KMMC works to determine the exact issue or cause and provide guidance and alternatives to 1) help mitigate the problem, and 2) implement sustainable solutions that support teams, leadership, and customers. Here is an example to understand how we have helped turn difficult experiences into productive interpersonal outcomes.
Overview/problem: When faced with pressing issues, large organizations such the federal government often default to reorganizing their structure. Practices known as “reorgs” are implemented to resolve problems quickly. If done repeatedly over time, these methods become embedded in the culture. In cases where appropriate planning occurs before implementing reorgs, the system is more likely to adapt and issues have a better chance of being resolved. However, when an organization's structural decisions are made without considering the impact on people and their functions, roles and responsibilities, new problems can and often do arise. Decreased morale, increased apathy, innate distrust and mismanaged conflict are among the consequences of ongoing reorganizations.
Opportunity/root cause: Groups of employees in a large client (1,000 employees) were apathetic and resistant to change. Morale decreased following a series of reorgs and leadership changes that occurred over a short period of time. Managers of several workgroups were dealing with a toxic environment, which was a consequence of the latest reorg. These managers were tasked to improve interaction, resolve conflict and build teams. Data gathered from staff members where conflict had become a behavioral norm revealed an undercurrent of distrust. Productivity suffered and scores on the latest Organizational Assessment Survey were low.
Process toward resolution: A number of facilitated all-hands and small group sessions designed to identify issues and explore alternative practices were held to allow new workgroups to form and begin the process of team development. Specifically, a series of half-day workshops focused on: (1) understanding one’s own and new team members' behavioral style/preferences, (2) exploring specific ways to interact and communicate more effectively, (3) identifying acceptable practices to support work groups moving forward, and (4) providing an environment for interpersonal interaction. Participants decided that actions they identified would be used when groups were reconfigured in the future. This step has had a positive effect on the interaction between individuals and among groups.
Result: In groups where leadership supported the group’s actionable decisions, communication among members improved and conflict decreased. This was particularly the case where revised communication channels and processes were created to enhance the workflow. However, success was short-lived. The culture of reorganizing was deeply ingrained; groups were again reconfigured and the status quo ensued. In this case, which is common in large organizations, a culture shift from leaders is needed to sustain change.
