How to corral conflicting visions – with care

How to corral conflicting visions – with care

Kansas City was lucky.

A coalition of more than 100 area social service agencies, behavioral health centers, institutions and more joined forces to address the societal ramifications of trauma and toxic stress. But, as is typically the case when large groups join forces, the collective felt messy. Lots of people meant there were lots of opinions – about how to grow and govern. Lots of stakeholders meant there was a lot at stake, including organizations needing to meet their individual goals. And, lots of commitment meant high emotions ran high.

It’s a good problem for a community to have – lots of passionate people committed to helping people heal. But passion doesn’t always solve the problem.

That’s where TeamTech came in.

The Kansas City group, operating at the time under the name Trauma Matters KC, requested TeamTech’s help to design and navigate a process for consensus. They needed someone who could act quickly as well, since the group’s grant was ending. There was significant tension around the question of which umbrella group could best build upon previous successes – and lead future work.

“There were lots of voices that needed to be heard,” said Jennifer Brinkman, who was involved in the process and serves as president of Alive and Well Communities in St. Louis. “And a lot of confusion among the various stakeholders about who was doing what.”

Time was critical in this initiative. Not only did the groups need to find a solution, they needed to do so quickly in order to maintain the excitement of the volunteer workforce and leverage its commitment.

“TeamTech was so efficient. They were quickly able to see clarity and move us through the problem to a solution,” said Brinkman.

Patricia Davis, a program manager for trauma-informed care at Kansas City’s Children’s Mercy Hospital, said TeamTech got up-to-speed quickly. “Team Tech was highly recommended as an expert at capacity building, but they were able to do that in a way that mirrored how we work. Awareness of trauma informed care, toxic stress and resilience was not only relevant to the ultimate goals of the coalition, but was also imperative to the process of reaching those goal,” said Davis. “They were able to incorporate the concepts and principles into the work and with all negotiations.”

Creative consensus

Meanwhile, across the state of Missouri, the same issues faced a similar group. Alive and Well St. Louis, also dedicated to understanding the role and impact trauma plays in a community, was losing its sponsoring organization.

So first, TeamTech, led by CEO Kathleen Harnish McKune, helped the Kansas City groups unite under a common mission, and then TeamTech helped that group unite with the St. Louis group. By forming one overarching non-profit, the new group, called Alive and Well Communities, is able to leverage economies of scale, best practices – and a whole host of resources.

“I cannot tell you how impressed we were that she could move us through the process that quickly – without losing people along the way. She never compromised input for speed,” said Brinkman.

Today, the organization is up and running, sharing a common vision, and working hard to make Missouri a healthier state.

Moving a mental health team from sinking to soaring

Moving a mental health team from sinking to soaring

When Tim DeWeese took over as director of a large county mental health department, he inherited an organization in shambles.

“Broken,” he said. “That’s the one word I’d use to describe us.”

The department was operating without a common mission, which, no surprise, lead to a disengaged workforce. What’s more, the department’s balance sheet was bleeding so badly the county had to bail them out.

To turn the department around, DeWeese knew he would have to align teams around a common vision – a clear and purposeful direction. He’d have to do it quickly. He’d need everyone to have buy-in. And he’d have to be practical about changes.

“I didn’t want some big strategic plan weighted down with theory,” he said. “I wanted a plan that was actionable. And I wanted someone to help me see it through through to the end. It was such a mess, I knew I needed someone to hold us accountable.”

A colleague recommended TeamTech because of the group’s bias for action, its practical approach to strategy – and its relentless emphasis on accountability.

Now, after two years of working with TeamTech, the department is hardly recognizable. For the first time in a decade, its revenue stream is in the black – and there’s a growing reserve. They’re recording the highest levels of productivity they’ve ever had. And, according to the recent county-wide employee engagement survey, their employees are among the most passionate and happy with their work.

“I couldn’t have done it without TeamTech,” he says. “None of us could have.”

The key? Empower everyone

Kathleen Harnish McKune, CEO of TeamTech, knew that to move the mental health department forward, buy-in would need to be widespread. The solution: TeamTech’s “Everyone A Leader” workshops. The workshops pivot on the idea that leadership is a decision not a title. The hands-on sessions are driven by the idea that if an organization isn’t empowering everyone to lead from where they sit, they’re not using their resources wisely.

For DeWeese, the real turnaround came after adopting the Everyone A Leader mindset. From the front lines to the board room, employees felt empowered to lead from their positions.

“We had engaged staff and so we then had engaged clients,” he said. “In fact, our client ‘no show’ rate dropped from 35 percent to 12 percent. That’s unheard of.”

The department now works with a unified clinical philosophy and approach. The entire organization knows the strategic direction they’re headed. And everyone comes to work ready to lead.

“I figured it would take us five or six years to turn the place around,” DeWeese said. “But we’re in an incredible place in half that time.

“The most important part of this though is that we’re better serving our clients. And that’s the reason we’re all in this field in the first place.”

A different approach to winning

DeWeese had worked with consultants in the past. Government agencies are no stranger to seeking guidance from outside sources. But, honestly, he’d never had much luck.

“We’d build a plan—a good plan—and it would sit on a shelf. It was never built to be acted on,” he says.

Out of the gate, DeWeese saw differences between TeamTech and previous consultants he’d hired. For one, TeamTech outlined expectations up front. They wouldn’t just build a strategic plan. They’d build it and launch it. Second, they helped the group identify – and remove – the barriers preventing them from succeeding.

“It was a huge difference,” he says. “It forced us to think strategically about how we remove, mitigate or work around barriers.”

The most impactful by-product of that approach, says DeWeese, is that it forced them to identify their strengths. Most outside consultants start with “What’s wrong?” and assume goals haven’t been met because of a deficiency – or two or three. Instead, TeamTech helped them focus on their strong points – and then harness that energy to break down barriers.

“It was very ‘meta’ for us,” says DeWeese. “We’re in the business of helping people with mental illnesses remove barriers. That’s what we do.”

TeamTech knows the key to melding missions: Listening 

TeamTech knows the key to melding missions: Listening 

When several non-profits realized their missions had grown incredibly similar – while funding had grown sparser – they initiated talks of merging. The non-profits all, in one way or another, provided medical care for patients who fell through the cracks. The safety net of the safety net is how they described themselves.

Andrea Routh, CEO of one of the medical societies at the time, knew merging them would be tough. They were all strapped with small staffs, busy Boards and an ever-increasing demand for services.

After securing a grant to pay for facilitators, the group of non-profits tapped TeamTech to help them assess the feasibility of a merger. Could they do it? What would the resulting organization look like? And, most importantly, how would it impact their clients?

“It was a huge challenge,” said Routh. “TeamTech’s job was tough. They had to facilitate agreements and consensus among a lot of different entities with a lot of different viewpoints. “

50 balls in the air

After months of meetings focused on unraveling the complex organizational structures of each entity, the groups agreed on a resolution for the Kansas City Medical Society Foundation to run the different programs, taking leadership over the initiative.

“I cannot believe that TeamTech was able to bring us to consensus,” said Routh. “There were 50 balls in the air at all times – and a lot of egos tossing them.”

On track and on task

Of all the many skill sets Kathleen Harnish McKune, CEO of TeamTech, brought to the table, her relentless focus on the future was, perhaps, the most impressive. Kathleen was organized, efficient and always thinking about the next decision that needed to be made.

As much as TeamTech moved the group forward, they never sacrificed listening for efficiency. In fact, said Routh, their ability to listen so well is what helped propel the group forward.

“They could quickly assess where there was consensus and where there wasn’t,” she said. “They could condense everyone’s comments very efficiently — and it’s because they were so good at listening.”

Interested in learning more about how TeamTech can get your organization moving?

How to get a group unstuck – and moving forward together 

How to get a group unstuck – and moving forward together

An unhealthy board. A budget in the red. And absolutely no plan past putting out the fire-of-the-day.

That’s how Melissa Reed describes the state of Prairie Paws Animal Shelter (PPAS) when she took over as Executive Director in 2014. The rural animal shelter, based in Ottawa, Kansas, had outgrown its mom-and-pop style of leadership and needed to regroup on multiple levels. New board. New strategy. New programming.

“We needed to build a common vision out of diverse perspectives. I knew it wasn’t going to be easy but I knew exactly who to call,” said Reed, who had worked with TeamTech throughout her non-profit career.


Building consensus

For PPAS, the tipping point came after construction of its new facility. A generous donor had agreed to fund the building, but the final cost far exceeded the original pledge. Reed inherited the problem and turned to Kathleen Harnish McKune and her cadre of TeamTech coaches to put the shelter back on track.

Kathleen helped the new Prairie Paws Board of Directors look beyond the daily, tactical issues and build a three-year strategic plan. It was no easy feat, said Reed, since the organization was operating at a loss.

‘Kathleen helped the board see that financial sustainability required strategic planning,” said Reed. “Out of the gate, she built consensus around that as our common goal.”

For Reed, handing her board over to a consultant could have felt uncomfortable, but she’d already experienced TeamTech’s collaborative, inclusive approach to working with leadership.

“Kathleen really listens,” she said. “She recognizes that a board has to be healthy, passionate, excited and driven – not just focused on the day-to-day. TeamTech helped us balance the daily challenges while thinking about the future.”


Getting the group unstuck

In short, TeamTech helped Prairie Paws Animal Shelter break out of the rut of focusing only on the day ahead. Once they began moving forward, PPAS administrators realized they needed to broaden their vision even more by understanding the community’s needs.

TeamTech stepped in again; this time to facilitate community assessment focus groups aimed at starting new programs for PPAS.

“The community assessments gave us key insights that helped us really build out our strategic plan,” said Reed. “Once again, Kathleen was able to make everyone around the table feel heard – and get unstuck. They’re methods are amazing at getting people to see the vision ahead – and focus on what’s important.”

Today, Prairie Paws is no longer operating in the red. The Board is strong and thriving. And, most importantly, everyone’s aligned and moving forward together.

“Honestly,” said Reed, “we couldn’t have done it alone. I needed TeamTech’s help getting there.”

TeamTech helps a state rethink resource allocation 

TeamTech helps a state rethink resource allocation 

The Challenge

Maximizing resources while improving services is the greatest challenge faced by state and local governments alike. Among the myriad of services provided by local government in Kansas, incarceration of juvenile and adult offenders is arguably one of the costliest.  Healthcare costs for prisoners, particularly costs of prescription drugs, have had a crippling effect on county budgets. Because the federal government requires county government to provide healthcare to inmates – counties have little choice but to absorb the growing costs.

The Solutions

TeamTech partnered with the Kansas Association of Counties (KAC) and the Kansas Governor’s Health and Human Services (HHS) Cabinet Team to identify and bring together decision makers from county government and state agencies to determine the best way to save money on medical care costs for incarcerated populations. TeamTech set up and led the process which included gathering the initial data on who was spending what on healthcare costs. Prescription drugs and hospital costs were the two largest contributors to cost and many counties also discovered that they had been spending way too much on prescription drugs.

TeamTech helped participants identify ways in which governmental entities, including county and state detention facilities can save money and improve efficiency.

As a result of the project, county officials soon discovered that they can save administrative costs in two ways:

  1. By contracting with companies that specialize in providing correctional healthcare to inmates, counties not only save money on prescription drugs but also on legal expenses and administrative costs. These private companies assist correctional agencies by providing correctional healthcare and carefully screening and managing billing for off-site health care services. Through these contracts, local physicians still provide medical care to inmates, but the local providers now must adhere to policies and procedures that work elsewhere to contain costs.
  2. By gathering and examining data on their prescription purchases, counties were able to either renegotiate with their current pharmaceutical drug companies for better prices – or take advantage of large volume pricing by combining purchases with other counties. In some cases, counties obtained better prices by contracting through the Department of Corrections for prescription drugs.  And in a few counties, local pharmacists adjusted their rates to match the lower rates that large pharmaceutical companies were offering.

The Payoff

  1. More efficient delivery of services: This program has resulted in significant savings to the tax payer. Greater cooperation between state and local government has tangible benefits: The Kansas Department of Corrections projects an annual savings of at least $1.4 million and Sedgwick County alone predicts an annual recurring savings of $1 million.
  2. Counties see value in working together: This successful effort has laid the groundwork for other local government collaborations and enables increased compliance with state and federal regulations. (Link here to The Kansas Collaborative)

“TeamTech brought the groups together, facilitated the conversation and steered the teams in a positive direction.  They had the tools necessary to take the information state-wide.”

“The key to our success was that we had the right people at the table and the data we needed to analyze our current situation and make necessary changes.  TeamTech didn’t just facilitate the meetings, they worked tirelessly to make sure that assignments were completed between meetings and prodded during meetings to get the best results.”

Elizabeth Gillespie
Director of the Shawnee County Department of Corrections

Click here to read more about the The Kansas Collaborative.

Teaching leaders how to talk with people, not at them 

Teaching leaders how to talk with people, not at them 

Ann Howie, formerly with American Century Investments


The Challenge

Communication issues are on everyone’s top ten list. Why? Because managers have expanded their “communication loop” as involvement has grown. The new audience is more diverse and demanding. Managers and project leaders can spend up to 75 percent of their day listening, talking, reading and writing. As a result, the first challenge is realizing the most effective way to communicate so individuals and businesses can move forward.

What follows is a personal account of one project leader. She attended the custom-designed curriculum developed by Team Tech, and the Organizational Development Department of the large global asset management firm where she is employed.


The Solution

“After reading the “Talking with, not at, people” course description, I hoped the workshop would provide ideas on how to find information that I needed to make more informed decisions. As a project leader, I hoped to expand my skills so that our project teams improved their communication and our projects could then move forward more efficiently and effectively.”

I attended the two-day course. Here is my assessment:

  • TeamTech provided common sense concepts using real life applications.
  • Listening topics that I’d heard, or read, before were presented with innovation and creativity, in a plain language manner that makes these concepts different and relevant, yet simple.
  • The diary we kept during class that included future planning and the one-on-one classmate discussions, allowed me to develop, critique, apply, and stick with what I had learned – not just for a week or two, but for several months now.
  • The questioning and pre-planning techniques have now become habit for me.
  • The most poignant “Ah Ha” moment for me during class was realizing that leaders/managers don’t have to know/have all the answers themselves. What leaders need is an understanding of how to use the resources and people that surround them. You can be a leader, facilitator and/or guide without being the official “manager” or “project leader.”
  • The class also provided tools to draw out missing information and fill in the gaps. I was very excited to learn that I could also use these concepts to guide meetings and conversations from the side without seeming bossy or rude and taking over.


The Payoff

In my personal and professional life (work, home, church, etc.) this course and the concepts taught provided many positive effects.

  • As an analyst, project lead, co-worker, peer, daughter, sister, wife, and mom; nearly every day, I find myself asking my personalized version of the questions Kathleen and Joel provided during class. And yes, I still keep my reference list in my planner (it goes everywhere I do.)
  • I’ve found that this approach brings about more open and honest participation and a stronger commitment to projects because ideas and resolutions come from everyone involved. It is a way to guide and influence others [and myself], but I am not telling (talking AT), I am sharing (talking WITH). People realize the topics via their own experiences and learn for themselves. All of this fosters ownership, teamwork, better communication overall, and win-win results.
  • Practicing this for several months, I’ve found that people around me are adopting these same techniques. We accomplish more in shorter amounts of time, we trust each other more than we did previously, and we are more open and close than we were before. We collaborate and celebrate in coming up with solutions that are much better than if we’d worked on things on our own.
  • I think another real benefit of the course is that Joel and Kathleen, by example, use these techniques to facilitate the entire class. You walk away having experienced the difference of being ‘spoken WITH’ versus being ‘spoken TO.'”