Stagnation in success:
How we helped an expert organisation to change
Consulting case of an expert organisation in the context of Neuwaldegg’s change management consulting.
This company is an expert organisation that has been on the market for half a century and is considered a pioneer and leader in its sector. It is not only the company that is known in the industry but also the people who have worked and still work there. One is aware of its expert status.
The name of the expert organisation still means something today too and its position on the market is solid. No leaps in growth are made, but the business has many regular clients, it delivers results and is familiar with the latest developments. Seen from the outside, there is no need for change. This evolved internally and slowly developed into a conflict that seemed almost hopeless.
A brief review: during the 50 years of growth, there were of course always conflicts which, when it got really heated, could be solved by parting ways. Someone had had enough and left the company, usually to start a similar, smaller business themselves. The market was large enough to allow this – without too many problems. However, about 15 years ago it was decided to change the legal form and to establish a limited liability company (GmbH) which all rights were transferred to. The same people were now owners, so had a different role and therefore expectations of each other, without this being discussed.
The conflict escalates
And so the inevitable happened, conflict broke out. It escalated, but now, having invested and financially committed themselves, leaving, parting ways was no longer as simple as before. So they fought and decisions were pushed through by majority votes until two camps had formed which were verging on hostility towards to each other. This was not obvious to anyone outside on the market but the shareholders’ meetings were almost bearable.
The owners had also sought external advice in the past, but it had not been of any help. They were at a loss, some owners were already thinking about retirement when we, almost as the last resort, received an enquiry from one of the owners in a long email. In several discussions, which were always conducted with representatives of both camps, we gained the necessary information to develop hypotheses and consider whether and what we should offer. We decided on an offer, but it was criticised to such an extent that we reconsidered whether we should make an offer at all.
The consulting service as an intervention
The result of our deliberations was a second offer, which we described as the last option for us to be involved, and which required both camps to make considerable decisions before we would start the consulting process. This led to intensive discussions within the two camps and finally to the contract being signed.
We can rarely see so clearly that the offer process itself is already an important part of the change process. You can imagine it like an inverted funnel: at the start it was very narrow for a long time and then the funnel gradually got wider and wider. The consulting process then followed the classic steps: interviews, diagnosis and workshops. We planned a different mix of participants and had a different setting for each of the workshops.
Confidence in change
One of the biggest challenges was to increase the owners’ own willingness to change, to get them out of devaluing and placing demands on each other. We had already begun to do this during the offer process and now we had to consolidate this and make it tangible in the personal encounters between the two camps, especially at the beginning of the first workshop. For this, we worked on the details of the design until the day before the first workshop (which then lasted half a day).
In retrospect, the mixture of the expected action, ambush and precise diagnosis that we reflected back resulted in the recipe that helped increase the willingness to change. Everyone could experience this on the first day. Meetings that had not been possible before took place and decisions were made together again. This was key to opening the funnel. Many other topics were worked on: the market image, the personal and organisational future, the adoption of some decisions and the creation of a long list of open decisions. Roles could be agreed and filled to deal with the important issues. Finally, we developed a model for the owners on how they can cooperate in everyday life, practised it with them and agreed on a follow-up after a practical phase.