Mae Berglas Service Designer & Design Strategist
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Designing Governance
to Support Organizational Change
A feedback and decision-making process for employees adapting to a new operating model.
Challenge: Employees lacked clarity about responsibilities, organization changes, and where to raise questions.
My contribution: Identified the gap, proposed a governance board, and facilitated sessions to define its structure and processes.
Result: A board supported by a charter and change-request form, with recurring meetings to review employee input.
Areas of Focus: Leadership Facilitation, Change Management,
Process Design
Client: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Digital Infrastructure Services Center (DISC)
Employees needed a clear route for questions and feedback
As DISC introduced changes to its organizational structure and operating model, employees faced uncertainty about responsibilities and expectations. They needed a clear way to ask questions, share feedback, and raise concerns.
I brought this gap to the client’s attention and proposed a governance board to oversee operational changes and respond to employee input. I then facilitated co-creation sessions with organizational leaders and branch chiefs to define the board’s purpose, scope, and responsibilities.
Board membership required balanced expertise and representation
Selecting board members prompted the most disagreement. Some stakeholders wanted representation from across the organization. Others favored senior leaders who had helped develop the operating model and understood it in depth.
I facilitated discussions about these competing priorities and the benefits and limitations of each approach. The group agreed on a three-member structure combining branch managers and senior leaders to bring organizational knowledge and employee perspectives into the decision-making process.
*Some information has been redacted for confidentality
The board needed a repeatable way to handle requests and decision-making.
With membership established, I facilitated sessions with the selected board members to define how the board would operate. Together, we clarified:
-
Member roles, responsibilities, and expectations
-
How employees would submit questions, feedback, and change requests
-
How the board would review and prioritize proposed changes
-
How decisions and updates would reach employees
The workshop findings informed a governance charter documenting the board’s agreed processes. A change-request form gave employees a centralized way to describe concerns and propose improvements.
*Some information has been redacted for confidentality
The Outcome Beyond the Workshops
Established the structure
The board had a charter defining its responsibilities and procedures, a feedback form, and an initial set of priorities.
Put the process into use
The board began meeting regularly to review employee questions and change requests, address issues related to the operating model, and reassess priorities.
Supported greater alignment
Board members reported reduced misalignment among both leaders and employees, as the process gave them a consistent way to discuss concerns and review changes.
The work connected organizational change with an ongoing mechanism for employee input, shared decisions, and maintenance of the operating model.
