During our conversation last week, you identified a few central issues. What follows is my organizational analysis.
Central Issues
Internal customers have not been happy with the Human Resources services provided by your department. Management is frustrated because when they need to hire someone, they have to call one person on Paula’s team to open the position, then deal with a person on Linda’s team to figure out the compensation level. Neither of those people is the person that the manager typically works with on the employee relations issues from Steven’s team. Then, the next time the manager has to hire someone, he will need to call Paula again and might be assigned a different recruiter. Managers want one person to call to handle all of their HR services.
Additionally, because it is a tight market for the best people, you need to open positions, interview candidates, and get job offers out much more quickly.
ASP has 200 new positions per year to fill, plus turnover, so as it is now, each recruiter is handling 24 open positions at any given time. It is currently taking 77 days to find candidates, interview them and get a job offer out. You need the generalists to move twice as fast. Each generalist will have a quota to fill and will be measured on time to fill the positions.
You are moving from a functional model to a full client management services model to address management’s concerns. In the new model, teams serve various internal departments that run ASP. For example, Paula will now support the sales marketing team. She will be supported by a team of four generalists who will assist various assigned management team members in the sales and marketing division. The full client management services model will require a lot of teamwork.
You noted several issues resulting from the current changes. First, while everyone has been expecting change, a few people were laid off, creating a fair amount of tension. Rumors were running rampant due to the staffing reduction, and you’ve lost a lot of time and now need to move quickly to get people into their new teams and start recruiting.
Today, the new organizational chart was published, and the HR Support management team feels relief since they still have their jobs. The generalists are anxious due to the staffing reduction.
Furthermore, the generalists now need to work with new HR Support managers, and the HR Support managers are now directly reporting to Steven, who was formerly at their level.
Steven will now be director of HR operations, but this has not been formally announced yet. You recognize that the employee relations group is taking on recruiting responsibilities and will need initial training.
Generalists will be measured on the number of qualified candidates presented to management and the in-cycle time of open position to acceptance of the offer. Understandably, the generalists with no recruiting experience are nervous about their ability to meet the new performance standards. In addition, while the recruiters are happy for the expanded role, the employee relations specialists are not looking forward to adding recruiting responsibilities to their roles.
The advantage to the new model is that Paula, for example, will now be the point of contact for the Vice President of sales and marketing and will be much more involved in developing and understanding the sales marketing strategy. The HR strategy will align with the sales/marketing strategy, which will also be true for the other departments.
Another advantage will be that when a new employee is hired, they will work with one generalist throughout their career. You expect to see more satisfied internal clients and fewer complaints. Each HR Support manager will be directly responsible for their internal clients, so managers won’t need to go from team to team to get the job done. You believe the new model will improve the productivity and reputation of the HR team.
Services Requested
You requested team building because only a few people have worked closely together before, and as noted earlier, a full client services model requires a great deal of teamwork, which will require A new kind of coordination. Instead of doing their own thing and managing their own projects, HR Support managers and generalists will be part of a team to support each business function. As such, they need to share information, determine a strategy and direction, and take on new and unfamiliar responsibilities.
You are considering a team-building activity to help the teams get to know each other and lead to teamwork and collaboration. You have also suggested that the teams complete the Myers Briggs Personality Inventory to gain insights into each other’s working styles. Essentially, you want to get beyond the change to tangible results, and you would like guidance on how to proceed.
Recommended Intervention Strategies
I want to recommend that you begin by conducting a startup/transition team meeting that includes all of the HR support managers and generalists assigned to each team. You and Steven might both take part. You can formally announce Steven’s promotion at the meeting, and Steven can introduce himself to the group as a whole. Steven can cover the significant changes with the whole group, then explain his expectations of each team, and explain how the new structure will result in positive outcomes for all of them, leaving time for questions from the teams.
After that, HR support managers and their generalists can break into groups to allow the generalists to get to know their new manager and managers to understand the generalists with whom they will be working. The startup/transition meeting is an intervention specifically designed to address the needs of new teams and teams in transition and can help to start teams quickly (Anderson, 2012, p. 230).
Although some individuals within and among the teams may have some former knowledge of each other, they now find themselves in a new configuration, perhaps working with people they have no experience with or working with people they know in a new capacity. This startup/transition meeting should address some of the issues that typically present during this type of change.
The startup/transition meeting should be structured to include introductions of all team members and time to speak with the leader(s) about expectations, leadership style, and work preferences. (Anderson, 2012, p. 231) It’s possible to utilize the Myers-Briggs Typology Indicator to facilitate this type of discussion. I would recommend that all invited complete the survey before the meeting and bring the results to share so that it does not become the sole focus of the meeting. It is important to note potential sensitivities that some may have regarding sharing this type of information (Anderson, 2012 p. 199).
To ensure effective use of the instrument, you will need to provide a nonjudgmental atmosphere in which to share the results. Background information about the instrument and its purpose should also be conveyed to participants so that everyone can understand the benefits of the instrument and its limitations (Anderson, 2012, p. 199-200). A knowledgeable facilitator can encourage processing the results in a way that leads to self-discovery and awareness (Anderson, 2012 p. 230), and I would be happy to facilitate this part of the meeting.
The schedule should include time for the teams to explore their mission and goals, given the change in structure. Here, there could be a discussion about priorities, milestones, and performance metrics. There could be a discussion on how the teams might divide work up, considering everyone’s current expertise and the individual performance measurements. It would also be essential to assess members’ roles and responsibilities within each team (Anderson, 2012,p. 231).
Certainly, agreement on team norms will be necessary. Teams may want to consider how they will make decisions, and final authority on decisions should be made clear. Obtaining agreement on what agenda items to include in future team meetings, how frequently team meetings will occur, and the duration and location of team meetings could take place at this startup/transition meeting (Anderson, 2012, p. 231).
The startup/transition meeting can address your need for the individuals on each team to get to know each other’s work styles. Additionally, offering an opportunity for the new teams to address some of the processes they will need to create under the new structure will be an effective way to get past the change and move toward actual results.
This meeting can also provide an opportunity for additional data gathering and allow you to identify any underlying or hidden issue of which you may not currently be aware. Because Steven is the department’s new director, it might be wise to ask him if he would like to facilitate this meeting. I am happy to provide my consultation either as a facilitator of this transition meeting or assist Steven should he decide to facilitate.
Another possible issue that you mentioned is the relationship between Matthew and the former employee relationship specialist who will be reporting to him. Without knowing specific details of the “run-in” that occurred, it is difficult to assess how the relationship and the team could be affected in the future.
There are specific individual interventions that we could do to help to alleviate these types of interpersonal issues if needed. Perhaps taking part in the team-building intervention suggested in this proposal will help to alleviate any residual matters between the two. However, if you would like me to assist with further data gathering to illuminate any possible concerns from either Matthew or the unnamed individual reporting to him, we can discuss this when we next meet.
As Anderson (2012) notes, building a high-performing team takes time. Rather than approaching this intervention as a one-time fix-all, I recommend considering a long-term strategy beyond this individual meeting. If you are not seeing positive results within three months, I suggest that the teams come back together for a diagnostic session. We could create a customized survey or use a tested instrument to identify areas where the teams are experiencing issues. (Anderson, 2012, p. 228).
Also, as you noted, some generalists have recruiting experience, and some do not. I suggest finding a way to bring those with different backgrounds together to talk about how they can help each other through the transition. The former recruiters could provide training to the former employee relations specialists, and if needed, the former employee relations specialists could provide training to the former recruiters. This discussion could begin at the startup/transition meeting, and a follow-up intervention could be offered at a future date, if needed, to facilitate this type of cross-training.
If you would like to move forward with my recommendations and implement the suggested interventions, we should meet again and discuss the specific timeline for the interventions and clarify our roles and what role Steven and perhaps others might play in the intervention.
We can also clarify expectations for the consulting relationship and talk more about expectations for the engagement. For example, we will need to determine how we will evaluate the outcomes of the intervention. In other words, how will we know the intervention was successful? As Anderson (2012, p. 110) suggests, we can also determine what feedback you would like me to provide, to what extent, and how you would like such feedback to be delivered.
References
Anderson, D. (2012). Organization development: The process of leading organizational change.
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.