It started as a Smart Office Rollout
A large public administration decided to modernize its working environment. COVID had accelerated new practices. Remote work had reshaped habits. Shared spaces, non-assigned desks, hygiene services, badge management, everything needed structure.
On paper, it looked like a Digital Workplace program. In reality, it became a governance stress test.
The Invisible Complexity
Very quickly, a familiar pattern emerged. No single department fully owned the Digital Workplace.
Digital services had a role. HR had a role. Facility management had a role. Operational teams had a role.
Responsibilities overlapped. Service scopes blurred. Decisions required arbitration across functions with different priorities and political sensitivities. What appeared to be a tooling discussion was, in fact, a structural question:
Who decides what?
On which basis?
With what level of evidence?
Without clarity, the risk was predictable:
- Fragmented initiatives
- Escalations between departments
- Premature large-scale transformation without alignment
The administration did not need more tools. It needed structured thinking.
Slowing Down to Move Forward
Rather than jumping into redesign, we started by reframing the problem.
Not:
“How do we deploy Smart Office services?”
But:
“What exactly are Digital Workplace services in this context, and how should they be governed?”
Step 1
Make the Invisible Visible
1. We analyzed usage patterns in shared spaces.
2. We focused on hygiene management and badge services, areas where operational friction was most tangible.
3. Data replaced assumptions.
4. SWOT analyses and value/effort matrices provided a neutral arbitration framework.
5. Discussions that were previously political became structured.
Step 2
Create a Shared Language
1. Through BPMN process modeling (Draw.io), we mapped existing workflows.
2. For the first time, departments could see (visually) how responsibilities intersected.
3. Misalignment became explicit.
4. Gaps became discussable.
5. Overlap became measurable and clarity reduced tension.
Step 3
Stabilize Before Transforming
1. Large governance directives take time. Operations cannot wait.
2. We formalized an interim operating model to secure service continuity while structural decisions were validated.
3. This avoided a classic trap: transforming while uncertainty is still unresolved.
Step 4
Structure the Conversation
Beyond analysis, the real work happened in rooms.
1. Stakeholder interviews.
2. Multi-level working sessions.
3. Steering committees.
Our role was not to impose answers, it was to design decision moments. We provided structured materials tailored to each governance level:
- Operational clarity for teams
- Trade-off visibility for committees
- Strategic framing for leadership
Alignment was built deliberately, not assumed.
What Changed
The most important outcome was not a new tool or a new org chart. It was clarity.
In a politically sensitive public environment, that clarity was decisive. Decisions became fact-based, responsibilities became visible, and transformation became intentional rather than reactive.
The Real Lesson
Digital Workplace initiatives often start with infrastructure. They succeed, or fail, on governance.
In complex public organizations, transformation is rarely blocked by technology. It is blocked by unclear decision rights and fragmented responsibility.
This project reinforced a core Ivy Partners conviction:
Sustainable transformation begins when complexity is structured, trade-offs are visible, and governance is made explicit.
Technology follows. Clarity leads.