Organizational Structure Review - Nanaimo

ORGAlillATIO"Al EfFHTIVENEU INC •
. CONFIDENTIAL
ORGANIZAT'IONAL STRUCTURE REVIEW
·. I,"~r~,~!:~~,~~O~IiQF .EI~DINGSFQ~JHE
i~CttY:DFNANAIMO
.....;;
;"
,
PREPARED FOR:
. >DI:~IGNfEAM .
.PREPARI:DBV:
PETER LEE
•..
TEKARA ORGANIZATIONAL'J;:#ECTIVENESS INC.
#405 - 808 NELSON ST.
:·i'\JV~N.(:bUVER/BYJ V£)Z.i~H.Z
;"
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
1 INTRODUCTION
\,'.:
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc. (Tekara) was contracted by the City of Nanaimo to
partner with an internal Design Team (comprised of the City Manager, General Managers, and
Director of Human Resources) to review and renew the organizational design of the top layers
of City Management.
This interim report outlines the review process and initial findings, which will serv~ as the
foundation for design options for an enhanced organizational design for the top tiers of City
Management.
1.1
Organizational Design Process
'i~\
.i-.'r.
':';-~~ '~?fff;; \. /}_\ ';-
> .: ~'"
~::'.
-.:.
.":':;: -:: .:-:~:;, -'"'."';":.
.,"
The review and renewal of the City of ~~n"\~11l11~[s;organi~ptic>:n~J d~~iglJ~.t,obk~,placefrom January
to March 2010, based on the roadmap (outlined below) for the project.
All members of the City's management structure (up to the Director level) and key managers of
all departments were interviewed for their perspectives and feedback.
In addition to theactivitjes outlined in Phase 1 of the roadmap, further rese.arch was conducted
to learn fromtheOrg§nJzatj.opal ;d~r~igi1',ahd experieoqeof 6l:Iie.t~~.;num,icipalities of a similar size
who are facing similar challenges.
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
2
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
2 CLARIFYING THE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
''''is;~ection ofthkfeport surnmar"izesthe wOikcompleted'during Phase lof the project .....
Strategic direction is the critical centerpiecet6 good organizational design~ If the strategyis not
clear, or not agreed upon bythe leadershiptealTl, there are no criteria on whicht:o base other
design decisions - without the strategy componEmt; it is iJ'npossible to make ratj()rlal decisions
along the way.
"', ,.
.
Here is thE: City of Nanaimo's strategic direction fort~etwo-yea(period of 201Q:2~12.,
Vision
In 2 years, we will have built pO$itive relationships with our Council, community, unions and
.
employees that allow the City to deliver excellent services.'
Mission
To.serve Council in its'deterrriiniitiol1,ofcofnrhUility prio'rities so thal:We are continuously
improving the services to our citizens; .' (Note: thisim'plies'that CifyManagement is adopting a
"customer" strategic focus, and that lor now; City Management's'/Jrimary "customer" is
Council).
Values'
Existing ;Values
What It Means for Us
.P~oVidings~pp()rt .
'. c:):,k!~~ing,;bpe~il"t.n:'nr",'" ~'r,mYTI; i:liitaj~Qtls.!~vittl ',¢,:ich'/otl'lef
T~kara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
3
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
5 Strategic Priorities
Strategic Priority
Success will be defined by:
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
4
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
2.1
Reviewing the Current
~truc:ture
The purpose. of thi$step. was to provide the Design Team with qualitative data to help with a
more accurate refled:iorlOIl the potential scope and impact of this project. This understanding
helped s,hape thep]"oject's design criteria, design process and approach to further COQsultation.
The assessment of the current state - and the gap between the current organizational design
and a future design that is better aligned with the renewed strategic directipn - was bas~d on
the model described below.
..
.
Organization design i~;~6~'~eli,bei-ateprpces~()tconfigUring
structures, processes, cultiJl'al/people policies and practices
to create an organization capable of achieving the
~r~r3l~:,j~~f:~~~W:~rg~'~liaBg~::iif,~~~'ii~~~plciIlY .
Orgi'mizational Design Model
;;
includes,the'vjs~onJmission,values,:'short and
Jong"term
goals. Strategy is the critical centerpiece to good
orgcm!zatiolJalc;lesign. If the.str.;.tegYisnot cle~r,. or not
agreed upon b)i'the leadershipteam, there are
criteria on which tobaseottler'deslgn tled§iolis .,j'
without the strategy component, it is irripossible·tomake
rational decisions ~Iong the way.
Structure deals with the placement of accoul')ta~i1ities,
formal power, authoritY a~d'the reiatecFrelati6nships and
hierarchy. It should be noted that structure is u s u a l l y ' : i'
overemphasized as it is the most visibl.e,colT)pone!"lt; .
however, structure is only one facet Qf~ffectiY,e .,'
organizational design: .' ..
. ", ....... ' ..
no
•
•
•
Prote~iSesotitline the key systems tha.t eiisureappropriate information sharing and decision maKing
tocre~tetheoptimallevelsofcollaboratibh and connection to ensure the structure functions
effectively; ' .
.'
...
.
, '.
•
c:olture deals with 'the underlying beliefs, values, alia behaviours that. aetermlne the long-term
success of an organization as well as the related people practices and systems that are central link
between an organization's.strategy; strllctureand.ptocesses.
Overall Summary of Key Findings
Critical issues that require immediate attention include:
•
The lack of a trUsting and constructive relationship between Counciiand management
whichl1as resulted 'In'lower levelsci¥'ehgagementamQng the management group, who
are generally committed to the City , 'but are 'H6t feeli'ng appropriately' acknowledged for
working 'hard ,andicontinuingtodelivergood .levels of servi(:e tQthecommunity.(It
should be noted that there appears to be little "fat" among the management structure as
managers generally have high levels of technical competence, and carry workloads that
appear appropriate, if not higher in many cases, for the culture of the organization.)
•
No clearstrategic;direction from Council.
•
Significant succession management challenges due to the aging demographics and
retirement optioDs of management over the next several years.
•
Opportunities for improving communication, decision-making, planning, and leadership
development processes;
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
5
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
2.2
Identifying Specific Design Criteria"
The purpose ofthi~ step is to translate both the strategiC direction and thefindings'of the
currentsta"te ass~$sment into implications forcjesign ,in the form of sp.ecificdesign criteria. In
simple terms, this me-aris being really speCifiC about what the Design Team hopes the new
design will accomplish;..
SpedficD~sign
cHteria
The table 'belowoqtlines the'Design Team's effort to translate all of thE! review findings into
designtrfte'i-i-a'f6d:herenewetV(future) organization desig1'i; :'tnesecr!~~dcrWill be importan~ in,.
shaping future,9t:gahi~ational design options.
"
,',
. ' ',.',
,,'
:iJ,:(~~<~':f.-,:.~~d";L::<-.:.
.
: ~ .,.~..; ":
Component
3
<
".y ~': ;::;~-:
,~,~
;:" ..
Design Criteria
LEARNING FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES
The next part of the report outlines the key findings of the "best practice~ research~' undertaken
to learn frolll the :p~g~ni:zi;ltiqnal design an~tE!xp~~fierw~.of.ot~~r ml,lni~ipa)jties. This re~earch
willalsQD~ vel)' JI~!~a,blein~hapjrQ th~9rafting of desig,~pp~ions' ;ahd re.com'!lendations.
Note that the this benchmarking process review included· revieWing our 'current data 'baseof
research as well asinte-rviewing,comparabie of a similar size who might be facing Similar
challengesjarid to learn 'about their approaches in the hopes of finding some' best practices that
the City ,ofNanaimo might want to adopt or adapt.
The following municipalities contributed to the research by participatingiin interviews:
•
City of Chilliwack·"
•
City 'Of Medicine Hat'
•
City of Kamloops
•
City of Prirlc€! George
•
City
•
District Municipality of Langley
•
District Municipality of Saanich
•
City of Lethbridge
•
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo
(including former City of Fort McMurray)
of Kelbwna
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
• City ofRed Deer'
6
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
A number of other municipalities were also approached and invited to participate and either
chose not to or did not respond:
•
City of Langley
•
City of Victoria
•
City of Medicine Hat.
Summary of Key Findings
•
Deputy City Manager Role:
o
Wood Buffalo (Fort McMurray) has a Chief Operating Officer (COO) who handles all
aspects of internal municipal operations, leaving the City Manag~r (or CEO) free to
focus on his r.~lationships with,Mayor andC6i.JJ;cil, and with other external
st:akehplders in.thecommynity andind~stry.
oVictorianasan Assistant City Manager. It appears from their chart that what would
typically be considered corporate' services functions, (Finance, Human' Resources, and
Legislative and Regulatory Affairs), rE!PQrt to the Assistant City Manager, whereas the
community servic.:es functlons',(Engireeririg, Planning, Developr,nent, Parks!
Recreation/Culture; and ,Firi) report to the City Mpilager. There no General
Manager Director of Corporate SerYi~es ontheirchi:irt.
or
o
Lethbridge has fairlyriew position called a'~'Director of the City Manager's 'OffiCe"
reporting directly to the City Manage~VI1itha ,focuson,e,:ommunity relations and
communications, performance measures, 'intergove~nrriental affairs,regional issues,
strategy management,' city wide projects, anc:l economic development liaison.
Whenever the 5eniorLeadership Team identifies that an emerging issue or initiative
is cpmplex, multi~faceted, and requires coordination across divisions, it is referred to
this Directort'otakethe lead on it.
'
o
•
In Chilliwack, the General Manager of Community Development (which incllJdes
MUl)icipal D~veloPrTIent ang Parks, Recreationfll1d c:ulture)aJso pli3ysthe role of
DePlltyCAO, available to act in the CAO role when,the CAO is away.
Office of the City Manager{
o
•
Is
Wood Buffalo (Fort McMurray) has an Office of the CEO that includes a variety of
functions related to communications, risk and compliance, and strategic initiatives
(iritludfng'etonorl1itdeveloprriEmt ahd liaisOn with First'Natibns).,
Langley~sOffice of the C.A.O.
()
includeS the Manager ofH!)manResource,s.and the
Mana9~r of Legislative Services ancl'their staff (including .Bylaw Enforcement and
fhe Deputy Corpprpte Officer).
'
, '.
o
Lethbridge has a "qir~ctor of the City Manager's Office" described earl,i.er (alJove).
The number of direct reports to the City Manager ranges from 4 up tb8(and
everythihg in 'between.'
,
'
• Mem~ershipon tl,~$e~,iprh:!ader$l1ipteap,
ranges from 4 to 8,as well, although not
all direct report:s to -the City Manager are on the team, and some non-d,irect reports are
invited in many cases based on the strategic or cross-functional nature of their portfolio.
• Plac~me'~tC)i,~jre Services:
In several muniCipalities~;the Fire Chlef'i~a;dii:eCt report
of the Gener,aiManag~r or Director of a division, namely: Corporate Sus'tainability
(KelQwna), CPrrimunityServices (Lethbrictge), Community alld Corporate<Affalrs
(Kqmlopps)!: ~!-!bncServices (Medicine Hat), Dev~loprrient Sei"VicE!5 (R~d b~er),and
,Puqlic, Safety (Wood Buffalo/Fort fy1cMurray).' In other municipalities, the Fire Chief
reports dJrectly to the City Manager (Chilliwack, Langley, Victoria, Sapnich):
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
7
,
Organizational Design Review
City of Nanaimo
•
Placement of Police Chief/RCMP Superintendent: The fellewing municipalities have
their .own pelice ferces (vs. RCMP): Saanich, Victeria, and Lethbridge. In these
municipalities, the Chief .of Pelice reperts te an autenemeus Pelice Beard/Cemmissien.
In municipalities served by the RCMP, the Superintendent mayer may net appear en the
erganizatienal chart, but there is seme kind .of liaisen and ceerdinatien relatienship in
place. In seme cases, the liaisen happens at the level .of the City Man(;lger (e.g.,
Saanich, Medicine Hat, Kamleeps), in ethers directly te Mayer ana Ceuncil (e.g.,
Chilliwack), and in yet ethers, at the Divisien level (e.g., Kele~!1~)'
•
Placement of Police Support Services: In mest municipaliti~s, the pelice suppert
services functien is placed in the Cemmunity Services Divisien.iA number .of
municipalitiesgrQup :pelice and bylaw services tegether.
•
Overall Protecl:hfe Services function: There Were ne clear cemmenalities around the
greuping e(Fire arid PoliceseniiceS; ir{speakin~ftothese municipalities who have
recently undertaken erganizatienal reViews, there isseniell'ew thinking 'abOut greuping
Fjre;Polic;e,' andethersafety 1eJClt~9,:fLinctioJ1S, ~egether:"'" fer, example, Weed Buffale
(Fert f\1cMurray) ,has, estabHsh,eej,a, Public Safety Divis,ien. '
•
Placeme~t of Economic Development function: In most municipalities, the
EcenemiCDevelopmentfunction dOes net appearexplic;it:lyin tltlesatt:he management
greup level in theorganizat:ienal cha'rt (within twe repertinglevels .of the City Manager).
Exceptiens include LangleY whiCh has a Directeref :Oevelopment Servfces &: Ecenomic
DevE:!lopmel1t, and ReclDeer whichha~ a Manager of Land&: Ecenemic pevelepment.
•
Placement of Corporate Communications: A few municipalities have a
commUhicatiens functien represe'ilted atthe managem1ehtgroup level. The feHewing
have CommuniCations managers .or directers reporting directly to the City Manager:
Medic:h1e Hat, Red Deer, \lictoriajPrihc:e George, WeooBuffalo (Feri: McMurray).
Lethbridge's Directer of the ti1:yManager's Office is responsible fer cemniunity relatiens
and cemmunicatiens. Kelewna has a Directeref Cemmunity &: 'Media Relations reperting
threugl) a General Mane'lger.
•
Placement of Legislative Services: In the follewing municipalities, the Legislative
Services functiensits in the Corperate Services Divisien: Red Deer, Kamleops, and
Saanich. In ether municipalities, a Manager .of LegislativeServicE:!s reperts .diIJ!ctly te
the City Manager (Lan.gley, Prince Geerge, Weed Buffale), .or Assistant City Manager
(Victeria).
'
•
Placement of Human Reso"rrces: In,the fellowing municipalities., HlJm.an Reseurces
(HR) reperts,directly tothe City Manager: . Langley, Medicine Hat, RedDeer, Kamleeps.
In' Vkteria; HR-j-eports
the Assistant City Manager. In the remainingnionicipalities
(Kelewria, Prili'ceGeorge, Weed Buffald~ Saanich, Lethbridge, and Chilliwack), the
Manager/Directer .of HR sits in the Cerperate Services Divisien.
.
:
:-.
:
"
. '
.
to
•
•
Placement of Parks, Recreation &. Culture: In mostrnuhiCipalitiesi the Parks
R€creatipn ,~ Culture functiens.iare grQupeq. tegether .uQq~ra ~emmunityJPl,IplicServices
Division. The exceptiens are: Langley, where Recreation &: Cultl!r~,fall under
Cemmunity Services but Parks fall under Engineering, Parks &: Environment. In Saanich,
vid8da ana Kamloeps, they havetheif owin:livisionJd~paH:'fnehfandrepertdirectiy te
the eityManager. ' '
, . ,. , '
Strategic Init:iatives 8r.SpeciC\11 Projects: Many municipalities t"!ay~ ere or twe
pesitiCinsrepoiting te the 'Cfty Manager wh,ose role is to work en' strat'egfC 'Initiatives .or
special prejects.' Fer example, Prince Geerge currently has an Inh~grated Cemmunity
Sustainability Plan Leader, KeloWh:aand Weed Buffale (Fert McMurray) beth have a
Directer .of Strategic lriitiai:ives~'Red Deer has a MimagerofCemmunicatiOns,.& Strategic
Planning, Lethbridge has abirectbr .of the City Manager's Office whe 'isrespcinsible fer
strategic ihitiatives and special prejects. '
-,'
Tekara Organizational Effectiveness Inc.
8
,
<