Our development programs are rooted in the strategic ambition of the company. An important part is therefore initial interviews and engagement with the top management team – partly to anchor the development process and partly so that the top management gets a clear picture of what the development process requires of them.
It is often a challenge to translate ambitions and goals so that they become concrete enough and thereby actionable. Building on the overarching strategy we provide tools and support for every single leader to become crystal clear on their strategic priorities and deliverables. We provide the leader with models and applicable tools that helps them and their teams to focus and understand their task in the light of the strategic ambition. This process is complemented by dialogues that create common understanding across the organization, as it is often here that competing goals and understandings create conflicts and sub-optimization. We call this approach “Leadership by design”.
Finally, there is a need for leaders to get help and support to develop their team and their own skill set. This process includes both familiar themes and models as well as new elements such as “organized talks” and “heart-beat teams”. We use relevant personal profile tools such as Hogan, DiSC, and MBTI and use Habitdrivers to change and anchor new habits, both for teams and individuals.
When we work with concrete changes, we supplement our methods with a mapping of who in the organization that others are listening to. Who do you go to when you need input or support? Typically, 3% of the company’s employees have good contact with 80% of all employees. When we know who the 3% are, they become involved as the organization’s voice in dialogue with the management. In this way, the company is helped to focus on the problems that are perceived as the most important to solve in the organization.
In organizations that are matrix-organized or work with agile approaches, we use sociocratic methods and models to create a culture that actually supports this organization. It is about balancing involvement and progress, and it requires fundamentally changed meeting structures, decision-making processes, and management understanding. These methods are accessible and well-described and “common sense” – but unfortunately not “common practice”.