Agile Sensing and organisational change

Peter Paul Leutscher is a partner at RedZebra Group. Their mission: ‘To develop purposeful leadership and successful organisations in a society that is permanently changing’. Peter Paul has more than 30 years of experience of organisational change as member of the management and consultant. Here, he reveals more about this subject from his role as member of the management. “You need to become the change you want to see”.

You sat on the executive board of a well-known management consultancy firm. How do you start an organisational change as member of the management and how do you oversee this?

“To put it in perspective: we had 400 employees in this company, out of a total of 70 thousand worldwide. A big fish in our country, not so big if you take the scope of the company as a whole. The chairman of the board of directors at the time and myself as business development manager were in agreement in terms of our vision for change within our own organisation. We launched Project Dolphin, with the way in which dolphins communicate as a metaphor for communication, addressing a challenge together and creating a feeling of unity. Using Richard Barrett’s method, we did extensive research into the extent of cultural alignment in our organisation. What are your personal values and which values do you see reflected in the organisation, besides the fact that as a company you want and need to earn money? The results were not exactly positive. The outcome contradicted with the organizational vision as well as with the self-image in the head office. The research was filed away and the recommendations were not acted upon. In the end, I then stepped down from the management team. About eight months later it emerged that we were right after all. The business was hit by an integrity crisis, there was talk of ‘failing to act with integrity’ at the head office and we barely pulled through. It cost the company more than a billion in fines and much more in shareholder value. You may still recall the Enron scandal, which involved the former accountancy firm Arthur Andersen. Large-scale fraud was committed at Enron. Two partners of Arthur Andersen knew about this and were just as involved. This resulted in the demise of both companies. The scandal came out because an Enron employee disclosed the case.

Can you translate this to the situation where you want to carry out an organisational change?

“In general: if you notice that an organisation is really very focused on short-term profits and you find there is little else, it’s difficult. ‘Culture eats strategy for Breakfast’. The Anglo-Saxon mentality of shareholder value is in itself not wrong as long as this does not lead to exploitation of the potential for revenue (i.e., your people). If this is the case, input from the shop floor is ignored and it often goes wrong. The middle management is frequently in a difficult position. The real story is actually told at the coffee machine, but no one dares to speak up publicly. The common phenomenon of a culture of fear. The top hears and senses nothing and as a cure, or remedy, targets efficiency and cost savings with even greater drive. Slowly but surely the spirit of the organisation is being managed out. The perception from the top is often ‘all they do is complain, fail to take responsibility and cut corners’. They are not OK, but we are very OK as the top’. Ultimately, the shareholders are themselves responsible for value destruction because they appoint the people at the top and set targets. The remuneration system depends on this.

How important is business agility for the continued existence of a company? And how does the introduction of agile working differ from a traditional organisational change?

“We were already focused on agility then, I believe, even if we didn’t refer to it as such. We asked for more ownership to create autonomous behaviour in people to a certain extent. You could already see then, if you took the time to listen properly to what people genuinely had to say, that you ended up with the things that are really valuable for adapting and continuing an organisation.”

Do you see that you can unlock something in your employees if you operate with anonymity, such as with agile sensing?

“Absolutely essential was and is a sufficient degree of psychological safety in the group. If so, people will come forward with their points for improvement. You spoke to people who had never spoken up because they did not feel safe previously. People will not otherwise show the best of themselves. It is necessary for the management style of leadership to facilitate this safety – through a guarantee of anonymity. But also for management, or the management team, to commit to the outcomes. Even if it has a personal consequence. ‘You need to become the change you want to see’, as mentioned earlier. When management, confronted with the feedback from their staff, chose to ignore the feedback when this is not to their liking, they behave very rudely. ‘The truth will set you free, but will piss you off first’. Organisational transition and pain always go hand in hand because you have to say goodbye to the old. In a hierarchical organisation the example that the top sets cannot be underestimated. If a blaming culture exists, people will be afraid. Freeing oneself from such a culture is a big thing.” Many organisations have been experimenting for years with the ideas of ‘The Just Culture’ by Sydney Dekker. Unfortunately, this is not yet commonplace in the script of modern business and government agencies.

Can you use narrative research as a means of motivating people?

“If there is a lack of movement at the top, for looking in the mirror and also scrutinising one’s own leadership style, then nothing will happen. That’s one thing. However, if you collect stories from your own people with such research, then as management it is hard for you to maintain that it is nonsense. If you fail to take these outcomes seriously, where are you guiding as management? Middle management is really always trapped. Here, is it also important how autonomously and self-assuredly a manager takes his role. A weak manager simply copies the story from MT. A strong manager takes due consideration of his team interest and ensures that his department within the organisation is a driving force. Stubborn but with good results, that sort of thing.”

A conclusion in relation to agile sensing

“Agile sensing gives an organisation a way to uncover the undercurrent and set something in motion in the process. Provided that the management team is fully committed beforehand. Agile sensing also, of course, contributes to connecting the oh so crucial connecting threads between the top and the other organisation layers. For everyone, it will be a confrontational experience, creating full transparency. But I am convinced that it is a very welcome, indeed crucial, information source for successful companies. As previously mentioned. Organisational transformation is not an easy feat. If the comfortable existing elite are unwilling to take a look at themselves in the mirror from an open positive attitude, you can forget all about any transition. It starts with personal leadership.”

Download the interview here