Ricky Burges

This talk is about my experience at Perth Zoo. I have been the Director at the Zoo for just over three years and my work has largely been to do with change and working with those who have been responsible for introducing that change.

The interventions that I have introduced are not original and I have used theories and models of organisational behaviour taken from various respected management and organisational experts. These people and their work is referenced in my paper.

Because it is a long story and this is a short time slot this is an abbreviated summary of the work at the Zoo.

Perth Zoo is located on 18 hectares on the southern side of the Swan River. A ferry ride from the centre of Perth City.

The Zoo houses over 1513 specimens from 212 species and receives a significant degree of community support through the attendance of some 600,000 plus visitors annually. The 1996/97 Zoo operating budget is around 11 million Australian dollars and the Zoo has a staffing level of 110 people.

As I stated up front my work has largely been about change. Change as you know is usually driven by changed markets, new competitors, declining demand or a declining organisation.

There may be tantalising opportunities just out of reach unless radical new thinking is applied.

Or, it may just be that there is an uneasy feeling on the part of the Chairman that ‘we’re not in Kansas any more, Toto". Or that, the competition is eating our lunch; or a realisation that we cannot meet the payroll this month.

In 1994, the Perth Zoo structure resembled most organisations chimney stacks. There were five programs headed by a group of managers and 102 full time staff. The most senior position in the organisation was the Director and all of the programs were headed by mid level managers.

The staff at that time generally demonstrated a sense of being in a large family and that someone "in charge" would look after things and make decisions for them. The leader led with strong views and that staff deferred to that authority.

Prior to commencing any implementation of strategies or suggesting any changes I made sure that I read all of the relevant information including the Zoological Gardens Act 1972, Annual Reports and other significant reports and reviews related to the operation of the Zoo.

I surveyed relevant literature, interviewed stakeholders and developed a strategic implementation plan.

In developing the strategy that was eventually used, I found Beckhard’s (1989) article "A Model for the Executive Management of Transformational Change in a book called Human Resource Strategies (1992) to be the most useful. Beckhard’s model develops ten conditions or elements that he states must exist before transformational change can be achieved in an organisation.

The cultural climate in 1994 was in a state of intense and volatile industrial unrest. There were grievances, stop work meetings, busy media activity and threats of exposure on national television.

Naturally, the Zoo Board and management wanted to urgently introduce some stability into the workplace.

It was a confusing time. The Zoo was characterised by intensely passionate behaviour of some staff and some managers were decidedly parental and encouraged and created dependency by those people who were quick to look for someone else to take responsibility. They were comfortable with the old way and didn’t want to change. Unions were fairly active and took advantage of the confusion amongst management ranks. There was a high level of stress and not surprisingly staff were distrustful of management.

Flavour of the month, at the time, was the concept of decentralisation and flatter structures. As you might imagine, I had some concerns about taking the organisation into this arena. Decentralisation encourages more individual freedom and empowerment at lower levels and reduces the burden on senior management. However, if you recall, there wasn’t really any senior management except the Director. In considering the natural instinct to recommend decentralisation I felt it was very important to consider timing, both from an individual and organisational perspective.

I considered whether staff had the personal skill and ability to evaluate situations and make decisions. And whether we could give them adequate information and train them to handle the new role. Whether we could put the required controls in and most importantly did staff want to make decisions. Attitudes and expectations had to be assessed.

I also considered the cultural aspects of the organisation. Culture can be defined as a set of habitual, traditional and expected, but unwritten and informal, set of rules and norms which strongly influence the behaviour and reactions of all employees. It will be reflected in ways such as attitudes, values, management style, approaches to solving problems, manner of dress, speech/language, rate, speed and quality of work, timekeeping and measure of success and recognition.

Culture tends to evolve very gradually and is largely based on what has occurred in the past. Over time it builds up considerable momentum and can be very difficult to change.

In 1994, observation and anecdotal information described some of the core values and behaviour within the Zoo culture then as:

Poor Communication

Insecure and Mistrusting

Dependent

Adversarial

Risk Aversive

The next step was to develop a strategic formulation to implement changes. A Task Force was developed with membership taken from all stakeholders. It was agreed amongst the Task Force members that industrial issues and baggage would not be on the agenda.

‘it is difficult to discuss win/lose issues in the same forum with win/win problems. Win/lose issues take priority, feelings run high, tempers get short, and the deviousness that is natural in adversary bargaining gets in the way of any constructive problem solving." Curtain and Ormond (1989)

Ownership and involvement are key issues for success. Devolving rather than withholding power has been instrumental in achieving results. Sometimes sharing of information and power is new for some people and a leader can provide a role model for others in the group.

The terms of reference were developed with the involvement of the whole group and meetings were scheduled weekly.

Beckhard’s model states that in any transformational change three states must be dealt with: 1. Designing the Future State, 2. Diagnosing the Present State and 3. The Transitional State.

The Zoo Business Plan, completed in 1994 was the basis for designing the future state. The plan is based on economic, conservation and humanistic issues.

A written statement, expressed in behavioural terms, including the basic organisational character, policies, values and priorities that would exist was prepared.

Values, behaviour and communication became a familiar topic in meetings. Every opportunity was taken to talk about the sorts of things that would be important in the new organisation. Senior staff received a copy of Stephen Covey’s book Principle-Centred Leadership (1992) and they were asked to pass it on to their managers when they had finished reading it.

The staff felt that they had been diagnosed to death, so most of the information about the state of the organisation in 1994 was taken from existing documentation. Existing reports indicated that the Zoo was very much animal focussed (which of course is no surprise) and staff were insular in their specialities. They were (and still are) risk aversive and low trust existed (and still does to a certain extent) between people. The structure was hierarchical and rigid and focus was (and still is) inward looking. Communication is filtered through and most passes along the grapevine. There was little accountability and yet strict controls over independence and individuality applied. There were strong messages to management for greater clarity, honesty and quality of communication, more praise and feedback, clearer goals, roles and expectations and more effective delegation of responsibility. They wanted a clear vision and direction for the Zoo.

In working out how to get from ‘here to there’ it was important to identify issues and develop strategies to support the process. We defined the system affecting the problem, analysed members of the critical mass with regard to their readiness and capability and we identified the power relationships and resources necessary to ensure the perpetuation of the change work group. Finally we set up the organisation, structure and the system to manage the transformation.

The most common question I am asked is "what do I do about Mary or Bob’s ambivalence"?

I have assumed as a working hypothesis that there is a great deal of ambivalence regarding change and I see this as normal and potentially useful. There is great value in the individual having strong forces against change even when they believe that the organisation can function better if some of the changes are made. Our job as managers is not to force change but heighten awareness of the forces acting for and against movement to a new place, problem or issue.

At Perth Zoo we have introduced the manager as a "learning model" and make a strong point that the full use of presence is a cornerstone of the approach I am urging managers to take. This is also central to the action-learning model and I have used this concept to construct an action-learning group within the senior management group at the Zoo.

The manager provides a presence that may be otherwise lacking in the organisation.

Presence is a difficult concept to define, evoking words such as power, influence, style, charisma and the like. However, it is not just an abstract concept; it is tangible, palpable, and it can be seen and felt. Presence is always brought into a dialogue, whether or not the bearer is aware of how it varies or is perceived. A nice definition for presence is:

"The living out of values in such a way that in ‘taking a stance’, the intervenor teaches these important concepts. That which is important to the organisation’s learning process is exuded through the manager’s way of being".

Nevis (1989)

Presence is not the same as style or personality. Style is a more superficial (also important) aspect of presence. Style is the delivery of the message. Presence denotes a good integration of knowledge and behaviour. Style may add to enactment, but it is simply a display of charm unless it accompanies an internalised body of knowledge.

Within the Zoo’s middle management there existed a level of exhaustion and resignation. This is understandable considering the level of negative activity that was present. There were some obvious skill gaps and people generally had a "can’t do or won’t do" attitude. They were fiercely dedicated to the Zoo and taking care of the animals. New employees or consultants were not really taken seriously. It was a bit like moving in to a country village. Until you have been there for 10 years you’re a newcomer and at best tolerated, having to earn a place within the system. Some were also well under resourced, financially, technically and through lack of human resources.

The Task Force recommended the new structure to the Board in April 1995 and in May 1996 it was implemented and now forms the structure within Perth Zoo. The most significant features of the new structure included the addition of a layer of senior directors in the organisation. This was achieved by rationalising some other areas of the Zoo (not those caring for animals) and the way the support programs are depicted supporting the main program. There has been a significant change in the calibre and amount of research being undertaken at the Zoo, particularly with the Zoo’s involvement with the Marsupial CRC and the Vertebrate Biocontrol CRC. Shortly we will recommend to the Minister and Treasury that Research is reflected as an individual program in its own right.

A manager’s worst nightmare must be when he or she hears the director urging them to increase their skill base, increase their performance, tighten the budget, ensure they meet equal opportunity guidelines, address occupational health safety guidelines, ensure work safety, meet customer targets and just occasionally they have the odd resistant employee who out of sheer bloody mindedness doesn’t want to know about any of the above.

Nevis has a list of skills for managers, which I’ve found useful"

1. To attend to the what’s happening around you, observe, and selectively share observations of what you see, hear, etc., establishing your presence in doing so.

To attend to your own experience (feelings, sensations, thoughts) and selectively

share this, establishing your presence in doing so.

3. To focus on energy in the organisation and the emergence of lack of issues (common figures) for which there is energy; to support mobilisation of energy (joining) so that something happens.

4. To facilitate clear, meaningful, heightened contacts between members of the organisation (including contact with you).

To help the group achieve heightened awareness of its process in completing units of work, and to learn how to complete units of work so as to achieve closure

around problem areas and unfinished business.

I also suggest to:

Listen carefully in a non judgemental way

Probe to understand the context and the background, avoid personalising the problem

Play back to the person what you are hearing, as a means of clarification and as a step toward possible solutions

 

 

David Hutton who wrote the Change Agents Handbook has produced a useful list for managers which I’ve reproduced here:

Be successful in the job - don’t take on situations where you cannot succeed!

Be clear about what you stand for, why you are doing this job, and what you want out of it.

Adjust your own measures of accomplishment to include the intangible, such as changes in behaviour and attitude.

Only take responsibility for what you can control or influence.

Learn to be patient and persistent - wait for the best moments for action, then wait for the results to develop

Be philosophical - accept that in spite of your best efforts, some things will go wrong. Let these go

Learn to accept flak and to listen to concerns without taking it personally

Draw upon your friends for moral support and encouragement

Have a life - pursue your other personal interests and passions and keep the job in perspective. Remember that this process is not an end in itself - it is only a means to an end.

Maintain your sense of humour - or get one quickly!

Be kind to yourself - forgive your mistakes, celebrate your accomplishments, have fun!

 

And for Growth he suggest:

Remain a humble student

Embrace personal change

Draw upon the power of diversity

Strive for balance

 

And, from me some personal observations:

I have always found it difficult dealing with those people who relentlessly pursue their own self-interest regardless of what else is on the agenda.

Sometimes, the sense of loneliness and isolation is difficult.

Learning to go slowly and let people find their own way is sometimes difficult. It is enormously difficult to accept that sometimes it is one step back for every two steps forward.

Learning not to take things personally when a project doesn’t work hasn’t been easy.

Particularly when there are unpleasant and unkind things said.

It has also been important to confront people when I found them "talking the talk" and then retreating to the familiar - doing hurtful, silly, thoughtless things. It has been so tempting to rage against this, yet so important to stay connected to the purpose and just bring it to their attention.

The enormous amount of energy and time required to meet all the demands of working with change is quite staggering and requires resilience beyond what I would have imagined.

Acknowledging that my energy needs to be spread across the whole organisation has been important. Hard issues, soft issues, conservation issues, research issues, marketing issues, financial issues, commercial issues, teamwork issues...all need attention. And I need attention; I need rest, relaxation and some fun.

In the first unit of my Masters the lecturer insisted we learned how to juggle. We didn’t pass the unit until we could juggle with three balls for three minutes. Of course they were symbolic representing balance and not neglecting any one of the important issues for work, home or study.

And finally, isn’t there an arrogance to doing all of this? One can only hope that we do it with humility, with a spirit of generosity and for all of the right reasons.