Org Structure governance model
Transcript of Org Structure governance model
Designing the Organization Structure & Governance Model
Gwen Callas-MillerTextron
Sue ToddCorpu
April 30, 2009
A private network serving learning and talent executives since 1997
The CorpU Member Network
Strengthen Leadership
Bench
• Attract the best talent in the industry
• Achieve top quartile retention of key people
• Improve overall employee engagement & loyalty
• Become a great place to work
Achieve L&D Excellence
Become Employer of
Choice
Drive Business Impact
• Align learning with key business priorities
• Organize L&D to support continuous business change
• Execute learning program design and delivery efficiently
• Measure the impact of learning
• Speed throughput of leadership pipeline
• Improve HiPo identification & development
• Meet changing generational needs
• Engage leaders as teachers
• Ensure manager-led development
• Develop strong succession plans
Human Capital Challenges
• Support top line growth
• Reduce cost
• Increase profit per employee
• Accelerate success of mergers & acquisitions
• Support global growth
• Improve performance management
4
Three Basic Models
Varied Organizing Models
Characteristics of L&D Organizing Decisions
Centralized Decentralized Federated
STRENGTHS Strong control over all aspects of L&D, and central integration points to HR processes
Empowers BU L&D teams who are in a good position to understand the needs of the customer
Balances freedom with control among the central team and separate BU L&D organizations
Decision-making concentrated in the hands of a single group
Allows freedom and ownership among training groups
Fosters a strategic longer-term approach through agreements between operating units
Provides a single voice to ensure consistent messages across the enterprise
Provides quick response to immediate needs of line managers
Addresses redundancy issues without diminishing BU’s ability to focus on local needs
Eliminates redundancy Programs are perceived as being more relevant to the needs of the workforce
Creates opportunity to appreciate diverse approaches, and standardize the best ones
Easier to develop brand and strengthen reputation of a single identity
Early Centralized Model
Strengthening Connections to the Business
Centralized Decentralized Federated
WEAKNESSES Eliminates diversity across programs that can provide insights on the “Voice of the Customer”
Fosters fragmentation and duplication of effort
Consensus decision-making can delay action
Programs and services may not adequately serve the unique needs of the business units
Difficult to create common skills and approaches across the organization
Some L&D teams may opt out of agreed programs
Can lead to weaker relationships with business unit managers
Often not strategic due to focus on daily challenges
Tough to redistribute budgets to address changing enterprise objectives
Programs may have a “corporate” flavor
Potential to put local priorities above corporate objectives
Central team can be viewed as being reactive
Centralized Decentralized Federated
STRENGTHS Strong control over all aspects of L&D, and central integration points to HR processes
Empowers BU L&D teams who are in a good position to understand the needs of the customer
Balances freedom with control among the central team and separate BU L&D organizations
Decision-making concentrated in the hands of a single group
Allows freedom and ownership among training groups
Fosters a strategic longer-term approach through agreements between operating units
Provides a single voice to ensure consistent messages across the enterprise
Provides quick response to immediate needs of line managers
Addresses redundancy issues without diminishing BU’s ability to focus on local needs
Eliminates redundancy Programs are perceived as being more relevant to the needs of the workforce
Creates opportunity to appreciate diverse approaches, and standardize the best ones
Easier to develop brand and strengthen reputation of a single identity
Decentralized Structure
Centralized Decentralized Federated
WEAKNESSES Eliminates diversity across programs that can provide insights on the “Voice of the Customer”
Fosters fragmentation and duplication of effort
Consensus decision-making can delay action
Programs and services may not adequately serve the unique needs of the business units
Difficult to create common skills and approaches across the organization
Some L&D teams may opt out of agreed programs
Can lead to weaker relationships with business unit managers
Often not strategic due to focus on daily challenges
Tough to redistribute budgets to address changing enterprise objectives
Programs may have a “corporate” flavor
Potential to put local priorities above corporate objectives
Central team can be viewed as being reactive
Centralized Decentralized Federated
STRENGTHS Strong control over all aspects of L&D, and central integration points to HR processes
Empowers BU L&D teams who are in a good position to understand the needs of the customer
Balances freedom with control among the central team and separate BU L&D organizations
Decision-making concentrated in the hands of a single group
Allows freedom and ownership among training groups
Fosters a strategic longer-term approach through agreements between operating units
Provides a single voice to ensure consistent messages across the enterprise
Provides quick response to immediate needs of line managers
Addresses redundancy issues without diminishing BU’s ability to focus on local needs
Eliminates redundancy Programs are perceived as being more relevant to the needs of the workforce
Creates opportunity to appreciate diverse approaches, and standardize the best ones
Easier to develop brand and strengthen reputation of a single identity
Federated Structure
Centralized Decentralized Federated
WEAKNESSES Eliminates diversity across programs that can provide insights on the “Voice of the Customer”
Fosters fragmentation and duplication of effort
Consensus decision-making can delay action
Programs and services may not adequately serve the unique needs of the business units
Difficult to create common skills and approaches across the organization
Some L&D teams may opt out of agreed programs
Can lead to weaker relationships with business unit managers
Often not strategic due to focus on daily challenges
Tough to redistribute budgets to address changing enterprise objectives
Programs may have a “corporate” flavor
Potential to put local priorities above corporate objectives
Central team can be viewed as being reactive
17
Centralization Decentralization
Centralizing Knowledge
Decentralizing Activity
Cen
tral
izin
g
Activity
Tug and Pull of Centralization Vs. Decentralization
Impr
ovem
ent o
f K
now
ledg
e
Improvement of Activity
Source: Trompenaars, Fons. “21 Leaders of the 21st Century”. 2001
Company Confidential Company Confidential 18
L&D as Business Partner:A Model for Governance and
Execution within a Large Organization
April 30, 2009Gwen Callas-Miller
Exec. Dir., Global Leadership Development
19
Quick Facts About Textron• Headquartered In Providence, RI• Approximately 38,000 Employees in 29
Countries• Manufacturing Operations in 20 Countries• 2009 Fortune 500 Ranking: 173• NYSE: TXT
20
Textron Systems
2008 Textron Inc. Revenue: $14.25 Billion
Bell HelicopterCessna Aircraft
Cessna
40%
Bell
20%
TextronSystems15%
Leading Branded Businesses
E-Z-GOGreenleeJacobsenKautex
Industrial
20%
Textron Financial
Finance
5%
Note: Percentages reflect portion of 2008 Revenues
21
Transforming Textron –Our Ongoing Journey to Premier
A Simpler, More Focused Portfolio of Leading, Branded Businesses in Attractive Industries
NETWORKED ENTERPRISE
EnterpriseManagement
How We Manage What We Own
PortfolioManagement
WhatWe Own
VISION:To be the premier multi-industry company, recognized for our network of powerful brands, world-class enterprise processes and talented people
22
Results of Transformation
• Decentralized, holding company
• Businesses insulated • Redundant
activities, spend• Limited sharing of
talent• Decentralized
learning model
Pre-2001 Today• Networked organization• Common processes • Horizontal councils for
functions• Enterprise-wide values,
development• Federated learning model
23
Talent Development as Key Element of Transformation
• Continuum of development resources across businesses - “Haves” and “Have Nots”
• Top level succession focus• Two executive development
learning programs
Pre-2001 Today• Enterprise COE for talent:
• Learning (Textron Univ.)• Performance Management• Vertical /Horizontal Succession• Career Development• Engagement• Change Management
• Businesses responsible for unique needs
• Tight collaboration with BUs through governance structure
24
• Level the playing field for high quality, consistent and cost effective learning
• Focus on enterprise learning strategy linked to business and needed across the company – leadership, functional excellence and business skills
• Viewed by CEO, Leadership team as an enabler to developing talent and providing a mechanism to bring leaders together to drive desired culture
Textron University’s Role in Transformation
25
Governance Structure & FlowsTransformationLeadership Team
Textron UniversityAdvisory Group
Textron UniversityLead Executive
HR LeadershipCouncil
Talent DevelopmentAdvisory GroupBU L&D
Textron Councils Functional Requirements
Performance Solutions ManagersLeadership & Functional Requirements
Textron UnivSupport TeamDesign & Execution
Textron University Team
ExternalBenchmarkSources
26
Role of L&D Advisory Group• Serves as “voice of the customer” on annual
strategic learning plan• Functions as extended TU team by
participating in program design, supplier assessment, executing communications and getting local consensus on priorities
• Collaborative partnership – for the most part• Members value:
– Opportunity to shape learning beyond their BU boundaries, and
– Share best practices across businesses
27
Textron University Advisory Group
TUAG Chair Chief HR Officer,& Management Comm.
Dep. Managing Dir.Global Tech CenterIndia
VP HRCessna
EVP, Chief CounselTextron Financial Company
EVP Strategy, Textron
Exec. Dir.Global LeadershipDevelopment, Textron
*
EVP Government,International &Management Comm.
EVP OperationsBell Helicopter
Asst. ControllerTextron
Textron’s Transformation Leadership Team (Management Committee & all Business Unit CEOs)
Industrial SegmentPresident
Senior Team of Top BU and Function Executives
28
Role of the Governing Board• Ensures strategic objectives are aligned with
enterprise objectives • Serves as a decision making body, accountable
to make choices on priorities and investment• Evaluates ongoing performance and value of
Textron University to the enterprise• Members serve as champions – demonstrate
executive commitment to learning as a strategic enabler
• Making a commitment to deliver measurable business results
5 Key Dimensions of Governance Accountability
• Driving out costs and pursuing optimal efficiency
Operational Effectiveness
• Establishing and enforcing quality standards
Program and Service Quality
• Accounting for and controlling expenses across the enterprise
Effective Controls
• Maintaining site of corporate objectives in relation to local needs
Adherence to Enterprise Priorities
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Marks of Good Learning Governance
Governance Mechanisms
Financial
PortfolioPeople
OperationsPrograms
Technology Integration
Service Usage Fees
Program Funding Model
Programs
Facilities and Technologies
Infrastructure Funding LearningServices
Roles & Responsibilities
Program Oversight
Shared Services
Process Owners
Rationalization Process
Shared Artifacts
Strategic Planning Process
Enforce Standards
Enforce Policies
Learning Platform
Exception Policy
Requirements Definitions
Talent Processes
Performance Processes
Work Force Utilization
DRIVEN BY EXECUTIVES
Information
Data Standards
Reporting Policy
Data Admin Controls
Decisions, Policies, Processes
Centralized Model With Governance
33
Managing Partner(Elected to 2-year term)
Governance for Decentralized Model
34
Advisory Board
Group Leader
Curriculum Designer
CurriculumDesigner
Curriculum Designer
Curriculum Designer
Curriculum Designer
Curriculum Designer
Curriculum Designer
Mining Diamonds Finance Asset Mgmt
Shipping Procurmnt HR Leadership Marketing Community Relations
HSE Exploration Project Mangmnt
Continuous Improvmnt
Principal AdvisorLearning Core Team
Executive Committee
Advisory Board
Training Curriculum Sponsors
Regional Capabilities
Performance Consulting LMS Administration Solution Sourcing Vendor Management Training Delivery
Logistics Localization
NameNameNameNameNameNameNameName Name Name Name Name Name Name
Business Unit Training
Operational Site Specific Training CertificationHSE
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Advisory Board
Governance for Federated Structure
Company Confidential 35
L&D as Business Partner:A Model for Governance and
Execution within a Large Organization
April 30, 2009Gwen Callas-Miller
Exec. Dir., Global Leadership Development
Company Confidential
If you have a question:
36
Q & A
RAISE YOUR HAND
OR
TYPE IT INTO THE QUESTION BOX ON YOUR SCREEN
May 20, 200911:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. EDT
Driving Innovation in Enterprise Learning with Web 2.0 and Social Networking
Learning Brand in Action: University of Farmers
Upcoming Webinars
June 9, 20092:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. EDT