. .

Let me introduce myself

Clement Leemans

Coaching & Co : Community of Practice at UC Leuven Limburg
Move! worked with the University College Leuven-Limburg to set up a Community of Practice on 'Coaching & Co'. It bri...
INDAVER People Make Projects Work
Context & Issues Indaver is a waste management player, active on the Belgian, Dutch, German, GB and Irish market. Fo...
Distributed Leadership
Leemans, C., (2017). Distributed Leadership. A powerful engine for Organizational Performance. Leadership Excellence Ess...
Dialogic Organization Development
Gervase Bushe & Robert Marshak (eds.), (2013). Advances in Dialogic OD. OD Practitioner. Journal of the Organization...
Collaboration between Turkey and EU companies
C. Leemans, M. Ozgödek, et al. (2013) International Network for Organizational Performance (INOP). Collaborating in Div...
Cristal Union A Learning Network as policy driver
Context & Issues In the organization a number of sugar and alcohol plants come together. Traditionally those plants...
Carglass Belux Performance Improvement Process
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Context : The organization works with a lot of, relatively small, subsidiaries. The central HR depa...
KBC Insurance A co-creative strategic process
INTRODUCTION: Process Consulting for a major ‘business strategy development’ project where we focused on involving a...
Distributed Leadership & Autonomous Motivation
Paul Adler, Charles Hecksher & Laurance Prusak., (2011). Building a Collaborative Enterprise. Four Keys to creating...
ERM Towards a Learning Organization
Context & Issues ERM Belgium - Holland, is a subsidiary of a large US based Environment and Sustainability consultan...
Shaping the Organization
At the end, it's not about Strategy, but about execution and results. And execution depends very much on what people do,...
Change Management
Scott Keller & Caroline Aiken., (2000). The inconvenient truth about Change Management. Why it isn't working and wha...
Practice Areas
We develop exclusively customized approaches geared to your organizational challenges and focusing on sustainable busine...
Job Crafting : A new look at job and workplace design
Amy Wrzesniewski, Justin M. Berg, & Jane E. Dutton., (2010). Turn the Job you Have into the Job you Want. Harvard Bu...
The Lafarge Learning & Development Network
C. Leemans. (2004), The Lafarge Learning & Development Network. A collaborative effort to develop and implement orga...
Sustainable Business Development
Barry Colbert & Elizabeth Kurucz., (2007). Three Conceptions of Triple Bottom Line Business Sustainability and the R...
HRD as a strategic business lever
C. Leemans & S. Duts (2013)., Human Ressources Development as a strategic business lever. This article has been writ...
Using Consultants in Organizations
Edgar Schein, (1990). A General Philosophy of Helping : Process Consulting. Sloan Management Review. Process Consultatio...
Engaging Experiential Learning Activities
C. Leemans, (2010). Engaging Experiential Learning Activities Ideally experiential learning happens “at work” and is...
Organizations in the Collaborative Economy & Peer-to-Peer
Bauwens & Kostakis., (2014) Network Society and Future Scenarios for a Collaborative Economy. The thinking about dis...
Move! 10th Anniversary
Move! 10 Years !!! In September 2004, so 10 years ago by now, Clement decided to change his Learning & Development D...
How Organizations Trigger Sustainable Performance.
C. Leemans. (2012) How Organizations trigger Sustainable Performance. A Mental Model for Organizational Development. In...
Learning Organization
Garvin, David A., Amy C. Edmondson, and Francesca Gino. "Is Yours a Learning Organization?" Harvard Business Review 86,...
Strategic HRM ?
Ulrich, D., (2010). Are we there yet ? What's next for HR ? Michigan Ross School of Business, Executive White Paper Seri...
Support for internal facilitators Lafarge China
INTRODUCTION: Due to rapid growth and acquisitions, the Corporate University wanted to decentralize its integration prog...
Strategic Leadership
A high performing organization is agile, capable of inventing rapidly new answers to the global, fast changing, complex...
Job Crafting
Leemans, C., (2014). Learning Organization & Job-crafting : A powerfull couple ? In this short article Clement Leema...
SHRM Practices
Is our HRM triggering the individual and collective behavior we want to see in a learning organization : autonomy, intra...
Learning & Change
Our focus is on building Learning and Change Capabilities in the organization. That can take place in different contexts...
Organizing for Sustainable Performance
C. Leemans, (2016). Organizing for Sustainable Performance In this short four page leaflet, we present Move! as an OD Co...
Strategic Process
Gerry Johnson, Kevan Scholes and Richard Whittington., (2005), Exploring Corporate Strategy (7th Edition) Prentice Hall....

Follow Move!

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

Context : The organization works with a lot of, relatively small, subsidiaries.  The central HR department manages the Performance Management Process (classical evaluation procedure, based on a yearly interview, personal objectives, linked to bonuses,…).

Business Issue : The evaluation procedure has become a merely ‘administrative process’ which is not anymore driving people’s behavior and performance and has lost all credibility in the organization.  More than 50 percent of the employees do not get feedback on their performance.  Most of them have not even individual objectives.

Initial Request : Can you propose a different evaluation format.

Consulting Process / Intervention :

  • After having analyzed the existing situation through several focus groups with most of the stakeholders (HQ management, HR, managers subsidiaries, employees, labor union representatives) the following issues occurred :
    • The fact that all subsidiaries had the same centrally decided objectives, made it difficult for the subsidiaries to develop and ‘entrepreneurial attitude’
    • Subsidiaries were subsequently mere ‘mailboxes’ of the decisions and interventions of central and regional managers, which lead to a very ‘passive’ attitude from most subsidiary managers
    • The performance data did not provide very specific feedback, which meant that the employees of the subsidiaries had no clear idea of their contribution to performance in the organization.  (they didn’t see the relationship between what and how they did things and good or bad results for the organization)
    • The individual objectives were rarely linked to the business objectives, but were ‘invented’ because we need to be able to ‘evaluate’. 
  • After the analysis, again with several focus groups as input, a mixed (customer / consultant) design team developed a new process that was based on the following principles :
    • Not focus on evaluation but on ‘performance improvement’
    • Create a cycle of events through which each subsidiary as a team (lead by their own manager) : creates an accurate image of their actual performance (SWOT); sets ‘subsidiary’ objectives; makes a team plan to get their; contracts on the individual contribution to the team.  The cycle included also regular ‘follow-up’ meetings to assess progress and adapt the action plan where necessary.
    • The focus in those team activities was not only on ‘business objectives’ but also on the process of working and learning as a team.
    • Underneath that team process, we developed an individual coaching process, through which the subsidiary manager coaches the individuals that report to him, in terms of their personal development and how they can achieve the contracted contribution to the team and the business.The implementation of all this was supported through
    • An internal team of facilitators that helped the subsidiary managers to start off this process.  These facilitators were trained to use the job-aids and coach and support the managers
    • Introductory training for all managers
    • Individual coaching by Move! where necessary (as a supplement for the internal facilitation)
    • A Toolkit with scenarios of the different team meetings (SWOT meeting, planning meeting, review meeting, …), job-aids, ideas of team activities, formats, etc…

RESULTS & IMPACT:

  • A clearly different role and attitude of subsidiary managers (more proactive / entrepreneurial)
  • More transparent contribution of subsidiaries to the business objectives
  • A far better link between real results, individual objectives, reward
  • Team cohesion
  • Ownership was felt for the performance of the organization
  • An increased knowledge and insight in the business / performance / customer satisfaction by all employees (including operators in the shops)
  • This process was generally recognized as a very powerful and innovative way to go about performance management.  Internally management took ownership for this process, the group recognized it as a best practice and the organization was awarded the “People Development Award” by Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School (Great Place to Work research).

download project sheet (pdf)  

 
Print Friendly
Top