The Problem Model

PROBLEM: ANSWER THIS ONE QUESTION: What is the Core Issue of this company, based on the data collected below.

FACTS ANALYSIS (SUMMARIZED)

The following comments and data have been supplied to OD Consultant and have been categorized into the following sections.

• CORPORATE VALUES AND VISION

The Client envisions and strives to:

• Be a household brand name for its outstanding reputation
• Offer an excellent working environment for all employees
• Be considered the best employer for their employees
• A place where all employees are goal oriented, team-driven and enjoy their work
• Ensure that everyone feels important and a valuable part of the business
• Be a highly competitive business in this industry
• Offer the tools and training for efficiency in work, paperwork, and gaining new clients
• Offer required training to all staff, in all areas
• Increase the profit margin to positively reflect a growing revenue
• Grow rapidly in Vancouver, Calgary and eventually Toronto and USA
• Provide better information and data flow between departments
• Demonstrate the values of the company: outstanding customer service, integrity, efficiency, and a great employer
• Be better than their competition
• Overcome and ensure that typical complaints from clients of competition include lack of efficiency; politeness, knowledge, completion, and fair pricing are addressed.

• HUMAN RESOURCES

• Currently, there are no policies, procedures or criteria for hiring and retaining staff. Hiring and training are done by several people within the organization, with no continuity or guidelines for hiring qualifications criteria. Job Descriptions are almost non-existent, except for foreman and project manager positions. As well, there are no specific criteria for promoting an individual; and training has not been supplied to ease these people into their new positions.
• Contracts are on-line for new people to read and sign. There is no indication that these are being completed. There is confusion with regards to what responsibility each person has and their roles. Several people believe they are responsible for the same task, affecting communication, productivity, and efficiency. In addition to this fact, personnel do not know who to approach if there is a problem.
• New hires do not have a clear idea of what their role or duties are and consequently, mistakes are being made, efficiency and productivity and respect are affected. Almost 100% of the workers on Site Operations do not know any or speak very little English. None of the Site Operations (Site Ops) staff are formally trained in the skills needed for this company prior to being employed. Those who have few skills in this industry are paid higher than normal wages of $23-38/hour. As a comparison, resources show that Certified Professional Accountants with a five-year degree and designation, as well as five years in their field receive a wage starting at $35/hour (CPA Association).

• STAFFING

• The company has approximately 60 -100 employees, 40 are full time and the balance is on-call. There are two offices: Vancouver and Calgary.
• Employees who are not full time can not be retained; many new employees are on call, so it is not easy to retain these workers.
• Some managers dont feel competent in their job and are under a massive amount of stress. Some senior positions are filled with people who would prefer a more technical and/or restoration finishing position.
• Joe, Mayank and Jorge market to the Insurance companies and other potential clients.
• Many of the Site Ops workers are friends of friends and are hired on this basis alone. This fact is causing high turnover (due to lack of English skills, training, and managing), poor productivity, customer complaints, and conflict.
• There is only one foreman to every three Project Managers. It could be the other way around for better use of personnel and efficiency.
• Some branches require more technicians for all procedures for efficiency (to dry and to rebuild).
• Some of the staff are very qualified and can be given more responsibilities
• Some senior or management staff would rather have a different job within the company, as they dont feel qualified for their present jobs

• TRAINING

• Training is limited to on boarding (done by two VPs). There is a list of training for new recruits, but there is no accountability that everyone has been trained sufficiently, or have maintained their certifications.
• When new software is introduced, there is insufficient training or a reasonable learning curve given to the staff. This decreases productivity, confidence, and adds to the stress in the department.
• There is evidence that project managers require training in management, communication, and scheduling skills. In addition, foremen do not receive any training for their position.
• All PMs and Site Ops workers must successfully pass the WRT certification course.
• There is no training available for skills required by PMs and Managers: e.g., scheduling, leadership, management, communication, and conflict management.

• TRAINING TOOLS

• CRM software is slowly getting populated, but is not being used effectively; and changing or upgrading software is often counterproductive, as it slows down the process and requires a learning curve for many.
• Software that address the Purchase Order procedure, overtime approval and fleet management would be helpful to become more efficient.
• A time stamping method, using DASH is used to control staff hours. It has not been proven successful at this time.
• All staff who need access to the job management/field software must learn with online instructions, pass a test, and complete a half-day training with Debra.
• Offering a system with Key Performance Indicators (KPI) is required to maintain high productivity. This system is not yet in practice for all divisions.

• PRODUCTIVITY

• There are no systems in place for hiring, firing, training and workflow. This causes higher costs than estimated, and senior management is frustrated with the results of a lower profit margin than planned. Jobs are often delayed, causing client complaints due to the delays of Head Office decisions and recommendations.
• Many senior positions are dealing with the day-to-day issues, rather than on planning for the future.
• Some people in responsible management positions do not appear to have the qualifications needed to do their tasks in an efficient manner. Since there is only one estimator located in the Vancouver office, the Calgary office has to wait for estimations. Having an estimator at each office would likely be more productive
• Many departments are under-staffed or unqualified. Results include a lower level of reporting than required for efficiency. There is no one in the corporation to deal with legal, or insurance issues, which is required and necessary for this type of business.
• There is conflict that has not been resolved properly. There is a defensive attitude, rather than a helping attitude or assertive communication to solve problems between many staff and managers. Stress is a huge detriment to some who dont feel competent for their job.
• There is no vendor list in the Calgary office which decreases the ability of the Project Manager to create new contacts and sales.
• There is a flat organizational hierarchy, where the CEO and some managers take on multiple roles, creating stress and overlap of some responsibilities. As a result, the staff is not concentrating on their own specific roles. Many department members have to offer to help others when the workload is overwhelming; and often their own responsibilities get somewhat neglected.

• PERSONNEL BEHAVIOUR AND CORPORATE CULTURE

POSITIVE FEEDBACK:

• There is a general positive respect for the CEO, his inspiration, values and vision for the company.
• Some people do not want to offend or open up any negative conversations with the CEO as they do not want to disappoint him.
• The mind-set of the managers is very positive.
• There is a great team environment within the office.

FRICTION:

• Allegiance to specific personnel, even though there is a lot of friction amongst the top personnel, is causing a fracture in production, the corporate culture, and efficiency. It is apparent that several staff members are not qualified for the position they or others hold. Training wouldnt necessarily fix the situation. This is causing resentment, frustration and a fracture between the different departments. Some employees find it difficult to give feedback regarding some staff or management styles for fear of being fired by senior management or the CEO.

• There have been spoken (and written) claims of emotional abuse, abusive human rights issues, and anger displayed to the employees, managers, and outside contracted workers. There are signs of a company culture that does not respect diversity and inclusion. There are reports of discrimination of women and demeaning and inappropriate comments made to a couple of women. The concern is that this behaviour could become a human rights issue. Some Asian women are not being treated according to Canadas work standards. Some site ops workers are being threatened on site. There is resistance for change, even at top levels. Collaboration and moving forward is very difficult. In addition, it is believed that many of the managers are handling more responsibilities than are possible. This creates added stress and ill-behaviour with some of the people.

ACCOUNTABILITY:

• Many site ops workers just dont show up and leave foremen and PMs in a lurch. This lack of accountability affects trust in the company and its workers. As well, some employees are ignoring the law and skipping steps in the procedures. This also creates anger, frustration, and mistrust in the team. Safety policies and procedures must be known and followed. Currently, some instances with police and regulatory boards are not being reported to avoid reprimanding.
• Two members of the interview team for this project have not responded, even after many requests over several weeks were made to complete their surveys for this assessment. Everyone in this process gave their word that they would cooperate and fully participate. As a result, their input will not be recorded in this assessment,
• There are complaints from customers, adjusters, and property managers. This takes up unnecessary time by managers and the accounting department to deal with the issues. It is believed that key clients are leaving due to lack of respect from some of the Field Operations Managers or Foremen/workers.
• There have been disturbing complaints from former employees about abusive and bullying behavior from the three Asian managers. Even sub-contractors have complained about such treatment and now refuse to work for the Company. Some managers, when questioned by the CEO, deny some circumstances in order to avoid disappointing the CEO. They admire and respect the CEO and would rather cover up the truth than get reprimanded.

TURNOVER:

• Turnover is currently 82% over one year in both Vancouver and Calgary offices. This is costing the company at least $225,000 dollars in turnover costs, alone. This is one of the biggest drains on the profit margin, stress of employees, and corporate culture and morale.
• There is fear amongst some personnel who believe that their job will be in jeopardy if they speak candidly about issues that are of concern with some of the Asian managers.

• Some positions pose very stressful situations that spill over to personal time and life. One person is currently so distraught, that they do not believe there is anything happening in the company that would be considered going well.
• Some employees are best friends with the CEO and are believed to be favored over others. Consequently, morale is low due to this belief.
• Five out of seven who were interviewed are moderately satisfied with their jobs. Two out of seven who were interviewed are only somewhat satisfied with their current position, yet would not consider changing companies or communicating their concerns or wishes. One of the upper management team would rather be a carpenter; and another would rather be a technician. These may be examples of promoting others without completing their due diligence.