: As a catalyst for change

CASE STUDY - AS A CATALYST FOR CHANGE.

INTRODUCTION

I was first introduced to Thurrock two or three years ago to work with the special project team in the implementation of change in two areas of working practise. The reason being that over the last nineteen years I have been involved in successful outcomes of dynamic development throughout the not for profit sector and corporate business in Europe.

At a point of time following this a Director of the organisation engaged in an investigation into the manner of the delivery of the material rather than concentrating on the end result. A somewhat unusual approach.

My location was then researched references taken and so it was quite a surprise to me to receive a formal invitation to attend the civic offices for a one to one meeting.

My work with the Human Rights Act, Diversity and Equality were of interest in the discussions that followed and eventually I was asked to help with the concept of cultural change within aspects of the authority.

It was decided to begin with a rather innovative approach.

To compare traditional training with this style of new learning would not be suitable. For example training is dependent upon an agreed agenda published in advance giving time scales aims and objectives and expected outcomes within a defined period of time. The method is of a more formal learning base, often with pre-prepared hand out notes and graphics. The method of delivery is one of fairly large groups of people (delegates) attending and the presentation of material involves o.h.p. PowerPoint, lecture and discussion.

The results are evaluated by various styles of critique and assessment and measured against the original aims and objectives laid out some time before.

I have worked in this traditional European based method of learning by achieving results on a multitude of occasions. It is traditional, proven, established and safe.

However Thurrock wanted something more!

Using my reference point of being a Chartered Marketer I was asked to market internally the possibility of developing an innovative method of new learning. It must be fully compliant within the Act and therefore in line with Thurrock Councils aims and objectives however it should be people based rather than topic based. We would take traditional business and management concepts, proven over the years (for example Maslow, Hertzberge, Berne, Luft and Ingham etc.) and revisit them in the light of staffs own understanding and experience. In other words we would approach the process of learning about change from the viewpoint of how the individual wanted to learn. Not what the Authority deemed should be learnt. The acceptance that modern management is about treating people the way they are. Old management was about treating people the way you wanted them to be. So who should attend?

I was asked to work with a swathe of attendees. A cross-section of peoples representing different types of jobs, working practice and possibly different beliefs and attitudes. Different levels of service and experiences. For example the group might involve Heads of Service, administrators, team leaders and team members. Invited not directed. Asked through the individuals approach to learning not the position they held. Encouragement not demands.

My work is not prescriptive it is innovative. So we had no title or agenda it was simply called an away day. The venue was the zone at Thameside to minimise costs. Informal layout and simply the only facility for visual aids were a flip chart. "How refreshing" it was commented upon.

To introduce the proceedings I explained a democratic approach. If the group agreed we would chair our own meetings, elect our own speakers and workshop style without hierarchy would be our method. My role as facilitator would be to introduce a subject listen to what the group said and respond by providing ways the group could investigate new learning. All agreed.

I had unfortunately made an assumption.

Following introductions at the start of the day I thought everyone new each other. I was wrong. It turned out later that although a number of the members of the group had worked in Thurrock for years and were office neighbours. They did not really know each other at all. Communicating with facade not real individuals. This itself was a major breakthrough because it began to show how learning had been stunted over many years.

The group’s point was just because they had attended some training in the past did not mean they had done anything about its outcomes.

So already the emphasis was beginning to lead towards dynamic change, how can we put into practice and make good what we learn?

Next we discovered that each team member wanted to learn in different ways. The group wanted to challenge the traditional method of educational delivery for business and in particular the use of visual aids. It was expressed that one only has to sit at the back of an auditorium when the visual aid is switched on to see the sigh of boredom set in. So there was no point in me trying to deliver any lectures!

Some wanted to learn fast, make decisions and move on. Others wanted text time to consider and evaluate. Others needed concepts pictures innovation and choice. On the other hand some members needed to be involved, practical ideas, participation, and how could we transfer our new learning to the work place. This meant I had to deliver in four separate methods and that way everyone is involved.

Further more when debate moved towards specific agendas we realised how ill equipped we were to discuss contentious issues. We could talk about them ok. But in the process of discussion some individuals sustained internal damage when their view was not accepted. Outcomes for the sake of it but no consensus and under the circumstances resentment and no real team.

The group wanted to learn how to improve this situation.

Then we discovered probably the most important point of all. Members began to explode a theory as they expressed the realisation that in business terms they were running their jobs in a results orientated manner. Everything was about getting results, targets, objectives, and headlines.

It could never be achieved because a result is an historical event. One cannot change it. So the long held and subscribed to view that the management of change will solve a problem in business will not work. Another myth exploded.

So by now the group were working as a motivated team. Fuelled by the desire for new learning not old thinking. They were setting the pace and content and the agenda. I was setting the tone.

The outcome was to concentrate on activity based working to control future results, in other words to manage the levels of activity in the work place, which will maximise end results.

The group termed this a move from management towards leadership.

EVALUATION

Years ago in agreement with the client course critiques would have been issued and there is still a need to provide this in formal training.

The delegate expresses what they have picked up on during the course. How they enjoyed it. The presentational style of the Tutor. The course content and the venue. This is then processed and monitored to conclusions.

This method must be continued as part of an organisation planned training procedure, however it is not the only way.

In dynamic learning such as the one described above the team elected to have feedback sessions with each other and the director concerned so that progress was determined by how issues were put into practice in the work place. Also what affect this was having on activity levels leading towards improving results.

To close the loop, as facilitator I meet with the individual team members to counsel and mentor progress in an ongoing learning journey as individuals move forwards with new strength and confidence.

The very nature of this apparently began to highlight adjustments being recommended within the EDS as a whole.

By working with small groups quietly without any fuss this cost-effective model can now be adapted anywhere to meet the individual needs concerned.

The method remains the same but the subject matter changes to reflect the voices in the room.

The initial step for managers is to be able to recognise that things can improve at work and that many of the answers required already exist amongst staff. However often due to pressure of work the focus or motivation is not there. The longer the delay the worse it gets until eventually the busy manager becomes stressed and continuously reacts to increasing demands on both time and tasks alike. Sometimes I have heard it described in Thurrock as being "The fun has gone out of the job." Because this programme is designed with the participation of Heads of Service, the modern manager can witness a change in the team in terms of higher motivation, empowerment, delegation, taking responsibility enthusiasm and a more positive approach to new ideas. This is now achievable in a relatively short period of time. Thanks to the enthusiasm of the participants in Thurrock so far. By learning new concepts the manager or team leader finds how to stop reacting and start responding. Removes stress blocks and is in more control.

For the individual

A greater feeling of self-worth and improved self-esteem. A more confident and common sense approach to work. A sense of team belonging with respect. A wider skill base from which to embrace change.

An improved understanding of the human dynamic which is vital when engaging in the challenges that a public service such as the one Thurrock wishes to enhance in a modern multi- cultural society, showing improvement for all.

WHERE IS IT BEING USEFUL WITHIN THE CIVIC OFFICES? 

The model is in continuous improvement gaining input from participants across the different sections so we give as well as gain.

It is available now in modular form so the time allowed is flexible to suit the needs of the department. Also because relatively low numbers of people are involved at any one-time workflow is not hindered.

There have been some spectacular individual results.