See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/326891780

Organizational Design and Change Management for IT Transformation: A Case

Study

Article · July 2018

DOI: 10.15640/jcsit.v6n1a2

CITATIONS READS
0 4,215

1 author:

James Cusick
IEEE Computer Society
110 PUBLICATIONS   205 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Advancing IT and Software Engineering View project

History of Science View project

All content following this page was uploaded by James Cusick on 08 August 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology
June 2018, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 10-25
ISSN: 2334-2366 (Print), 2334-2374 (Online)
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.
Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development
DOI: 10.15640/jcsit.v6n1a2
URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/jcsit.v6n1a2

Organizational Design and Change Management for IT Transformation: A Case Study

James J. Cusick1

Abstract

A case study is presented in Organizational Design and Change Management. Within the global Information
Services Company Wolters Kluwer, a significant organization change was planned and conducted to
centralize distributed IT operations teams within one of its main Divisions. This project followed standard
change models such as the Kotter Change Model and the guidance of the ITIL Organizational Change
Management (OCM) process. An introduction to organizational change is provided prior to a detailed
description of the change project and its results. This includes the objectives, approach, and scope of the
change, composition of the project team, organizational design steps, organizational design, change
management approach, change implementation, and results. This study may be of assistance to researchers
hoping to understand industry practice in OCM and to industry practitioners needing to plan and execute a
change in their own company.

Keywords: Organizational Design, Organizational Change, Organizational Behavior, Organizational Change

Management, OCM, Kotter Change Model, Transformative Leadership, IT, Information Technology, IT
Infrastructure, IT Operations, ITIL, Agile, DevOps, CTO, CIO, Corporate Culture, Data Visualization, Data
Analysis, Project Management.
1. Introduction
Organizational structures are critical to effective operations, productivity, and innovation. Within the IT
(Information Technology) industry this is especially so. This paper outlines a major reorganization at a global
company with a high reliance on IT capabilities. After describing the organization, a brief discussion of organizational
design and change methods are presented. This is followed by a detailed explanation of the goals of the change, the
steps taken around the organizational design, and subsequent change management to realize the design and its
transition. Finally, the results of the changes are discussed with observations for improvement in the organization and
to the approach taken.
Wolters Kluwer (WK) is a global leader in professional information, software solutions, and services for the
health, tax & accounting, finance, risk & compliance, and legal sectors. Wolters Kluwer helps customers make critical
decisions every day by providing expert solutions that combine deep domain knowledge with specialized technology
and services. Wolters Kluwer reported 2017 annual revenues of €4.4 billion where over 80% of these revenues are
derived from digital services or software making IT critical to overall corporate success. The group serves customers
in over 180 countries, maintains operations in over 40 countries, and employs approximately 19,000 people
worldwide. The company is headquartered in Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands.
The experience documented here focuses on the technical organizations of the Governance, Risk &
Compliance (GRC) Division with over $1B in revenue. Additionally, the Shared Services organization GBS (Global
Shared Services) plays a role in this study. GBS is a central IT group supporting the entire company. GBS was
established more than a decade ago and over time has taken on significant technical and functional responsibilities
under a common leadership and organizational structure.

1Wolters Kluwer, Global Business Services, Global Infrastructure & Operations, 111 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY, 10016,
USA. Email: j.cusick@computer.org.
James J. Cusick 11

To provide more business context, each individual GRC-IT group, at the outset, provided critical IT systems
and applications services to support diverse product lines. The systems supported by GRC include public-facing Web-
based applications and internally used ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) or other support systems primarily in the
financial and legal services domain. Major vendors manage network services and hosting depending upon the business
sectors. The disparate GRC technical teams were collectively responsible for the planning, overall operations, and
availability of these systems from an end customer standpoint. The core transformation described here is the move
and reorganization of the embedded GRC technical operations teams to a central GRC CIO2 organization within the
GBS central organization.
Carrying out the relevant IT functions require organization, staff planning, methods, and tools. From a
corporate perspective, it increasingly became evident that these functions should reside in the central and shared IT
organization to benefit from scale, efficiency, and cost factors. Furthermore, the definition and delivery of these
services in a common manner using best practices could then achieve consistency around service and management
visibility. This would also allow for improved career growth opportunities for individuals within the organization. The
journey from separately managed IT organizations to a jointly configured IT organization is the focus of the
remainder of this paper.

2. Organizational Change Management Overview

Motivation for this paper includes the author’s dual background in Organizational Psychology and Computer
Science. The author’s early research in organizational behavior was documented in a study on varying perceptions of
organizational change (Cusick, 1985). This work created an interest in such topics which has been maintained over the
years. However, during three decades spent fulfilling technical roles, organizational change and design principles were
not central to my work. With the opportunity to manage this change project these topics reemerged and became
especially interesting. This led to reviewing some of the current literature and documenting this case study.

To get started in understanding organizational change it is useful to introduce a definition. One such
definition (Web Finance, 2017) says that:
Organization change occurs when business strategies or major sections of an organization are altered. Also known as reorganization,
restructuring and turnaround.
Another way to put this is that for any company or organization going through a transformation they are
undergoing organizational change. Interestingly, since the early days of the Industrial Revolution change was a
constant within technical organizations. In fact, with the establishment of Scientific Management as introduced by
Taylor continuous change toward improved efficiency cemented technological change as a vital part of modern
society and organizations (Cusick, 2003).
A leading writer in the field of organizational change and change management, Rosabeth Moss Kanter,
focused on how change is not only constant but ultimately necessary for the advancement of business and technology.
She wrote that innovation is required to bring new technology or processes into use effectively. This may be due to a
need for productivity but also for product creation or other competitive reasons. Often, this very need for innovation
calls for organizational change just as it calls for technical change as a former organization structure may not facilitate
the creation of better systems and processes (Kanter, 1985).
2.1 I TIL Organizational Change Management
An IT method which captures the process of executing such ongoing change is found within the ITIL (IT
Infrastructure Library) framework (Bon, 2013). This framework defines a broad array of technical services which IT
operations organizations tend to follow. This is also a model followed at Wolters Kluwer. A relevant component of
this framework further covers Organizational Change Management (OCM) which is defined as an approach which is:

2A CIO (Chief Information Officer) is typically focused on the infrastructure, operations, and enterprise data of a company. A
CTO (Chief Technology Officer) is typically focused on the development of new technologies or technology-based products.
Both terms will be used in this paper and are meant to carry these two distinct meanings.
12 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

…structured around the changing needs and capabilities of an organization. OCM is used to prepare, adopt and implement
fundamental and radical organizational changes, including its culture, policies, procedures and physical environment, as well as
employee roles, skills and responsibilities (TechOpedia, 2017).
It is important to differentiate OCM from the ITIL practice of Change Management (Bon, 2013). Traditional
Change Management within ITIL focuses on the introduction of technical changes into the operational environment.
This covers such areas as change documentation, change review, change approval, and change implementation. The
GRC organization follows mature change practices to support its IT operations (Cusick, 2010; Cusick 2017).
However, OCM covers a different type of change all together focusing on the stakeholder analysis, organizational
readiness, change preparation, communication planning, human resources (HR) reviews, and required staff training
(TechOpedia, 2017).
A classic view which presents the aspects of an organization and change to an organization looks at the
people, process, and technology associated with it and its operations. One such view is provided in Figure 1 (Bon,
2013). Here the additional factor of partners is added (which could be substituted with customers). Bon also
introduces the concept of information as a central artifact as a hub in this model. As we look further into the
approach of implementing OCM this model will provide a useful grounding.

Figure 1 – Considerations for Organizational Change Management (Bon, 2013).

Rounding out this introduction of Organizational Change Management from the ITIL perspective Hunnebeck
(Hunnebeck, 2016) defines several essential elements around what OCM delivers:
1. Ensuring strong and committed leadership.
2. Helping people understand what the organization is trying to accomplish and why.
3. Getting individuals to participate willingly – answering the question “what is in it for me?”
4. Creating prepared participants.
5. Sustaining the momentum by reinforcing the change.
2.2 Change and Transformative Leaders
Returning to Kanter for a moment, one of her important contributions was the idea that organizations do not
randomly change themselves but require people to consciously plan and conduct effective change. Those who do this
well hold an advantage in the marketplace. In some cases, organizations are required to constantly reinvent themselves
in the face of external events and in other cases they may invite change to leverage or prepare for innovation. Kanter
called the best of these “Change Masters”. A Change Master is thus defined as "people and organizations adept at the
art of anticipating the need for, and of leading, productive change" (Kanter, 1985). If we combine the OCM methods
with a dynamic Change Master an organization can move from one state to another transforming itself frequently or
as needed and reaching the objectives it sets out.
At relatively the same time as Kanter’s work Tichy and Devanna introduced the concept of the
Transformational Leader (Tichy, et al., 1986). In response to falling US industrial competitiveness this work focused
on the specific leadership skills required to implement change in order to achieve the productivity and innovation
gains required to win back US standing in global industries where leadership is about change, innovation, and
entrepreneurship. Tichy and Devanna (Tichy, et al., 1986) defined Transformational Leadership as below:
Purposeful and organized search for changes, systemic analysis, and the capacity to improve productivity.
James J. Cusick 13

Furthermore, they defined a three-phase approach for change. This change model represents an early view
into what would later become more sophisticated change models such as the one from Kotter introduced in the 1990s
(Kotter, et al., 2012). Here are the three phases as defined by Tichy:
1. Recognizing need for change.
2. Instituting a vision.
3. Enacting the change.
The change model typically used at Wolters Kluwer is provided by Kotter (Kotter, et al., 2012) and is not far
from this core model defined by Tichy to empower leaders in change efforts. The 8 step Kotter model (see Figure 2)
is comprised of 3 general steps and then 8 detailed steps. The actual change process used in this case study maps
closely with both the Tichy and Kotter models at least in general terms.

Figure 2 – The Kotter Change Model.

Some have criticized recent management efforts to introduce and lead change (Ashkenas, 2013). Their
argument goes that leadership skills in change management have been underdeveloped and thus largely left to
consultants and HR specialists to conduct. At least in this case study that could not be further from the truth. The
changes described here were planned and carried out by experienced executives and managers taking full ownership
for the concepts, approaches, plans, organizational designs, and detailed logistics. Support from HR and
communications specialists were critical but brought in only as needed and only as supporting functions.
2.3 Corporate Culture and Change Types
Oftentimes organizations are discussed in terms of culture. The concept and term Corporate Culture was
introduced by Davis (Davis, 1970). The culture of an organization can go a long way to determine the approach
around change or its ultimate success. In some corporate cultures, change is welcome and embraced and in others it
may be fought and resisted. Awareness of the culture is critical to support organizational change success. Davis
defined Corporate Culture as the “Guiding Beliefs” which drive strategy, which then drives process, structure, people,
systems, and “daily beliefs”. During our work in this transformation effort we discussed culture often and made both
strategic and tactical decisions around how to proceed based on the project team’s respective understanding of this
culture. In fact, as we were dealing with multiple Businesses with different histories we were also dealing with multiple
cultures.
Once engaged in a change activity it is important to start by considering the type of change to be conducted.
As stated there are many motivations for change including gains in productivity or the introduction of new products.
Sometimes the creation of new technologies can trigger the need for a new organizational pattern. This has been true
in software development more than once. Most recently in the Agile methods area and with Scrum teams (Coplien, et
al., 2004). When introducing broad new technologies or approaches it might be required to create radical new roles
and relationships or even a loose organizational model which might be found in R&D settings.
14 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

However, for the GRC IT transformation a highly standardized organization was called on to maintain
delivery of reliable and predictable services which make up a critical cultural and functional characteristic of an IT
Operations organization. While the introduction of this engineering process brought with it new organizational
structures (in particular, new technical tower affinities) the centralization of traditional ITIL based IT operations
teams does not demand radical invention of new organizational models. Instead, a staider model will suffice as will be
seen. Burns (Burns, et al., 1961) defined this as the mechanistic approach which is suitable for stable industries. Such
an organizational design is marked by precise definition of member function and is highly hierarchical.
In terms of the types of change according to Cameron one sees in OCM efforts they can run the gamut
covering at minimum the following (Cameron, et al., 2012) (those that apply to this case study are marked as such):
 Individual – (applies)
 Team – (applies)
 Organizational – (applies)
 Restructuring – (applies)
 M&A
 Culture – (applies)
 Project Led
Cameron goes on to describe numerous aspects of Change Management which include:
 Leading Change
 Change Agent
 Complexity
 Uncertainty
We have already discussed some of the aspects of leading change (Transformative Leader) and being a change
agent (Change Master). Complexity is a key aspect to the difficulty of designing an organization and a change plan. In
terms of this case study there was certainly some complexity with multiple Business Units involved, numerous senior
leaders, hundreds of employees, and dozens of mission critical applications. There was little margin for error in the
execution of the change. As for uncertainty, in this case study, there was always some variable undefined. Also, for the
staff they were informed that changes would be forthcoming but at times were uncertain of the details until such
information could be shared in formal communications.
3. Creating a CIO Organization
The genesis for the creation of a new and centralized CIO organization was the perception amongst senior
Divisional leaders that streamlining and improved focus was needed within the technical teams and this should start
with the establishment and maturation of a Division-wide IT operations team under unified CIO leadership. It was
recognized that operations varied across the Division with divergent quality results. Further, no true leverage of
resources or expertise could be attained with teams working in virtual silos. Thus, on Tichy’s ladder the first step had
been achieved – recognizing the need for change.
Early in 2016 an experienced CIO was recruited from outside the company to lead the effort of forming and
leading this new organization. Immediately the IT operations team from 2 Business Units were organized under the
new CIO. These groups were highly compartmentalized and required no reorganization to come under the new
leadership of this executive. From this point a task force was formed to carry out the transition, reorganization, and
changes required to bring an additional 4 groups into the CIO organization and merge them with the existing ones.
3.1 Objectives and Vision
In terms of the guiding principles, organizational goals, and business requirements several key objectives were
documented and repeatedly discussed and communicated within the leadership team and the project team. These
included:
James J. Cusick 15

 Provide exceptional IT services to GRC CTO organizations to allow them to focus on new product development.
 Provide exceptional IT services to GRC organizations at large to help guarantee stability and efficiency in their IT
usage translating to higher productivity and user satisfaction.
 Institute clear IT service towers with best-in-class management and technical capabilities.
 Ensure consistent technical service delivery with an emphasis on continuous improvement.
 Establish ongoing cost management discipline to support better profitability.
These objectives thus translated into a vision of a unified IT organization delivering best-in-class services and
enabling other parts of the organization in product development and business achievement.
3.2 Scope
As mentioned earlier, this restructuring was focused on the IT organization of the over $1B GRC Division of
Wolters Kluwer. A total of 6 Business Units were a part of the change scope. Within these businesses over 250
software applications were involved. Many of these applications have 24x7x365 mission critical roles within the
company and for the company’s customers. These applications and supporting platforms are hosted by several
vendors in globally dispersed locations. The staff and contractors involved in the analysis and change totaled in the
hundreds. Of this total, approximately 20% of the IT staff were transitioned to the new tower structure in the CIO
organization. The criticality of this staff and the systems they support meant that it was not possible to miss a beat
during the actual change and conversion. This put additional emphasis on the change management integrity.
3.3 The Team
There were three primary groups involved in this organizational design and change initiative:
1. Business and technical leadership.
2. The core team.
3. The support team.
The Business leadership consisted of the Division CEO and by extension his staff. Additionally, a BU CEO
was nominated as a sponsor to work with the core team regarding ongoing decisions as needed. Also, each CTO
within GRC was on the project. Most CTOs would contribute some resources into the transformation such as staff
and application platforms to support. As a result, they were key stakeholders as were the Division BU CEOs.
The core project team was led by the GRC CIO. The effort was Program Managed by the author (a technical
leader in the organization). Additionally, several other IT operations leaders who would be part of the new
organization’s leadership team participated on the core team. A strategy VP reporting to the Division CEO was also
on the core team.
Finally, the support team consisted of HR specialists, finance, communications, and GBS leaders who would
be providing the organizational “landing zone” for the ultimate transition activity.
3.4 The Context
The change project started within the setting of an established organization with a variety of predefined
commitments. This meant that the organizational transformation would need to consider both the business conditions
of the company as well as the realities of the existing technical teams and their obligations. Effectively, the project
would not be starting with a blank slate. Some assumptions and operational considerations would be inherited and
somewhat immutable at least in the beginning.
Other key drivers included the reduction of functional duplication, improvement of platform availability,
deployment of common best practices, development of staff skills in related technical domains, enablement of global
support, and providing for cost reductions. While this represented a long list of objectives for the initiative many of
these were seen to be achievable given the opportunity to reorganize properly. A further consideration was to help the
BU development teams operate with less interaction to the underlying technical vendors. This would further allow
them to focus on new product development.
16 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

In terms of some of the starting concerns which the BU leaders and CTOs had coming into the project there
were several, but they could be summed up as having to do with loss of control and an increase of inefficiency.
Essentially, the CTOs were reluctant and concerned about transferring their technical staff to the CIO organization as
this would eliminate their direct control of these resources and introduce expanded dependency on the CIO
organization. There was also concern around the potential for a lack of responsiveness and the introduction of new
overhead. To combat this issue and taking a cue from well-known findings (Haire, 1964) that information distortion
increases with the levels it must pass through in an organization the organizational structure retained as flat a form as
possible. Additionally, the organizational change approach emphasized a BAU (Business as Usual Approach) whereby
after the change the same lines of communication would be in place.
Finally, the business and the CTOs were concerned that the restructuring maintain a clear distinction between
what types of software products, applications, and systems as well as their supporting roles should remain with the
business and which should be migrated to the CIO. The three core layers included a) Customer Products; 2) Business
Enablement systems; and 3) Back-office systems. It was understood that the development functions around the first
of these would reside in the business. The others as well as infrastructure services would be with the CIO.
3.5 Complexity factors
As discussed earlier there were numerous characteristics of the company, the existing organizations, and the
legacy technologies which needed to be accounted for in the organizational design and related changes. In addition to
those previously mentioned several attributes of the organization led to higher complexity, including the following:
 The diversity of incumbent hosting vendors supporting different businesses and products forced some
complexity and customization. The reduction of this complexity is being tackled by a dedicated global initiative,
but this did complicate the immediate operational model.
 Customer requirements around security and compliance are extremely high for most of the in-scope businesses.
This put an additional burden on the organizational design and the change process to ensure that compliance
remain intact.
 Most application development within the CTO organizations follow the Agile/Scrum approach. As a result, the
new CIO operations teams needed to be adept at working in this manner. The methodology of DevOps
engagement and operations needed to be integrated into the organizational solution. While DevOps was a familiar
concept to the teams and often practiced, it would need to be followed more broadly which introduced further
change requirements for the future as teams further integrated into a Scrum orientation (Ramakrishnan, 2014).
4.The Organizational Design
With the organizational restructuring initiative defined, chartered, and provided with its initial project leaders,
it was time to get to work on the organizational design phase. The author’s introduction to the project as Program
Manager and eventual leader of one of the new organizations departments came a couple of months after the
establishment of the new Divisional CIO position. Naturally, this was preceded by a commitment from the senior
leaders in the organization to the overall objectives listed above and a generalized approach. The details of the
approach and the resultant organization and its rollout required significant effort from that point going forward.
4.1 The Approach
The backing of the senior leadership of the Division and its Business Units had already been obtained
through discussions and structured interviews by the CIO around the vision for the new organization. What was still
necessary was to bring the CTOs more fully into the process and provide for an inclusive process as this has been
shown to improve change results (Cusick, 1985). Communications from the Division CIO and the BU CEOs began
this process. Also, a face-to-face workshop was planned to kick-off the initiative more fully and to develop buy-in.
The workshop would also serve as a data validation step as well as a further requirement gathering opportunity. This
would meet the steps of forming a powerful coalition in the Kotter Change Model. Following these initial steps, the
organizational design with each technical role definition would be developed along with the roster of individuals
moving into the new organization.
James J. Cusick 17

After thorough vetting through continued interviews with the CTOs and the BU CEOs and with the advice
of HR the eventual organizational design and specific changes per individual staff member would be laid out. These
changes would then be organized into a multi-layered communications plan to be executed starting on the effective
date for the changes to be put in place.
A sequence of follow-up steps was also planned to meet the Kotter change model steps of not only
communicating but supporting it fully.
4.2 Developing the TOM
One of the first steps in the organizational design work and the OCM process was to create a notional view
of the future organization. A key early decision was in developing a Target Operating Model (TOM) which was
expedited by reusing an internal BU’s organizational model which was known to work well. The decision was made to
extend this model and adopt it for use across all BUs in scope of the change. A TOM is a widely used approach for
conceptualizing and refining a planned organizational design (Fox, 2012). The TOM in this case provided core
organizing principles for the emerging organizational design. Our emerging TOM consisted of several technical
“towers” as defined by operational functions and technical domains. This approach fit with current IT organization
design models often called the “Plan-Build-Run” model (Agarwal, et al., 2013). This model allowed for a separation of
strategic planning and product groups from CTO managed development or R&D groups, and from the IT
infrastructure3 or CIO group. Furthermore, our GRC CIO towers (shown in Figure 3) were also selected to map to
the global technical organization and not only the Divisional CIO team.

Figure 3 – The Initial GRC CIO Target Operating Model.

Once the draft TOM was developed the next step was to bring the leadership together in a workshop to
review the objectives jointly and drill down into some of the details of the planned changes. The workshop succeeded
in giving the leadership a chance to come to overall agreement on the objectives and approach of the change initiative.
The Divisional CEO was in attendance to kick-off the workshop as well as other business leaders and all the CTOs.
This brought all the leaders onto the same page.
In preparation for this workshop the TOM was broken down into a further level of detail. A multi-tiered
taxonomy of technical categories was assigned to the core towers. Within the 8 high-level categories over 110 detailed
services were then assigned. The detailed services were derived from industry IT operations service description lists.
These services were then laid out in a questionnaire format in support of the workshop to start the analysis around the
actual organizational changes required to meet the realization of the TOM.
The questionnaire captured baseline information about each BU IT group such as staffing, budget, and key
product areas. The functional list contained all 110+ service types from the TOM’s operations list. Each CTO was
asked if a) they conducted the service; b) if it could be migrated to the CIO; and c) the qualitative complexity of such
a migration. The data collection was completed prior to the workshop and consisted of 896 data points which were
then analyzed per Business Unit and compared across BUs. One analytical data visualization was dubbed the “swarm”
diagrams as seen in Figure 4. These figures represent only two of the submissions provided per BU. From an affinity
analysis perspective, a comparison of the baseline CTO functions as currently operated against the TOM provided
excellent decision support insight. Each BU was quickly contrasted in these views to observe patterns around which
functionalities were present or not and which could then be migrated to the CIO organization.

3IT Infrastructure typically refers to hardware, software, and operational support required to provide hosting, network, and end-
user services (Agarwal, 2013).
18 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

Interestingly, for those groups which were already part of the CIO organization there was 100% affinity
alignment, as expected, and thus there was nothing new to migrate. In other cases, there was limited alignment and
thus more alignment work would be required in those cases. Further analysis along these lines using the workshop
data was done to prepare for the additional organizational design activities and to review with senior business
leadership and all the IT leaders. This analysis also covered budgetary and complexity factors.

Figure 4 – “Swarm” diagrams visualizing differences in function migration for two seperate Business
Units. Note differences in distribution of the colored circles indicate the volume of infrastructure
services (labeld within the circles) which were sorted by CIOs as either hybrid, migratable, or functinos
to retain.

4.3 Creating the Staffing Plan

With the TOM in place, the detailed services defined, and the affinity analysis complete it was time to focus
on the skill sets and staffing to populate the towers of the new organization. The first step was another round of data
collection. A new template was created which placed all technical staff and management within the Division into a
CTO specific spreadsheet. This list included key attributes of each staff member including their title and supervisor.
Additionally, and most importantly, the template included a grid which covered each of the TOM towers. In this grid,
a percentage of resource effort was entered by the CTOs for each staff member or contractor in their BU technical
organization. For example, if someone worked solely in the hosting function that cell would show 100%. If they
worked partially in hosting and database each cell would show 50%. However, for each person a total column would
need to reflect 100%.
Once these templates were collected from each CTO a clear staffing plan for the new CIO TOM began to
emerge. In some cases, the initial cut at collecting the data showed conclusive allocations and thus pointed to a
migration of an individual or group of individuals. Conversely, some staff did not register at all on the TOM which
meant they did work more aligned to product engineering, Scrum leadership, or other analysis functions. Finally, in
some cases there were inconclusive or complex results. The project’s core team worked with each CTO in these cases
to come to the best determination on the eventual mapping of such individuals to stay with their current team or
migrate to the CIO organization perhaps with some backfill adjustment. One thing we did not rely on heavily were
the job titles. These often were only directional, and it was much more useful to interview the leadership who had
direct knowledge of the individuals under review. The resultant roster for the CIO TOM towers soon became
solidified after multiple and repeated reviews with the CTOs and HR.
James J. Cusick 19

The final steps around building the staffing plan and progressing the OCM process included the creation of
the new leadership team and the organizational model itself. A key aspect to the TOM definition was the leadership
model across towers, the business relationship function, shared responsibilities across towers, cross tower
communications and coordination. Significant time was required to define these areas of responsibilities and their
interactions.
The end state organizational design did change during the final months of the effort as requirements evolved
around certain aspects of converting the TOM to an actual functioning organization design. This included making
some adjustments at the request of the Global Shared Services team who the new CIO organization would now be
joining through a matrix reporting approach. In the end, the actual organization design in summary form shown in
Figure 5 was very close to the TOM as presented above.

Figure 5 – The actual high-level GRC CIO organizational design as implemented.

As promised, this approach cleanly separated the development (CTO) and operations (CIO) resources and
functions as originally desired. Also, the proven organizational model used to seed the TOM turned out to be very
close to the end state organizational design. This process also produced a validated and specific roster which
management, HR, and communications could then work with to guide the change management steps. Finally, the end
state organization with its design mapped well into a Global IT organization as a “landing zone”. Eventually, the GRC
CIO would be further integrated into GBS which also followed a similar tower design.
4.4 A Path Not Followed
During the Organization Design effort, our HR partner suggested looking at a classical method to attain a
balanced organizational design. The STAR Model from Galbriath (Galbraith, 2017) is a framework for basing design
decisions and tradeoffs. The Model includes considerations on strategy, people, structure, process, and rewards. The
core team considered this framework as an aid in the design process, however, at the time when it was introduced the
framework’s core areas had been discussed and decided upon aside from rewards which were actually well defined by
the company’s existing performance evaluation and review process. This rewards program was essentially out of scope
for the initiative as that would potentially cause an alternate reward structure as compared to the broader IT
community. As a result, after due consideration, the STAR Model was not actively employed but did serve as a
confirmation that the project had considered the major factors in the organizational design work. If starting a new
effort, however, such a framework might be useful to apply at the very beginning of the concept phase in designing
the TOM.
20 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

5.The Change Management Plan

From the outset of the CIO organization design effort it was recognized that a change management plan
would be required. The outlines of the plan were discussed and loosely documented in a requirements form.
However, it was not until after the executive interviews, creation of the TOM, the workshop, team roster
development, and confirming reviews took place that focused energy was placed on the change management plan
itself. This was due to the fact that until the nature of the change was established more firmly only limited plans could
be developed for implementing them and most importantly communicating them.
At this point the core team reached out to the dedicated communications function within GRC to expand the
discussions around formally creating a change management plan and develop appropriate multi-level launch
communications. By enlisting the expertise of an experienced and professional communications resource the change
management plan could begin to evolve from a set of principles to an actionable approach.
The core elements of the change plan focused on addressing the following objectives:
1. Assure that all staffing changes as defined in the organizational design would be properly communicated at a
given time and in appropriate sequence.
2. Define effective messages to executives, managers, and staff that was consistent and communicated what was
changing and why.
3. Develop scripts for the implementation of the changes including specific notification conversations, town halls,
and on-site visits.
4. Include an emphasis on the BAU approach as the primary change was the introduction of the towers and the new
alignment to the Global Shared Services organization.
5. Creation of 90-day action plans for the leadership team to follow once the change was official.
While much of the change plan focused on communications this was also balanced by some technical
planning and the definition of the new leadership roles which were in fact the only truly new roles in the initial
change. The plans did include developing a working inventory of all applications and systems, including their
architectural characteristics, operational requirements, and dependencies, to be managed by the new organization
along with a catalog of its IT service offerings. Also, the specific responsibilities for each tower leader within the final
organization design was defined along with regular coordination meetings and escalation processes to allow for
effective management functions from the outset. Finally, the change plans analyzed and reflected all in-flight projects
and key initiatives so that the new leadership team had proper visibility into operational commitments and deliverables
out of the gate.
The plan itself came in the form of a statement of objectives, a list of artifacts, a communications target list, a
set of communication messages, a timeline, and supporting materials. The plan was reviewed extensively in the final
months of the change initiative up until the final days just prior to the launch of the organizational change and it was
then followed carefully with little need for adjustment.
6. Change Implementation
With a detailed change management plan in place the change implementation followed course in a predictable
and controlled manner. Looking back at the full scope of the organization design process as well as the development
of the change management plan a total of six months had transpired before implementation. There had been some
foundational executive planning in 2016 prior to the change initiative kick-off. However, once the kick-off did occur
in the late summer, the bulk of the work then happened in the 3rd and 4th quarters (covering less than 4 months). By
late 2016 the TOM was fully defined along with the preliminary rosters and overall change approach. Additionally, the
business case for the planned change came into full view and was approved by senior leadership. In the early part of
2017 (just 2 additional months later) the work focused on HR confirmations, BU approvals, and change logistics.
With final organization charts in hand the team was ready to proceed with the change.
The execution of the change started with informing (or enrolling) senior members of the management team
one day in advance of the rollout to the full staff. After this, high-level emails were sent to only the affected teams
informing them of the contours of the change and to be available for additional discussions and a town-hall later in
the day. The next step was to conduct 1-on-1 meetings with any manager or staff member who would be undergoing
a reporting change.
James J. Cusick 21

The town-halls covered the purpose and details of the change and were presented by the senior leaders of the
organization. Following these meetings team level meetings were also held to reinforce the change details and respond
to questions or concerns. Finally, companywide communications were provided with tailored levels of information.
This all transpired in a single day.
At this point the pre-defined 90-day plans kicked-in. These plans focused on regular meetings among the new
leadership team, follow up steps to finalize the organizational change, site-visits across the country allowing for the
newly formed teams to meet each other and build relationships, and further communications at the organizational and
team level. Tower leaders also set up staff meetings and related operational meetings as required.
Furthermore, within the towers detailed project portfolios were developed. This baseline required
approximately 6 weeks to document and capture all active work threads and place them in a common project
management format. While an analysis of the in-flight projects had been done as part of the change planning the
structure of the new organization allowed for a more precise accounting and common information representation.
This also supported the new tower leaders to better understand the scope of their responsibilities. A typical result
from the project portfolio results set is shown in Figure 6. As can be seen 50% of the effort in the tower was
dedicated to infrastructure support, upgrades, and initiatives.

Figure 6 – Sample Project Profile Result depicting what type of projects were in-flight at the time of the
change and what percent of total effort each project or service consumed.
Additionally, a skills survey was carried out in this same timeframe to get a deeper understanding of what the
skill base of the new towers were comprised of and if any adjustments needed to be made. While the high-level
project analysis had been covered earlier in the process it was not possible to dive into the skills of the individuals any
earlier than after the change was rolled out broadly as the tower management staff were not included fully in that
planning and were essential to the baselining of the skills profile. The baseline revealed both strengths and some
weaknesses with the tower staff composition (see Figure 7). This assessment would later be used for additional
organizational development initiatives, career development, and training opportunities.
22 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

Figure 7 – Sample Skills Profile Result (where experience level ranges from “0 = No experience” to “3 =
expert”).

The 90-day plans ran their course and the teams continued meeting existing deliverables and providing
services as planned with few surprises. The final administrative changes were queued up and put into place. HR
system changes were implemented approximately one month after the reporting changes were announced. Budgetary
changes were developed over several months and laid in for the next budget cycle. This simplified the change as
operational workflows were not disrupted by confusions introduced by financial changes at the outset of the
reorganization.

7. Post-Implementation Experience
Now that the 90-day plans have been completed and an additional 6 months have passed it is possible to
reflect on the key implementation experiences. In general, they have been positive for each organization involved, the
staff, and the technical services delivered with some exceptions. Both these successes and gaps are reviewed here.
7.1 What Went Right
Despite a few challenges the overwhelming result was the successful accomplishment of most of the
objectives set out for the change initiative. These included the separation of CTO and CIO functions and resources,
creation of a tower organization and management structure, and the establishment of a focus on continuous
improvement and cost reduction. In the final organizational model, all of these goals were met and have now been
operationalized.
Additionally, of the central design requirements, nearly all were reflected in the resultant organization and its
implementation. Of paramount importance to the business was that the products and services continued to operate.
The change had no direct adverse impact on any application’s availability. The leadership and communications from
the core team was consistent and comprehensive helping the organization to understand and accept the changes. Also,
improved focus on R&D was accomplished as was the basis for a fuller DevOps methodology adoption across the
organization. Keeping experienced management in place allowed for a consistent adherence to the local cultures of
the multiple BUs involved with the change.
One significant benefit from the reorganization was unleashing added productivity by bringing new parts of
the GRC organization together. One observation within weeks of the change was that the second level managers
began working together without prompting or direction. Once introduced and given a chance to learn about each
other’s expertise they started to extemporaneously meet and innovate to solve joint problems faced by the towers or
the overall organization. Had they remained in their former silos this cross-organizational collaboration would never
have materialized.
James J. Cusick 23

Another form of this resource leverage was of a more directed sort. In several cases the leadership team could
see opportunities to assign individuals or to reorder teams within the new organization to meet emerging project
demands. This was true in multiple cases where Project Managers who had been isolated within their BU could now
take on assignments across the Division. Further, it was possible to combine two separate support centers into one
and improve both the quality of the service and to tap into additional resource cycles. We were also able to combine
multiple teams working on software build services into a single center-of-excellence for multiple BUs. Finally, various
knowledge sharing opportunities have come up mostly serendipitously but all of which have been very beneficial to
productivity and efficiency as well as skill development within the staff.
Finally, within Wolters Kluwer generally and within the GRC organization specifically the concept of
Employee Engagement is strongly emphasized. Employee Engagement (Kahn, 1990) is defined as measuring an
employee's involvement with, commitment to, and satisfaction with work (and by extension their employer). Since
making the reorganization, surveys of Employee Engagement have demonstrated continued high levels of
engagement. In addition, ad hoc discussions with staff underline this. Perhaps most importantly, customer feedback
on the service provided and deliverables of the staff and teams have been (with a few exceptions) outstanding.
Obviously, experiencing significant change at work can be stressful for some people. What is encouraging is how
many of our staff seem to have remained engaged within the new organizational model as high engagement correlates
with high organizational effectiveness.
7.2 The Adjustments Required
There were some last-minute changes to the organizational design which did cause some disruption and
consternation within the core team, but which was never apparent to stakeholders or the broader organization. In
specific, the TOM had included an Information Security tower. However, due to a planned global consolidation of
that function it was decided not to include it in the organization charts and messaging. Eventually the Divisional
desktop support team was also migrated to the global team. Shortly after the launch both functions were moved to
their ultimate homes in the global IT team (GBS).
Additionally, two contractors not on the roster were discovered after the move was executed. This was simply
an oversight by the local manager in not updating their roster fully. Once this had been discovered it was immediately
corrected. The same was true for an employee who happened to be moving to a new role at the same time the change
was planned. This position was being backfilled by a new-hire so once again the disconnect in communication was
quickly adjusted once the issue was identified.
After operating with the new organization for several weeks at least a couple other alignment adjustments
became desirable. After reviewing with the leadership team, the BU stakeholder, and HR, the changes were made to
consolidate several separate contributors into a new team. This has proven to be highly beneficial. The initial miss can
be attributed to the fact that planning an organization and managing one provides two very different perspectives.
Of more concern as time progressed were the occasional events that demonstrated that the organization’s
operating model had some blurred lines of responsibility from the customer or stakeholder point of view. This could
have been a serious concern if not addressed quickly. An example of this was when due to normal attrition a key
manager left the company. While a replacement was put in place the unplanned change disturbed the BU and required
extensive communications around how the CIO team was handling the event and what it meant to the BU
stakeholders. In the end, a reestablishment of strong relationship management and project management around the
effected groups moved the teams through the event for the better.
7.3 The Next Big Thing
Now that the GRC CIO organization is in place the next evolution of the organization is underway. At the
90-day mark the CIO organization was formally folded into the global GBS organization. However, the full
integration of the teams requires yet another organization design effort. This started almost immediately and will be
complete in 2018. Once this design is ready a new change management plan will be put in place and implemented. It
seems like such changes come quickly to meet the continuing and evolving needs of the business. Such needs include
the continued expansion of the global IT organization through the centralization of BU IT resources as well as the
continued reduction of technical duplication and the improvement in best practices and staff leverage.
24 Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2018

8. Lessons Learned
There are several primary learnings from our work in developing this organizational design, change
management plan, and its implementation.
 First, a clear vision around the end state truly is required. This needs to be unambiguous and the leadership needs
to continually reinforce this vision.
 Second, strong business and executive support is vital. Without this the other steps are essentially brittle which is
unsustainable over the course of a long change project.
 Next, a consistent and well pursued approach is required. Without understanding ahead what the steps are to turn
the vision into reality this type of effort will stall out.
 Communications were understood from the beginning to be critical to success and the experiences of this study
underlines this further. The careful communications preparation and deployment made a significant contribution
to the success of the effort.
 Analysis and decision making are critical to success. Significant amounts of data were collected and analyzed
rationally. This data then drove objective decision making and helped explain why one choice was made over
another. Such data informed organizational design requires rigor but is effective.
 Finally, one key step that was taken was a repetitive checking and rechecking of all the data involved such as the
rosters, effort distribution per individual, and the organization charts. This focus on data quality was even more
important as the application of this data centered on decisions impacting people’s job situations.
9. Conclusions
After living this project and its outcomes for over 18 months I can report that aside from meeting the
objectives set out by the business the project was received well by the stakeholders and the organization at large.
Additionally, the approach rested on the expertise of the sponsors, the core team, and the support team. This
interdisciplinary group worked well together and made innumerable decisions which essentially all turned out well for
the company. The knowledge and skill of the team included familiarity with the organization, its businesses, leadership
principles, the intricacies of IT operations and the ITIL framework, communications methods, and more. The team
also applied industry standard organizational design and change approaches including the Plan-Build-Run Model, the
Kotter Change Model, and the ITIL OCM process. Perhaps this study can be of assistance to researchers hoping to
understand industry practice in OCM and to industry practitioners needing to plan and execute a change in their
company.
Acknowledgements
This organizational design and change project was conceived and executed by numerous people. Richard
Flynn and John Weber represented the business throughout. Mark DeTroia, the GRC CIO, provided the vision and
the guiding hand in the change and its execution. Joe McMorris, Linda Linz, and Jonathan Dale joined the initial CIO
leadership team and helped with planning and key decisions and analysis. David Gardner represented the CTO
community. Other key contributors included the BU leaders, the BU CTOs, Lisa Glover, and Jennifer Wolfe. The
communications and change planning was governed by Elissa Salter. Additionally, our HR partners Melinda Papagni
and Amanda Shirk provided key inputs and review throughout. The GBS leadership team played a key role in assisting
the change process and the final organization design especially Andres Sadler and AJ Lang. Finally, special thanks go
to all the staff who enthusiastically endorsed the changes once they were presented to them and as a result made the
overall effort successful.
References
Agarwal, Himanshu, et. al., (2013),Using a plan-build-run organizational model to drive IT infrastructure objectives,
McKinsey on Business Technology, Number 32, Winter 2013, [Online] Available:
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/using-a-plan-build-run-
organizational-model-to-drive-it-infrastructure-objectives (December 2013).
Ashkenas, Ron, (2013), Change Management Needs to Change, Change Management, Havard Business
Review,[Online] Availble: https://hbr.org/2013/04/change-management-needs-to-cha. (April 16, 2013)
Bon, J. V., (2013).Foundations of IT Service Management: based on ITIL.(2nd edition). Green Park, Reading,
UK:Van Haren Publishing, September 15, 2005.
 James J. Cusick 25

Burns, Tom E. and Stalker, G.M., (1961).The Management of Innovation, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship,
1961.
Business Dictionary, (2017).Web Finance Inc.[Online] Available:
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/organitation-change.html (12/27/2017)
Cameron, Esther, & Green, Mike, (2012).Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete Guide to the Models,
Tools and Techniques of Organizational Change, (Third Edition).Kogan Page.
Coplien, James O., & Harrison, Neil B., (2004).Organizational Patterns of Agile Software Development, Prentice Hall.
Cusick, J., (2003). How the work of software professionals changes everything, IEEE Software, 20(3):92 – 97.
Cusick, James J., (2010). Creating an ITIL inspired Incident Management Approach: Roots, response, and results,
Network Operations and Management Symposium Workshops,IEEE/IFIP, Osaka, Japan. May 2010.
Cusick, James J., Achieving, and Managing Availability SLAs with ITIL Driven Processes, DevOps, and Workflow
Tools, [Online] Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.04906 (14 May 2017).
Cusick, James, (1985). Management and Staff Attitudes Towards Organizational Change, Proceedings of the 14th
Annual Western Undergraduate Psychology Conference, At Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA, April
1985.
Davis,Stanley,(1970). Corporate Culture, Cambridge, MA: Balinger.
Fox, Chris, (2012). How to design a Target Operating Model (TOM),StrategicCoffee, [Online] Available:
http://strategiccoffee.chriscfox.com/2012/12/how-to-design-target-operating-model-
tom.html(12/29/2012).
Galbraith, Jay, (2017). The Star Model, [Online]
Available:https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6ecd/ffec764a041bbd68716b788e783e6aa8d669.pdf
(12/27/2017).
Haire, Mason, (1964). Modern Organization Theory, John Wiley & Sons, 1964.
Hunnebeck, Lou, (2016).ITIL® Practitioner: Essentials for Organizational Change Management, Axelos, [Online]
Available:, https://www.axelos.com/news/blogs/may-2016/itil-ractitioner-essentials-for-ocm (5/16/2016).
Kahn, William A.,(1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work, Academy
of Management Journal, 33 (4): 692–724.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss, (1985). Change Masters, Free Press, Florence, Massachusetts.
Kotter, John P. & Cohen, Dan S., (2012).The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their
Organizations, (1st edition). Harvard Business Review Press: Boston, MA.
Ramakrishnan, Srinath, (2014). Change Management Models, Scrum Alliance.[Online]
Available:https://www.scrumalliance.org/community/articles/2014/march/change-management-models
(3/21/2014).
TechOpedia, (2017). Organizational Change Management (OCM). [Online] Available:,
https://www.techopedia.com/definition/13996/organizational-change-management-ocm (12/27/2017).
Tichy, Noel M., &Devanna, Mary Anne, (1986). The Transformational Leader, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

View publication stats