Kaizen: A Case Study in Organizational Restructuring
David L. Bevett, BS, MPH
February 2, 2002
In the 1990’s, publicly funded health programs were struggling to deliver quality services with
decreasing organizational capacity due to funding cuts, privatization, and other pressures. In 1997, I
was hired as a management consultant to work on an organizational restructuring project. The goal
was to help an Alameda County Public Health program adapt and thrive in a new and uncertain
environment. We believed that the project was feasible. My scope of work was to facilitate the
transformation through strategic planning with senior managers, and staff training on continuous
quality improvement (CQI). With recent Master’s degree in tow, and my first major restructuring
project in sight I was ready. Two years later, I found myself emerging from kaizen: a case study in
organizational restructuring.
The restructuring project was initiated with interviews with management and staff at every level of
the organization. From the beginning, I openly shared my views on organizational effectiveness with
select managers and staff. I truly believed we were there to provide answers. After a few smiles and
several disturbed looks I stuck to the interview questions. According to Bohannon (1995) I had just
learned an import lesson “culture creates hazards for the creatures who bear it” (p.11). The graduate
school culture that promoted open dialogue and debate did not exist outside of school. My failure to
recognize this fact sent shock waves through the organization: I was later told that the program
director did not tell managers or staff why they were being interviewed. My communications had
only drawn greater suspicion and exacerbated the problem.
The data collected during the interviews with management and staff provided insight into problems in
the organization’s structure, internal processes, and culture. Further evaluation revealed that some of
the cultural issues could be traced to dysfunctional management behaviors. After presenting the
results to the program director, I was strongly encouraged to focus on the systems and structural
issues. In retrospect, the director struggled with conflict-avoidance issues, and his directive was a
natural attempt to keep the level of conflict within a “desirable range” (Bohannon, 1995, p. 15). This
conclusion was later confirmed when complaints and harassment charges were filed against the
program director and several of the managers.
Several months into the project, the complex internal dynamics of the organization started to emerge.
And the true purpose of my work became clear: The program director was in the midst of extreme
conflict with the senior managers, and I was to serve as the third party referee and final point in the
triad (Bohannon, 1995). The fact that I had been hired without the knowledge of the senior managers
underscored the somewhat covert nature of my role. One of the midlevel managers privately
disclosed that I was the last of a series of change agents contracted over the last two years. My
relative inexperience with organizational restructuring, and admittedly, arrogance had landed me in the
middle of an organization in turmoil. There were hidden political landmines, managers forming
opposing camps, and staff throughout the organization preparing for a meltdown.
Intuitively, I understood that agreeing to avoid the cultural issues and focusing on structure would
cause problems in the future. In addition, the influence of the senior manager's alliance coupled with
my inability to present a compelling argument resulted in skipping key steps in the strategic planning
process. And as stated by Bohannon (1995), “If the required actions are not followed in the right
order, the resulting structure will probably collapse—if, indeed, it can be built at all” (p. 50). The true
power of culture had become evident. Clearly, we had underestimated and therefore failed to
adequately study the culture of the organization. I had accepted the position of change agent without
evaluating the organization’s capacity or readiness to change. There was trouble on the horizon.
The only option I could see at that point was to regroup with the management team and present my
case for going back to complete the steps we skipped in the planning process. My basic argument
was that the level of investment in the planning phase would ultimately determine the degree of
success in the implementation phase. Therefore, sufficient time, thought and energy should be
allotted to clarifying and evaluating the strategies, goals and objectives of the restructuring plan prior
to implementation. And, that the final planning steps and restructuring efforts should include the
entire organization to maximize our chances for success.
Fortunately, the management team was receptive. And, recognizing the impact of impending funding
cuts, we worked together to complete the plan. The plan was rolled out in an organization-wide staff
meeting with breakout sessions to invite input from program staff. Team leaders were chosen by the
departments to serve as representatives in the restructuring process. It appeared that momentum was
building, and we were making progress. And then it all fell apart. A bombshell hit: The organization
was brought under formal investigation due to complaints and charges of harassment filed against the
program director and several of the managers. An Industrial Psychology firm was hired to conduct
the investigation, present their recommendations, and implement a leadership development program.
One of the senior managers was placed on administrative leave and later demoted and transferred to a
separate division within the agency. Another senior manager later resigned and took a lesser position
in another organization. Several months later, I left the organization with the understanding that “Only
with the failure of a pattern can one fully realize the power of that pattern” (Bohannon, 1995, p. 81).
And with the knowledge that I had experienced kaizen: A case study in organizational restructuring.
References
Bohannon, P. (1995). How Culture Works. New York: The Free Press.
David L. Bevett, BS, MPH
February 2, 2002
In the 1990’s, publicly funded health programs were struggling to deliver quality services with
decreasing organizational capacity due to funding cuts, privatization, and other pressures. In 1997, I
was hired as a management consultant to work on an organizational restructuring project. The goal
was to help an Alameda County Public Health program adapt and thrive in a new and uncertain
environment. We believed that the project was feasible. My scope of work was to facilitate the
transformation through strategic planning with senior managers, and staff training on continuous
quality improvement (CQI). With recent Master’s degree in tow, and my first major restructuring
project in sight I was ready. Two years later, I found myself emerging from kaizen: a case study in
organizational restructuring.
The restructuring project was initiated with interviews with management and staff at every level of
the organization. From the beginning, I openly shared my views on organizational effectiveness with
select managers and staff. I truly believed we were there to provide answers. After a few smiles and
several disturbed looks I stuck to the interview questions. According to Bohannon (1995) I had just
learned an import lesson “culture creates hazards for the creatures who bear it” (p.11). The graduate
school culture that promoted open dialogue and debate did not exist outside of school. My failure to
recognize this fact sent shock waves through the organization: I was later told that the program
director did not tell managers or staff why they were being interviewed. My communications had
only drawn greater suspicion and exacerbated the problem.
The data collected during the interviews with management and staff provided insight into problems in
the organization’s structure, internal processes, and culture. Further evaluation revealed that some of
the cultural issues could be traced to dysfunctional management behaviors. After presenting the
results to the program director, I was strongly encouraged to focus on the systems and structural
issues. In retrospect, the director struggled with conflict-avoidance issues, and his directive was a
natural attempt to keep the level of conflict within a “desirable range” (Bohannon, 1995, p. 15). This
conclusion was later confirmed when complaints and harassment charges were filed against the
program director and several of the managers.
Several months into the project, the complex internal dynamics of the organization started to emerge.
And the true purpose of my work became clear: The program director was in the midst of extreme
conflict with the senior managers, and I was to serve as the third party referee and final point in the
triad (Bohannon, 1995). The fact that I had been hired without the knowledge of the senior managers
underscored the somewhat covert nature of my role. One of the midlevel managers privately
disclosed that I was the last of a series of change agents contracted over the last two years. My
relative inexperience with organizational restructuring, and admittedly, arrogance had landed me in the
middle of an organization in turmoil. There were hidden political landmines, managers forming
opposing camps, and staff throughout the organization preparing for a meltdown.
Intuitively, I understood that agreeing to avoid the cultural issues and focusing on structure would
cause problems in the future. In addition, the influence of the senior manager's alliance coupled with
my inability to present a compelling argument resulted in skipping key steps in the strategic planning
process. And as stated by Bohannon (1995), “If the required actions are not followed in the right
order, the resulting structure will probably collapse—if, indeed, it can be built at all” (p. 50). The true
power of culture had become evident. Clearly, we had underestimated and therefore failed to
adequately study the culture of the organization. I had accepted the position of change agent without
evaluating the organization’s capacity or readiness to change. There was trouble on the horizon.
The only option I could see at that point was to regroup with the management team and present my
case for going back to complete the steps we skipped in the planning process. My basic argument
was that the level of investment in the planning phase would ultimately determine the degree of
success in the implementation phase. Therefore, sufficient time, thought and energy should be
allotted to clarifying and evaluating the strategies, goals and objectives of the restructuring plan prior
to implementation. And, that the final planning steps and restructuring efforts should include the
entire organization to maximize our chances for success.
Fortunately, the management team was receptive. And, recognizing the impact of impending funding
cuts, we worked together to complete the plan. The plan was rolled out in an organization-wide staff
meeting with breakout sessions to invite input from program staff. Team leaders were chosen by the
departments to serve as representatives in the restructuring process. It appeared that momentum was
building, and we were making progress. And then it all fell apart. A bombshell hit: The organization
was brought under formal investigation due to complaints and charges of harassment filed against the
program director and several of the managers. An Industrial Psychology firm was hired to conduct
the investigation, present their recommendations, and implement a leadership development program.
One of the senior managers was placed on administrative leave and later demoted and transferred to a
separate division within the agency. Another senior manager later resigned and took a lesser position
in another organization. Several months later, I left the organization with the understanding that “Only
with the failure of a pattern can one fully realize the power of that pattern” (Bohannon, 1995, p. 81).
And with the knowledge that I had experienced kaizen: A case study in organizational restructuring.
References
Bohannon, P. (1995). How Culture Works. New York: The Free Press.
| Copyright © Knowledgeark.net, 2016 |
| Terms and Conditions |
Knowledgeark.net > Organizational Development > Kaizen: a Case Study in Organizational Restructuring
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |