. .

Let me introduce myself

Clement Leemans

Learning Organization
Garvin, David A., Amy C. Edmondson, and Francesca Gino. "Is Yours a Learning Organization?" Harvard Business Review 86,...
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,...
Strategic Leadership
A high performing organization is agile, capable of inventing rapidly new answers to the global, fast changing, complex...
INDAVER People Make Projects Work
Context & Issues Indaver is a waste management player, active on the Belgian, Dutch, German, GB and Irish market. Fo...
SHRM Practices
Is our HRM triggering the individual and collective behavior we want to see in a learning organization : autonomy, intra...
KBC Insurance A co-creative strategic process
INTRODUCTION: Process Consulting for a major ‘business strategy development’ project where we focused on involving a...
Job Crafting
Leemans, C., (2014). Learning Organization & Job-crafting : A powerfull couple ? In this short article Clement Leema...
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...
Organizing for Sustainable Performance
C. Leemans, (2016). Organizing for Sustainable Performance In this short four page leaflet, we present Move! as an OD Co...
Learning & Change
Our focus is on building Learning and Change Capabilities in the organization. That can take place in different contexts...
Practice Areas
We develop exclusively customized approaches geared to your organizational challenges and focusing on sustainable busine...
Distributed Leadership
Leemans, C., (2017). Distributed Leadership. A powerful engine for Organizational Performance. Leadership Excellence Ess...
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...
Distributed Leadership & Autonomous Motivation
Paul Adler, Charles Hecksher & Laurance Prusak., (2011). Building a Collaborative Enterprise. Four Keys to creating...
HRD as a strategic business lever
C. Leemans & S. Duts (2013)., Human Ressources Development as a strategic business lever. This article has been writ...
Carglass Belux Performance Improvement Process
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Context : The organization works with a lot of, relatively small, subsidiaries. The central HR depa...
Change Management
Scott Keller & Caroline Aiken., (2000). The inconvenient truth about Change Management. Why it isn't working and wha...
Strategic Process
Gerry Johnson, Kevan Scholes and Richard Whittington., (2005), Exploring Corporate Strategy (7th Edition) Prentice Hall....
Move! 10th Anniversary
Move! 10 Years !!! In September 2004, so 10 years ago by now, Clement decided to change his Learning & Development D...
Organizations in the Collaborative Economy & Peer-to-Peer
Bauwens & Kostakis., (2014) Network Society and Future Scenarios for a Collaborative Economy. The thinking about dis...
How Organizations Trigger Sustainable Performance.
C. Leemans. (2012) How Organizations trigger Sustainable Performance. A Mental Model for Organizational Development. In...
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...
Support for internal facilitators Lafarge China
INTRODUCTION: Due to rapid growth and acquisitions, the Corporate University wanted to decentralize its integration prog...
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...
ERM Towards a Learning Organization
Context & Issues ERM Belgium - Holland, is a subsidiary of a large US based Environment and Sustainability consultan...
The Lafarge Learning & Development Network
C. Leemans. (2004), The Lafarge Learning & Development Network. A collaborative effort to develop and implement orga...
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...
Strategic HRM ?
Ulrich, D., (2010). Are we there yet ? What's next for HR ? Michigan Ross School of Business, Executive White Paper Seri...
Sustainable Business Development
Barry Colbert & Elizabeth Kurucz., (2007). Three Conceptions of Triple Bottom Line Business Sustainability and the R...

Follow Move!

 Context & Issues

cristalunionIn the organization a number of sugar and alcohol plants come together. Traditionally those plants were very independently run and had their own industrial policies as well as safety, environment and quality processes and practices.

A few years ago, Cristal Union decided to create a number of centralized functions in order to create a more coherent industrial strategy group wide. One of those functions is the Quality, Safety and Environment Department, headed up by a QSE director and staffed with a small central team that was charged to develop a common policy across the different plants of the group.

 Our Analysis of the issue

It was obvious that it would be very difficult to roll out a policy that would be centrally decided and forced upon the formerly independent plants. Moreover, one of the reasons for centralizing QSE policy was also to allow for ‘cross group learning’ in such a way that all plants could profit from a number of interesting practices or experiments that some plants were putting in place.
So our analysis was, that we should not so much go for a ‘centralized developed policy’ that then subsequently had to be rolled out (or shoved down their throat), but that we would need a process that allowed for learning by working together on a ‘shared policy’, result of collaborative work of all plants and the HQ, without predefined ‘outcomes’ or ‘hidden’ agenda’s.

The intervention process

So we decided to create a ‘learning network’ (or a Community of Practice) consisting off all QSE managers of the different plants and the central QSE plant. This group would come together every six week for a ‘network day’.

The objectives were :

  • Learning from each other
  • Create common / shared projects on common problems or challenges
  • Develop an ‘overarching’ strategy for QSE
  • Follow-up of the strategic QSE plans / projects
  • Share information in all directions

It started mainly the few first meetings to get to know each other, sharing information on projects that were going on in different plant, start working on the SAP implementation, … Gradually we also started to prepare the mid-term strategy plan and the yearly ‘common’ objectives for the activity QSE.

After a few meetings we decided to open up once a year our network and invite the roughly 60 employees working in the QSE area in the plants. The activities that we did during those ‘open network days’ were largely prepared by the different plants and piloted by the QSE managers of the plants. Another step was made when we started to ‘outsource’ the preparation and facilitation of the meeting to individual ‘plants’ thus giving them (instead of the HQ Team) the responsibility over the meeting and installing the idea of mutual interdependence between the plants.
Specific methodologies used: Force Field Analysis, Intervision, experiential games, projects-fair, specific workshops in subgroups, etc…

 DSC01885  DSC01889  DSC01884  DSC01886

Outcomes

It is difficult to say that the QSE strategy as such is better, then would have been the case when elaborated by the HQ team, but what we can say is that there was a genuine input from all plants into the new strategy, the yearly objectives were very much considered to be ‘shared objectives’ and we also saw growing collaboration between plants (within the network, but also other initiatives started where plants shared information, or supported each other’s projects, etc… An obvious outcome was also that the divide between plants and between ‘the plants’ and ‘HQ’ was a lot less pronounced after a few months and the energy and initiative gradually shifted from the HQ to the network as a ‘shared governing body’.
Another outcome that inevitably was realized was the fact that individual initiatives of plants were far more coherent and fitted in the shared ‘strategy’ and were often already discussed in the network in a very early stage which allowed to pull together competencies and resources out of the network for the plant projects.

download project sheet (pdf) 

Top