Achieving performance excellence and forming strategic partnerships using the language of work model

11

Performance Improvement, vol. 50, no. 10, November/December 2011©2011 International Society for Performance Improvement

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/pfi.20248

ACHIEVING PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE AND FORMING STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS USING THE LANGUAGE OF WORK MODEL

Elaine Jones

I WAS INTRODUCED to Danny Langdon’s language of work (LOW) model in 1997 while working for an international pipeline company in Calgary, Alberta, and I have been successfully using it ever since. What initially attracted me to the model over the many other perfor-mance consulting models and approaches was the inclu-sion of conditions and feedback in addition to the typical inputs, process steps, outputs, and consequences (or out-comes), and the ability to complete major pieces of work in a very short period of time. I have used this model extensively over the past 14 years, and it is the cornerstone of all my work in organizations.

USING THE LOW MODEL I have developed and mentored teams of human resource and performance consultants to understand the essence of “big P” performance using the LOW model. I have been able to inform, influence, and guide executives and leaders in many different organizations (private, public, and non-profit) of the value of not only doing this type of work for excellent business results but of using a common language or model throughout the organization to assimilate it into the organization culture. My team members and I have used the model for cultural audits of two merging entities; for organization scans or reviews to delve more deeply into employee and work environment survey results; to facilitate organization design and redesign, including structure, competencies, and job models; for workload and process reviews to help employees understand their work but also reduce stress levels and influence change; to define and manage the white space among three different departments with overlapping responsibilities; and to cre-ate entirely new organizations based on first defining the work and then the organization to support it.

SUCCESSFUL CONSULTATIONS WITH THE MODELOne of my first successful consultations using the LOW model was in 1997 at an international pipeline company based in Calgary, Alberta. The senior leader of the cus-tomer relations division of approximately 110 employees had been asked to reorganize the division—again. Since there had been two other recent reorganizations of the unit, the senior leader questioned the need to reorganize as a solution to addressing customer relations and satis-faction results. I had been working in the organization promoting human performance technology (HPT) as a results-based methodology for identifying the right solutions to improve business success, and this senior leader decided to “give it a try” on the condition it was completed in 6 weeks. I first had to train a team of per-formance consultants in my department to support this effort, in addition to developing the project plan and role clarification with the client. Because the model is easy to understand, team members and clients were quickly able to move forward.

Six of us embarked on the project using the LOW model as our framework for collecting and analyzing the data and identifying appropriate interventions and rec-ommendations. In this case, we chose to meet with each individual employee and leader in the division and used the LOW framework for coding and organizing the data with the ability to view the data from a leader and team perspective, as well as at the various levels: organization, group, individual, and process. One of the key differences and advantages of HPT over organization development action research is the systematic and systemic way of col-lecting, analyzing, and reviewing the data collected. This was a very successful project, completed on time, and

PFI20248.indd 11PFI20248.indd 11 11/16/11 6:05:57 PM11/16/11 6:05:57 PM

12 www.ispi.org • DOI: 10.1002/pfi • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2011

with solid performance recommendations for the client. And most important, we discovered that the division did not need to reorganize; in fact, it was perfectly aligned with its customer base of small-, medium-, and large-sized producers. However, there were several systemic issues, including breakdowns in communications across the division, duplication of efforts, process problems, and serious technology problems, in addition to leadership behaviors that were not helpful, and in some cases very problematic to achieving results. Although we met with the typical initial resistance to the results and recommen-dations, the senior leadership team quickly got onboard and developed an action plan to address the prioritized concerns and recommendations. News of this initial success quickly spread throughout the entire company, and my team and I were in hot demand. We completed another four large LOW projects, all with different needs and issues and all resolved using the LOW model as the framework, prior to the announced merger of this com-pany with another one.

More recently in my current public service organiza-tion, my team has completed over a dozen critical proj-ects using the LOW model as our framework. The first project was for a 300-employee department within the organization and was triggered by year-over-year low employee engagement scores on the corporate-wide Work Environment Survey despite numerous efforts by its lead-ers to improve the situation. As a revenue-generating department, high performance and engagement were crit-ical to business success. The executive leader of the large division consulted with me and asked for my support to identify the underlying issues. The LOW framework was used to guide this project. With a newly developed team of six performance consultants, we developed the first phase of the project plan to collect the data from approxi-mately 300 employees, team leaders, managers, directors, and the executive director under tight time lines.

The initiation of this project in itself was highly engaging for employees. Following the collection and analysis of all of the information and a review with the executive team, the results were communicated to employees at the department’s annual general meeting. The response from employees was highly positive, and skeptics were converted when they heard their own issues and feedback being reported along with recommended solutions. With strong commitment and collaboration between the executive and employees, and support from my team, we embarked on a yearlong journey of imple-menting recommendations with clear action plans and employee involvement. Solutions included addressing technical equipment and computer dysfunctions; review-ing travel policies; initiating leadership development; and

performing workload assessment and job reviews, process reviews, and organization design. Many of the recom-mendations required further application of the LOW model with smaller groups within the department, and the model was a constant throughout the implementa-tion of action plans. Because of executive commitment and follow-through, ongoing communications and sta-tus updates, feedback, and involvement of employees, this project was successful and within the first year resulted in an 8-point rise in engagement scores overall for the department, as well as increases in many of the engagement drivers. The foundation was in place, and improvements continued into the future. Business results improved as well with a more engaged, motivated, and productive department of employees and leaders. As before, the success of this project, and a well-developed team of performance consultants, soon brought more requests and referrals from across the organization.

After 5 years of educating leaders and producing results in the organization using the LOW model, we were recently asked to work with three separate branches with overlapping responsibilities to help clarify breakdowns in the relationships and identify duplication of work and inefficient processes within and among the three branches. The first step was to work with each branch to take a representative group through a session using the LOW model to identify their own processes and poten-tial breakdowns. The second step was to bring the three branches together to identify problematic and inefficient processes and breakdowns among them. The representa-tive teams found this work to be very helpful in identify-ing the strengths and areas for improvement. This work is ongoing but with strong indications of more effective and efficient working relationships and processes going forward that will lead to positive business impacts and results. The three branches deal with several stakeholders and have a critical mandate and business impact to the organization.

CONCLUSIONThese are just a few examples of the value produced from using the LOW model in an organization. It is interesting

The [LOW] model was a constant throughout the implementation of action plans.


Performance Improvement • Volume 50 • Number 10 • DOI: 10.1002/pfi 13

ELAINE JONES is the executive director of the Strategic Human Resources Branch, Ministry of Finance, British Columbia Public Service. She has over 20 years of professional performance con-sulting experience, as both an internal and external consultant, working for major organizations in Canada and the United States. She received an MBA from the University of Calgary and a BA from the University of Houston and is a Certified Human Resource Professional. She is certified in several assessment instruments and is a Master Practitioner of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. She was recently presented the 2011 British Columbia Human Resource Management Association Provincial Finalist Award for HR Professional of the Year for leadership and organizational impact. Her Strategic Human Resources team recently won the Association for Psychological Type International Otto Krueger Organization Excellence Award for the ethical use of type in organizations, and the Ministry of Finance APEX (Achieving Performance Excellence) Award for customer service. She may be reached at [email protected].

to hear leaders and employees referring to the language of work model as something they need to help with a busi-ness issue. To me, this demonstrates the value in using a common framework and language with clients that results in faster decisions and progress with addressing work and performance issues.

I am a lifelong learner and read the latest journals and literature relative to my profession. In my view, the LOW model is the one tool that will always remain in my

toolkit. Most recently I was selected as a British Columbia Human Resource Management Association 2011 Award of Excellence Finalist—HR Professional of the Year for leadership, organizational impact, and being a strategic partner with clients. I will never be able to thank Danny Langdon and his partner, Kathleen Whiteside, enough for the impact the LOW model has had on my professional success in organizations and on the impressive results for the many organizations where it has been applied.


Documents

Achieving performance excellence and forming strategic partnerships using the language of work model