Participative Designs offers a unique program that focuses on “building bridges” between groups, departments, organizations and stakeholders.  We start with understanding the current barriers to collaboration and cooperation.  Then we work with you to design and implement a process for building understanding, trust and establishing a basis for ongoing cooperation and teamwork. 

Applications:

• Two departments who must work together and are not cooperating with each other.
• Two work groups or units who have an internal customer-supplier relationship and are not communicating or meeting deadlines.
• Two or more groups who must merge or form one larger work unit or group.
• Union-management groups who need to find common ground and develop ways to collaborate in order to stay competitive and cost effective.
• An internal group of advisors or consultants who must learn to work with a wide range of people with different styles and ways of thinking.

Some features of our Team Audit program include:

• Alignment with your overall organizational and business goals.
• Full customization based on the situation and groups involved.
• The identification of areas of interdependence and mutual gain
• The involvement of the “whole system” directly in the process.
• The mutual understanding of differences in style and motivation
• The building of common ground as the basis for future collaboration.
• The removal of deeper systemic barriers and challenges.
• The generation of a preferred future based on mutual goals and cooperation
• On-going implementation support including regular check-ins and reviews.
• Integration with our Leadership Training and Team Leadership programs.

Case Examples:

1. A larger business unit was seeing the need for major changes in how they worked.  The process engaged first the leadership team then the entire staff in analyzing the current business environment and generating a shared vision of where they wanted to go.  Barriers were identified and action plans developed and implemented.
2. An alternative school was struggling after their initial year with internal friction among the parents and between the parents and teachers.  After a series of individual meetings to discuss differences and needs, a combined session was held involving all the parties which results in a shared future direction and set of action priorities for change.
3. A children’s service agency was concerned about integrating areas offices into one central office after 15 years of internal competition and bad feelings.  The leaders and staff of the groups involved were brought together to acknowledge the “negative rumours, gossip and “elephants under the table”, identify their common client values and identify strategies for bridging the differences.