BlueApricot

Presenting problem by client: A large publicly-traded company had acquired three companies which had very different work environments and performance accountability systems. Tensions within the newly made up executive team, made up of employees from all four entities, prevailed on what the priorities were to support merger integration and financial success. The tensions were spilling over to middle management, resulting in lack of cooperation and refusal to comply with company rules. The company lost a number of high performing employees who did not like the new atmosphere.

Challenge: The top team members were suspicious of one another and their diverse backgrounds were seen as a problem rather than strength to be leveraged. Some had only worked for large multi-million dollar companies while others were familiar with start-ups or boutique companies. There was a philosophical disagreement on what would improve the bottom line: cost cutting (including layoffs) and improved management of existing resources, or fostering a work environment in which employees were valued, engaged in strategy and goal setting, with absolute minimal layoffs.

Discovery: Following interviews with middle and upper management staff, including the CEO, CFO and COO, we discovered, not surprisingly, that trust was low and the level of candor about problems and challenges was virtually minimal. Few people understood the rationale behind at least two of the three acquisitions and fear was rife that the CEO and CFO were interested only in cutting labor costs. Others wanted to see the larger company leveraged for growth by offering new products while others believed a consolidation of existing products was needed. The company had a strategic plan that had not been visited in a year and needed revising in light of the acquisitions. The company was struggling with how to get everyone on the same page when so many different views prevailed?

Solution: We decided the CEO and the executive team needed to first focus on their leadership role: we began that work by facilitating dialogue around their values and aspirations for the company using a combination of assessments and exercises to help them open up to one another. Initially, not unlike the middle management’s experience of finding the top team resistant to conversing about the problems, we were met with a mixture of resistance and skepticism as to whether what we were doing would make any difference. The breakthrough came after the second meeting following giving the team ‘no bull’ feedback from the discovery process. One executive began to share how he had initially been excited about coming to work for the CEO only to find him unapproachable and seemingly preoccupied with cost savings. Over the next three hours, the conversation turned on its head as it became clear the CEO understood his role needed to change from protecting the status quo to seeing the larger threat confronting the company: a demoralized team and staff who did not trust his priorities were right. Following our team coaching methods, we saw the emergence of a new team made up of the same players but now spending more time with each other to figure out how they could support each other to accomplish high trust and greater productivity.

Results: The executive team identified the values by which they would operate in the future. They also committed themselves to a new approach to determining strategy in which the views of rank and file employees would serve as a catalyst for establishing the vision over the next five years. The top team itself began to breakdown misunderstandings by meeting on a bi-weekly basis to improve communication and information sharing, as well as partner with each other on different initiatives. The middle management ranks were enthusiastic about the planning process and came up with suggested goals and revenue targets that exceeded the expectations of some of the most skeptical executives. Within five months, the team coaching had paid off: productivity and profitability increased and the workplace environment became significantly more positive. Only a few layoffs were made, the result of individual poor performance on established goals rather than as part of a cost cutting exercise. The top team, including the CEO, admitted it had been feeling overwhelmed after the mergers and following the loss of a major contract before we came in. They now felt energized to seize new opportunities, work cohesively among themselves and with each others’ direct reports, and began building a more solid infrastructure to attract and retain top talent.

+ Click here to see Case Study 1