The History
This team of 18 were responsible for a number of large and publically visible projects, and on the face of it were flying. The reality was that internally the team was floundering and the top three directors were in serious conflict with each other and subsequently their teams were working in silos and competing for resources. This behaviour was threatening the very existence of the organisation. An intervention was requested by one of the directors.
The Method of Intervention
The Enneagram was introduced as a team tool with all 18 staff members present at the first two-day session where a full explanation of the process and all nine Enneagram types was given.
For the purpose of this case study we are only going to give you the history of the three senior directors, their Enneagram numbers and how these impacted on the organisation.
The MD typed as an Ennea 8, The Operations Director as Ennea 7, and the Financial Director as Ennea 3.
From the team perspective the authoritarian style of the MD immediately became the talking point, with the Ops Director quickly identifying that the conflict and head-butting that takes place between them personally is a result of his own 8 wing coming into play. The 3, who can appear in the world as authoritarian himself, recognised that he brings a façade of authoritarianism to the table which can be quite intimidating to others, but also that he doesn't always carry through on his planned behaviours.
The MD was slightly uncomfortable at this setting, not really seeing why the others would object to his straight and effective manner of doing things. After all, everyone did agree that they were still effective. He did, however, see that it could be difficult for the team members if two directors had opposing ideas of how to reach a finish-line and there were no clear lines of authority.
The Ops Director also quickly faced the fact that his need to have several different projects on the go all at the same time was in fact demotivating for some of the team as the depth of thought required for each project was not necessarily present, meaning that some of the people in the team had to trust blindly and were finding this very difficult to do. This behaviour of his was directly in line with the 7's nature of wanting more and varied opportunities, mostly to keep their work exciting.
The Financial Director had to accept that his need to win at nearly any cost meant that there were some projects that he never actually came on board with as he did not see their potential for success, nor did he feel he was being given sufficient recognition in this management team. He thus didn't feel that he was winning and simply worked harder on other projects where he felt that he was.
After some additional one-on-one coaching the MD conceded that he often felt himself to be the patriarch of a group of individuals who need his protection, and that is why he drives them so hard and nearly mercilessly, fighting especially hard when he sees his team as the underdog, which they sometimes were due to public opinion on some of their final products.
Once he recognised his underlying need to protect his team he could also identify that they were all adults and did not need his protection; what they needed was his collaboration and respect, enabling them all to move forward as a cohesive unit.
At this stage it was decided to have a group discussion with the three directors present. This was an extremely fruitful meeting where possible future behaviours and trigger-points were identified, allowing each individual to identify their habitual responses in certain situations. Real breakthroughs were achieved here and it was agreed that there would be a third team-day allocated to the group as a whole.
The Conclusion
13 of the 18 individuals showed tremendous growth through the two month period that the coach was on site. The five that did not partake returned from their off site project and within a month had requested that the exercise be repeated for them.
The directors are now a much more cohesive team and are allowing their own teams much more autonomy and creativity. The result is that the silo effect has been diminished and productivity is on the rise. The MD has found that he is way less stressed as a result of better collaboration and the Financial Director has found that there is much less conflict between his team and Operations. The Ops Director has been given additional staff to back up the number of projects that he has on his plate and his team no longer feel that they are being spread too thin. All three of the directors found that their leadership skills were greatly enhanced as a result of this exercise and the Financial Director reported a significant saving on two of the projects. He directly attributed these savings to the improved collaborative efforts between especially Operations and Finance.
Staff Training offers Coaching nationwide, contact us for more information