I recently retired as director of the University of Toledo Division of Organization Development & Leadership, a division that provides human resource consulting, workplace assessment, customized training and interventions leading to improved organizational effectiveness. We have delivered human resource related services for some of the largest companies in the world, as well as dozens of local organizations. In 30 years of counseling, training and consulting, I have never met a consultant that was so easily able to infuriate employees, although I have heard of consultants like this. Apparently, Mr. Warrick fully intended to instigate, antagonize, confront and condemn Zoo workers who he (or Zoo leadership) considered "bullies" or "troublemakers." As a retired consultant, I can tell you that such an approach is destined to fail.
Repairing dysfunctional workplace cultures is always difficult. But there are acceptable methods to be employed that do not include scare tactics or threats, as Mr. Warrick employed. We begin with extensive assessment. This includes interviews with ALL leaders, union and management. Next, we conduct focus groups. This typically includes all workers in a department or work area - NOT to inlcude their bosses. We emphasize in focus groups that what is said in that room remains in that room. My colleagues and I collect vast amounts of information, analyze the information objectively and sometimes interview an entire cross-section of an organization. Then we create and implement a confidential, custom-designed survey. We ask ALL employees to rate the organization and its leaders across a range of critical categories, including pertinent information collected during the interviewing and focus groups.
After the surveys have been statistically analyzed, we create a report for the organization's leaders. The report offers a snapshot of the organization's current culture, including recommendations for improvement. It is also critical to distribute the report (or at least a summary) to the workforce. Consultants should never ask employees to vent their feelings without providing them with survey results. It's condescending.
It is also important to include union leaders in management planning for organization culture change. Union buy-in is critical. If it does not occur naturally, my colleagues and I conduct group sessions with management and union leaders (win-win negotiation) until they can agree to collaborate on plans for culture improvement.
Finally, all union and management leaders must participate in implementation of the new plans. They must be held accountable for meeting deadlines and accomplishing their part of the plan. My colleagues and I hold monthly meetings with the joint leadership team, continue to collect workforce data, provide additional analysis and hold leaders accountable for improvement. At some point (typically around 18 months later), leaders are collaborating and communicating better and we are no longer needed.
I've never met Mr. Warrick. But, like I said, I've heard about consultants like him. I was contacted many times by corporate owners or leaders who discovered that hiring people like him made the culture worse, not better. It is never useful to confront people in a negative manner. And where does this person come off threatening the jobs of Zoo employees? He is not a Zoo or County employee. He's just a hired consultant. Such behavior will endanger the organization. Employees always lose trust in confrontational leaders.
You can force people to do something by putting a gun to their head. But they will hate you for it. And when you need them the most, they will walk away. We ask employees at every level to tell us what's wrong with the organization. We use valid statistical methods to analyze surveys and then report the results to all employees. Instead of confronting and intimidating employees, we learn from each of them. Then, we show the workforce how small changes in things like communication, collaboration and trust can lead to meaningful cultural improvement. For example, sometimes we implement customized training programs in interpersonal communication skills for the workforce, at the same time that we work with management to improve organizational communication.
It takes a lot of time and a great deal of effort on everyone's part to change an organization's culture. My division has had a great deal of success with this. But one thing I know for sure... never threaten, confront, intimidate or agitate employees. The Zoo had good reason to fire Mr. Warrick, as did the Reynoldsburg City Council. It's frightening to consider that were it not for The Blade's persistent investigation, he might still be threatening and intimidating Zoo employees. One might suspect that even the Marines have more respect for individuals than this agitating consultant.
posted by Chaz at 03:12 P.M. EST on Wed Mar 23, 2005 #
I would hazard the problem with the Zoo is that it's probably run like a fiefdom, a management and, possibly, employee entitlement. That's usually what happens when the same people are in charge for too long. It's a problem that's rife in Toledo government and quasi-government.
swd
posted by swd at 08:50 P.M. EST on Thu Mar 24, 2005 #
I wonder if the Zoo hired Warrick to "kick employee ass" or if Warrick led administrators down his road of confrontation and problem solving by threat and elimination? Either way, administrators are on the hot seat for using human resource and organization culture techniques right out of the Gestapo manual. In the end, they created a stew.
This stew was already on the burner when Warrick arrived. I know this because I interviewed Operations Manager Bob Harden in 2003 about problems at The Zoo (before I retired as a director at UT). Back then, there was already a big problem with communication and collaboration. Much of it existed before Harden came on board. There are multiple unions, heavy beauracracy, departments that really functioned as silos and a generalized lack of trust. I would not call it chaos, but it was moving in that direction.
There are two ways to resolve a dysfunctional organization culture. One way (the Warrick way) is to confront employees. This method employs management threats to achieve results. And while an employee with a gun at his head might seem to change his behavior, the employee will never again trust or willingly collaborate with management. In fact, in most organizations like this, employees leave - as soon as possible. The result is that the organization throws out the baby with the bath water. You see, even the best employees will leave, because who wants to live in a culture of intimidation?
The other way to repair broken culture is long, somewhat painful and somewhat expensive. But it has worked very well for countless companies that used my UT division (Organization Development). This method calls for intensive investigation and assessment first. You can't fix a problem until you are certain it is a problem, and then until you understand it's nature. This involves a lot of interviewing (cross-sectional), focus groups and surveys. The information is statistically analyzed and presented to management and employees. Then, with union and management leadership, interventions are implemented to achieve positive results. Some of the interventions are training-related (i.e. interpersonal communication skills), some are structural changes (i.e. improving organizational communication). The win-win negotiation methods we use help each side understand the objectives of the other side and reach solutions based upon common values and constructive solutions.
The constructive solution path takes 1-2 years to complete, in a large and complex organization. It must always include union leaders. And the cost of training and consulting can be well over $100,000. But the result is an organization in which everyone communicates better, collaborates and trusts each other. It also, by the way, leads to increased work quality and productivity. So there's a financial return on investment for the organization.
posted by Chaz at 06:05 P.M. EST on Fri Mar 25, 2005 #
Chaz, we workers can see people like Warrick coming a mile away. This species of attack dog is known as a "hatchet man". He's brought in to fire people. And, when the hatchet man is done, he then gets the hatchet himself (as happened less than a week ago).
Just be reading the Blade's extensive exposees, in my opinion Warrick was brought in by a management that was highly unmotivated to fix anything directly at all. Warrick's anger at employees was just a side effect; what matters more was that he seemed to sense that the management were not going to effect changes in line with performing actual management functions, as past behavior well demonstrated. He was angry at them too, but since his type of scumbag is used to target employees, he vented most of his ire in that direction.
I'm wondering if Warrick wasn't actually brought in to persuade workers to quit. After all, if you lack the spine to discipline or fire workers, and additionally seek to avoid paying unemployment insurance, then it seems to fit that you'd bring in an attack dog and let him maul the workers for some time. As a bonus distraction, the workers won't really be angry at YOU, hence you also avoid retaliation.
I know too many people in Toledo who fit the profile of a cowardly (but schemingly vicious) manager. Hence, I strongly suspect that my speculation above is part of the truth.
posted by GuestZero at 03:49 A.M. EST on Sat Mar 26, 2005 #
Just one comment on the "Blade's persistent investigation." If the Blade where worth anything, and it's not, it'd be reporting things like this before the fact, not after.
The Blade only jumps on the bandwagon once the cat's out of the bag! It doesn't have any choice then but to report.
swd
posted by swd at 07:29 P.M. EST on Sat Mar 26, 2005 #
This zoo saga story is almost three weeks old. Maybe there are issues here that as a taxpayer I should be concerned about, but I'm not. I don't get it. It's a zoo.
I can't believe that the zoo switched from leasing Volvos to Pontiacs for a couple execs. Oooo, I feel a lot better. How is that a solution to anything? The zoo is still paying for it. What the frigging hell makes the difference if it's a Volvo or not? And are these Pontiac whatevers actually "made" in America? Is that the issue? Whether or not the vehicles are American made. Who has that much time to give a damn about where vehicles are made?
Oh wait, the zoo saga is about some animal guru being shit-canned, right? Again, who cares? Does he think he's the first person to ever be fired for political or ego reasons?
Is this whole Toledo zoo mess or perceived mess indicitive of the small-minded thinking and misplaced energy that hampers Toledoans? All this uproar over the zoo. I guess it's a big deal for some. Looks like a massive waste of time to me.
posted by jr at 11:44 P.M. EST on Sat Mar 26, 2005 #
1. "A task force was convened [Thursday] to investigate problems at the zoo."
2. "The 14-member committee was established by Lucas County commissioners and charged with probing all aspects of the zoo."
3. "The task force set up four subcommittees and set its sights on a 100-day deadline for submitting a final report."
I'm flabbergasted. This is embarrassing. Does Toledo sit around and think up stupid things to occupy their time with? Is all of this necessary for THE ZOO?
Wait, there's more ...
"The task force has an e-mail address, zootaskforce@co.lucas.oh.us, for members of the community to send inquiries or ask about special issues they would like addressed."
An e-mail address. Well isn't that special. Maybe the task force can get Mayor Ford to build them a website: ZooTaskForceWorks.com. Or how about:
AnotherToledoMassiveWasteOfTimeAndMoney.com
Is this 100-day investigation costing taxpayers any money? If so, then I suggest we need a task force to investigate the task force. You know, Toledo loves its task forces, like that sham of a task force from a couple years ago that was suppose to investigate whether or not a smoking ban would be harmful to businesses.
Feasibility studies, task forces, and trade secrets, that pretty much sums up Toledo and Lucas County.
Ooooo, but people are fired up over this zoo issue ...
"The committee already has heard from dozens of residents of Toledo and Lucas County - mostly angry residents calling for more oversight of the zoo, which will receive $11.4 million from Lucas County taxpayers this year."
A measly $11 mill, eh? You angry little sparkplugs, you.
I found this next posting from the now defunct ToledoArts.com website. I kept the data. It's from a year or two ago.
"A new study shows the Toledo Zoo is providing a substantial return on taxpayer investment."
"Executive Director Bill Dennler says the study indicates for every tax dollar the zoo receives, it generates about 8 dollars in local economic activity, and the zoo's annual impact on the local economy is estimated at 70 million dollars."
"Also, the study says people from outside the zoo's primary market area spend 22 million dollars per year at local businesses when visiting the zoo. The study was conducted by the Center for Policy Analysis and Public Service at Bowling Green State University."
So the taxpayers are upset over 11.4 million of their dollars going to the zoo that will result in about $90 million of local economic activity?
Maybe the zoo should organize a task force to search for signs of intelligent life in Lucas County, especially among those angry residents. Ahh, save the nickel, zoo, you won't find any intelligence among those angry people.
I say, the zoo should get one of their gorilla's to give the task force the middle finger.
posted by jr at 01:50 A.M. EST on Sun Mar 27, 2005 #
Agreed.
The Zoo is one of the few bright spots of this area, along with the TMA.
We are lucky to have these two entities in a city of our size, and they are the envy of cities larger than Toledo.
The ex-consultant probably just screwed his future business opportunities, since he is now marked as someone who will publicly torch the companies with whom he has done business. It is important as a consultant to offer professional and confidential services, neither of which this individual has provided.
posted by historymike at 10:24 P.M. EST on Sun Mar 27, 2005 #
I agree with GuestZero. Warrick was brought in as a "hired gun" to intimidate, instigate, confront and antagonize employees. The goal is to fire "bad" employees, or failing that - to make their daily lives so miserable that they resign. After all, who today could possibly believe in such draconian paradigms for management. I've often been called in to repair damage caused by such consultants. Sometimes it takes years to improve the culture.
I also agree with HistoryMike. As a director at UT, I was called in by regional companies to help improve employee "problems." But I've never seen the results of such a Gestapo-like consultant's bad decisions made public. I've heard these things from impacted employees, but Warrick has been exposed, in all his nightmarish detail. A business owner or leader would have to be a business Nazi to hire such a person. Warrick needs to find a new community, or a Nazi-like business owner to work with.
The Zoo is a tremendously complex organization, with multiple departments, multiple unions and what looks like a very bad problem with both organizational and interpersonal communication. Whatever organization they select to help them (the next "consultant"), a lot of carefully planned interventions and much time will be required to achieve performance improvement.
The only good news is that the community loves its Zoo, leadership problems have been exposed and the Board's sad rubber-stamp behavior has been exposed. Let's hope they hire the right consultant next time.
posted by Chaz at 06:47 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 28, 2005 #
The zoo "war" has gone to the web. This is what keeps Toledoans up at night, I guess.
"Opposing Web sites launched amid the controversy at the Toledo Zoo are locked in a war of words and accusations. The creators of the pro-zoo Web site www.supportthezoo.org are charging that supporters of Dr. Tim Reichard, the zoo's recently fired veterinarian, have created two similarly named sites - www.supportthezoo.net and www.supportthezoo.com - which are redirecting web surfers to www.doctortim.org."
Okay, so the zoo is partially funded by taxpayers in Lucas County and not just Toledo. But closer to home in Toledo, why not organize task forces to investigate the two biggest abusers of our tax dollars, which are Toledo City Government and the Toledo Public School System?
posted by jr at 11:30 P.M. EST on Tue Apr 05, 2005 #
"Okay, so the zoo is partially funded by taxpayers in Lucas County and not just Toledo. But closer to home in Toledo, why not organize task forces to investigate the two biggest abusers of our tax dollars, which are Toledo City Government and the Toledo Public School System?
I guess those institutions haven't hired Scott Warrick yet.
posted by Chaz at 06:52 P.M. EST on Fri Apr 08, 2005 #
This is in response to CHAZ. Isn't Chaz a defunct men's perfume? Are you trying to cast a pretty smell on opinions from a group of digruntled employees known as the "bullies" that would seem the world should live in anarchy? It would seem that you have a connection with this group of anarchist that are behind the Dr. Tim website, because the suggestions you have offered only seem to reinforce their way of thinking.Your apparent attack on Scott Warrick would indicate that.
Maybe you just got your educational analysis from the Blade or Dennis the Mennis "Denny Schaffer" radio. Did you ever stop to practice what you preach and communicate with one of your own fellow colleagues before you decided to launch a viscious attack upon him? I have read in the newspaper myself that Mr. Warrick charges $145.00 an hour or $50,000 or less in consultant fees. The Blade had a feel day on this saying the zoo was wasting taxpayers money. Then...Enter Chaz; With his opinions and saying that he or his group could solve the issues at the Toledo Zoo but it may take 2 years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars or more. Sure smells sweet to me! Sign me up for cut, what the Hell!
I would suggest you contact Mr. Warrick and be a non-bias consultant instead of a strong-arm for the so called Zoo bullies that hide behind annonimity every time they make a statement to the media. Here's a thought...If you are so good and so impartial why don't you do something good for your community and offer your proffessional services to the Zoo pro-bono? Maybe you would come out smelling like roses. Lucas County taxpayers would appreciate that!
posted by xcalibur at 10:10 A.M. EST on Sat Apr 16, 2005 #
Xcalibur:
There is no need to antagonize Chaz by making rude comments about his name.
Try to remain focused on the issues, rather than the personal attacks, OK?
As far as Chaz's career, he HAS spent a lot of time in community service. You may disagree with his views, but let's keep it civil.
Chaz weighed in on the issue, offering his expertise as an organizational consultant. I think that he brought a valid perspective as someone who has worked with dysfunctional organizations and helped them get back to a more productive basis.
How would you fix the organizational problems of the Zoo? This would be a better way to discuss the issue, rather than attacking Chaz.
posted by historymike at 10:48 A.M. EST on Sat Apr 16, 2005 #
xcaliber's rudeness belies his/her poor understanding of organizational behavior, as well as a very poor understanding of what I have done for the community during the past thirty years. My biography is in Who's Who in America and Who's Who in American Education. I am a published author. I helped more than 1,000 area job seekers as a vocational rehabilitation counselor and Work Evaluator, worked with countless psychiatric patients in a local hospital, worked 16 years at UT, and created my own division that helped more than 100 regional employers improve their organization's performance.
At the time of my retirement (last year), I charged $150/hr. for my own consulting. Some of the faculty and consultants that I hired to work with my division's corporate clients were paid over $200/hr. They were worth it. But why bring compensation into this issue? Some consultants are worth more - some less. Their record and reputation speaks for their abilities.
I've worked with global firms like OC, LOF (Pilkington), UPS, DaimlerChrysler, Ford and many, many others. More importantly, I've worked with dozens of local companies, including non-profits. My division continues to have a spotless record of helping to improve organizational performace throughout our region. Since we are The University of Toledo (not a for-profit consultant), I only charged our corporate clients enough to pay for the consultants that I hired and to cover our office expenses. Talk about serving our community at the lowest possible cost! I had 2,000 faculty experts to use, as well as hiring consultants from the community based upon their unique talents - all brought to bear for our client's benefit at a low cost. What consultant can say that? The employees and executives of those organizations still say great things about our ability to select just the right consultant or facilitator to meet their unique needs. More importantly, employees get along better with each other as a team, supervisors and managers have improved leadership skills and the organization's performance is better.
So, before you stick you head out and say damaging things about people, try to know the facts first.
posted by Chaz at 03:56 P.M. EST on Tue Apr 26, 2005 #
Syndicate ToledoTalk
