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.