CP: A few years ago the name Viernulvier came into place and the name wasn’t the only new development. You also became famous for your internal organisational practice. Could you elaborate on that? 
 
FD: In 2013 Vooruit celebrated its 100th anniversary. The whole team developed an amazing programme on top of the regular workload. But they also got a budget cut of 1 million Euros. This combination became the perfect recipe for an internal organisational disaster. There were fundamental internal fights about the management of the institution, also related to the question how to deal with the budget cut. There were people who ran into a burnout because of too much work that they had to do. This crisis changed everything. They said: “Listen, it’s not working anymore that there is a board of directors with only five people who decide what we all have to do. We are clever enough, we are motivated enough to set up a different model of organisation.” That’s how it started.

CP: So the crisis was the initiating moment for developing change by asking, challenging, doubting the own processes of working. But you also have to have a certain knowledge to do that, no? Where did this come from?

FD: It was learning by doing. Most of the knowledge came from the heads of the people working here. I don’t think that someone from outside the organisation can bring in so much knowledge. The employees themselves know how to solve situations when they are confronted with decisions made on tables where they themselves are not seated.

FD: We regularly look at the design of the model and ask ourselves what doesn’t work. Are there problems we are facing that we don’t have an answer for? For example, what if we have to decide something immediately? Who is doing that? We developed a procedure and rules about how we are making decisions with the goal that the responsibility is not always on the same table.

CP: So there’s not only one table where one director sits alone, but rather many tables with changing places? 

FD: Yes, there are a lot of tables and that is great. So many people are used to work on their own table with their own specialists. In many organisations this separation is often the start of a conflict because people tend to think that their own team is doing a great job and it’s always the fault of the others. Because you don’t know them well and you don’t know what they are doing. What we try to do is to minimise the activity around one table with all the same experts.

CP: From my point of view you use two main languages for this. One is the visual language of the organigram that displays in a transparent way how you organise yourself internally. The other thing is a specific vocabulary. I learned that you speak about functions on the one side and roles on the other side. Could you please describe why this is important? 

FD: And the third thing is mandate. The function is really the job that you are doing, you are specialized in, your position so to say.

CP: Like general coordinator for you or artistic coordinator for Kristof. 

FD: Exactly. But it’s a role that Kristof plays in a team. We need him for his knowledge, but he also has to come to a decision together with people from other teams. And this understanding of a role applies to everybody. In the next meeting somebody else can be the leader. The role is not fixed to your function. 

CP: It’s in flux.

FD: Yes. And the third thing is mandate, of course. I can give you a role, but if you don’t have the mandate to decide, it’s a big problem. Because then you have the responsibility without the mandate to change. And if you want to bring people to a burnout, that’s a very good recipe.

KB: You have the freedom to take on different roles. This is the great thing. For example, if I would be interested in the question how the kitchen works, I could play a role in that. My feeling is, being quite new here, that this organisation is carried on so many shoulders. A lot of people feel responsible for things outside their domain.

CP: By carrying the weight on many shoulders, you found a way, through your model, to make the everyday work much easier. 

FD: Definitely, yes. You can’t carry everything alone. And it’s also beautiful to see people growing through this because they take care of other responsibilities or share it. You’re not only a good bartender and that’s why you are a bartender. Maybe you also have very inspirational thoughts on how we could develop on sustainability. 

CP: And how do you bring this into the decision-making of the teams? 

KB: There’s the freedom to access the agendas of all the teams. 

CP: So the doors are open for this and it happens. 

FD: Yes, and we know each other. 90 people is not that much. 

CP: 90 is a manageable number. You know everyone. How would it be with 300 or 500?

KB: Our model fits to the scale and the mission of our organisation. And it stands in the tradition of this house. That’s why it works. This model has grown into this building and its organisation.

FD: And we have a very practical knowledge of that, but no theoretical. 

CP: Oh, really? I thought you were very much into organisational design. 

FD: Not at all! We regularly have people here from universities who study this a great deal and ask me about theories. Sorry, I don’t know. I haven’t read 100 books about it. It’s the way it works here. Nothing more than that. 

KB: It’s a very good example of a bottom-up model that has grown organically. This is also the reason why we are coordinators and not directors. It’s the opposite of top down.

FD: For me, it’s most important to listen to the youngsters. We actively engage employees who are under 30 and we hear that they formulate completely other needs and expectations from their employer. We learn from them instead of blaming the Gen Z for anything. We installed a young panel, which is a group of 17 people under 30. The topics they put on the table are really disruptive for the way that we are doing things at the moment. And that’s great. But we ask them not only to put the problems on the table, but also to imagine a good future for this organisation together with us. 

CP: I wish you that all the crises stay in the past and all the beautiful and good energy lies ahead of you in the future. Thank you very much.