Do Leaders Know (How) They Can Release the Organizational Energy to

Foster Innovation and Increase Productivity?

An Executive Master Thesis presented by

Yngve Magnus Ulsrød

January 2014

Executive Master in Consulting and Coaching for Change 2012-2014

INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France

2

Table of Contents

Abstract ..................................................................................................................... 4

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 5

Literature Review ..................................................................................................... 9

The Initial Phase ..................................................................................................... 14

Executive Coaching ....................................................................................... 15

Management Team Coaching ....................................................................... 15

Working Culture Assessment ........................................................................ 16

Working Culture Assessment Results ........................................................... 18

Results and Analysis From the Initial Phase ....................................................... 21

Executive Coaching of the MD - Outcome ..................................................... 21

Management Team Coaching - Outcome ...................................................... 22

Corporate Company Values .......................................................................... 24

Working Culture Assessment Results - Outcome .......................................... 24

Working With the Assessment Results - The Core Team - Outcome ............ 25

Working With the Assessment Results - The Management Team – Outcome

...................................................................................................................... 26

Working With the Assessment Results - Common Focus Areas - Outcome . 26

Working With the Assessment Results - Staff Meeting June 5th 2013 ........... 27

At the End of the Initial Phase ....................................................................... 28

At a Turning Point? – Entering Phase 2 ............................................................... 29

Interview With the MD ................................................................................... 31

Interviews With Nine Managers From the Management Team ...................... 33

Interview With the Working Group ................................................................. 36

Interview With the Core Team ....................................................................... 38

Further Discussions With the MD .................................................................. 39

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator .......................................................................... 40

Follow Up Meeting With the MD .................................................................... 41

Employee Survey Based on the Working Culture Assessment ..................... 45

3

Conclusions and Reflections ................................................................................ 47

References .............................................................................................................. 51

4

Abstract

This action research study explores the experience of an organization with an

intervention that was designed to understand the organizational energy in that

company. The intervention includes a working culture assessment and executive

coaching; it also addresses leadership behavior in a traditional hierarchic

organization with a strong national culture. The study analyzes the involvement of

management and staff as well as the experience of an internal consultant in the

intervention. The aim of the intervention was to investigate how change in both

leadership behavior and in the working culture can release organizational energy, as

discussed by Bruch and Ghoshal, in a way that might influence productivity and

creativity. The study also reports the experience of the internal consultant in this

intervention, based on the academic goal of the Executive Master for Consulting and

Coaching for Change program at INSEAD, which is to put theory into practice. The

paper will address a multi-party learning exercise in a triangle consisting of the

Managing Director, the organization, and the author as the internal consultant. The

study will discuss expectations, anxiety, and the psychodynamic affect in the

organization throughout the intervention. The findings show that when managers are

engaged and change the style and content of their communication with employees in

a positive manner, productivity, creativity, and loyalty can improve. The intervention

was perceived as an effective tool to increase energy among some employees who

confirmed they changed from being reserved, and at times scared, to being more

open and cooperative.

Keywords: Organizational energy, coaching, team development, authentic leader,

change management, contemporary leadership.

5

Introduction

The target for this action research intervention project was one of the German

companies owned by a global logistics and deep sea shipping company with offices

worldwide. The German organization represents one of the major markets with

contracted annual revenues above USD 700 million. The organization in Germany

has 80 employees, 99% of whom are German nationals. Many speak English

satisfactory, but it is not a preferred language. The author was given the opportunity

to do an intervention to assess how the present leadership affected the

organization’s productivity and how we might challenge the organization to be more

collaborative and innovative. The intervention was designed for use in this specific

company, but was also viewed as a possible prototype that could be used in other

parts of the global organization. Currently, in the organization as a whole, there is a

movement towards a more contemporary approach to leadership that helps to

promote the further development of employees and the organization. Key elements

include (a) how leaders support and nurture creativity and collaboration, (b) how

communication is delivered and received, both top-down and bottom-up, and (c) how

development and career management are executed. The global company has

traditionally been on the higher end of return on capital investment for many years.

Part of its success can be attributed to the fact that 80% of the revenue is secured

through long-term contracts with customers, and the company is one of the global

leaders in the field of global transportation of cargo at sea. The following questions

were discussed amongst senior management: Do we have the same understanding

of the competitive challenges in a volatile global market? Are we able to make the

local organization a global business player with our German customers who have

their products in the global market place? Do we have the right leadership in place

6

on all levels in the German organization? Traditionally, German companies have a

strong hierarchical leadership style. The German business and political culture

provides fewer possibilities of interaction with foreign cultures and languages

because German is the dominant language spoken in most business transactions.

This preference for the German language over other languages is a cultural choice

that extends beyond business. One ordinary expression in the day-to-day social life

is the dubbing of most foreign movies and TV series in German.

In this action research paper, the author is assessing how the Managing

Director (MD) can influence the organization, how the MD knows how to influence

the organization, how the author can use his experience and knowledge in an

intervention, and how the perception of change is in the organization during and after

the intervention. Action research is explored historically and as it is understood and

applied currently in the article Action Research: Rethinking Lewin by Dickens &

Watkins (1999). They state: “Organizational action research involves cross-functional

teams who address deep-rooted organizational issues through recurring cycles of

action and reflection" (p. 128).

Action research aims to build communities of people committed to

enlightening themselves about the relationship between circumstance, action,

and the consequence of their own situation, and emancipating themselves

from the institutional and personal constraints which limit their power to live

their own legitimate . . . values. (Kemmis & McTaggert, 1988, p. 23).

The intervention created awareness and commitment in the organization through

active participation.

The author is curious about how to best execute a program that assesses

leadership and working culture in an organization in which he also is the HR

7

executive. Will he be perceived as neutral, and will he be able to discover what is

actually going on in the organization? The psychological contract, the unconscious

expectations employees have of management and management has of employees,

relates heavily to dependency (Levinson, 2009, p. 57). Is the author’s formal role in

the organization in conflict with the role as the internal consultant in this study or can

he be seen as authoritative and knowledgeable (Levinson, 2009, p. 64)?

“We want to reach a billion dollar business!” The seriousness of that statement

from the managing director was clear, although it was said with a smile. Having a

vision and a dream, and communicating it without any explanation or a strategy to

accomplish it, gave rise to speculation and uneasy discussion within the

organization. However, it also created a good buy-in on the part of the employees to

participate in the planned intervention because it raised curiosity. It is a compelling

vision that had an impact on people (Fry & Slocum, 2008, p. 93).

From the outside, it was perceived that the German organization’s collective

energy was complacent or de-energized (Cross, Baker, & Parker, 2003, p. 53), with

low inclination or potential to be creative and cooperative. We wanted to assess the

energy-as-affect perspective capturing emotions, enthusiasm, and excitement that

drives employees towards shared organizational priorities (Bruch & Ghoshal, 2003,

p. 47).

The intervention was established as a project with a defined purpose and

objective. External consultants with solid experience in the field of organizational

assessments and executive coaching were invited to participate. The author did not

have previous experience with this type of intervention project.

The project scope was defined as follows:

8

1. Design an organization that meets future market challenges and

successfully delivers according to realistic goals based on organizational

capability, capacity, and structure.

2. Establish an overall leadership behavior with strong communication and a

teamwork mindset to execute our goals in the Long-Term Strategy.

It was part of the initial plan to involve the local management and employees in the

intervention project. The task the author had, as an internal consultant, was to

collaborate with the external assessor and the organization to help the intervention

succeed (Levinson, 2009, p. 37).

The intervention included executive coaching of the Managing Director (MD),

team building of the local management team, assessment of the working culture

(Schein, 1990, p. 111), establishment of areas that need to change, and finally,

implementation of the change (van de Loo & Lehman, 2013, pp. 1-9). Following are

the relevant questions to be addressed:

To what extent can the MD be convinced through his own experience that a

contemporary leadership style is a better way of leading in order to influence

increased productivity and creativity?

What are the key drivers to change the organization, and how can that

change be made sustainable?

9

Literature Review

In 1999, our newly formed global organization adopted company-wide values

as a unifying message after the merger of two companies. What became the global

corporate values were based on those already existing prioritized values and beliefs

collected from the individual companies throughout both original organizations. It is

my experience that our values influence leadership and employee behavior in the

organization, regardless of the country in which our employees work. Some may

have a different understanding of the values, but the values do affect people one way

or another. The values established for the organization are Customer Centered,

Teaming & Collaboration, Stewardship, Empowerment, and Innovation. When

people’s value priorities are aligned with the organization’s behavior, as expressed in

its values, people will feel a stronger sense of belonging to the organization.

As Brian P. Hall points out in Values Shift (1994), “Values are ideals that give

significance to our lives, that are reflected through the priorities that we choose, and

that we act on consistently and repeatedly” (p. 21). When people’s feeling of

belonging is strong, their desire to be more productive and creative will be stronger

as well.

Employees who view their work as a vocation to which they are called are

likely to approach their work very differently from employees who see work primarily

as a means to satisfy their pecuniary needs (Fry & Slocum, 2008, p. 89).

The collective understanding of these values should form the behavior within

an organization, which can be recognized by owners, employees, suppliers, and

customers. The organizational behavior is hence the expressed branding of the

organization and is the basis for how people perceive that organization, from both

within and without.

10

Anton Obholzer, in Psychoanalytical Contributions to Authority and

Leadership Issues (1996), stresses the importance of “. . . the state of mind . . . of

the organization, how it views its difficulties and what routes it follows to address its

difficulties” (p. 55).

A global organization with multiple offices in several countries should be

considered in the context of how the collective understanding of the company culture

is also being affected by the respective country cultures, as well as the local office’s

own culture, which more closely represents the individual employees from that

locality. One of the key drivers for establishing and influencing the culture is the

leadership behavior and communication in the organization, including what is

communicated through internal media such as Intranet, newsletters, etc., and what is

perceived by employees who also have contact with colleagues visiting from abroad

and with whom they are communicating by phone or email in virtual teams. What I

have also noticed is the employee’s interpretation of the influence by others; either

they are implicit or explicit influential factors.

In the German organization, we noticed the different behaviors in their

respective departments and professions as well as the way the people were

physically located. Office layout has an influence in how people communicate and

cooperate. People in the offices where the assessment took place are spread over

several floors and modules, and unless they actively seek contact, there is a

possibility of not seeing each other for days or weeks. This is well described in E. H.

Schein’s (1990) “Organizational Culture”:

When one enters an organization one observes and feels artifacts. This

category includes everything from the physical layout, the dress code, the

manner in which people address each other, the smell of the place, its

11

emotional intensity, and other phenomena, to the more permanent archival

manifestations such as company records, products, statements of philosophy,

and annual reports. . . . Culture can be defined as (a) a pattern of basic

assumptions, (b) invented, discovered or developed by a given group, (c) as it

learns to cope with its problems of external adaption and internal integration,

(d) that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore (e) is to

be taught to new members as the (f) correct way to perceive, think and feel in

relation to those problems. (p. 111)

I noticed that the act of having discussions – as well as the discussions themselves –

about these matters throughout the working culture assessment project helped to

establish a keen awareness of patterns and assumptions that perhaps previously

had gone unnoticed. That recognition prompted change actions.

In the case written by Elizabeth Florent-Treacy, Massimiliano Saccarelli and

Manfred Kets de Vries, Creating an Authentizotic Organization by Putting People

First: The Best Western Italy (A) Case, it is pointed out the need “to identify personal

and organizational motivators – including affiliation (friends, family and community);

meaning (both in role and for the organization); and exploring (creative rethinking of

personal and organizational projects and goals)” (Florent-Treacy, Saccarelli, & Kets

de Vries, 2013, pp. 7-8). Involving as many employees as possible and letting people

know that management is working on the same issues creates motivation, meaning,

and innovative thinking that helps the organization increase the energy, both

individually and collectively.

It was important for the leadership to understand their affect on people and in

the organization. Anton Obholzer (1996) states:

12

The leader’s capacity to bear the institutional “transference” appropriate to the

role, without being carried away by it, is from a psychoanalytical perspective

an equally important capacity. . . . The leader needs to be aware of the

projections that he/she carries on behalf of the membership, and be aware of

the risks to the leader and thus to the institution, of such processes. (p. 55)

When starting with the working culture assessment project, it was important to

start with the Managing Director (MD) and the leaders reporting to him. For the

leadership to be an integrated part of the change, and in fact owners of the change,

the change became explicit as to internal purpose and commitment. It could not be

driven only from the outside. Hence, the MD went through executive coaching, and

the management team became an integrated part of his coaching.

Heike Bruch and Sumatra Ghoshal (2003) describe four energy zones: the

Aggression Zone and Passion Zone on the high level of intensity of organizational

energy, and the Resignation Zone and Comfort Zone on the low intensity of

organizational energy. They state:

Weak emotions, positive or negative, do not spur people to action. Companies

in the comfort zone have positive emotions such as calm and contentedness;

they lack the vitality, alertness and emotional tension necessary for initiating

bold new strategic thrusts or significant change. (p. 46)

Further, Rob Cross, Wayne Baker and Andrew Parker discuss in their paper “What

Creates Energy in Organizations” (2003) the link between people in an “energy

network” and differentiators when it comes to energizers and de-energizers. The

energy zones concept was easily understood in the German organization and I found

that it was a useful “picture” to discuss and to trigger reflections amongst employees

and managers. It also became evident how they perceived the de-energizing factors

13

and the energizing factors and how they experienced the organizational behavior in

relation to energy discussions.

Harry Levinson, in Organizational Assessment (2009), and W. Warner Burke,

in Organization Change, Theory and Practice (2011), provide helpful insights to both

ethical issues and the practicality of carrying out an assessment. Burke also explains

the organizational culture change and how we may understand the meaning of

artifacts and the understanding of values and beliefs that are expressed in the

organization.

Although beforehand, my “outsider’s” view was supported with good

knowledge and experience from the values implementation in the organization, it

was important that I spend many days in the German organization for a deeper dive

into behavioral issues. Without on-site experience, it is too easy to jump to quick

conclusions based on statements from people outside the German organization,

even when they may be inside the global organization (including the author), or rely

on statements and opinions from external consultants. More time spent actively

engaged in the organization, talking with people and discussing their daily lives,

reflections, and feelings in the office, is a key component in getting a better “Smell of

the Place.” I find the reflections of Professor Sumantra Ghoshal in his speech at a

World Economic Forum relevant to my experience in learning to know the

organization better by just being there and being actively engaged – but also by

being there longer. (Ghoshal, 2010).

14

The Initial Phase

The initial phase encompassed the following activities:

- Executive coaching of the MD

- Coaching the management team

- Working culture assessment

- Working with the assessment results

The intervention project was defined as a project for leadership development

and organizational change. The German organization has been successful for many

years but was aware that changes must take place to meet increasing international

competition. The first step was to look at different ways for the MD to work with his

team and their existing leadership capabilities. Annual People Surveys show good

results in key drivers for leadership in the organization in categories such as Set

Direction, Achieve Results, and Engage People. For the German organization, the

results on key subjects are in the range of 70-90% and well above the rest of the

organization’s results. Compared to external logistics companies the results are even

better. The response rate in the survey (participation from the employees) was close

to 90%. The German organization has highly qualified and committed employees,

many of whom started as apprentices and continued in the organization after their

graduation. This means that their technical competence and capabilities are very

high. Some younger employees, however, left the company and started over in other

companies because they did not see career opportunities in the organization.

Replacements can easily be found, but the feeling in the organization is that too

many good people are leaving.

15

Executive Coaching

We arranged an executive coach for the MD. When interviewing possible

candidates for this position, we emphasized qualifications such as previous

international experience as an executive leader and solid coaching experience with

executives. The coach who was hired was a UK citizen, and the fact that he was not

German added a useful alternative cultural perspective. The coaching lasted for

about eight months and targeted several areas, with a focus on execution of

leadership and behavior in the organization.

Management Team Coaching

During the period that he was being coached, the MD decided to include the

management team in the coaching process for the purpose of team development

and to better define team purpose and expectations. It was believed that the team

did not function as a team, and that when they did infrequently meet, their agenda

was limited to only sharing information. There was little interaction among the team

members and few discussions about the different topics brought into the meetings.

The behaviors between the managers and the team were typically transactional and

we did not see that they could change unless some members of the team were

replaced and/or new members added. It is a common understanding that a transition

space is necessary for the team and the organization to change (Kets de Vries,

2010, p. 218). A transition was made when, prior to one team session, the members

were asked to write down key points describing how the team works, how it should

work, and how they perceive the team purpose. Based on this, a common team

purpose was defined, as were expected team behaviors. Effective working agendas

for future meetings were established and agreed on as well.

16

Working Culture Assessment

We engaged a consulting company to do the Organizational Review or

Working Culture Assessment as it was called later. We agreed to assess the

organization according to the principles of an Employer Value Proposition, which was

an assessment tool used by the supplier. The Employer Value Proposition focuses

on the elements of ability (skills and recruitment), opportunity (process and

structure), and motivation (engagement and internal communication).

The assessment was based on gathering information on the current

management style, the organization, working practices, competencies, and

behaviors, as well as perceived gaps related to those areas. The information was

gathered from interviews and workshops with selected individuals and groups.

Seven managers and 21 employees were selected for interviews for the assessment

which started in September 2012.

We decided to have a staff meeting at the beginning of the assessment

process to explain what we were doing and why. We knew that clear communication

and a comprehensive sharing of information would be necessary to help employees

cope with anxiety throughout the assessment phase.

When I saw the results presented to me after the interviews, I realized that the

assessment model was different than the one we had initially agreed on with

the supplier. I was puzzled by this and told the consultant that I needed to

know why this model was used as a replacement for the original tool we had

agreed on. I realized it was too late to change the model because, at that

point, all interviews had been done, and I decided to use what we had. It

made me worried and annoyed that another model had been substituted;

however, when I read the results I thought I could work with it and I contained

17

my anxiety. (My personal reflections will be presented throughout this study in

this italic format to distinguish them from quotes from others.)

The alternative model used for the assessment was The Competing Values

Framework.

The Competing Values Framework was developed initially from research

conducted by University of Michigan faculty members on the major indicators

of effective organizational performance. It has been found to be an extremely

useful model for organizing and understanding a wide variety of organizational

and individual phenomena, including theories of organizational effectiveness,

leadership competencies, organizational culture, organizational design,

stages of life cycle development, organizational quality, leadership roles,

financial strategy, information processing, and brain functioning. The

framework has been identified as one of the 40 most important frameworks in

the history of business. (Cameron & Quinn, 2005, p. 2)

The Competing Values Framework looks into two major dimensions: flexibility

and discretion, stability, control and then internal orientation, integration, external

orientation, differentiation. Together these two dimensions form four quadrants, each

representing a set of organizational effectiveness indicators (Cameron & Quinn,

1999, pp. 30-32).

The Competing Values Framework was used as an assessment model. We

found that it was much easier for the employees who had been interviewed to

understand the model than it was for the employees who had not been interviewed.

Our second staff meeting was held towards the end of 2012 when the

consultant presented the assessment results. We had prepared well in advance and

had agreed to show very little of the information on slides, and instead the major part

18

of the presentation was delivered orally and in English. It was very quiet after the

presentation but that was not unusual because normally people do not ask many

questions in our staff meetings unless the meetings are conducted in the local

language. To break the silence, I asked the participants (about 65 in total) to break

into in pairs and discuss what they had seen, what they understood, and what they

did not understand. Some feedback was given and some discussions took place.

I realized the presentation of the results and showing the model for the

assessment was difficult to understand for the majority of the people. We

learned that the model and outcome were too conceptual and theoretical.

Feedback after the meeting was in fact that people did not understand much

at all. At this moment I understood that a very close engagement (from me)

and a great deal of simplicity in this intervention project would be an important

key if we were to succeed. The level of English that was used, verbally as well

as written was too advanced and needed to be adjusted to the audience.

Working Culture Assessment Results

The working culture assessment highlighted the following:

Further alignment and clarity between the business activities and the

organization could significantly empower and enable management and

staff.

An integrated approach towards business and organizational culture will

develop an atmosphere where corporate strategy, market presence, and

technology will be better shared and understood – creating a competitive

advantage and reducing internal competition between departments.

Greater management clarity is needed on the vision, long-term strategy,

and the value of the business activities.

19

Attention is needed on key parts of the strategy, business plan, objectives,

and challenges going forward with special focus on clarifying priorities.

More attention to consensus and the positive effect of a common working

culture needs to take place.

There is a need to establish an understanding of future capabilities and

competencies going forward, as well as career planning.

To work with the assessment results, we established a Core Team of seven

employees: six from the German organization and one from the regional office in

Stockholm. The Swedish participant, who is the HR manager in Sweden, was added

to give an outsider’s view of the discussions taking place. The Core Team further

engaged 16 colleagues to get a broader view and provide more input for areas that

needed improvement. We established the scope and mandate for the Core Team.

The consultant and I would be the facilitators. The interest and the engagement from

the Core Team were high, and all members were in good spirits. They managed to

produce a comprehensive report as a response to the working culture assessment.

This was the real voice of the people! They also raised some concerns about how to

handle expectations both from the managers and the employees.

At the same time I engaged the management team to develop key

improvement areas as a response to the assessment report. However, during this

period, anxiety was growing and that came to my attention. I received concerns from

the MD who had started to get critical questions from managers and employees, and

he was feeling their anxiety as well. There were rumors and fears circulating about

previous downsizing projects, which again became related to the assessment

project. I suggested to the MD that we needed to be more clear in our

communication and that we should have new staff meetings to explain our intentions.

20

We also agreed that we would work more closely with the management team, and

that the Core Team should establish a “Message to the Management” without

interference from the other managers.

I started to be concerned that this project could be a failure as I knew that the

MD easily could stop activities he was not comfortable with. We had never

done this type of intervention in our organization before, and we were not

comfortable with the reactions at this stage. Were we on the way to destroying

something good? Would we make people more confused and reduce

productivity and creativity? I gave the order to stop all work with this program

for the rest of the year. Starting early 2013, I would meet all parties involved.

Our strength was that the MD and I were in agreement on the way forward

and how to deal with his management team. I felt at times interference from

the external consultant in my way of dealing with the organization. I had to

build confidence in myself and trust my own decision as an assessor and

internal consultant (Levinson, 2009. P. 38).

21

Results and Analysis From the Initial Phase

Executive Coaching of the MD - Outcome

During the analysis of the executive coaching, the MD’s own reports and

interviews with executive peers outside the German organization and with the MD’s

manager were included. The coaching outcome revealed that the MD needed to be

more focused on leadership, bringing to them the same quality and energy he shows

with customers and his external network. The MD is very strong in building and

maintaining his network and establishing contacts. He is also responsible for our

larger corporate accounts and enjoys great respect in the business community. He

has an impressive ability and talent to connect with people and make acquaintances

easily. Using the same energy internally and connecting more deeply with his own

management team would be a key driver for the change needed. In addition,

establishing better communication and a well functioning management team, and

securing sufficient resources in the office would strengthen his leadership

capabilities. The MD suggested a new organizational layout, which was accepted by

the executive management.

My role in this was to be a sounding board for the progress of the coaching

and a liaison between the different managers and executives in the

management team to whom the German organization reported. During this

process, a remark was made by one executive outside of the German

organization: “The MD in Germany gets too much attention.” This caused me

to reflect on a statement by Anton Obholzer (1996): “Envious attacks on

colleagues are a phenomenon, and the ‘bite’ of envy, the spoiling attack can

extract a heavy price when it comes to institutional functioning” (p. 54). We

22

decided to keep on with the coaching as an ongoing process and connecting it

to the coaching of the management team as well.

Management Team Coaching - Outcome

Later in 2012, we had a management meeting and established the way

forward with the management team as well as the Core Team, establishing

expectations, involvement, and deliverables. Several of the managers disagreed with

the earlier decision that they could not be involved with the Core Team, particularly

concerning those people from their own departments. They reported that they felt

uncomfortable not to be able to answer questions the Core Team may have, not to

be able to support them. Another concern was that the employees may come up with

improvement areas different from the ones the management team would suggest. I

made it clear that all ideas for improvement are welcome, and if they are not the

same, it is, in fact, a benefit and not a problem. I suggested that any questions the

Core Team may have should come to me or the consultant, and we would answer

them. In addition, we would work with the Core Team so they will be effective and

deliver as agreed.

The management team established their own improvement areas based on

the assessment report. We also agreed that the MD and I should have staff meetings

to explain the report and expectations going forward.

In the management team session, the following team purpose was

established:

Import the Corporate Long-Term Strategy (LTS) to the German organization.

Set Goals / Directions.

o Each employee in the German organization should know his/her role

and expected contribution in achieving the goals of the LTS.

23

Create and drive change to foster a competent, diverse, and responsive

organization.

Create new patterns of actions and beliefs under the umbrella of the corporate

human resource standards (i.e., Corporate Values, Code of Conduct, People

Survey, etc.).

A typical management meeting agenda was established as well and included these

elements:

Update on the Long-Term Strategy

Commercial Business Performance Review

Commercial Outlook

Organization

Operations

Financial results

I was at this stage comfortable with how to deal with the assessment report

and what the next phase in the assessment project should be. My uncertainty

had left me. By connecting the assessment report findings to the company

values, we could explain the assessment in a vocabulary the employees know

and are comfortable with. I did realize, however, that there was a gap in my

way of running the project and the consultant’s expectations, and that was the

reason I decided to stop all group work for the rest of the year in December

2012. In the management meeting we agreed on the way forward. We

arranged staff meetings where we explained the status of the project and next

steps, and we presented a much simpler report connecting the assessment

results to the values in the organization. Also, we used a more common

24

English language and the MD elaborated on key phrases with German

explanations.

Corporate Company Values

The global organization was established in 1999 as a merger between two

well-established Scandinavian companies. During the merger this truly global

organization, with a worldwide business and with employees of many nationalities,

invested in defining and establishing core values and beliefs that reflected the newly

formed organization. The value implementation was based on interviewing close to

100 leaders from all parts of the organization.

The introduction of core values after the merger provided a common

understanding of the expected organizational behavior in the new company and set

standards that bridged the separate work cultures and country cultures of the original

companies. The corporate values are: Customer Centred, Empowerment, Teaming

and Collaboration, Innovation, and Stewardship. The values discussions and

implementation was based on Brian P. Halls’ research presented in Values Shift: A

guide to personal and organizational transformation (Hall. 1994).

Working Culture Assessment Results - Outcome

When we presented the assessment results for the second time in a staff

meeting in January 2013, the MD stressed that this is not a downsizing project but a

project where we will focus on leadership, involvement of people, and

communication. In addition, we will improve our competence development and

career planning activities and add resources. We stated that the assessment shows

a gap in how we operate and how we would like to operate. As an example, we are

competing internally while we should cooperate; we should compete with our

25

competitors. The assessment showed that we share too little information about our

results, customers, and challenges, meaning we do not have a shared

understanding of threats and possibilities. The areas where the German organization

is doing very well were highlighted and the MD stated again that we will reach “A

Billion Dollar Business” as a target and that we all need to work together to reach

this target.

The other managers in the management team attended the staff meeting and

the feedback they gave us afterwards was that people were very positive. People

understood what we tried to achieve. We managed to communicate purpose, what it

would look like when we reached our goals, how to get there, and the people who

can help us get there (Bridges & Mitchell, 2000, p. 5). The anxiety was contained!

Working With the Assessment Results - The Core Team - Outcome

When the Core Team met with the consultant in their first meeting in 2012,

some of the managers joined the meeting. This changed the format of the meeting

because the managers took the lead and this inhibited the employees in the Core

Team, who were then unable to be productive. When we made new rules ensuring

that the lead resided solely with the Core Team in future meetings, they worked

efficiently and productively, utilizing input from the working groups they had

established and from surveys and individual interviews. They identified five key

areas for improvement under the umbrella of “Message to the Management”:

Leadership and People Management

Customer Relationship

Skills and People Development

Teaming and Collaboration

Innovation / Other Improvements

26

Details of each of the items above where included in their report to provide a

full explanation and understanding of the content. We prepared the Core Team to

present the “Message to the Management” in a later management meeting.

Working With the Assessment Results - The Management Team – Outcome

In the session with the management team, the following improvement areas

were established:

Communication

Resources

Competence Development

Being Change Agents

Clarity in Roles and Responsibilities

Capacity of HR

Administrative Support

Working With the Assessment Results - Common Focus Areas - Outcome

We arranged a meeting between the Core Team and the management team.

After the presentation of the different proposals, the participants were divided into

working groups to discuss content and suggest priorities. The final outcome of the

work resulted in the following improvement priorities:

Communication

Teaming and Collaboration

Innovation

Openness and Trust

Skills and Development

Bridging the Distance (between offices and departments)

27

Valuing Employee Input

Common Leadership Style (role model)

Adequate Resources (available free time to think)

To get a head start with improvement in these areas, two managers were assigned

to each of the above areas that required further studies.

Working With the Assessment Results - Staff Meeting June 5th 2013

We arranged a staff meeting where all items above were presented. We

prepared an interactive meeting and established ten groups after the initial

presentations.

We also set the following agenda for the meeting:

Status – where we are now

“Message to the Management”

Management’s Key Areas for Improvement

Combined and Prioritized Areas

Workshop (10 groups)

Workshop Summary

New German Branch Management Team and Organization

Releasing the Energy

Summing Up

The staff meeting was arranged by the MD, the local HR manager, and me.

The HR manager facilitated the meeting. We agreed that we would conduct the

meeting in German to insure greater involvement and better understanding for all

participants. In addition we decided on an interactive meeting where the employees

were split into groups for a workshop. Each group would discuss the improvement

28

areas presented and come up with comments and questions. We also provided the

possibility to address other improvement areas.

The staff meeting became very active and people readily used the opportunity

to discuss, propose, and give comments. The meeting set-up and the ease in which

it was possible to participate released great energy and productivity.

For the workshop, we divided the participants into 10 groups and asked the

following question:

What would you like to see more of?

a) Within areas already presented?

b) Other ideas?

At this stage, prior to and during the staff meeting, there were concerns that

the employees may come up with many additional new ideas than had been

already identified. I suggested that this would probably not happen and if so,

we could most likely incorporate those ideas into those we already had or

even add some points. This exercise was to get involvement and ownership.

The productivity and interest were very high and the meeting lasted for 4

hours!

At the End of the Initial Phase

The staff meeting on June 5th, 2013 was the end of the initial phase or phase

1. During this phase, we managed to identify behavioral areas of focus for the MD,

purpose and a typical agenda for regular management meetings, ways to involve a

large number of employees to contribute suggestions for improvement; in addition,

we also identified areas of improvement along with the necessary actionable tasks.

29

From this work in phase 1, an organizational change and new management team

were in the pipeline.

At a Turning Point? – Entering Phase 2

The initial phase covered the following activities:

- Executive coaching of the MD

- Management team coaching

- Working culture assessment

- Working with the assessment results

Phase 1 also covered the improvement areas suggested by the management, the

“Message to the Management” from the employees, and the outcome of the staff

meeting on June 5th, 2013.

The executive coaching session of the MD was completed, the working

culture assessment was finished, improvement areas had been identified with great

effort from managers and employees, and the final staff meeting with the active

involvement of all participants was successfully accomplished as well. What now?

People went into vacation mode, finalized preparation for important tenders, and

returned to normal business mode.

How could we keep up the momentum? How could we ensure commitment

from management and the MD? How could we measure and communicate success?

Do we have a different energy level in the organization after this? Do people know

what creates energy and do we have a shared picture of where we want to be?

I decided to interview all managers and the Core Team. In addition, I wanted

to meet a large group of the employees for discussions and interviews and I wanted

to spend time with and shadow the MD.

30

I prepared the following thoughts and questions as a guide for the personal

interviews of the managers:

1. We need transition to be able to grow;

a. What type of transition do you expect?

b. Which type of transition have you seen so far?

2. In the last staff meeting (June 5th) several initiatives where presented;

a. What has happened after this meeting?

3. How was your experience with the working culture assessment?

4. Has the leadership behavior changed?

5. What is important for you in your work place and in order to execute your

role?

6. Working culture:

a. In your view, what is the working culture today?

b. What do you want it to be?

7. Leadership and employee behavior:

a. Is the behavior changing?

b. What type of behavior would you like to see?

8. In the context of the working culture assessment, we talked about

general goals as a change in the organization:

a. What goals would these be?

b. What does it take to get there?

9. We have discussed the desire to enhance collaboration and to have a

more open working environment:

a. In your view, what would this mean?

b. What would be the drivers to get us there?

31

c. What would be the possible obstructions?

The above questions were used as an informal guide to initiate discussions

and to keep track of the themes I wanted to discuss, rather than as a formal set of

questions that had to be answered.

Interview With the MD

For a period of more than three hours, the MD and I discussed the

intervention project, the progress, and what to expect next. Following are extracts

from his comments:

We have started the search for a new director as head of sales. Three

managers who now reports to me will be reporting to this new commercial

leader. All three managers know of course of the change and at least one of

them is happy with that. They are all very transactional and operative and

good in what they are doing. However, they know we need an additional

leader with a stronger strategic drive, when it comes to both internal and

external matters. We need someone who can work on a strategic as well as

on an operational level – a commercially oriented people person. We have

also made physical changes in the office, adding more space and bringing

people who need to work together closer to each other. This has produced a

good effect already.

I have also promoted a new manager as head of the customer care and

documentation department. She reports directly to me and her people will now

have a leader who is present in the office much more than the previous

managers who were travelling a lot. Together with another new employee who

will work with Performance Analysis, we will now have two females in the

management meetings.

32

We will start our management meetings with the new format in January

but I do not foresee that we will have hired the new head of sales by that time.

This person will come from the outside as I don’t see we have the right

candidate in the organization today. The management meeting will change a

lot when we have the new people in place.

What have you learnt and brought with you from the coaching?

I have become a more thoughtful leader. I know I can be impatient and it

shows. I have learnt to have equal focus on internal matters as well as

external matters – working through people is a win-win situation. I have also

learnt to say no to my managers who just drop in and drown me with details

and steal my time. I think running the management meetings the way we have

planned, and at regular intervals, will take this need away from them. When I

started in this company, the ones who talked fast and who could think fast

won the discussion and were easily promoted. There was no time for

reflection, but rather it was a “fighting” atmosphere. This has had an effect on

me and since I’m a fast thinker and can draw quick conclusions, I can get

impatient with others who drown me in details.

I asked him to mention one to four areas for him to work on. He said that there

were several issues as we have discussed already and which has been addressed in

the coaching as well. I challenged him to focus on one as a priority, and he

suggested “being more patient.”

In discussions with the MD I feel at times aligned with his thinking, reflections,

and feelings. The MD is one of the most business oriented persons I have

met. He is easy going, can relate to all people in the organization and with any

level of people outside of the organization – all with a great deal of

33

confidence. I have seen him in action many times and he connects to people

with straightforwardness and honesty. I have at times, made him angry,

frustrated, and insecure through this assessment project but we have

managed to talk it through and end it in good faith. He is not angry for a long

time, nor is he negative for long. He will seek positivity and he likes to be

around people with a positive drive. I felt I had to learn to know him even

better and we agreed he would do the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

instrument, which is explained later (Myers, Kirby, & Myers, 1998).

Interviews With Nine Managers From the Management Team

Following are quotes extracted from interviews and discussions with members

of the initial management team. As a part of the discussions we also talked about

organizational energy and their perception of where the organization may be in this

context. (Bruch & Ghoshal, 2003, p. 47). Each interview lasted approximately one

hour.

Many people were about to leave and I felt the same due to lack of

communication and little knowledge about possible careers in the

organization. Now there is hope that the organization will move forward.

The managers have learnt to be more available for their employees. The

management meetings used to be a one-way communication and this will

change with the new agenda and the defined purpose of the management

team.

I have noticed that the behavior of the MD is changing under different

regional presidents.

What is important is that we implement what we have said we will do.

34

If we go wrong, it will be due to lack of communication, if we do not follow

through the transition we have defined for the new management team, if the

new sales manager does not live up to our expectations.

The German working culture is very different than the more informative and

communicative Scandinavian leadership style.

I would like to see the MD more visible in the organization. He should be

more open and available. People would like to see more of him.

It is a lot of talk – no action – but this is common for our organization.

Implementation of what we have said is missing.

People are afraid of making mistakes.

It is easy to create uncertainty in this organization.

The MD is pulled away from the organization and it may be perceived as if he

is ignoring people.

We need to do what we have promised – we need to create trust.

It was a good start with the assessment project. The perception is that

change has taken place already.

Some senior people say we have done this before and have a wait-and-see

attitude.

New people look forward to the changes we have said we will do.

It is important that we tick-off what we are doing and remind ourselves of the

achievements.

35

We are going from working in silos to collaboration. People ask more

questions and we see an improved awareness and interest.

It is easier to contact other managers and departments – we are more

available to each other.

The MD is more communicative and provides better feedback. He is walking

around and is more relaxed.

I would like to see more of the following: that the employees raise their voices

even more, that we involve more people in projects, more activities where we

work on common matters bringing us more together.

To move people into the passion zone, we all need to have a common

understanding of our challenges and expectations – we need to feel the fire.

Since the assessment took place, I see more freedom, there is a possibility to

challenge the status quo, the light is switched on and there is more

engagement.

We are on the right track. It was good that we did this exercise.

This process is quite unique seen from my experience with other companies.

It is seldom possible to get that much out of people.

The biggest achievement is that we were able to hear people’s voice.

The broad majority of the employees embraced and appreciated the process

but it was too academic in the start.

I cannot see how to connect the initiatives to the One Billion USD statements.

36

The previous management team was not a team but some people who just

met. There were too many people. It will be good to have a smaller team.

The MD has created some expectations. It will be a challenge to keep up the

momentum when things are changing.

As expected there was a difference in the comments and responses from the

managers who will report to the new director and those who had received a

promotion or kept their same job. This had an effect on their experience with the

assessment as well as their view afterwards.

I greatly appreciated the opportunity to meet with the managers again, and

they appreciated meeting with me. They have been through a lot of changes

and I think nobody was actually happy with the management team they

represented. I had a feeling they where hostages in a setting not comfortable

for any of the members. They seldom met and the agenda was without

structure. They have now been involved in establishing the purpose of the

team and the new agenda. Even though some were not going to be members

of the new team, they supported the change and agreed it was necessary.

They welcomed the fact that I took the time to follow up, but some were

skeptical that the MD would change over time. Discussing organizational

energy, some stated that they were in the passion zone and some stated that

they were in the middle of all four zones but moving in the right direction.

Interview With the Working Group

The Core Team engaged 16 colleagues (working group reporting to the Core

Team) to get a broader view and more employee input regarding possible areas of

37

improvement. I had prepared three questions for discussion, and I met with 11 of the

employees from the working group:

1. Is the intention of the working culture assessment understood in the

organization?

2. What has happened since the June 5th meeting?

3. What are your expectations going forward?

The group was silent for a while after I presented the questions. I suggested

that the chronological sequence of the questions is not important but rather that we

have a discussion about where we are in connection with the work we have done so

far.

I noted that the respect for an executive leader in the room produced some

hesitation and uncertainties, most likely caused by the hierarchical

authoritarian structure they were accustomed to, and I spent some time

explaining why I wanted to meet with them and why I had a follow up. They

felt more at ease after some small talk. I learnt afterwards that this was

important because they had not been informed of the meeting or its purpose

and only learnt about my presence when they were called for the meeting.

After I allowed some silence in the room for reflection, the following comments were

offered:

The assessment was done so we can change our behaviors, our way of

working and to measure if we follow our own values in the organization. Also,

it was an opportunity to be heard.

We have started a lot of initiatives: an innovation team, a social room, job

rotation, and a kindergarten project. It is a wind of change! Some of us also

38

have a new manager who cares for us and who spends time with us. We feel

more motivated and engaged and we have added more resources.

We expect that the action points identified will be realized and that some

changes taken place already will be improved. This will keep up the

motivation in the organization and it is an ongoing process.

I felt the comments were sincere. It took a little time to open up and it was

evident that there is some fear among some employees when it comes to

expressing their feelings openly. This can be a combination of the working

culture in the organization and the fact that some are not used to talking with

an executive, in spite of the fact that they have met me many times. When a

few first started to talk, the others followed suit, became relaxed, and we had

some good discussions. I was very pleased to hear their statement that this is

an ongoing process.

Interview With the Core Team

The Core Team of seven employees where extremely important in the working

culture assessment. They represented the employees and were an important

alliance in the intervention. If they did not understand what we did, and if they could

not drive the process of delivering a “Message to the Management,” we would not be

able go through with the intervention. The Core Team was highly committed and they

were able to involve the organization through interviews and questionnaires. We

prepared the Core Team well for their presentation to the management. We also

prepared the management to receive the “Message to the Management” and how we

should work with the results.

The Core Team experienced the process as follows:

39

The perspective of the assessment depends on the seniority in the

organization. Some were skeptical due to previous experience when changes

were promised and they were not delivered or not sustained.

The first staff meeting where the assessment results were presented

confused many people. The first meeting we had was not good because some

managers interfered. The external consultant was pleasant to work with, but

his approach confused us. The model was too conceptual and we did not

recognize the way of working it was supposed to represent. Perhaps the

model was not relevant for our business? It was when the results from the

assessment were simplified and connected to our company values that we

could understand what to do. The engagement in the project moved us from a

comfort zone to a passion zone, especially in the process of involving other

people. People enjoyed contributing; they called us and asked questions and

wanted to support the program. This was very energizing.

I realized I had done the right thing by changing the approach and simplifying

the language in the report. Ignoring people’s perceptions and level of

understanding in an intervention and not seeing the values and basic

underlying assumptions (Schein 1990, p. 111) in the working place can be

disastrous. Feeling “The smell of the place” is a key factor for success.

Further Discussions With the MD

I gave the MD some general feedback from my interviews. There was a mix of

positive and negative responses from the interviews but overall, people had a

positive and optimistic perception about the assessment and the outcome. We both

felt very pleased with the outcome.

40

We agreed that I would prepare the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator for him and

that I will send out a survey to the whole German organization targeting relevant

questions in relation to the working culture assessment. I would then follow up with a

new visit in a few weeks to discuss the type indicator result and most likely I would

also have more questions for him.

I wanted to have a deeper understanding of the MD’s behavior and

preferences. During the interviews and in management team building

sessions I could observe how he reacts to people differently. What is

important for him, and why does he get energized with some people while he

is rather annoyed with others? The MD is curious to know himself better as

well and was very interested to take the type test.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

This popular personality assessment tool was begun during World War II by

Katherine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Meyers. Both were students

of Carl Jung and wanted to adapt his theories to the workplace. It was standardized

in 1962 and is now widely used in business and in many different settings.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a self-report questionnaire

designed to make Jung’s theory of psychological types understandable and

useful in everyday life. The MBTI results identify valuable differences between

normal, healthy people, differences that can be the source of much

misunderstanding and miscommunication. (Myers et al., 1998, p. 5)

The outcome of the MBTI showed the MD’s dominant function as extraverted

intuition with the auxiliary function as introverted feeling (ENFP).

The characteristics of ENFPs are being curious, creative and imaginative and

energetic, enthusiastic and spontaneous. They value harmony and goodwill.

41

They are also usually lively, gregarious, and sociable with a large circle of

friends.

On the other hand, the ENFP type may hate routine, schedules, and

structure and usually manage to avoid them. They may not take care of

details and routines and under great stress they may become overwhelmed

by detail and lose their normal perspective and sense of options. (Myers et al.,

1998, p. 21).

When the report was available, we discussed it on the phone. He was very

pleased with the report and confirmed that he found it incredibly accurate. We

agreed to a follow up meeting to discuss his preferences. In addition, I had some

more items to discuss since our last meeting.

At this stage I started to reflect on whether or not there is something I do not

understand or am not catching. Is something hidden? Is there something I’m

searching for that is not there, or is it something I don’t see? Does the MD

conceal something or is he honest in his communication? Do I ask the right

questions? Perhaps I did experience his “inner theater” (Kets de Vries, 2012,

p. 11) or maybe I did not?

Follow Up Meeting With the MD

The MD likes to brag about good achievements and shows a high level of

confidence when things go well. On the other hand, he will show a great deal of

frustration when things do not go well.

I decided to go deeper into his past to understand more about him (Kets de

Vries, 2010, pp 208-212). In our talks he told me that he grew up in a small German

village with his mother and father around him as well as his grandparents. It was a

harmonious life, neither rich nor poor, and things generally went well in life. He has

42

an expectation that other people should be happy as well and may show frustration

towards people with a “darker” mind or a more critical approach to life. During our

discussions, he has been open about his family and his childhood and his

relationship to his wife and young daughter. The MD is comfortable talking about

himself regardless of the topic, and we could discuss all aspects of his past and

present life situation. I led him into Hidden Commitment (Lehman, 2013) discussions

and possible relationship conflict areas using the Core Conflictual Relationship

Themes (CCRT) (Book, 1998, pp. 21-32).

Prior to the meeting I had prepared the following topics and questions to

discuss.

1. What makes you feel good and why?

2. What makes you annoyed and why?

3. What energy kick (positive drivers, motivation: external and internal) do

you get as a leader?

4. What are your values and beliefs? (Are you able to live those values and

beliefs – also when it comes to relationships)?

Based on the questions, we discussed the energy a leader gets from his

position and the how a leader can use that energy to influence the organization. We

discussed who gave him energy and who drained his energy - and why. We talked

about leaders we both had in the past who had influenced us and why. We talked

about acceptance and being accepted. In addition, we had a lengthy discussion

about the MBTI report and our preferences. He offered the following remarks:

When business is going well, we have success. We need to win, and the

employees and my managers need to understand that. This brings us

forward. I feel good and everybody else should feel good as well when we are

43

doing well. If the competition is hard, we need to fight. I don’t like to hear

about impossibilities. I dislike loss of time and appreciate that people know

what to do and then do it. I expect my managers to work hard and move

people forward. I get very frustrated when my managers don’t do what we

have agreed or when they drown me in details. The coaching has taught me

to say no to time thieves and to be more focused on the organization. I can

handle a lot of information very fast and do not need to spend hours on

details. I look forward to having structured management meetings with the

new agenda and the new members. I will also walk around more, seeing the

employees and talking with them. I like doing that but have not prioritized it.

I addressed his “Things to Work On” list, and he confirmed that these items

were the same issues that the external coach and he had settled on as well:

1. In the management meetings

a. Be a better communicator and listener

b. Avoid sarcastic comments

c. Give feedback

d. Let others contribute and value their contributions

e. Encourage people

f. Keep the structure

2. Availability

a. Be more visible and talk more with people in the office

b. Bring some visitors around (share your external job internally)

3. Commitments

a. Attend agreed meetings, appointments, and respect deadlines

b. Inform in due time when you cannot keep an appointment

44

When challenging him again to name one topic where he should improve, he

suggested the one that he mentioned in our previous conversation: Being more

patient!

Using the Hidden Commitment exercise (Lehman, 2013) we realized that

anything that threatened his positive and happy feelings would make him feel

uncomfortable and less worthy. This was possibly due to his growing up in a stable

atmosphere. We discussed relationship conflict areas, and, in general, he does not

have a professional relationship conflict he is aware of. The MD has a large network

and speaks with members of his network often. This is, of course, his selected

network of both social and business associates. A conflict may occur when

discussions or behavior do not reflect his preferred behavior. As an example, this

happens with one of his managers who will be very focused on details; in those

circumstances, the MD will quickly lose his focus because of those very details. Then

the other person will add even more details, and faster, to compensate for the MD’s

lack of interest and the situation grows into a deeper conflict between the two.

During our discussions and when shadowing him in the office and when he

met external contacts, it became clear to me that he is an authentic leader and that

he has a clear understanding of how to positively influence people in the

organization as he does with the customers. He has followers and he enjoys being in

the driver’s seat. He has become much more aware that he can increase or reduce

productivity with his behavior towards managers and employees,

According to his MBTI, his preference is in the positive direction, with little

tolerance for the opposite, seeing the world through rose-colored glasses.

Discussing the MBTI report I could easily connect to the preferences he has. I

have the same type and preferences! I felt a “countertransference reaction”

45

(Kets de Vries, 2012, p. 237) that we hardly had any challenging discussion –

but agreed on the preferred behaviors. We very well knew what made us

happy and what caused our irrational behaviors as we discussed them.

Employee Survey Based on the Working Culture Assessment

We conducted an employee survey at end-of-year 2013 and collected the

answers January 7th, 2014. The aim was to assess the perception from the overall

organization on leadership and changes after the June 5th, 2013 staff meeting, in

which employees participated in providing input to a list of possible changes. In

addition, we wanted to keep up the momentum of the intervention to secure

continued implementation that will take place in 2014 and onwards. The following

questions were asked in the survey:

1. How long have you been employed by WWL?

2. Are you male or female?

3. Are you a manager with personnel responsibility?

4. I participated in one of the working groups for the cultural assessment.

5. In our office we have an open communication.

6. I get the information I need to carry out my job.

7. Management share openly key information about the company.

8. We have regular department meetings.

9. We have regular staff meetings.

10. Teaming and Collaboration has improved in my department since the

working culture assessment and the “Message to the Management.”

11. Teaming and Collaboration has improved between my department and

other departments since the working culture assessment and the “Message to the

Management.”

46

12. It is accepted that I come with ideas for improvements in my work.

13. I can openly suggest innovative ideas to others.

14. We have a creative and innovative working environment.

15. We have sufficient resources to carry out our daily work.

16. I have sufficient skills to carry out my daily job.

17. My organization is dedicated to my professional development.

18. In my department we have an atmosphere of openness and trust.

19. The changes in the organization have a positive effect on my working

environment since the working culture assessment.

20. My manager promotes teamwork.

21. I am passionate about my work.

22. My manager is passionate about his/her work.

23. Management within my organization recognizes strong job performance.

24. Do you think the organizational change will meet future challenges?

25. Do you have any other comments, questions, or concerns?

The respondents could answer Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral (neither

agree nor disagree) Agree or Strongly Agree. The response rate was 95%! The

results show that 40-50% has a positive perception (agree/strongly agree) of the

change program, and 50-60% has a neutral response. Further, the survey shows

that there is a 50-50 split of the perception (neutral/agree), if; a) they have

participated in one of the working groups or not, and b) if they have been employed

0-5 years or 6 years and up. This means that their perception of the assessment

program is not influenced by their direct participation or how long they have been

employed.

47

A follow up survey, with the same questions, will take place at the end of

2014.

Conclusions and Reflections

While it would be wonderful to be able to show financial evidence that our

intervention has increased revenue based on productivity and innovative thinking,

what we can report is the existence of some observable, positive changes within the

German organization. We have observed that the MD is more aware of his influence

on the organization, and we experience him as much more active in our executive

board meetings. His change of behavior and understanding of contemporary

leadership has created a change in the organization. The coaching he was subject to

gave him the skill to change. We realized that he did have the will to change, and

this moved us forward (Kets de Vries, (2006), p. 137). By applying the insights

derived from individual change (the MD) to the domain of organizational

transformation, we managed to facilitate and drive the organizational change (Kets

de Vries, 2006, 138). The perception of the other managers and employees is that

attention to the psychodynamics in the organization creates more loyalty and more

energy. People could easily relate to the concept of organizational energy and what

drivers are required to get there. Managers took on the challenge to be more

communicative, and they started to have regular department meetings. Teamness

may impact an organization’s productive energy and employees’ job satisfaction and

turnover intentions (Raes, Bruch, & De Jong, 2013, p. 182). The departments have

started to cooperate even more and share their challenges and their work with one

another. The flow of communication across departments has grown. The fear of

48

speaking up and addressing improvement issues has changed noticeably. The key

driver for change was engagement – from both managers and employees – towards

a common target they all understood.

Will it last? We know it will take time, and we will follow up on the progress.

The new management team, once in place, will behave differently because of the

outcomes initiated by this intervention, and we have already planned new team

development activities once all members are in place. The biggest threat is not

people’s ability to change, but the MD’s commitment to the change and his

willingness and ability to sustain the learning, keep the promises, and be consistent

in his drive and communication.

It has been interesting to work in the German organization and to learn of the

comparison of the different types of leadership as expressed by the Germans: the

Scandinavian style is perceived to be more open and inclusive, while the German

style is thought of as more traditional and hierarchical. Employees who had previous

working experience in other German companies confirmed that they never had staff

meetings and were never given information about strategies or results. This causes

me to wonder what it is that makes the difference. We know that the German

industry is very effective, and they produce products of high quality. Germany is

doing well financially, and they have a history of building themselves up from

economic downturns and previous wars. Germany is the highest ranking of the EU

countries when it comes to patent registrations, indicating that their creativity and

innovation must be very good as well. By changing their leadership styles to be more

contemporary and inclusive, will German industry develop even more? Will German

industry decline under a”contemporary” system? Or will there be a difficult transition

49

period? How flexible is the German structure? How dependent on the national

character and structure is the national business?

The organization as a whole has learnt from this intervention, including those

outside the German organization. Having leadership on the agenda makes all

leaders more comfortable talking about soft values and also about their own

concerns. The value of the discussions is at times higher than the activities we

engage in for change. The debate about leadership, psychodynamics, expectations,

and feelings amongst leaders and within the organization enables other leaders to

put forth a people-focused agenda, not as a subject belonging exclusively to the HR

department but as topics about ourselves and the people we have working for us.

The people, as an asset, is as important, or even more important, than any other

asset a company may have.

Since I managed to do an intervention as an internal consultant and learnt

from my own insecurity and anxiety as we moved along, it has been a great learning

experience. I was flexible when I needed to be and firm when I had to be. I also

learnt that the model for an assessment is a good communication tool - if it can be

truly communicated and understood. The challenge the external consultant and I had

with each other helped me to look at things differently and forced me to take charge

and trust my own behavior and feelings.

Communication needs to be adjusted to the audience and to the

preconceptions that people have about leadership, their own culture, and the topics

of intervention, values, and beliefs. The business leader as an authentic

communicator is needed regardless of national or work cultures, but we also need to

know our audiences and understand their worldview. The corporate world need

authentic leadership regardless of national boundaries.

50

We have decided to do a new intervention this year, in another part of the

organization, in another country – somewhat differently – but only slightly so.

“I transmit but do not create.” (Confucius)

51

References

Book, E. H. (1998). Identifying the CCRT focus. In How to practice brief

psychodynamic psychotherapy: The core conflictual relationship theme

method (21-32). Washington, DC: American Psychologist Association.

Bridges, W., & Mitchell, S. (2000, Spring). Leading transition: A new model for

change. Leader to Leader, 16, 30-36

Bruch, H., & Ghoshal, S. (2003) Unleashing organizational energy. MIT Sloan

Management Review, 45(1), 45-52.

Cameron, S. K., & Quinn, E. R. (1999). Diagnosing and changing organizational

culture. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Cameron, S. K., & Quinn, E. R. (2005). An introduction to the Competing Values

Framework. Organizational Culture White Paper.

Coutu, L. D. (2002). The anxiety of learning: An interview with Edgar H. Schein.

Harvard Business Review, R0203H.

Cross, R., Baker, W., & Parker, A. (2003, Summer). What creates energy in

organizations? MIT Sloan Management Review, 51-56.

Dickens, L. & Watkins, K. (1999). Action Research: Rethinking Lewin. Management

Learning, 30, 127-140. Retrieved from

http://mlq.sagepub.com/content/30/2/127l

Florent-Treacy, E., Saccarelli, M., & Kets de Vries, M. (2013). Best Western Italy

(Parts AC): Creating an authentizotic organization by putting people first.

INSEAD Case Study. Retrieved from

http://research.insead.edu/2013/01/florent-treacy-elizabeth-saccarelli.html

Fry, W. L., & Slocum, W. J., Jr. (2008). Maximizing the triple bottom line through

spiritual leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 37(1), 86-96.

52

Hall, B. P. (1994). Values shift: A guide to personal and organizational

transformation. Rockport, MA: Twin Lights.

Ghoshal S. (2010, March 3). Smell of the place [Video file]. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUddgE8rIOE

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Victoria, Australia:

Deakin University Press.

Kets de Vries, M. (2006). The leadership mystique: Leading behavior in the human

enterprise. London, England: FT Prentice Hall.

Kets de Vries, M. (2010). Reflections on groups and organizations. San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kets de Vries, M. (2012). The leader on the coach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass..

Lehman, R. (2013). Hidden competing commitments. [PowerPoint Slides]. INSEAD.

Levinson, H. (2009). Organizational assessment. Washington DC: American

Psychological Association.

Myers, B. I., Kirby, L. K., & Myers, K. D. (1998). Introduction to type: A guide to

understanding your results on the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA,

Consulting Psychologists Press..

Obholzer, A. (1996). Psychoanalytical contributions to authority and leadership

issues. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 17(6), 53-56.

Raes, A. ML., Bruch, H., & De Jong, B. S. (2013). How top management team

behavioural integration can impact employee work outcomes: Theory

53

development and first empirical tests. Human Relations, 66(2), 167-192.

Retrieved from http://hum.sagepub.com

Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109-119.

Van de Loo, E., & Lehman, R. (2013, March). Understanding change and transitions.

[PowerPoint slides]. INSEAD.