[ New South Companies: Lumber Industry Giant Survives Severe Downturn and Poises Itself for Record Earnings ]
[ Shell Oil Company: Completion of $1.45 billion Project 4 Months Ahead of Schedule ]
[ Global Financial Institutions: 300% Increase in Software Development ]
[ Major Semiconductor Manufacturer Dramatic Reduction in Cycle Time: From 270 to 66 days ]
[ Major Insurance Company: 783% Return on Investment ]
[ National Laboratory: Creating a More Strategic and Entrepreneurial Culture: Increasing New Program Development by 30% ]

New South Companies:
Lumber Industry Giant Survives Severe Downturn and Poises Itself for Record Earnings

Learning as Leadership Case Study
From 1999 to 2003, the lumber industry experienced one of its most severe downturns in history. Logs became more expensive to buy and lumber less profitable to sell. Between 2000 and 2002, more than 100 US sawmills went out of business. For New South Companies, Inc., the downturn caused profit margins to drop more than $25 million. How did this $200M industry player, with roots going back to the 1930s and 1940s, radically revise its way of doing business in order to survive, and even thrive, in this harsh business environment? What allowed the senior management team to tap into the courage to transform themselves and their organizational culture from victims to victors?

Change Starts at the Top
In 2000, even though senior management had reorganized the company and set specific and measurable goals for its business units, implementing these goals remained difficult. Although Mack Singleton had lead New South to $150M of growth in his 20-year tenure as CEO, it became clear to him that the existing company culture and his own leadership style might be a barrier to overcoming the new hurdles New South was facing. In the summer of 2001, Mack decided to attend a personal mastery seminar with Learning as Leadership (LaL), acting on the advice of company board member and recent LaL participant, Harold Stowe. At the seminar, he began to recognize personality tendencies that involuntarily prevented him from empowering his direct reports to meet the company’s goals. For example, he had a competitive nature and a strong need to be in control and be right. Consequently, he often behaved like a one-man show, making all key decisions himself and directly involving himself in any problems that arose. His tendency to not listen very well and to define roles and assignments only in broad terms further exacerbated his struggle to fully maximize his senior management team’s talent and horsepower.

As he began to uncover and explore these tendencies at LaL, Mack zeroed in on a growth opportunity for himself in delegating tasks, making difficult decisions, and holding people accountable. When he returned to New South, he immediately clarified the company’s organizational structure and more clearly defined the roles of his direct reports to give them greater power to make decisions, allowing him to back off from being overly involved in operations. He also communicated more honestly and directly about performance issues and strove to be more open to feedback from his team.

Cascading Transformation
Mack’s personal changes not only led to powerful organizational shifts at New South, it also inspired him to bring the entire senior management team to LaL’s one-year 4-Mastery program starting in the fall of 2001. That group’s learning experience played a pivotal role in the company’s subsequent ability to make rapid changes and improvements in a difficult environment.

In the year-long course, the team members explored what prevented them from taking more effective action in this time of crisis. One key insight involved the degree to which they perceived themselves as victims of a constantly fluctuating commodities market. Once they realized how much this collective, unrecognized assumption paralyzed them from taking proactive action, they were able to reframe the situation. Although it was true that the company couldn’t change the commodity market, the team could do more to improve what could be controlled, such as making the plants more efficient and productive. This change in mindset gave them the motivation and courage to step out of paralysis and make significant organizational changes.

The team members also began to explore personal areas that contributed to overall difficulties in the company. For example, almost everyone recognized the tendency as individuals and as a team to avoid conflict, which inhibited their effectiveness as managers and cascaded down into the company culture. This tendency virtually paralyzed the entire organization: leaders set vague and comfortable goals, accountability to objectives was lax, and problems were allowed to fester. Ultimately, performance and productivity were adversely affected. With the threat of plant closures looming darkly on the horizon, the management team realized they could no longer afford to continue this behavior. They committed to doing the uncomfortable work of raising tough issues with each other.

One dramatic outcome was that Mack was finally able to address growing concerns about the performance of a senior manager promoted to a key position at New South that turned out to be beyond his capability. At LaL, this manager was able to explore his defensiveness and failure to take ownership for problems happening under his leadership. He and Mack then had several conversations in which they were able to put the interests of the company ahead of personal ego, and he was moved to a junior position that capitalized on his strengths as a manager.

Tightening the Reigns
Throughout the year, buoyed by LaL’s ongoing coaching that kept them focused on these new practices, the group began to lead and work together more effectively. Business unit goals were clarified, measuring systems were improved, and new ways of sharing progress within the company were implemented, including requiring quarterly reports in formal management meetings. At the senior management level, means were structured to meet regularly and to raise contentious issues they had avoided discussing in the past. On several occasions, hard decisions were made regarding certain lines of business that had been languishing for years.

A concrete example of how their changed behavior drove greater financial performance was in the procurement department, where their log costs were greater than the industry average. Senior leaders down to yard managers began to more aggressively challenge the numbers presented to them by vendors, gaining more accurate counts of log length, diameter and quality. No longer accepting that “this is the way it’s done,” they created a systemic and cultural shift that was unsettling to their comfortable “good ol’ boy” network, but lead to a significant improvement in yield and increased profitability.

As the economic crisis continued in to the summer of 2002, New South was able to capitalize on these changes plus its clear plan for increasing efficiency and cutting costs, to attract a new lender, fully restructuring and refinancing its debt at a crucial moment. In the spring of 2003, faced with continued industry pressure, senior management had to make further and tougher decisions around cost-cutting and personnel, including freezing all salaries and wages, suspending incentive plans unless profits supported a payout, terminating a defined benefit plan, and modifying vacation policy. Despite having to take these difficult measures, the team’s new candid and direct approach to communication minimized the fallout and negative feelings among employees. While all workers were adversely affected, many supported such changes given the conditions the company was facing.

By the end of 2003, the company was able to show quantifiable savings in several areas:
	•		A reduction in labor and overhead costs of 17% per unit, for a total bottom line savings of approximately $6.2 million annually attributable to productivity improvements and cost control
	•		An improvement in yield (tons of log to produce 1,000 board feet of lumber) of 3.8% for an annual savings of $2.3 million.
	•		An exit from unprofitable business lines and the elimination of a second shift at one of the company’s business units (which had not been profitable in 10 years and is now operating in the black) for an approximate annual savings of $1.7 million.
	•		Bottom line financial performance improved from a $10 million loss in 2000 to a $1 million dollar profit in 2003, in similarly severe industry conditions.
	•		A quality of life shift for senior management from stress and discouragement to excitement and innovation. CEO Mack Singleton said it simply: “We’re having fun with all this.”

The Next Level of Innovation
While recognizing the value of these improvements, senior leaders knew that New South was still in the survival stage and had to continue cultivating new business opportunities. As part of their strategy, in the fall of 2002, the next level of management was sent to Learning as Leadership’s 4-Mastery program. During the first seminar, the VP of Human Resources came up with an innovative idea that then catalyzed New South to a new level of growth and development.

A creative thinker, the VP of HR often kept his ideas to himself and would never have suggested the initiative before attending LaL. Even though New South’s culture did not readily encourage new approaches to conducting business operations, he drew on his coaching support to take the risk of being potentially criticized by upper management and bring the idea to the table. Similarly, CEO Mack Singleton had historically not been receptive to suggestions regarding the company’s direction if they differed from what he himself had put forth, particularly from the lower ranks. His coaching helped him to overcome his reflex to reject it and recenter on his goal of recognizing his staff as a precious resource and tapping into their creativity more. By overcoming his need to be in control, and recognizing the need for more improvements, he was able to support the idea and empower the next level of leadership to have a greater role and stake in the direction and progress of the company.

The “New Horizons” group was subsequently formed, consisting of multifunctional teams with different levels of personnel to help candidly assess opportunities in key business areas such as procurement, sales, new products, operations, and corporate vision. This cross-functional think tank not only generated key ideas for organizational improvements and new business opportunities, but also dramatically improved vertical communication in the organizational hierarchy. It also succeeded in deepening the “victim to victor” shift to more layers of management struggling with fear and powerlessness regarding the gloomy market place. More and more, they too felt that they were part of the solution.

Some key initiatives that came from the New Horizons group include:
	•		Improvements in sales and marketing. The sales department had historically focused more on taking orders than on acquiring new business. They instituted goals and training that drove greater proactivity in identifying new opportunities.
	•		Innovative operational improvements. Initiatives in procurement, communications and “right sizing” plants were part of an expanded long-term plan.

Record Earnings
2004 at last provided a boom in the lumber industry, and thanks to the personal commitment of senior management to transform themselves and the company, New South was poised to make the most of it. Having thrived while others went out of business during the four previous austere years, 2004 proved to be its most profitable year since the company’s inception:

	•		Total 2004 revenue stood at $408 million (up from $196 million in 2000) and net profit was an unprecedented $16.5 million.
	•		2005 led to even greater performance: over $510 million in revenue and $18 million in profit.
	•		New South Companies was purchased in January 2006 for $205 million, more than sevenfold its appraised value in 2001!

Now, regardless of the up and down years, Mack Singleton and senior management, now part of a larger, Canadian lumber manufacturing company, stand ready to face the new challenges and opportunities of an ever-changing commodity marketplace.

Mack Singleton: mac@newsouthcompanies.com
Collaboration with LaL: from 2001 to current

		New South Companies PDF (202 KB)

Shell Oil Company:
Completion of $1.45 billion Project 4 Months Ahead of Schedule

Learning as Leadership partnered with the leadership team of Shell Oil's offshore oil platform, URSA, over a six-year period, helping them to repeatedly accomplish extraordinary results. URSA is the world's largest deepwater platform. Combining LaL's consulting, facilitation, training and 360 feedback services, LaL was able to support URSA to return from the brink of failure, rapidly becoming one of the top producing oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico. A $1.5 billion project, URSA is located 130 miles offshore, operates around the clock, and produces 175,000 barrels of oil and $7-8 million of sales per day, depending on the price of oil. When the URSA Asset Leader first approached LaL, drilling problems had set back the construction of the rig by 6 months, costing the company $250 million.

Phase I: Achieving the Impossible
In Phase I, Rick, the URSA Asset Leader and his team participated in LaL's 4-Mastery One Year Leadership Development program. In his first seminar, Rick discovered how his desire to be the hero and please his team led him to protect them when things did not go well. He and his crew negotiated easily achievable goals so as not to fail or be criticized. They believed they could only influence their own assignment, and setting goals beyond their personal responsibility scared them. Rick became aware of how and why he did not push himself or his team beyond their comfort zone. When he realized the degree to which these behaviors were contributing to the failure of the project, he pushed his team to take risks and responsibility for the success of the entire rig, not just their part of it. With coaching support, he provided unprecedented cross-functional leadership, challenging his own team and other units to step out of their territorialism and work as one group towards a common goal. He worked through strong initial resistance and ultimately obtained their buy-in to accelerate the project. As a result, not only did they make up their six-month setback, they surpassed all expectations by completing the platform four months ahead of the original schedule.

Phase II: Inspiring Goals
By the end of 1999, the project had encountered a new set of difficulties. The first oil well failed and production volumes were minimal. The gap between current productivity and their performance objectives was so wide that most of leadership and staff had fallen into a victim attitude, complaining that management was unreasonable. Rick sent five more of his team members to Learning as Leadership's training to revitalize the project. Through the seminars and subsequent coaching, team members were able to identify and overcome individual and team obstacles to success by talking openly about the current issues and giving honest feedback regarding improvement measures. They began articulating a vision, agreed on a framework for implementation and accountability. LaL then facilitated a three-day on-site goal-setting session in which the team outlined the business situation and succeeded in discussing individual obstacles limiting the team's performance. By addressing their powerlessness, they were able to move into action. They outlined five core goals they cared about in areas of production, safety, environment, cost reduction and values in a language everyone could understand and commit to, the team got back on track. They were able to increase year 2000 production performance by 43%, reduce operating costs by 50% and maintain a 99% up-time. The URSA team still follows these five goals today.

Phase III: Successful Transition
As new members of URSA's leadership team joined the rig, they participated in the 4-Mastery program to maintain the culture of learning and practice. Open, honest, direct communication and effective collaboration continued to grow among team members. When Rick was promoted, the new Asset Leader, Christina participated in 4-Mastery in November 2002 to align with the team. At the time of her first LaL training, Christina felt under a tremendous amount of pressure; she was stepping into big shoes. Her predecessor was a charismatic leader, with a loyal following in his team who had achieved unprecedented results. She felt she had to live up to performance measures established by him and her management team—which she deemed impossible to attain. In addition, the leaders on URSA were being tapped for higher levels of the organization, leaving her with new leaders to develop. At the urging of her LAL coach, who knew the team's capabilities, and wanting to continue the tradition of risk-taking, the Asset Leader defined higher targets than she thought possible. When she presented them to the team, they took on the challenge with enthusiasm, the fruit of years of effort to develop just such a culture. LaL conducted another on-site facilitation in January of 2003 to align the team on these goals. By the end of the year, production targets had increased by over 1 million barrels of oil, costs were reduced by almost 20%, and URSA broke records for the longest production up-times. To her amazement the team not only met the seemingly impossible targets, they actually exceeded them.

Contact: Rick Fox, rick.fox@shell.com,
Christina Sistrunk, christina.sistrunk@shell.com
Collaboration with LaL: Nov. 1997 to Current

Results:

Outstanding Performance Achieved
	Lead by Rick Fox, Asset Manager from the platform's inception.
	•		Reduced project schedule and completed platform four months ahead of schedule, saving $40 million in 1998
	•		Reduced operating costs by more than 50% from business plan in 2000
	•		Achieved "Best in Class" uptime performance of 99% in 2000
	•		Dramatically improved 2000 production performance by 43% (12 million barrels)
	•		Outstanding safety performance
Performance Surpassed
	Lead by Christina Sistrunk, Succeeding Asset Manager
	•		2003 production was over 4 million barrels of oil.
	•		Reduced costs by almost 20% ($4MM) over the previous years.
	•		Broke record for longest up-times.
Continued Legacy
	Performance started under Rick Fox and maintained under Christina Sistrunk
	•		Outstanding safety performance
	•		Ahead of targets and achieving aggressive environmental goals:
			- Exceeded clean air act requirements - Pioneered an aggressive recycling and waste minimization program, and a wellness program.
	•		Created a culture and an atmosphere with high morale and a high rate of skill acquisition and advancement; a benchmark for excellence in the Shell world

		Shell Oil Company PDF (141KB)

Global Financial Institution
300% Increase in Software Development

During a major reorganization, Carol, a new VP, was selected to integrate software-testing functions into the software development group from previously separate divisions at one of the world's largest financial institutions. Carol stepped into a leadership role with 80 direct reports, 50% new quality assurance staff, and several hundred stakeholders for a project that included 14 million merchants and 11 billion transactions, with a 99.9% uptime mandate. Immediate goals were to improve productivity and quality. Success required teamwork among 200+ staff throughout the greater global organization.

Significant obstacles to accomplishing this were not technology, but very long-standing walls of perception and judgment - even hostilities - that appeared to be supported by some of the leadership team. One important person in particular, a "gatekeeper" to critical contacts across the corporation, presented a challenge. With repeated experiences of how these walls prevented essential cooperation, Carol was close to giving up. She knew she could not do it alone, and she wanted the organization to work together without hostilities.

Throughout LaL's 4-Mastery program, Carol realized how some of her core beliefs ("I have to do it alone," "If I let my guard down, I will be responsible when things don't work," and "They don't respect me") had led her to engage in counterproductive behaviors (blaming others, avoiding conflict, and acting alone) reinforcing and being reinforced by the organization’s culture (walls between teams, lack of collaboration and cooperation, not talking about the real issues, mistrust and blame).

Being clear about that cycle, and realizing its costs, she was able to break free. Modifying her behavior and adopting a new attitude, supported by coaching, Carol was able to:

	•		Recognize her limiting beliefs and assumptions
	•		Step through her fears
	•		Ask for help from the most important and 'least likely' collaborator, the "gatekeeper"
	•		Create collaborative problem solving and partnering at all levels to focus on the greater goals and mission
	•		Support all levels to work together very differently, without hostility

Results:

	•		300% more software developed, tested and delivered than the previous year
	•		Turnover eliminated
	•		Individual productivity improved by 40%
	•		23% fewer software errors in production and a 34% reduction in unit cost

		Global Financial Institution PDF (64KB)

Major Semiconductor Manufacturer
Dramatic Reduction in Cycle Time: From 270 to 66 days

Over a five-year period LaL supported members of a major Semiconductor manufacturer's Product Development Center (PDC) to better compete in the marketplace by reducing new product design cycle time. For the ten years prior to engaging LaL, the team had tried various methods to reduce cycle time and were only able to do so from 300 to 270 days.

Through LaL's 4-Mastery training courses, team members were able to identify aspects of the company's culture, as well as their respective beliefs and individual patterns of behavior, that contributed to sub-optimal performance. In their words, their individual and team dysfunctions caused them to get in their own way; they were not able to fully use their expertise to accomplish the needed results. By breaking through these barriers, the team was able to dramatically improve cycle time, reducing it from 270 to 66 days.

Phase I: Successful Pilot
During Phase I the team realized that cultural norms such as "always be working on a new project" led them to start new projects even when the success of current projects demanded their full attention, compromising both outcomes. They also recognized how they were wasting precious time in reactive patterns of behavior. Examples included a team leader who would put ideas on the table and then withdraw from the discussion if they weren't immediately accepted. He discovered that the behavior was rooted in a fear of rejection and it prevented his often innovative ideas from being heard. Another leader would lash out at his staff when their efforts did not meet his expectations, causing alienation; this relationship resulted in less work being done and even longer delays to the project. Yet another leader insisted on "winning" disagreements, especially with Quality Control. He inadvertently instigated an "Us vs. Them" dynamic that caused one product to be delayed five weeks. Shocked to realize how their behavior caused much of the project delays, the team practiced being more direct, honest and constructive with each other, as well as striving to better understand others' perspectives on issues. It was actually the first team leader's adamancy about a new idea that sparked a team commitment to a seemingly impossible goal - to reduce new product development cycle time from 270 to 90 days. Through the changes they were able to implement, the team actually succeeding in surpassing their goal and achieving a pilot test time of 85 days, 6 months less than previous times.

Phase II: From Pilot to Department Wide Success
In Phase II the team's goal was to build on the success of the pilot team and implement the new strategy throughout the entire department. They revamped their product development process and additional PDC team members participated in LaL trainings. Initial efforts went poorly; the PDC had a matrix reporting structure and typically ran 4 product development teams simultaneously. Theywere unable to reproduce the cycle times of the pilot team, and stress rose in the organization as they tried to meet the market pressure of the then booming dot.com industry. They employed LaL's facilitation and consulting services on a number of occasions to help them through this difficult period. Initial facilitations dissected failed projects in order to understand why the pilot process was not working on a broader scale; later sessions defined how to implement those learnings and served to hold the leaders accountable to their commitments. These sessions revealed that the matrix structure was severely aggravating their misalignment and lack of communication on priorities and staffing resources. Competition amongst project managers, understaffed teams and unrealistic project plans contributed to an environment of stress and low morale in which, paradoxically, no one could be held accountable for under-performance because everyone was staffed in too many roles. Employee retention had become a major issue. With LaL's guidance, the PDC leadership team committed to and put into place a communication structure that addressed these issues as they came up, nearly eliminating the time that a product would "languish" due to conflicting directives. By the end of this phase, PDC project teams were consistently developing products across the department that matched the pilot team's seemingly impossible marks.

Phase III: Ongoing Breakthroughs Despite Drastic Economic Downturn
Just as performance and morale were improving due to the preceding work, the company was faced with a huge economic downturn in the semiconductor industry. They needed to reduce costs and increase productivity. Their plan for ongoing work with LaL was actually curtailed due to a moratorium on discretionary spending. Top leaders in the PDC drew on LaL's expertise to set up a peer-coaching framework that sustained key practices in the culture. Despite several rounds of layoffs, the team was able to exceed their FY '02 objectives by releasing 57 more products than their objectives at an average cycle time of 66 days.

Results:

	•		After a year of training with LaL, the team achieved pilot tests on new product development cycle time at an unprecedented reduction over previous averages—from 270 to 90 days—a result far beyond their wildest dreams.
	•		After their initial cycle time reduction achievement, they broke new ground, reducing the original time to 66 days. They also surpassed their new product introduction targets and achieved 95% product success hit rates on first time designs.
	•		The Product Development Center members became agents of change in their organization, creating a learning culture that still remains long after the completion of LaL's 4-Mastery Program.
	•		All this and the impressive FY '02 results mentioned above, despite dramatically reduced spending during a series of very difficult years for the semiconductor industry.

		Major Semiconductor Manufacturer PDF (131KB)

Major Insurance Company
783% Return on Investment

One of California's largest insurance companies hired a vendor to develop an Electronic Performance Support System (EPSS) to meet its new business goals of restructuring and re-skilling its front-line work force. The specific objective was for employees to handle 80% of customer inquiries and provide a higher level of service to its 3 million members.

The client's IT department saw the project as a threat, and the client's managers didn't think that they had enough time and resources to devote subject matter experts to it. Employees, disillusioned from previous failed initiatives, doubted this new effort would make a difference, threatening its success.

Teams from the vendor and the client, including the Program Manager and several key project participants, participated in Learning as Leadership's training, allowing them to create a higher level of collaboration throughout the organization.

As a result of the training, the Program Manager changed her focus from concern with career and receiving credit to uncovering her true motivation: making work life easier and more fulfilling for front line employees. This resulted in a new internal commitment, empowering her to meet a series of internal challenges to the viability and worth of the project.

Team members learned the meaning of going 100% without letting the fear of the outcome distract them, enabling them to focus on the work at hand in the moment.

Team members learned to bridge the chasm between functional silos to bring a cross-functional team together to surface and resolve key differences in understanding of the work. Their inclusive approach built organizational support and laid the groundwork for a problem-free implementation.

Results:

	•		Delivered a full-scope multimillion-dollar Electronic Performance Support System on-time and on-budget
	•		Innovated cross-functional collaboration and cultural norms, aligning personal and corporate goals within the client organization and in the client and vendor relationship
	•		Increased customer satisfaction and employee confidence with enthusiastic reception and high visibility in the industry and the media
	•		Awarded top honors by Bill Gates at WINDOWS World, Best Successful Practice Award by ASTD and Award of Excellence by ISPI
	•		Achieved a 783% Return On Investment (productivity improvements) calculated by external experts

		Major Insurance Company PDF (119KB)

National Laboratory
Creating a More Strategic and Entrepreneurial Culture: Increasing New Program Development by 30%

Over a three and a half year period, LaL supported key leaders and stakeholders from a national laboratory to dramatically shift their skill-sets from being an internal lab service provider with shrinking government funding and impending layoffs to one that was more entrepreneurial and strategic. Through their participation in the 4-Mastery training courses, on-site consultation and facilitation support, the Division Director, Section Heads, Group Leaders, research and technical staff members became more effective and productive. This endeavor required a major culture change and resulted in a 30% increase in funding over the period of LaL's engagement from late 1998 to early 2002.

Phase I: Developing a Strategic Plan
In Phase I of the project, the Division Director and his Section Heads (the organizational leadership team) focused on developing the strategic plan. With LaL's assistance, they also uncovered the unproductive organizational and cultural issues and team dynamics that would undermine buy-in and inhibit the plan from being successfully implemented.

Some of the core realizations were:

• "Perfectionism/over-analysis": the product (the strategic plan in this case) had to be perfect before it could be delivered; as such, it risked being endlessly delayed.
• "We are the expert" Syndrome: leaders and staff would not acknowledge weaknesses or ask for help, leading to inaction on difficult endeavors.
• Conflict Avoidance: there was a lack of directness in the leadership and a difficulty in holding people accountable.
• Turf protection/Silos: different programmatic and functional leaders feared sharing resources, leading to an overall situation of scarcity and inefficiency.

Through a series of workshops, individual coaching and team facilitations, the management team developed a structure and process for defining the organization's strategic plan. To improve their ability to interact with staff during the definition and implementation phases of the plan, they learned skills and tools to better understand how their individual behaviors contributed to the cultural dynamics. Their commitment, with LaL's coaching and facilitation support, to modeling the changes the division needed to succeed enabled them to better lead their organization through the change process.

The result of the first phase was a strategic plan that everyone in the organization bought into and used as a roadmap for the subsequent growth.

Phase II: Building Real Teamwork
Phase II focused on addressing the core organizational issues that the strategic planning process in Phase I brought to the surface. While meeting with staff members to develop the strategic plan, the management team discovered that research staff had a lot of fear, anger and mistrust towards management. Communication was poor, and employees feared reprisal for speaking up. The rumor of impending layoffs due to a lack of funding increased the tension. Drawing on information that surfaced through the feedback process, LaL determined that the main effort should focus on bridging the gulf between management and staff and creating more collaboration and communication across the organization. Participants in this phase included the Division Director, Section Heads as well as the broader set of Group Leaders.

Through the seminar training process and with subsequent coaching and facilitation, the team learned how to hold reports accountable, give and receive feedback, and step out of blame and judgment of others in order to better support inter-group collaboration. Coaches also supported the team leaders to develop their leadership and communication skills in order to provide better and more consistent feedback in performance reviews (a traditionally weak area). Leaders were able to provide more direction and create developmental plans for their staff members. Results for the second year included far more cooperative teaming and project productivity.

Towards the end of this year, LaL also began working with the leadership of a sister division on similar issues.

Phase III: Growing Cross-Team Programs
Assessing the results of the first two years and re-evaluating the strategy, LaL decided it was time to address the division's main challenge: high charge-out rates and lack of funding. The focus in Phase III thus shifted to developing new business in the form of private sector and DOE program funding and increasing accountability for meeting budget. Three cross-functional teams comprising the Division Director, Section Heads, Group Leaders and research staff (who were included to be able to bring the change effort down into the organization) were formed around three areas of emerging technology that were identified as having the highest potential for bringing in maximum funding to the organization.

There existed long-standing competition, mistrust and unresolved conflict to the point that certain researchers refused to work together, either within the Division or in other Divisions in the lab. Working with LaL, the teams were able to resolve these issues and develop a strategic plan for their particular target area that included areas for improvement, financial goals and strategies for obtaining them. LaL's consulting focused on helping the teams overcome their fears and break through their mental models about "selling" to be able to develop new networking resources and relationships inside and outside of the lab. This required supporting team members to step out of their comfort zone; the team was mainly composed of "introverts" who needed to learn how to communicate, "schmooze" and sell. LaL also focused significant effort on supporting management to achieve their budget through stabilizing charge-out rates and reducing overhead, which involved dramatically increasing the clarity of their accounting practices and stepping out of conflict avoidance to encourage staff growth.

Results:

	•		The development of a strategic plan that took input from the whole organization and therefore benefited from unprecedented buy-in.
	•		Long-standing silos & turf battles were dissolved; a culture of collaboration was created.
	•		Leaders learned and successfully implemented performance management skills for their direct reports.
	•		Team members were able to bring in projects ranging in scope from $.5 million to $30 million. One group obtained a 20% growth in the first year and maintained it in subsequent years. Overall funding increased 5.2% in FY '99, 6.5% in FY '00 and 14.7% in FY '01.

		National Laboratory PDF (432KB)