Stefania Tattoni
Step 1. Identify key stakeholders
Identify and describe all key stakeholders that will play a role in the organizational design
or be impacted by it. Make sure to anonymize the stakeholders. Which parties do you need
to convince and get to sign off on your organizational design initiative? How will you go
about doing this?
The business challenge identified in the previous assessment was a framework aiming to evaluate
together several operational and organizational metrics whose variations monitoring can provide
an assessment of site management to plan development actions. Currently Ops management of
sites are classified by volumes processed only, not on their managerial complexity. Each site size
consists in a specific number of managers for each level. An organization based on standard size
excluding site complexities is easier to control in terms of budgeting but less effective in terms of
resources allocated. The workload is unbalanced across the network and, since the salary is the
same for people in the same level this can generate frustration and sense of injustice due to
differences across scenarios to be managed.
In order to propose a fluid staffing model through the usage of this framework I would recommend
to involve the following stakeholders:
-
-
Sr Ops Leadership / Country Manager to get the sponsorship and the interest for this project
Labor planning to get inputs on costs and labor budgeting
Finance in order to be aware of the initiative and for a first overview of constraints in terms
of costs/controlling or risks that may rise
ER & legal: partnering with ER and Legal to see implication in terms of compliance due
to this new flexible organization that may require frequent lateral moves across the
organization or flexible contracts to offer.
A small group of site leaders in order to involve internal customer’s point of view to
understand any managerial consequences
Step 2. Identify potential challenges
What are at least two potential obstacles or limitations of your organizational design? How
do you plan to minimize or address them? Be context-specific in your response.
1st limitation: in terms of worldwide scalability not to have a standardize staffing model of Ops
sites is risky because does not allow an easy check at site level if the number of resources is
sufficient or not. Even if at country level the number of resources can be checked, in case there is
a mismatch vs targeted number of managers required the deep dive to understand discrepancies
would require more efforts and too much discretion at the country level
Minimization action: to provide not a 100% fluid model but a new classification not limited to
volumes size but a model able to embrace a limited number of complexities
2nd limitation: complexity factors identified should be consistent during short range of time,
because if higher complexities require higher number of people, to arrange lateral moves or
promotions to cover quickly a position would generate extra costs or a frustrating management
experience.
Minimization action: complexities should be calculated annually in order to guarantee a bit of
stability in terms of teams, turnover and employee stability.
Step 3. Outline your HR leadership action plan
Articulate an HR leadership action plan, referencing Kotter’s eight-step model of leading
change. Provide at least two specific examples of how you would effectively implement the
organizational design or change?
In order to implement effectively this model sizing change, I would recommend to describe
carefully the current situation, where a standard sizing model based on volumes generates extra
costs and unbalanced workload across sites. There are sites in contingency that need people
traveling to provide additional support (since they are out of standard staffing model), whereas
there are other sites that have managers not working at 100% of their possibility and are leaving
since the context is not enough challenging for them. Metrics on Managers’ engagement and
attrition are increasing and this is impacting also Operational staff engagement and absenteeism
rate since they are not sufficiently supported as they should from managers.
The reasons mentioned above should create a sense of urgency for the organization to implement
this organizational change.
A team composed by Sr Leadership, HR, ER, Legal, Finance and Site leaders should be established
in order to gather all the elements that have to be considered to draft the new sizing model based
on complexities.
The role of site leaders will be fundamental to lead the change afterwards with other managers
(Build guiding team). Once the new sizing model has been defined a staffing meeting involving
all leaders to cascade the vision behind this organizational choice must be arranged
(Communicate the vision). the organizational change will be represented as the desire not to
provide all sites with the same dress, but to provide the best dress that can be the perfect outfit for
one's body shape.
Leaders role will be fundamental to share with managers this change. Leaders through 1:1 will
identify promoters and detractors of this initiative, managing them individually with the support
of HR developing other lateral opportunities for those who don’t want to embrace this change
(empower action).To make this change stick, monthly updates on metrics will be shared in order
to keep monitored the achievement of the reorganization based on the fluid standard staffing model
and in order to facilitate over the time this change also incentives can be provided in order to
support managers to accept easier lateral moves vs more complex context.