Identifying and overcoming barriers to efficiency

When everyone is busy – but not enough is getting done

Inefficiency isn’t always obvious.

In many companies, staff work hard, meetings take place, processes are defined and tasks are allocated. Yet the impression remains that:

The department isn’t really making headway.

Typical signs include, for example:

• Decisions are repeatedly postponed
• Coordination takes a disproportionate amount of time
• Responsibilities remain unclear
• Information is not passed on in a timely manner
• Problems are passed back and forth between departments
• Conflicts are avoided rather than resolved
• Staff withdraw or become increasingly cautious
• Processes work on paper, but not in day-to-day practice

The crucial question is therefore not:

‘How can we work even more efficiently?’

But rather, first of all:

“What is actually preventing this system from working?”

Efficiency problems do not always have organisational causes

When a department is operating inefficiently, the first step is often to review processes, responsibilities or working methods.

That makes sense – but it’s not always enough.

After all, the real cause may lie elsewhere entirely.

For example:

• an unresolved conflict between two key individuals
• a lack of trust between departments
• a manager whose decisions nobody openly questions
• conflicting objectives between different departments
• a person who is formally in charge but who, in reality, has no decision-making power
• long-standing grievances or rivalries
• Fear of consequences
• informal power structures
• Past decisions that nobody wants to talk about anymore

Inefficiency then arises not because staff are unable to do their jobs, but because the social or organisational system hinders their collaboration.

The elephant in the room

In some situations, many of those involved are well aware of what the problem is.

But nobody wants to say it out loud.

Perhaps it concerns a key manager. Perhaps there is a conflict between shareholders. Perhaps a decision was made that nobody wants to criticise openly. Or perhaps there has been an informal rule in place for years that shouldn’t officially exist at all.

Issues like these can have a huge impact on an organisation’s performance.

The problem is:

The longer an issue remains unaddressed, the more secondary problems arise around it.

Then, for example, discussions turn to processes, responsibilities or communication, even though the actual conflict lies elsewhere entirely.

Our task is to bring such interconnections to light – without hasty finger-pointing and without unnecessary escalation.

How we identify obstacles to efficiency

The most important approach is often surprisingly simple:

We talk to the people who work within the system on a daily basis.

The aim is not to gather as many opinions as possible. The key is to recognise patterns.

For example, we ask:

• Where does collaboration work well – and where doesn’t it?
• At which points do delays regularly occur?
• Which decisions are particularly difficult?
• Who should actually be making the decision?
• What happens when someone raises a problem openly?
• Which topics come up time and time again?
• Which topics are conspicuously rarely discussed?
• Where do official processes differ from actual working practices?
• What would those involved change if they were completely free to decide?

These discussions often quickly reveal a much clearer picture of the actual situation.

From individual conversations to the bigger picture

An individual employee usually sees only part of the problem.

Management sees a different part. A neighbouring department, in turn, sees yet another.

That is why we do not consider individual statements in isolation, but look for recurring patterns and connections.

In doing so, we focus in particular on three levels:

People

What behaviours, interests, relationships or conflicts influence collaboration?

Role

Are responsibilities, decision-making powers and expectations actually clear?

Organisation

Do structures, processes and management systems support collaboration – or do they create additional friction?

It is only by combining these perspectives that we can identify where the real obstacle to efficiency lies.

Typical process

1. Understanding the current situation

Together with the client, we clarify where inefficiencies are perceived and what impact they have on performance, quality, speed or collaboration.

2. Selecting stakeholders

We identify which individuals and interfaces are relevant to understanding the situation.

3. Conducting confidential discussions

Through structured one-to-one discussions, we identify perceptions, the reality of the work situation, conflicts and recurring obstacles.

4. Identifying patterns and causes

The individual perspectives are brought together to form an overall picture. In doing so, we distinguish between symptoms, causes and contributing factors.

5. Developing options for action

Together with the client, we clarify which changes are actually necessary.

These may include, for example:

• Clarification of roles
• Changes to decision-making processes
• Resolving a conflict
• Staff counselling
• Team development
• Changing leadership behaviour
• Adaptation of organisational structures
• Supporting a change process

How companies benefit from this

The greatest benefit often lies, initially, in clarity.

Instead of constantly introducing new measures to tackle individual symptoms, a shared understanding emerges as to why a particular area is not functioning as well as it could.

Building on this, targeted changes can be implemented.

Typical outcomes include:

• fewer inefficiencies
• faster decision-making
• clearer lines of responsibility
• better cooperation between departments
• fewer hidden conflicts
• greater openness to real problems
• greater commitment
• more targeted measures rather than knee-jerk reactions

Not every efficiency issue requires a new process

When workflows grind to a halt, the obvious reflex is often to redesign processes.

Sometimes that is exactly the right thing to do.

Sometimes, however, a new process would simply reorganise an existing problem.

That is why we first clarify:

Is the problem actually structural – or is something else preventing the existing structure from working?

Making this distinction often saves companies a considerable amount of time and avoids measures that require a great deal of effort without solving the actual problem.

When other services can be brought in

Analysing a barrier to efficiency is often the starting point for further targeted measures.

Depending on the cause, the following may, for example, be appropriate:

• Staff counselling, if a single key individual is a major contributor to the problem
• Team development, where collaboration within a team needs to be improved
• Management training, where leadership behaviour or leadership skills play a central role
• Change management consultancy, where structures or responsibilities need to be fundamentally altered
• Business consultancy, where the core issue lies at the level of the business owner or shareholders