Tl;dr
Project Overview
This case study explores the Teaming for Success initiative at EY, which focused on improving how employees onboard into new teams and projects. A recurring theme identified across the organisation was that employees struggled with the lack of a structured, meaningful process when joining a new engagement or forming a new team.
To address this, EY had previously developed twelve teaming artefacts, aligned to the firm’s three core pillars: Better Me, Better Us, and Better World. These artefacts were intended to guide teams during project initiation; however, adoption across teams was low.
The Teaming for Success project aimed to increase adoption of these artefacts by redesigning them from a user‑centred perspective and embedding them more naturally into real project workflows.
The Challenge
Although the twelve artefacts were well‑intentioned, they existed primarily as static, bullet‑point guidelines. Teams reported that they were difficult to interpret, time‑consuming to use, and hard to apply in the fast‑moving, ambiguous early stages of a project.
The challenge was to:
Redesign EY’s teaming artefacts to be more intuitive, relevant, and usable—so that teams would actually adopt them when forming and starting new projects.
Research & Discovery
Research was conducted to understand why adoption of the artefacts was low. This included:
- Surveys distributed to EY employees
- User testing with three teams of four participants each
Key insights revealed that teams were not using the artefacts due to:
- Limited time during project initiation
- The dynamic and unpredictable nature of early‑stage teaming
- Unclear relevance of each artefact to real project work
- Overly abstract language that felt disconnected from lived experience
Reframing the Artefacts
Following research, each of the twelve artefacts was deconstructed and redefined in simple, user‑centred terms. Rather than focusing on what the artefact was “supposed” to do, the team reframed each one around:
- What problem it helps a team solve
- What understanding or outcome it aims to achieve
- When and why it should be used in practice
This reframing made it possible to realign the content of each artefact to its true purpose.
Redesign & Content Development
Once the purpose of each artefact was clarified, the content was redesigned to better support usability and adoption. Improvements included:
- More accessible, human‑centred language
- Contextual examples drawn from real team scenarios
- Conversation prompts to encourage discussion
- Clear, step‑by‑step guidance on how to use each artefact
The intent was to make the artefacts feel less like policy documents and more like practical tools teams could pick up and use immediately.
Pilot & Testing
The redesigned artefacts were piloted with a newly formed project team. Testing took place through three facilitated workshops, each aligned to one of EY’s pillars and covering three to four artefacts per session. Each workshop was followed by a retrospective discussion.
Feedback from the pilot was overwhelmingly positive. Participants noted that:
- The artefacts were “worth the effort” for building a connected engagement team
- The tools helped teams articulate how they wanted to work together
One participant noted:
“Using these tools is worth the effort to develop a more connected engagement team.”
Challenges identified during testing included:
- Inconsistent attendance across workshops
- The need for clearer guidance on how other teams could adopt the artefacts independently
Another participant summarised the value as:
“The main thing you’ll get out of it is knowing how your team wants to operate.”
Outcomes & Recommendations
Insights from the pilot workshops led to several key recommendations:
- Provide clearer guidance on how artefacts should be used in real engagements
- Continue refining and testing artefacts across different team types
- Encourage teams to dedicate intentional time to using the tools
These recommendations were consolidated into a brief project plan outlining next steps for further rollout and refinement.
Reflection & Learnings
This project reinforced several key learnings:
- Products must fit seamlessly into existing workflows; heavy policies or rigid guidelines significantly reduce adoption.
- Low adoption is often a symptom of top‑down solution design, where organisational goals override user needs.
- Incorporating lived experience into product explanations dramatically improves clarity and relevance.
- “Speaking the user’s language” may require collaborative sense‑making before design begins.
The project also highlighted the flexibility of the design thinking process. At a macro level, the work represented an iteration phase on existing artefacts. At a micro level, each artefact went through its own full design cycle—research, reframing, prototyping, testing, and iteration—before being presented to senior leaders as a refined solution.
BP Portfolio 