CHANGE MANAGEMENT + SUSTAINABILITY SAMPLE REPORT

INTEGRATED OPERATIONS CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

FINAL REPORT

ARCHIPELAGO

“Practice isn’t the thing you do when you’re good.

It’s the thing you do that makes you good” -Malcolm Gladwell, Social Psychology Author

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archipelago partnered with OSO to efficiently stand up a new organization. We provided organizational performance assurance through coaching and facilitation.

Each OSO function developed an ambitious, 12-week change management plan to stand up their respective teams. Accountability to the plan was high, with adherence ranging from 80% to 100%. As our engagement concludes, 68 of the deliverables are on schedule.

The results of this joint effort:

• • • • •

35 new work processes, 75 deliverables, with 348 associated readiness activities (identified as necessary to stand up the new organization), >430 hours of coaching, and 20% improvement in Meeting Quality

We would like to recognize the six OSO functional groups for closing over 150 of the Readiness activities by week 12, 85% on schedule.

Change is hard. 71% of change programs fail.

The major risk moving forward is a lack of adoption of new processes by the site-based stakeholders. Therefore, we recommend further iterations of process implementation and improvement in the next calendar year, as well as more intentional active communication by leadership. Field-based coaching, with occasional office-based help, is suggested.

The Process Design, Governance, and Performance Sustainability activities, results, and forward analysis follow this executive summary.

04

PROGRESS STATUS deliverable count

planned versus actual progress 100

On Track Be Aware Needs Attention

COMPLETION (%)

75

56.2% PLANNED PROGRESS 44.9% ACTUAL PROGRESS ~8 DAYS BEHIND SCHEDULE

00

August 30

TIME

November 26

you are cognizant of what needs to be done

READINESS ASSESSMENT

PROTOTYPING IS ONE OF OUR WAYS OF RAISING AWARENESS AND PREPAREDNESS SIMULTANEOUSLY

you are immediately capable of executing

PROCESS COUNT

35 total processes

22

12

100% complete

in progress

01 not started

63% OF PROCESSES ARE COMPLETE AS OF THE END OF OUR ENGAGEMENT.

05

Loading up the front-end is the best possible investment. What is done (and not done) in planning has more bearing on outcomes than anything else.

06

TABLE OF CONTENTS Our Commitment An overview of Archipelago Roles, Responsibilities and Deliverables.

The Engagement: Process Design

08 10 10 11 13

Context Insights Recommendations + Risks

The Engagement: Organizational Governance Context Insights Recommendations + Risks

The Engagement: Performance Sustainability

17 17 18 20

Recommendations + Risks

23 23 23 25

Additional Insights: Readiness

27

Appendices

30

Context Insights

Appendix A: Design Thinking

31

Appendix B: High Performance Teams

32

Appendix C: Psychological Safety

33

Appendix D: Engagement Scoring Metrics

35

Appendix E: Process Mapping

36

Appendix F: Process List

37

Appendix G: Weekly Reporting

38

Appendix H: Reference Communication Framework

44

07

OUR COMMITMENT Process Design and Measurement: Coach leaders and team members in the design and operationalization of core work processes. Ensure that accountability is embedded within the processes, from management to the front-line.

Observe, identify, and coach to formalize performance metrics with leaders and key contributors to drive long-term accountability.

Organizational Governance: Assess, design, and facilitate engagement (meeting) cadence and terms to foster strong decision-making. This is done through automation (where possible and necessary), intentional Terms of Reference, and structured meetings that are as long as they need to be (and no longer).

Performance Sustainability: Develop a single project charter for the six Integrated Operations Core Capabilities. Our charter will include Roles and Responsibilities, an implementation schedule, deliverables, metrics, and risks.

Embed process-mapping, coaching, performance indicator development, and facilitation techniques within the leadership team.

The next section will share progress, insights, risks, and recommendations.

The Appendices will highlight tools and artifacts from our engagement.

08 03

“They say a champion is not made when he wins races. It’s the seconds, minutes, weeks, and months when he prepares that matter.”

-Eliud Kipchoge World Record Holder, Marathon

09

THE ENGAGEMENT: PROCESS DESIGN CONTEXT To ensure that accountability be embedded, we coached the appropriate leadership on how to manage and own the process.

For example, we structured, scheduled, and facilitated the first few process design workshops, in concert with the designated leaders.

As key stakeholders became more comfortable with the process, team members took over the workshops, including real-time facilitation, action capture, and map design. This transferred ownership to ConocoPhillips employees.

In the interest of measurement and transparency of progress, all process mapping deliverables and activities were scoped and included in a web-based (accessible and visible) action tracking tool: Readiness Tracker01. Each team had ownership of their deliverables as they placed them in the plan (with guidance to focus on the “Big 3”: Plan of the Day, 120-day Schedule, and 2-year Plan).

Each week, the six leads shared progress and collaboratively course corrected.

Archipelago developed a weekly one-page report sharing progress, insights, and potential risks for our sponsor and stakeholders. (See Appendix G) With Archipelago in a coaching role, ConocoPhillips’ long-term capability in process design, process mapping, and accountability will be sustainable after we depart.

PROCESS COUNT

35 total processes

22

12

100% complete

in progress

01 not started

The Readiness Tracker is a proprietary web-based software tool that visualizes progress, and provides insights on project readiness, project health, and activity status. Above all it promotes accountability and transparency.

01

10

Figure 01: sketching and prototyping become an important part of the mapping and design process <60d-29d Integrated Scheduling Process>

INSIGHTS The process mapping journey progressed smoothly. Each of the six OSO Leaders worked with their teams to identify and visualize the processes and sub-processes required to stand-up their respective teams and ‘roll-out’ new systems.

Several teams leveraged the existing high level process maps developed prior to the formal event kick off.

11

Figure 02: 1/35 process maps created by the OSO team <60d-29d Integrated Scheduling Process>

Challenges The challenge to this (and many) initiatives undertaken over the past 12-weeks was the remote aspect of work and collaboration. Early in the engagement, small groups were able to gather in the office. This did not last long, as most employees were mandated to work remotely.

Figures 01 + 02 demonstrate how we were able to bridge the gap between disparate, remote teams and in-person process building. The prototyping process is an effective way to convert ideas into functional, testable products.

Successes The ConocoPhillips software ecosystem made communication and collaboration easier. Coupled with Archipelago’s remote work tools, Process Design and Mapping sessions were completed.

12

Technology Recommendation: Using a tablet and pencil/stylus within virtual meetings proved to be the biggest enabler of visible, real-time sketching and prototyping.

When and where appropriate, and following strict organizational protocols, coaches and leaders met in person to brainstorm, design and prototype. The willingness and urgency shown by OSO Leaders to work with Archipelago (in-person and virtually) removed a common barrier: resistance to change; and allowed the for 12-weeks of effective work.

The concept of design thinking was presented to OSO teams and a larger organizational audience - with great enthusiasm. It represents a desirable way of working and reinforced the benefits of rapid prototyping, testing and iteration. This was especially useful for Process Design and Mapping.

“[The concept] of rapid prototyping could be a game-changer for this organization.”

RECOMMENDATIONS + RISKS As of this writing, only 13 process maps remain to be completed. The capability to do so exists within each of the six teams.

The challenge, therefore, is not in developing these or other sub-processes. Instead, the biggest risk is lack of uptake of the processes as they are rolled out, starting December 1, 2021.

We have several recommendations when it comes to fostering successful adoption of the processes post ‘go-live’: 1.

Increased active Senior Leadership support of the change process. Senior Leadership = the OSO Supervisors, the OSO Manager, and our sponsor, the VP of Operations.

“Active” support is not emails, town halls, nor other forums of broadcast communication (but those are necessary). What we mean by active is: field trips, lessons to be learned workshops, after action reviews, decision

13

meetings, etc. In these sessions, in-person wherever possible, senior leadership must: • • •

re-iterate the purpose of the OSO change program, actively engage the stakeholders, and regularly and actively follow-up.

Metrics can be used for this initiative. For instance, make field trips mandatory for OSO Supervisors that lead functions with field-based interfaces (1x per month for the next 3-6 months). These should be tracked in a tool just like the Readiness Tracker.

2.

Field trips by the OSO Supervisors and +1 Leads. When possible, the trips should occur during the week of handover to spend time with the off-going and on-coming personnel. The focus shall include, at a minimum: • • • •

3.

rapport building, scenario review (from the previous quarter) OSO big 3 process deep dives, and Q+A sessions.

Development of an OSO Business Review: a recurring OSO-focused check-in with Ops Managers and OSO Supervisors.

The business review is a data-driven conversation to track and trend progress, share successes, and discuss barriers or threats to the overall OSO initiative. KPIs will need to be identified (the OSO initiative needs to be connected to existing KPIs, as opposed to creating new ones).

Additional recurring connections between OSO Supervisors & Leads. Some informal elements of this exist, however, we advise formalizing it with fieldbased interfaces to share topics and issues pertaining to the OSO’s “Big 3”.

4. Focused, Field-based coaching support.

We strongly believe that the “sprint” style 12-week implementation of the change program in Calgary was effective. The time constraint focused the team on the tasks at hand.

Therefore, we recommend a similarly intense focus, primarily for the fieldbased stakeholders, after the holiday sojourn. Interface management with Calgary would also be addressed.

14

At a high level, we propose 2 coaches who will rotate mid-January to midApril: • • •

~1 week in office in Calgary, working with OSO Supervisors and Leads, followed by ~1 week in the field (Surmont and Montney respectively) Field time would be scheduled to overlap with the field handovers, where applicable.

We believe that ensuring that the field is not “left out” from a coaching engagement is important. Not only would this increase the likelihood of change, but it would create and empower site-based stakeholders to continuously improve and advocate processes. Since two full-time ConocoPhillips field-based “champions” have been identified, our proposal is half the size of the initial stand-up in the Calgary office.

15

Archipelago prides itself on being 100% supportive, yet 100% objective.

16

THE ENGAGEMENT: ORGANIZATIONAL GOVERNANCE CONTEXT To support the implementation of this organizational change program, Archipelago assessed, designed, and facilitated engagement (meeting + communication) cadence with each OSO Leader. We reviewed and collaboratively designed functional meeting Terms of Reference (TORs). Often times this included a linking to new sub-processes designed by the OSO teams.

We scored each engagement (one-on-one coaching, workshops, or meetings). We shared those results with our coachees. We scored 422 sessions in 12 weeks.

Our engagement was an iterative and agile process, with check-ins regularly (through surveys and 1-1s) to assess the meeting quality, psychological safety, and high-performance teaming.

deliverable count

planned versus actual progress 100

COMPLETION (%)

75

56.2%

44.9%

00 On Track Be Aware Needs Attention

August 30

TIME

Planned Progress

November 26

Actual Progress

12 week sparklines

+8%

Psychological Safety Score

+3%

Meeting Impact Score

17

+4%

Accountability Score

INSIGHTS Challenges Remote engagement once again proved to emerge as a barrier - but unlike our process design efforts, opportunities for informal ‘friction’ and ‘touches’ were limited due to strict protocols.

Ideally, OSO Leaders would have opportunities to collaborate and literally ‘bump’ into one another to share progress, ideas, challenges, etc. Culture is defined by what you consistently do. It shows up in your language, your 1:1 interactions (both scheduled and informal), your meetings and communication, and the quality of your work.

Spatial Recommendation: Whenever possible, OSO Functional Leaders and their +1 leaders should have designated space adjacent to one another. This would further cultivate relationships, collaboration and positive friction.

Successes From day Ø, the reception from ConocoPhillips to coaching support was one of “pull”. In our lexicon, “pull” means that leaders and their teams were asking for coaching and welcomed our assistance. Our Client Openness metric was benchmarked at 8.3, and rose to 8.7 over 12 weeks (+4%). This was the highest score within our Coaching metrics.

Secondly, we saw rapid adoption of the Learning Sessions shared within OSO. For example, within days of the Design Thinking concept being introduced amongst the OSO, multiple teams adopted prototyping, embraced creative confidence, and began to rapidly future-cast, design and test concepts.

In another example, the simple concept of, “saying no” (to stay focused) went from an ice breaker to a tool for managing expectations. The exercise helped the OSO leadership understand the difficulty and necessity of focusing on less to achieve more .

Table 01 summarizes metrics from our Governance, Meeting, and Coaching KPIs. Detailed metrics are found in Appendix D.

18

Baseline

Week 12

Δ

Term of Reference Designed

0

27

-

Structure

68%

74%

+6%

Conflict

70%

85%

+15%

Communication + Connection

69%

81%

+12%

Failure

63%

73%

+10%

Learning and Diversity of Thought

65%

79%

+14%

Meeting Impact

65%

79%

+14%

Conversation Quality

61%

73%

+12%

Accountability

48%

60%

+12%

Action Item Quality

56%

68%

+12%

Session Quality

76%

82%

+6%

Client Openness

83%

87%

+4%

Weekly Hours

19

38

+100%

Coaching Relationships

0

26

-

Area Governance

Psychological Safety

Meeting Effectiveness

Item

Coaching

Table 01: Governance and Coaching Scores <Week Ø to Week 12>

Meetings starting on-time improved by over 30% (41% to 71%); however, meeting finish time remained a challenge, with 57% of meetings running long.

Based on our observational data, each OSO team member was spending an extra 30 minutes/week in meetings that ran longer than scheduled. Additionally, each leader spent about 15 minutes waiting for meetings to start. Lack of meeting time management resulted in ~45 minutes/week of waiting time + meeting overrun.

The lowest scoring metric was Accountability. The main driver for low Accountability scoring was Action Item Quality.

19

Actions were taken in about 37% of the observed meetings. Even when actions were taken, 69% of the time, action due dates were missing. The complete breakdown of items measured are in Appendix D. Consistently good governance/cultural behaviors we observed: • • •

Involving the right people (90% of observed meetings), indicating a very inclusive team environment.

Asking questions that allowed others to demonstrate their knowledge, skills, or abilities (82% of observed meetings) Aligned and supportive of decisions reached (96% of meetings where decisions were reached). This was the most impressive behavior observed. We did see plenty of disagreement and strong opinions, but when a decision was reached, teams would be aligned and supportive.

Not every meeting reached a decision, but when one was reached it was almost universally supported coming out of the meeting.

Meeting Value | Starting + Finishing On-Time: (0.75 hours/week/person) x (170 OSO team members) = 127.5 hours/week (127 hours/week) ÷ (1 FTE/40 hours/week) = 3.2 FTE

The time equivalent of 3.2 Full Time Employees is spent waiting for meetings to start and meetings running over their scheduled time.

RECOMMENDATIONS + RISKS Some of the risks and recommendations described in the previous section (Process Design) are relevant to Organizational Governance. We will not repeat them.

Our recommendations for continued development of effective communication, governance and high performing teams are: 1.

Any new interactions or meetings, should make use of Terms of Reference(s), and pre- and post-meeting coaching/feedback. The Calgary-based OSO team have been coached and scored for 12-weeks; maintaining this momentum would be prudent to the goals of change sustainment.

2.

A clear and consistent value proposition to engage the field-based personnel does not exist. We have heard various value propositions in dry runs. This only serves to confuse the audience. Development of a Communication + Stakeholder Alignment Plan(s) by OSO leadership should address a fieldengagement strategy. See Appendix H for initial reference.

20

3.

Continued use of prototyping and dry runs (or rehearsals) when implementing a new process. As detailed in Appendix B, consistent rehearsals are one of the five elements present in high performing teams.

Within OSO, we were able to test processes and ideas earlier. This allowed participants to provide candid feedback and course corrections much earlier than if the dry runs had not been done.

Our philosophy is that go-live should not be the first time that we try something.

4. Score your meetings. The metrics are simple to look at, they trend, and they give impetus to change behaviors.

For instance, in week 7, we shared results on meeting timing: 77% of the meetings in OSO went over their allotted time. You can imagine that this cascades, with back-to-back meetings running long because they started late. When meetings start late and end late, this begins to normalize within a group. However, with weekly scoring and associated coaching, you can measure and refocus the group towards better behaviors.

Figure 03: Meeting Scoring Metrics (clockwise from top left: Meeting Impact, Conversation Quality, Action Item Quality, Accountability

5.

Capture action items more thoroughly. Quality action items were captured less than 31% of the time. This metric continues to improve (relative to the baseline), but reminding participants that quality actions are written down, have a single owner in the meeting, have a due date, and have general agreement from meeting participants. Our research shows that lack of the aforementioned leads to false promises, forgotten actions, and a general culture of ineffective communication.

21

6.

Evaluate and decrease time spent in meetings. We translated the recurring meetings within the OSO Organization’s calendar into the abstract diagrams below.

For each asset’s busiest week, each ‘bubble’ represents a specific meeting, with the diameter reflecting the duration. Each subsequent block, moving from left to right, represents the days of the week from Monday to Friday, and the subtle horizontal split representing morning and afternoon. Lastly, the coloration within each day’s block represents the relative intensity (meeting time commitment), with red being most intense and green being least intense.

The conclusion from this ‘high-level’ view is that little time is available for non-meeting work. We recommend a ‘meeting audit’ to course correct towards specific days being recurring-meeting-free, and creating space for critical thinking and innovation.

SURMONT MEETING DENSITY

MONTNEY MEETING DENSITY

Figure 04: Meeting Density + Heatmap Diagrams

22

THE ENGAGEMENT: PERFORMANCE SUSTAINABILITY CONTEXT The focus of this implementation was to enable process mapping, coaching, performance indicator development, and facilitation techniques with ConocoPhillips’ OSO Team.

This aligns with our goal within every Archipelago engagement: to leave skills and competencies with our client. The following summarizes what we have shared, what we have left behind, and some of the risks associated with failing to practice the right behaviors.

INSIGHTS Over the 12-week engagement, we worked with our six OSO leads and the OSO Manager to explain, embed, and practice the tools and principles stated above.

As change management implementation experts, we have developed our own frameworks to ‘leave behind’. Artifacts (presentations, resources and one-page summaries) have been uploaded and shared within a centrally located folder within the preferred OSO communication and data management tool (Microsoft Teams).

For example, elements of our coaching and feedback model, in Figure 03 below, were shared and consistently emphasized with our coachees.

Teaching to Learn Recommendation: Formalize OSO Leaders as internal resources to leverage all they’ve learned with their respective coaches and the Archipelago reference material to act as mentors to their peers and direct reports.

Out of all tangible goals Archipelago has, this is among those that requires the most balanced effort from consultants and clients. We coached leaders, developed a frequent reporting framework, and led a number of specific learning sessions.

23

Figure 03: Archipelago Coaching + Feedback Model

However, for this endeavor to maintain its trajectory, tools must be used and principles must be practiced.

We worked with the OSO HR Business Partner to map out our Psychological Safety system to one already used by ConocoPhillips. We scored these metrics daily, distributed insights weekly, shared how and why we look at specific metrics, and how to course correct (if necessary). Beyond this, it is the responsibility of the OSO leadership team to consistently practice the right behaviors, and in this instance, cultivate a culture of safety.

The same depth and breadth applies for our meeting effectiveness toolkit, our facilitation techniques and our process mapping handbook.

Lastly, we ran four dedicated “learning sessions” multiple times across the OSO organization (with the functional leaders, and with various combinations of groups within each function). These are identified below, within our shared folder, and summarized within the appendices.

• • • •

Psychological Safety High Performance Teaming Design Thinking + Creative Confidence Focus

24

Process Recommendation: We introduced the concept of a ‘charette’ to the OSO Leadership team. This is a concept from a design context where creation is cross-functional and time constrained. In support of rapidly creating, testing, and iterating: use time constraints and inter-disciplinary perspectives to challenge the status-quo and sprint towards deliverable iteration.

RECOMMENDATIONS + RISKS The primary risk is that implementation lags (or fails) the design of new processes.

A secondary risk is burnout of team members. A 12 week change initiative can be energizing. However, if poor communication, unproductive meetings, nonpsychologically safe environments, or lack of team support become the norms, the team’s collective energy will fade, and poor performance will follow.

Our recommendation for program sustainment is: periodic audits.

We recommend a 6-month time frame for the program to settle and take shape within the organization. We propose an initial audit in late Spring 2022, with subsequent assessments being proposed based on results of the audit and the required steps towards course correction (if necessary) .

An audit would assess at a minimum: • • • • • •

progression against process design, process uptake, communication quality, coaching behavior meeting quality, and implementation of the Archipelago Learning sessions: • High Performance Teaming, • Design Thinking + Creative Confidence, • Focus, and • Psychological Safety

25

If you don’t have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?”

-Coach John Wooden, UCLA Men’s Basketball

26

ADDITIONAL INSIGHTS: READINESS In Week Ø, we internally scored the OSO’s Stand-Up Readiness. And we repeated the exercise in Week 12. This section shares our analysis.

Figure 05: Archipelago Readiness Matrix

Strengths There were four main drivers that improved the OSO readiness score. These items were all scored low at the beginning of the engagement but increased over the 12 week period: • •

Effort/Scope Planning (awareness): clear deliverables, effective activities, clear accountabilities and validated and approved scope.

Effort / Scope Execution (preparedness): focused on goal over plan, scope management and KPI performance to target

27

• •

Governance Framework (awareness): KPI established Team reporting and Effective organizational structure Governance Sustainability (preparedness): Right people making timely decisions, and sufficient capacity for workload.

The scores within our Readiness Assessment are aligned with our work scope.

Our mandate was to help define process re-design scope(s) and coach through execution of the plan to ensure sustainability after Week 12.

One consistent strength throughout the duration of our engagement was the Resource Planning (awareness) / Funding & Resource Management (preparedness). This is a sufficiently staffed team with every possible resource available to support their stand-up effort.

Staff transition to their OSO specific roles was delayed and not always smooth, but the structure is good. There is adequate staffing for the work to be done, despite some work inefficiencies and the proper allocation for field engagement.

Opportunities for Course Correction We did observe a strong Office to Field connection at the beginning of the project, with many OSO leaders having worked in the field, specifically with the teams and assets they are currently supporting.

What became clear as we moved towards process implementation was that the majority of site visits that did occur were not focused on engaging site-based stakeholders in service of OSO processes. Furthermore, communication to and in the field was inconsistent across the groups. This resulted in a lower score within the Office to Field metric of our Assessment.

The two biggest weaknesses we identified are Communication Framework and Vision. The OSO team did establish goals, and showed alignment and commitment to achieving these goals. However, clearly communicating the value (and consequences) of success (or failure) would have strengthened the connections to the vision, and contributed to a consistent message.

Throughout the duration of the 12 week engagement, we heard things like: ‘Make Canada competitive’, and ‘save time’, or ‘lower cost of supply’. However, these statements were never quantified and void of tangible meaning and a measurable target.

28

The Communication Framework consists of a Communication Plan, a Stakeholder Engagement/Alignment Plan, and clear, consistent messaging. The framework does not yet exist, and the recommendation is to create and act upon it. Accountability lies with senior leadership.

When asked what value OSO and their new processes provide, we heard 7 very good answers; but we heard 7 very different answers. We recommend collaboratively developing a single comprehensive and value-based message.

As simple as it sounds, leaders should review and rehearse this message such that there is no hesitation when asked to communicate with stakeholders or potential resistors.

Item

Baseline

Week 12

Vision

2.0

4.5

Sponsorship/Leadership

6.5

7.6

Effort/Scope Planning

3.7

6.9

Communication Framework

3.0

4.0

Resource Planning

7.5

9.0

Timeline Planning

4.5

7.6

Governance/Framework

2.4

6.9

Effort/Scope Execution

1.6

6.6

Timeline Execution

3.5

6.4

Verification

-

7.5

Funding + Resource Management

4.3

6.0

Governance Sustainability

1.0

5.7

Project to Operations Interface

3.5

2.7

Table 02: Readiness Assessment Scores <Week Ø to Week 12>

29

CONCLUSION Most organizational change programs fail. Consequently, one key to success is to not do what most organizations do: otherwise you're risking the 70% failure rate.

OSO decided to do be different: • • •

by leveraging Change Management Experts early on, by quickly Prototyping with a Design Thinking approach, and by embedding High-Performance Teaming and Psychological Safety into the culture.

From a Readiness perspective, awareness and preparedness have improved enough to catalyze the change program. To continue it, 12-18 months of focused change management will be required. The journey has not stopped. And it never stops. But we believe OSO has begun in a strong way.

To succeed, a team need disciples; we can count numerous amongst our coachees that are empowered to carry the journey forward.

Andrew Zakaluzny Founder + CEO Archipelago

_ Adam Onulov _ Germaine Holden _ Ben Flanagan _ Andrew Zakaluzny 30

APPENDICES

Additional resources + References

31

APPENDIX A: DESIGN THINKING Design Thinking is a solution-based approach to problem solving.

This methodology is inherently rapid, iterative and collaborative. It enables the designers to understand and empathize with users, challenges assumptions/anchors and re-frame problems.

One of the biggest challenges of designing is accepting imperfection and iteration. It is rare to create the perfect solution on the first try.

Rapidly prototyping helps with communicating initial concepts – quick sketches and models that enable potential users to test scope, scale, and intent. These are (potentially) disposable, editable and invite improvement.

The clearer the picture, the clearer the path.

At Archipelago, we love future casting. When envisioning a future state, immersing oneself into that narrative through all perspectives and experiences ultimately generates the most tangible actions towards that desired future.

We like to have our partners write short stories. Whether they are about the most effective meeting in the world, or the greenest ESG program in history – we want to know what it feels like. Who is there?

Who does it impact? What are the results?

A charette is defined as an intense period of design or planning activity. It could refer to any collaborative session in which a group of designers draft a solution to a problem. In other words: a focused, cross-functional and time constrained working session in support of rapidly creating, testing and iterating.

Design thinking is a non-linear, iterative approach to problem solving. It is one approach – but one that we like to use with our clients to help with visualizing designs and re-framing perspectives on achieving desired future states.

32

APPENDIX B: HIGH PERFORMING TEAMS Researchers identified 5 signals evident in High Performing Teams. Our goal is to intentionally embed those signals in our teams every week.

01 Framing

The Leader conceptualizes within the team that this journey is a “learning”, not simply an “add-on”.

It is a journey worth doing In the end, we will be better off.

02 Roles

The Leader explains and reinforces to the team why their individual and collective skills are vital to the team’s success.

Without you, we don't suceed.

It is something reinforced through action; not just saying it a handful of times.

03 Rehearsals

Successful teams do dry runs of their key executables, and they have communication plans

We practice in sports... why not at work?

'Go-Live' cannot be the first time we try something.

“There is a difference between people in music and sports talent hotbeds and ordinary people everywhere else—talented people have a vastly different relationship with practicing.” -Daniel Coyle, The Culture Code

04 Encouragement

Team members are coached and feel empowered to speak up (psychologically safe)

Active tools are used to foster the surfacing of ideas and the airing of disagreements.

05 Active Reflection

After Action Reviews and associated learnings are intentionally incorporated between executables

Candid feedback before and after practice.

In the Navy Fighter Weapons School, immediate after-action reviews after every dogfight (Rehearsals combined with Active Reflection) was a fundamental game changer. Their win-loss ratio went from 2.4 to 12.5.

33

APPENDIX C: PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY

Psychological Safety is the model that informs how we observe clients in action.

It is the shared belief about the consequences of interpersonal risk-taking, which blends three main components: trust, respect for each other’s competence, and caring about each other as people. Psychological safety is demonstrated in your culture, which is what you consistently do.

We score client meetings and interactions to establish and track changes to a psychological safety score.

The focus should not be on the overall scores, but rather on improvements within each element*.

•

Structure: team applies good structure to promote learning, encourage inclusion and help manage conflict • Baseline: 67.5% • Final <12 week average>: 73.3% • Improvement: 5.8%

•

Conflict: team does not shy away from constructive conflict, effectively manages destructive conflict, and reaches resolution • Baseline: 70.1% • Final <12 week average>: 78.8% • Improvement: 8.7%

34

•

Communications and Connection: team communication is inclusive, respectful, and above the line • Baseline: 69.5% • Final<12 week average>: 73.8% • Improvement: 4.4%

•

Failure: team encourages openness about mistakes, and learns fast, whilst still holding itself to account • Baseline: 62.7% • Final <12 week average>: 71.4% • Improvement: 8.7%

•

Learning / Diversity of Thought: team values diverse viewpoints and is intent on learning • Baseline:65.3% • Final <12 week average>: 73.3% • Improvement: 8.0%

Within the “Conflict” element was the improvement in the number of interactions where team members shared challenges and others offered meaningful resolutions to those challenges. There was an 18% improvement (46% - 64%) in just that one component.

The categorizations and definitions within the ConocoPhillips Psychological Safety model are provided by Symmetra, and were mapped againts the Archipelago metrics. *

35

APPENDIX D: ENGAGEMENT SCORING METRICS

36

APPENDIX E: PROCESS MAPPING BASICS DEFINE

SCOPE

BRAINSTORM

SEQUENCE

MA P

define the purpose of the processa nd communicate why it exists. what is your objective?

define the scope for each process; how will you know when you are done? what iss uccess?

make note of the core activities within with a processo r function wouldf ail

establish the logical order of activities to ensure process success

visually represent and test your work-flow

Process: An organized group of interrelated activities that work together to achieve specific, discrete outputs that are of value to a customer, user group, or other key stakeholders.

Activity: An activity is a unit of work performed by one accountable function – often one at a time and in sequence. Activities consume resources and result in a work product/deliverable/artifact.

Task: A task is a step performed to complete an activity. Several work steps may be required to complete an activity. In other words, a task is the lowest logical work unit within a process.

Process Map: start

activity

A visual representation of a sequence of interactions between supporting activities and tasks.

activity

task

task

activity

activity

end

task

task

task

It identifies what and who is involved in completing each necessary step; and provides an end-to-end perspective of all work being performed.

START/END INTERFACE

ACTIVITY TASK

DECISION DIVERGENCE

Beyond identifying which processes to design and visually represent, here are some key considerations: • • •

•

Define and communicate the purpose of the process. Why does it exist? What does it do for us?

Establish an immersive narrative. Start from the end and describe what our future state looks and feels like.

Define the following: • Process Owner • Interfaces • Inputs and Outputs • Metrics Test your process. Ask “what if?” and “so what?” and establish or eliminate redundancy, recursion or verification points.

37

RE

M

OV E

D

APPENDIX F: PROCESS LIST

38

APPENDIX G: WEEKLY REPORTING Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Total

Total Number of Engagements

18

-

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

22.5

-

Session Quality

7.7

-

Client Openness Score

8.4

-

August 30

December --

ALL for your time and commitment to embracing the purpose to the program (and our presence) Patrick Stanley and Debbie Sleith for the overall project kick-off, preparation and coordination of a ‘well-oiled’ team and program.

Look ahead: Next Week [ September 6 – 10, 2021 ] • •

Insights •

Recognition

Baseline

Overall session quality is generally high; this metric is measured as a function of openness, duration, content and accountability

• •

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Coaching sessions with respective OSO Supervisors; Assist with workshop facilitation regarding calendar and communication cadence; Begin development of Communication Philosophy (coordinate with HR); Several OSO Team Kick-Offs

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Total

Baseline

6.3

-

Trust

64.7%

-

Competency

63.1%

-

Care

65.0%

-

Implementation Quality (-2 to +2)

Total

Baseline

1.75

-

Highlights •

Psychological Safety is vital for any high performing team. High performing teams, in this context, are those that are satisfying organizational needs, effectively challenging one another, and constantly in search of information that will enable them to improve.

Psychological Safety Score

Success Metric: Internal to Archipelago

5.5

5.3

Meeting Impact

Conversation Quality

50.0%

31.3%

Accountability

Action Item Quality

Witnessing two OSO Supervisors hug in a meeting; we have never seen that kind of camaraderie and gratitude before

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Total

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

15.0

-

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

16.3

-

Session Quality

7.3

-

Client Openness Score

8.1

-

•

August 30

Success Metric: Psychological Safety Psychological Safety is vital for any high performing team. High performing teams, in this context, are those that are satisfying organizational needs, effectively challenging one another, and constantly in search of information that will enable them to improve.

HR-led OSO Leadership Team Sessions scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday (15 + 16); Many teams are conducting their respective ‘Kick-Off’ meetings; Progression of How We Work: Communication principles; Progression of Communication/Meeting Cadence planning;

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Baseline

Psychological Safety Score

6.0

-

Trust

66.2%

-

Competency

71.5%

-

Care

60.0%

-

Success Metric: Internal to Archipelago

Implementation Quality (-2 to +2)

7.3

6.8

Meeting Impact

Conversation Quality

33.3%

16.7%

Accountability

Action Item Quality

Baseline:

Baseline:

Baseline:

39

Total

Baseline

1.25

-

Highlights •

Baseline:

Total

ALL for exhibiting behaviours of vulnerability, support and gratitude within team meetings and working sessions.

Look ahead: Next Week [ September 13 – 17, 2021 ]

• • •

Overall session quality is still generally high (although lower than Week 0); baseline numbers are complete as of the end of this week (Week 1).

December --

Eric Thomas for initiating workshops with the Archipelago team to understand the organization and establish several ways to collaborate.

•

Insights

Recognition

•

Organizational Governance and relationship building has been the primary focus of weeks 0 and 1 – process design and coaching will become more of a focus once personnel transitions are more complete; The Archipelago team conducted their respective Personality Dimensions profiles: Ben Flanagan: Germaine Holden: Andrew Zakaluzny: Adam Onulov:

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Total

Total Number of Engagements

21.0

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

20.0

19.4

Session Quality

7.9

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.5

8.3

•

August 30

December --

Look ahead: Next Week [ September 20 – 24, 2021 ] •

Insights •

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Baseline

All coaching session metrics have been trending upwards this week, with the largest increase being number of engagements; Baseline values are established as of this week

•

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

OSO leaders to begin scoping specific deliverables and accountabilities for their three primary focus areas (90d plan + 120d plan + 2 year plan); Engagement with internal and external stakeholders (with process mapping exercises) to commence next week.

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

6.7

6.4

Meeting Impact

Conversation Quality

0.0%

0.0%

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

Total

Highlights + insights •

Psychological Safety is vital for any high performing team. High performing teams, in this context, are those that are satisfying organizational needs, effectively challenging one another, and constantly in search of information that will enable them to improve.

<Baseline: 6.1>

Baseline

Psychological Safety Score

6.0

6.2

Trust

66.2%

65.5%

Competency

71.5%

67.3%

Care

60.0%

62.5%

<Baseline: 41.7%>

<Baseline: 24.0%>

6/6 (100%) OSO teams have had initial kick-off meetings with larger; There have been concerns expressed about the volume of work versus the timing of the work – prioritization and scoping are critical next steps; • Public health protocols forced all but one engagement to be conducted remotely – Archipelago will continue to be available by all means; • Archipelago team is expanding their coaching reach, up to 14 coaching relationships and 21 sessions completed this week; • Action tracking software introduced to the OSO team with coaching and scoping sessions being conducted starting next week.

•

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Total

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

22.0

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

15.8

19.4

Session Quality

7.8

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.2

8.3

•

August 30

Sessions were almost exclusively remote this past week; Coaching and meeting sessions have been transitioning to whiteboarding, scoping and mapping sessions towards the end of this week.

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

December --

Look ahead: Next Week [ September 27 – October 01, 2021 ] • •

Insights •

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Scoping + Tracking

Governance

•

Continued scoping and data input into the action tracker; Formal Process Mapping + Scheduling workshop scheduled for Monday morning; Review of deliverables and identified processes to occur Thursday/Friday with a consolidation of all deliverables into one timeline to follow.

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Highlights + Insights •

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

6.8

6.2

6.6

6.8

Structure

73.9%

66.7%

Meeting Impact

Conversation Quality

Total

Baseline

Conflict

75.3%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

72.8%

69.5%

Failure

68.2%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

72.3%

64.4%

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

35.8%

79.2%

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 41.7%>

<Baseline: 24.0%>

40

• • •

Action Tracking tool introduced to 6/6 OSO leaders with clients conducting ‘keystrokes’ and navigating the tool; and the initiation of client driven inputs into the tracker (Scoping) P&O team did their first deep dive of the Integrated Operations processes, as part of their scoping and scheduling exercise Hearing the Discipline Engineers’ mapping their capabilities and gaps to understand their competitive advantages Reviewing initial scopes and process maps with Operations Technologies + Analysis

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Scoping + Tracking

Total

164

74

13

261

11

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

22.0

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

58.9

19.4

Session Quality

7.8

7.5

Client Openness Score

7.9

8.3

August 30

December --

Look ahead: Next Week [ October 04 – October 08, 2021 ]

69 On track

• •

Insights • 57 meetings scored to date • 107 coaching sessions logged to date • Over 165 hours spent 1:1 with 19 COPC leaders

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Optimization of 2Yr Plan Scope will continue (October 05) Iteration 02 of the OSO Action Plan will commence with additional inputs from all functions within the OSO team

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Be aware

Deliverable Count

2.9%

9.3%

8.0%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

Highlights + Insights •

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

7.3

6.2

6.3

6.6

Structure

74.3%

66.7%

Meeting Impact

Conversation Quality

Conflict

78.0%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

73.9%

69.5%

50.8%

88.9%

Accountability

Action Item Quality

Total

Baseline

Failure

73.1%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

73.9%

64.4%

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

<Baseline: 41.7%>

Activity Count

Needs attention

<Baseline: 24.0%>

• •

We are starting to see some of the team “storming & norming” taking place. People are become more comfortable with their new jobs and are settling into their new teams. Levity and expressions of gratitude are slightly under average and constructive conflict in meetings and quality of conversation are up, too. We want to see differences of opinions and willingness to challenge one another while still being able to come back together and align on decisions being made.

Iteration 01 of our action plan until the end of the year has been completed and optimized.

Highest Psychological safety score we’ve seen so far (both by Archipelago and Symmetra calculations)

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Scoping + Tracking

154

85

33

16

288

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

21.0

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

52.2

19.4

Session Quality

7.6

7.5

Client Openness Score

7.8

8.3

August 30

December --

Look ahead: Next Week [ October 11 – October 15, 2021 ]

70 On track

•

Insights •

•

Quote from P&O regarding workshopping and standing up the team: ”We've been working together for 3 weeks, but it feels like 6 months”

•

P.S. score saw a dramatic decrease this week.

•

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Total

Baseline

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

5.8

6.2

Structure

61.9%

66.7%

Conflict

69.1%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

57.8%

69.5%

Failure

59.7%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

62.3%

64.4%

Archipelago to work with key clients establish a realistic update cadence with the intention that it will become part of how they manage their business (activities, deliverables, dates, etc.); Session 02 with Discipline Engineers on establishing core strengths and preparing to be the 2nd wave of change after optimization processes are established; OSO All-Hands Session

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness Conversation Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

5.8

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 41.7%>

<Baseline: 24.0%>

78.6% 36.0%

41

Needs attention

Activity Count

7.1%

16.5%

10.7%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

Highlights + Insights

Meeting Impact

6.2

Be aware

Deliverable Count

•

Readiness (Action) Tracker has been populated, but the OSO Leaders have not established the habit of updating their Deliverables / Actions;

•

Leaders are intentionally engaging their teams with conversations about being high performing and working on how they work;

•

Getting the items into an accountability tool has forced the team to pragmatically think what's actually achievable over the next 3 months.

It's also forced the team to really consider stakeholders, since most process-mapping activities involve others.

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Scoping + Tracking

Execution

125

113

42

22

302

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

17.0

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

32.5

19.4

Session Quality

8.2

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.1

8.3

August 30

December --

Look ahead: Next Week [ October 18 – October 22, 2021 ]

72 On track

•

Insights • • •

Total coaching relationship has increased to 23 We have done more “Front of Room Sessions” this week than any other (4 facilitated meetings) The biggest driver of improved Psychological Safety has been “Conflict”, which is a combination of having appropriate levels of challenge

•

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Total

Continued Process Mapping and governance sessions amongst all support groups; Cross-functional Process Mapping (including between P&O and PD, and P&O and Minor Mods.)

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

6.7

6.2

Structure

72.2%

66.7%

Conversation Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

Conflict

80.4%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

70.6%

69.5%

Failure

66.6%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

66.5%

64.4%

6.9%

23.1%

16.7%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

•

7.2

7.0

Activity Count

Needs attention

Highlights + Insights

Meeting Impact

Baseline

Be aware

Deliverable Count

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 41.7%>

<Baseline: 24.0%>

88.6%

22.7%

Specific item that should/will be a focus for Archipelago will be Accountability; which equates to clear actions and direction.

When actions are being taken – they are of increasing quality, but are only being captured in 1 out of every 3 meetings.

•

Evidence of “Tracker Driven” conversations where leaders are using the tool and it’s outputs to drive productivity and clarity.

•

We had our first intentional social engagement (fellowship). This is important for OSO leaders to reinforce their rapport with Archipelago and each other.

•

“The Action Tracker is hot”

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Scoping + Tracking

Execution

116

103

68

37

324

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

13.0

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

24.5

19.4

Session Quality

7.8

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.2

8.3

August 30

December 03

Look ahead: Next Week [ October 25 – October 29, 2021 ]

73 On track

•

Insights

Deep dive into Psychological Safety with the OSO functional leaders;

Be aware

Deliverable Count

•

Only 23% of meetings end on time, with an over-run average of 10.5 minutes;

•

64% of all OSO Stand-Up Activities are completed or in-progress!

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Total

•

Distribution and follow-up learning session focusing on principles of Process Mapping;

•

revisit communication strategies (content and cadence); how can we communicate more and close the gap between expectation and execution?

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

7.9

6.2

Structure

79.1%

66.7%

Conversation Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

Conflict

91.2%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

85.7%

69.5%

Failure

84.3%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

83.2%

64.4%

7.2

7.0

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 47.8%>

<Baseline: 56.3%>

75.0%

64.4%

42

Activity Count

11.0%

31.4%

23.7%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

Highlights + Insights

Meeting Impact

Baseline

Needs attention

•

Increased cross-functional working sessions as clear evidence that there has been a transition into execution and integration;

•

Conflict, has jumped over 20 percentage points compared to baseline measure. Conflict, which is meant as constructive conflict, is measured as a combination of observable behaviors: openness, good questions, challenges, resolutions, conversation quality, constructive conflict, aligned & supported decisions;

•

Introduction of design thinking and prototyping principles with the OSO Leads and some of their teams;

•

observable trickle-down of language, behaviours, and concepts.

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Scoping + Tracking

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule Execution

95

111

79

48

333

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

20

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

37.3

19.4

Session Quality

7.8

7.5

Client Openness Score

7.9

8.3

August 30

December 03

73

Look ahead: Next Week [ November 01– October 29, 2021 ]

On track

•

Insights •

Deep dive into Psychological Safety with the OSO functional leaders;

Be aware

Deliverable Count

32 sessions scored this week resulting in a big drop in Psychological Safety score, mainly in the conflict and communication and connection elements. Both of these elements include observable behaviors about challenges that are shared and resolutions offered to those challenges.

Distribution and follow-up learning session focusing on principles of Process Mapping + templates;

•

Continued focus on communication and alignment with key stakeholders (both across OSO and within OSO functions

•

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Total

•

Continued efforts with Process Mapping, and new structure ‘dry-runs’

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

7.3

6.2

Structure

73.0%

66.7%

Conflict

81.2%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

75.9%

69.5%

Failure

76.2%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

79.6%

64.4%

13.7%

37.6%

32.7%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

Highlights + Insights

Meeting Impact

Conversation Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

Baseline

Activity Count

Needs attention

7.2

7.2

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 47.8%>

<Baseline: 56.3%>

•

There are more conversations about feeling overwhelmed with volume and pace of change (in addition to focus on business continuity);

•

Completion of critical DDD Process milestone (M.M.) and testing/practice of new Plan of the Day (P.D.) and 120D Plan structure (P&0);

•

Increased focus on communication to a broader CPC audience and stakeholder alignment – presence and cadence must increase from now until ‘go-live’ date(s);

•

Heightened level of comfort with rapid prototyping and process mapping across all OSO functions, with an increase of the number and frequency of working sessions.

80.0%

65.0%

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Scoping + Tracking

Execution

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Testing + Communication

Go-Live

77

113

87

63

340

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

29

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

42.1

19.4

Session Quality

7.7

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.0

8.3

August 30

December 03

Look ahead: Next Week [ November 08 – November 12, 2021 ]

74 On track

•

Insights •

Expressing gratitude to others in a meeting is quite low right now, observed in only 54% of the meetings this week.

•

Conversation Quality continues it’s positive trajectory, while Accountability + Action Item Quality drop by a minimum 10%.

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Total

•

Formalization of communication framework; functional teams will have to transition into education and communication mode as we near significant golive dates (December 01); Continuation of narrative building and prototyping desired state processes; testing sessions are expanding to cross-functional and field-based audiences

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness

7.3

6.2

Structure

73.5%

66.7%

Conflict

82.9%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

75.2%

69.5%

Failure

73.4%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

77.5%

64.4%

Conversation Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

7.7

6.9

Accountability

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 47.8%>

<Baseline: 56.3%>

55.5%

43

Needs attention

Activity Count

16.2%

43.6%

37.3%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

Highlights + Insights

Meeting Impact

Baseline

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

Be aware

Deliverable Count

64.9%

•

High Quality testing and prototyping sessions were observed in multiple groups; design thinking principles could prove to be transformational to pace of process design;

•

Discipline to overcommunicate with more broad and more granular audience will be critical prior to go-live dates;

•

Expressing gratitude to others in a meeting is quite low right now, observed in only 54% of the meetings this week. Expressions of gratitude are simple ways of reinforcing desired behaviors or thanking someone for a job well done;

•

Pursuit of new ways of thinking and communicating will prove to be beneficial to potential organizational savings and efficiencies (ex: meeting intensity calculator + visualization)

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Scoping + Tracking

Execution

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Testing + Communication

Go-Live

67

105

98

69

339

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

15

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

42.0

19.4

Session Quality

8.0

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.5

8.3

August 30

December 01

Look ahead: Next Week [ November 15 – November 19, 2021 ]

75 On track

•

Insights •

•

What makes a high quality action item, according to Archipelago? A good action has four components • O n e a ccou n ta b le p a r ty • A d u e d a te • T h e a ccou n ta b le p a r ty p r esen t w h en th e a ction w a s cr ea ted • T h e a ccou n ta b le p a r ty a g r eed to th e a ction a n d d a te

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Total

Baseline

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

7.6

6.2

Structure

76.6%

66.7%

Conflict

87.1%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

78.2%

69.5%

Failure

76.5%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

76.5%

64.4%

Readiness Assessment. We measured the organizational baseline in the first week of September, and will conduct a pulse-check next week.

Learning Session: High Performance Teaming, will take place next week with opportunities for each functional lead to share content with their respective teams.

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness Conversation Quality

<Baseline: 6.4>

<Baseline: 6.1>

7.5

6.8

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 47.8%>

Activity Count

Needs attention

20.0%

49.1%

41.1%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

Highlights + Insights

Meeting Impact

Accountability

Be aware

Deliverable Count

<Baseline: 56.3%>

53.5%

75.8%

•

Challenge: The absence of a clear value proposition to engage the field-based personnel, it will likely be incredibly challenging to align the execution to the expectations.

•

Visibility of Meeting Frequency and Density has created the right sense of urgency to broadly communicated an evaluation of how much time is spent in meetings.

•

Acknowledgement that gaps between now and Dec 1 still exist, and closing them won't be easy - the stress level has increased, but in our opinion not to an unhealthy level, but to a "we need to sprint to the end" level.

Integrated Operations Change Management Success Metric: Coaching

Project Timeline Governance

Total

Scoping + Tracking

Execution

Success Metric: Scoping + Schedule

Testing + Communication

Go-Live

57

107

106

77

347

Baseline

Total Number of Engagements

13

16.5

Total Coaching Time (Hrs)

34.0

19.4

Session Quality

8.2

7.5

Client Openness Score

8.7

8.3

August 30

December 01

Look ahead: Next Week [ November 22 – November 26, 2021 ]

75 On track

Readiness Assessment. Presentation of findings, which initially show the resourcing, sponsorship and people components are scoring very high, and alignment (site-based) and communication need added focus..

Insights •

•

Top performing metrics within engagement sessions: involving the right people + aligning on key decisions, even if there is disagreement

Learning Session: High Performance Teaming, will take place next week with opportunities for each functional lead to share content with their respective teams.

Metrics that need focus: assigning quality actions – especially with specific due dates.

Success Metric: Psychological Safety

Final Program Report scheduled for November 26th, with document to be distributed shortly after.

Success Metric: Meeting Effectiveness Meeting Impact <Baseline: 6.4>

Total

Baseline

7.3

6.2

Structure

74.4%

66.7%

Conflict

84.8%

71.3%

Comms + Connection

80.7%

69.5%

Failure

72.9%

61.3%

Learning + Diversity of Thought

78.7%

64.4%

Psychological Safety Score (/10)

Be aware

Deliverable Count

Accountability

21.3%

50.9%

42.6%

Stand Up Readiness

Planned Progress

Actual Progress

<Baseline: 6.1>

•

Challenge: Not all OSO Leaders have been engaged with or on site. We are aware that there are plans to visit Surmont and Montney in the coming weeks but have yet to see a MUST DO as it relates to focused on-site presence for all leaders.

•

Ability for increased in-person engagement with many teams. Observing the them allowed for additional insights and coaching opportunities to support High Performance.

•

Kick-Off and first learning session with nominated site-based ‘champions’; this is a hugely important initiative towards bridging the gap between concept and execution.

7.3

Action Item Quality

<Baseline: 47.8%>

<Baseline: 56.3%>

59.7%

44

Activity Count

Highlights + Insights Conversation Quality

7.9

Needs attention

71.9%

APPENDIX H: REFERENCE COMMUNICATION FRAMEWORK

OSO Communications Plan: Our Objectives: Operations Support + Optimization The objectives of establishing the Operations Support + Optimization Team is as simple as the name implies: Support Operations. We are going to cultivate a One Canada identity and optimize Canadian assets to succeed.

We will re-design new processes, and introduce efficient tools to support value-based decision making, evolved organizational culture and time back.

Our Objectives: Communications Plan

In the interest of open communication, it is our intent to create positive awareness of the OSO initiative, across all functions.

Establish clarity by sharing OSO objectives, milestones, insights and future developments.

Continue to cultivate the essence of ConocoPhillips company culture by sharing knowledge throughout our organization.

Our Plan The proposed communication plan identifies our audience, the frequency with which we will communicate with our audience, and the methods we will use to share information. audience

objective

SLT <High Level Leadership>

Awareness: Updates + Forecasting · Single page updates / dashboard · Monthly <Planned>

OSO Leadership Team + OMs

CPC Management Team(s)

All CPC Employees + Contractors

Awareness: Updates + Forecasting Scope Change Approvals

Awareness: Updates + Forecasting

Awareness: Updates Clarity Culture Awareness: Updates

External <Public>

Clarity Culture

tool(s)

frequency

· Detailed Progress Updates

· Weekly *

· Financial Governance Updates

· Bi-weekly *

· High Level Dashboard

· Bi-weekly *

· Readiness Updates

· Monthly

· ‘All Hands’ Presentation

· Monthly

· Project Dashboard

· Bi-weekly *

· 15-20 Page / Slide Presentation

· Weekly *

· Readiness Updates

· Bi-weekly *

· Director Updates

· Monthly

· Bulletin / Newsletter / Editorial

· Monthly

· Screen-based Dashboard

· Weekly *

· OSO Portal (Sharepoint)

· Weekly *

· ‘All Hands’ Presentation

· Monthly

· Social Media

· On-going **

· CPC Website

· On-going *

* document / media shall be built and continuously updated with accurate data and graphics ** social media strategy and guidelines to be developed

45

web: email: social:

www.archipelago.one info@archipelago.one @archipelago.one