Case Studies

A scale-up food-technology business was initially assisted with the resolution of tension between certain executive team members and subsequently with effectiveness of the executive team more generally to interact with each other in the most effective way.

Operational leaders at the next level were supported in their development to be as resourceful as possible in their roles.

In most cases, this involved causing them to see certain changes in their approach that could make a big difference.

In one case – and this is reflective of many similar situations – the manager concerned wasn’t self-aware about his own power and the possible benefits of moderating that in certain situations to achieve more productive conversations with his team – to avoid scaring them essentially.

Understanding our own power and sometimes lack of power is really a universal development opportunity.

The production management, production engineering and maintenance leadership group for a large manufacturer of air conditioning equipment (circa 1,500 staff) has been supported with leadership development for a number of years.

This involved equipping the group with a standardised leadership competence model and supporting the development of leaders at all levels in the team and developing their ability to lead their operation collaboratively.

The resulting capability growth has enabled the business to navigate successfully through significant market-driven variation in production volume, in both directions. 

An agile, teamworking leadership culture was established in a specialty printing business.

This company’s issue with lack of alignment amongst its leadership group was resolved through instilling collaborative leadership behaviours throughout the organisation, both up and down the organisation and laterally.

This enabled the business to move from loss-making to break-even and beyond.

At one institution, work on leadership development has led to increased research grant and industrial partner income, more focused strategic leadership of the operating units of the university, and more systematic development of future leaders within those units.

At least an additional £30-40m in research grant income has been secured as a direct result and the institution now has a much-improved reputation as a partner for industry.

At another institution, one academic unit (school) was supported in transitioning from a centralised line management structure to a more devolved approach with a number of research institute leaders coached in taking on line management responsibility.

The leadership team were supported in agreeing processes to give effect to the new arrangement. 

The leadership team of a professional services function within an academic institution was supported in overcoming tension between team members, arising partly through lack of clarity about direction and strategy as well as communication problems within the group.

A university-industry research centre was assisted to establish a culture appropriate to its dual industry-university operation.

Crucial to this is accepting the need for a “cultural island” approach in which the culture of the organisation is deliberately developed to have the features appropriate to technology transitioning between academia and industry, specifically though the Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) 4-6.

Without conscious attention to this, organisational participants are liable to assert the appropriateness of their background TRL context (1-3 for university and 7-9 for industry), leading to a variety of problems and difficulties.

Workshops on this topic were subsequently run on a number of occasions for a related organisation.