Case study · Public sector
Structural reform inside a public administration
A cantonal administrative unit had decided a major structural reform — new org chart, new unit boundaries, new leadership roles. A year later: the paper was in place, the effect was missing. People kept working in old patterns with new titles.
- Duration
- 18 months
- Architecture fields
- TransformationLeadershipDecision Architecture
- Industrie
- Cantonal administration · > 400 employees
01
Starting point
The reform was formally implemented. In practice, clear mandates, shared language and spaces for the new leadership to actually grow together were missing. Between political steering, agency leadership and operational units it was unclear who was allowed to carry which decisions — and who had to.
- 01New leadership roles existed on paper but weren't accepted as authority.
- 02Decisions were either escalated upward or made informally in the corridor.
- 03Citizen-facing projects slipped even though resources were in place.
- 04Turnover in key positions rose noticeably.
02
Intervention
Instead of restructuring again, we worked on the architecture underneath the structure — along a clear four-phase model.
- 01
Phase 1
Diagnosis on three levels
Political, operational, cultural. Interviews and workshops across every leadership line. Making visible where the reform was stalling.
- 02
Phase 2
Decision spaces
Who decides, who advises, who is informed. Documented per leadership role — including the boundary to political steering.
- 03
Phase 3
Leadership workshops
Nine workshops over twelve months: practising the new architecture on real live cases — with reflection, not front-of-room input.
- 04
Phase 4
Institutionalisation
New leadership rhythm, binding formats, onboarding standard for future leaders — so the new architecture doesn't hang on individuals.
03
Impact
The reform became real after the fact. Not through more programmes, but through clearer responsibility, more resilient leadership spaces and less informal workaround.
3 levels
with documented decision mandates
9
leadership workshops over 12 months
≈ 40%
shorter lead time in key processes
«We had changed the structure and thought that would be enough. It wasn't. What was missing was the clarity underneath — which leadership, which decision, which responsibility.»
Note — Anonymised. Figures are internal approximations from the reform controlling.
Clarity begins in conversation
A similar question
in your own house?
First conversation: shared clarification, no sales. No pitch. An honest map.