“I have discovered what wonderful colleagues I have!”
“I have realised that we all share the same goal. We may express ourselves in different ways, but now both the goal and the path towards it are clearer!”
These were reflections from participants when we carried out a Columbi process at a residential care home in Sweden at the end of 2023. Around 30 employees took part.
At the start there were challenges. Informal groups had formed. People spoke about each other instead of with each other. There were also difficulties in cooperation between units.
We began with the question: “What characterises your current work situation?” Employees then met in mixed workshop groups with colleagues from different units. They shared thoughts, reflected and discussed the current situation. This produced a range of proposals for activities to improve collaboration and the working environment.
The proposals became an action plan with around 20 activities managed by the employees themselves, and another 20 requiring support from managers and leaders. Some actions were simple and could be put into practice straight away. For example, greeting each other, or choosing the “green lens” (kind interpretation) instead of the “red lens” (such as mistrust or irritation) when meeting colleagues. Many of the other activities have already been carried out. The work continues according to the action plan to strengthen cooperation even further.
All participants agreed that the Columbi workshop had started an important process. It improved communication between the units and created the first step towards stronger unity. There was also a greater sense of pride, as everyone saw themselves as an important part of the workplace.
We will return in the spring for a follow-up – and we look forward to it!
Elisabeth Adriansson Sandberg och Karin Kullberg
A large company in northern Sweden had faced serious cooperation problems for many years. The conflict was so severe that it visibly affected both profitability and employee health and wellbeing.
One clear example of the negative climate was that blue-collar employees consistently avoided the staff canteen. Instead, they ate and took breaks in the production facilities. White-collar employees, in turn, felt so unwelcome in the production areas that they preferred not to enter. Communication took place mainly by email and telephone. Although both groups worked in the same location, collaboration and dialogue were almost non-existent.
Management had sought help from both psychologists and management consultants. Despite these efforts, nothing changed. At that point they came into contact with Columbi and decided to carry out a Columbi mapping exercise. The aim was to understand how employees themselves described the situation and what they saw as the core of the problem.
The survey received a good response. However, when employees came to the mandatory feedback meeting, they were initially cautious and suspicious. Interest quickly grew once results were presented. Seeing their own words describing the problems encouraged open conversation.
During the workshop, where consequences and proposals were discussed, engagement became strong. Three groups of 15–20 participants each produced around 70 suggestions for improving the work environment.
Immediately after the meeting, most participants expressed open positivity. Typical comments included: “This is the first time the company has really listened to us” and “It feels good that our views have been taken seriously, discussed, and documented.”
Just one week later, the atmosphere in the company had clearly improved. Many employees had even returned to the canteen after years of absence.
Four months later, a new organisational structure was in place and a new scheduling system had been introduced, based on the employees’ proposals.
Peter Lundh, VISE AB
In the autumn of 2020, I carried out a Columbi Work process at a consultancy firm within finance and administration. The company already had a strong culture and sense of cohesion, so we did not expect any major surprises – and indeed, there were none. That might raise the question: was it really worth carrying out the exercise, or was it simply a waste of time and money? The answer is a resounding no – it was not wasted at all.
Even though the overall results were very positive, there were of course areas where adjustments could be made to improve further. Management received many valuable insights to take forward in their development work. We also used the workshop as an opportunity to define a vision and set of values, where the Columbi results provided important input.
Every time I run a Columbi process, I am struck by the engagement it creates – and this was no exception. In this case, where much was already working well, employees received confirmation that their perception was accurate. I am convinced that this sense of confidence was further strengthened through the process. Staff also expressed a clear pride in being part of the organisation.
Both management and employees saw great value in carrying out Columbi Work. They are now working together to develop the ideas and improvement proposals that emerged.
Johanna Lindquist
A small company with around 30 employees was facing a difficult situation. Staff were not speaking to each other, and the atmosphere was heavy and resistant. In this climate, the decision was made to carry out a Columbi Work process. The aim was to find out how the group truly experienced the situation – what was it that really caused friction? Naturally, management had theories and ideas about the problems, but despite many attempts they had not managed to turn things around.
Could a Columbi workshop really change the situation? Could it create a positive afternoon when the results themselves pointed to major problems?
Columbi workshops are based entirely on the impressions provided by participants. We go through all the words they have shared, and from this extensive list, the group chooses the words they want to work with in small groups. In pairs, they select issues, reflect on the impact, identify possible measures, and decide who should take responsibility. The small groups then report back to one another and to the wider group. In form it is a normal workshop – but with Columbi the issues analysed are their own, not someone else’s.
In this case, the feedback session revealed that different small groups had described certain situations in similar ways. Common threads emerged that had not previously been visible, but now united several people in the larger group.
One example was a form – an order template that many wanted to change and improve. Seen from the outside, it looked like a minor issue. But for those handling the form daily, it was a source of irritation. Importantly, management had not even been aware of the problem.
The group quickly found simple solutions that could be implemented immediately, with significant impact on the work environment. Less irritation over a poor form, a joint positive effort to redesign it and greater efficiency in ordering processes. A small working group was created on the spot – we will fix this!
After this first step, everyone leaned in. They became more positive and engaged. What is the next common thread? How do we solve it together? No one simply pointed to the manager and said “you fix this.” Instead, the group took ownership. Since the questions and observations were their own, it was only natural that they would also help create the solutions.
We also highlighted what was already working well. Even in the bleakest situation, there are bright spots – and these need to be recognised, reinforced, and appreciated. The workshop gave space for positive signals of good teamwork, care, and helpfulness. After just three hours, the atmosphere in the room was noticeably better. Columbi works!
Anne Styren
In my daily work as an interim HR manager, I often enter companies that are undergoing some kind of change – anything from a small reorganization to a complete restructuring due to acquisitions or major downsizing. Regardless of the type of change, it often leads to a certain amount of worry and sometimes dissatisfaction among employees. Change, in that sense, can be a real energy drain.
We know that many people find change difficult, whether large or small, especially if they feel they have no influence over what’s happening. We also know that people feel better when they experience being seen and heard. That doesn’t mean they expect to be part of every decision, but rather that their opinions and voices are worth listening to.
My dilemma as an interim HR manager is that it’s difficult to capture everything that’s in the air, quickly enough. No matter how much I try to talk to employees and ask about what’s bothering them, I can’t quite reach everyone. Later, I often realize there were low-hanging fruits – obvious issues – that could have been handled easily at an early stage. Had they been addressed, we could have avoided much of the friction and energy drain, and instead put our energy and focus where it was needed most.
It’s also clear that our new reality, where many of us no longer work at our usual workplace but remotely, creates new challenges. We need to lead and motivate without being physically present. This hasn’t made it easier to capture how employees are really doing.
We hear that many find it difficult to work full-time from home or away from the regular workplace. We also know that isolation – both from colleagues and from the social environment around work – can have a negative impact on wellbeing. How do we capture this, especially as autumn darkness approaches and everyday life feels a little heavier? How do we pick the fruit that needs picking when we can’t even see each other’s gardens?
In early autumn 2019, I stumbled upon Columbi, and suddenly the pieces fell into place. Here was a tool that could, in a simple and practical way, capture things I hadn’t even thought to ask about. Through a digital interview where each employee shares what is important to them, followed by a workshop where we collectively discuss what is most important to “us” as a group and what actions we should take moving forward, we could reduce friction and improve wellbeing in the workplace.
If only I had had Columbi when we introduced activity-based working and spent so much time on working groups and information meetings – and still failed to capture the real sources of friction.
If only I had had Columbi when managers asked me how to increase engagement and motivation among employees. They felt they weren’t reaching everyone, knowing that some didn’t want to or dare to speak up, while others took up too much space. It would have been so simple to conduct a Columbi and then use the results as the basis for a workshop where everyone could discuss how to work together.
If only I had had Columbi when the friction between sales and back office was at its peak. We could have more quickly introduced job shadowing across departments and made the team structure changes that later reduced errors and misunderstandings – which in turn created two well-functioning, high-performing departments.
So, what is the difference between Columbi and all the other employee surveys or pulse checks I’ve worked with during my nearly 20 years in HR? There are plenty of providers, many of them good – but few can handle both the open-ended question and the statistical reporting, which I believe is Columbi’s true strength.
What does that mean? First, it’s the employees themselves who decide what they want to measure – there are no pre-set questions. They get to write down what matters most to them right now. Second, everyone then spends a few hours discussing what should be done differently going forward to reduce friction and improve wellbeing. Here, everyone’s voice is heard, everyone’s words are included, and the conversation is grounded in their own impressions. Together, the group decides what matters most right now and what to focus on, based on their internal analysis of the Columbi results.
It’s important to have a solid foundation – a process backed by research and empirical evidence. Naturally, today’s Columbi has that. Columbi’s history goes back to the 1980s, with roots in Ben Shalit’s “Wheel” method and Richard Lazarus’s Coping Theory, and it builds on extensive empirical findings from studies conducted both in Sweden and abroad.
I often say that I was “lean” from birth – always asking, “Can this be done in a simpler, more effective, and not least, more enjoyable way while still getting the best results?” Columbi is exactly that – a way to quickly and easily capture a snapshot of everyday reality, of what drains energy right now and what needs to be addressed. With Columbi, we can pick the low-hanging fruit straight away and focus our energy on the issues that really require it.
Eva Pijnenburg, Columbi Ambassador
This is about a construction company that had been growing, and with that growth came new needs for communication and structure. The initial assignment was to work with the company’s leadership, both at the individual and group level, and as a natural next step, the focus expanded to include the company’s inner life. This meant extending the assignment to include business development. At that time, I had recently come across Columbi, and I saw how such a survey could help the company on several levels. Of course, it was about understanding what employees saw as their challenges and what they felt was working well. But I also saw the opportunity to engage employees in the company’s development.
In the fall of 2019, the company carried out its first Columbi Work followed by a workshop. This was also my first Columbi, and I can say that it exceeded expectations, fully meeting both my and management’s goals.
Management gained a clear picture of what was working and what could be improved. Beyond that, however, an extraordinary level of engagement was created – far greater than what I had seen when previously working with traditional employee surveys as a manager. The suggestions that came up ranged from structure and communication issues to how teams collaborate. One example was the wish to visit construction sites before work started, to get a better sense of the job ahead. This would allow them to work more efficiently and effectively once the project began. Employees felt that too much time was lost during setup due to missing items or unanswered questions. Rather than viewing this as solely the supervisors’ responsibility, employees realized they could request it themselves if the supervisor hadn’t scheduled it. This brought clarity about personal responsibility and showed how much could be influenced simply by communicating more.
A year later, the company conducted a follow-up Columbi. It gave management clear confirmation that the measures taken had delivered the desired results while also providing valuable input on areas that still needed attention. It also became clear to employees what had actually been done since the previous survey. The results clearly showed that the company had successfully addressed last year’s issues and that everyone recognized their role in the success.
Even the union representatives have been very positive about working with Columbi, as they saw how it gave everyone the opportunity to be heard and to influence management’s focus areas. At the same time, it strengthened employees’ understanding of the company’s challenges, since communication within the organization had improved.
Johanna Lindquist
