaotic; technology is capable of catastrophic failure. Try building a service culture around that.Where’s the Service in the Service Economy?Although airlines are the most conspicuous examples of failing to balance people and tech, it seems to be creeping into all parts of the economy, as algorithms try to bring ever more precision to businesses. Especially in retail. The goal is to never have excess labor being employed for a single minute anywhere. In this frictionless world, there is always precisely enough help available to help you make your purchase or to get served.You know how that goes. We seem to live in a nation where there is always one fewer checkout lane open than needed (and don’t get us started on self checkout, which normally requires more than one self to operate). If you’re waiting in one of these lines, this understaffing can seem deliberate.Not too long ago, I was discussing airline operations with David Neeleman, founder of the highly successful new airline Breeze Airways (not to mention JetBlue, Azul, and WestJet) when he mentioned that he routinely passed by long lines of customers—or potential customers—at airport Starbucks. This frustrating level of service drove him to distraction—and this is a man who does not drink coffee. His point was that in an airport terminal, with scheduled flights, you can pretty much know how many people are going to be around your location at any given time. How can they not figure this out?, he asked, incredulously.Perhaps because they don’t want to: the obvious conclusion is that it’s better to be slightly understaffed than overstaffed, especially in businesses that ebb and flow during a day. In my nabe, the usual culprit is our CVS pharmacy, where the line gets 10 deep about the same time every day. Or at Chipotle, where 7 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. becomes a crap shoot as to whether your online order will be ready as the app promises. The problem? There are two hospitals nearby, and shifts are changing about then, something Chipotle’s scheduling software hasn’t seemed to have mastered. One more person-hour would do wonders, the difficulty being that you can’t schedule one person for one hour. So we wait.At Sephora, meanwhile, I seethed in a line on a Saturday afternoon with my wife as checkout terminals remained unpersoned even as the queue expanded. Spotting a manager, I asked, “Can’t you pull people off the sales floor? Isn’t everyone cross-trained?” She, of Gen Z, gave me that “okay, boomer” look before moving on. I’m still not sure whether she lacked the authority to shift salespeople to the front end, or the interest.Dissatisfied shoppers in brick-and-mortar stores are free to leave and not return, or to buy online. Dissatisfied fliers don’t have that option. How many times have I heard an angry passenger screaming, “I’m never going to fly this airline again,” at an agent and thought: Oh yes you are. And that includes Delta. The carrier may have burned some goodwill this summer, but there’s a still deep reservoir it can still draw on—at least for now.That includes its talent pool. As we have again experienced, when the technology chokes,  the front-line workers bear the burden for the company, because software doesn’t hear you when you scream at it. The airlines, and many other companies, either need to invest in more dependable technology—or they need to stretch their people a little bit less.Bill Saporito is an editor at large at Inc. magazine, whose work has also appeared in the New York Times and Washington Post. Previously, he worked as an assistant managing editor at Time magazine and as a senior editor at Fortune. He has written for From Day One on the power gap among labor unions and the myth of the “woke” corporation. (Photo by Panama7/iStock by Getty Images) 

Bill Saporito | August 22, 2024