The VP of operations knew that there were inefficiencies in the London office, but he felt too close to the situation to know what it was. He asked me to look into it and come up with recommendations.

The London office had a great deal of personnel but they largely could be broken into the following groups.

Management wanted to make the best use of limited staff and equipment.

The journalists wanted to make the best content they could but felt that they weren't given modern technology to do so.

The engineering staff worked hard to maintain and buy equipment and faced pressure to make resources stretch as far as they could

Previous staffing and budget cuts left this office feeling pressured. They did the best work they could with what they had. They were also the main hub for international news and were frequently deployed across the globe, including the warzones. In those situations, they wanted to feel supported and not short-changed on gear.

There was also some defensiveness about the New York main office dictating the needs of the London satellite office.

This project was an early attempt to embed more design thinking approaches into the organization.

After a round of research with key people across the bureau, I analyzed the interview to make a workflow map and identify pain points.

I then presented these to leadership. However, instead of simply doing a readout of research and recommendations, I used design thinking methodologies to make it a collaborative process.

I walked the New York-based VP and the London Bureau Chief both through the research and recommendations. This allowed them to talk through any objections with me and each other, thereby reducing the office politicking such a readout could trigger.

We then did a brainstorming exercise to address the pain points that came up. I like to guide these sessions with a mindset of "Not only there are no bad ideas - include your bad ideas because they can often inspire better ones."

We then collectively put all of these ideas on a feasibility versus impact matrix. This forced the leaders to really think through what solutions they had the capacity to deliver.

The London Bureau reported feeling much more appreciated because their thoughts had been listened to and accounted for.

Key tension points in the workflow were also brought to the forefront and began to be addressed strategically.

The leaders of the different offices were able to work together effectively because they built the solutions hand in hand.