Ms. Nakamura's Redesign

In practice

Her assessment finds all three needs frustrated by structure. Autonomy is suppressed: five levels of approval where comparable offices use two, job descriptions written as rigid procedures, and an activity-tracking system that logs work in fifteen-minute increments and is used only to punish. Relatedness is undermined: each unit in its own wing, one small break room for the whole office, a cost-allocation system that charges units for helping each other, and recognition only for individuals. Competence is neglected: a training budget cut deeply over five years, stretch assignments handed out by seniority, an annual rating with no feedback conversation, and three days of procedural orientation for new staff. Her response is a structural redesign around the three needs, not a motivational campaign. For autonomy, she cuts approval levels to two, rewrites job descriptions around outcomes, and replaces activity tracking with quarterly outcome reports. For relatedness, she builds a shared collaboration space, removes the cross-unit charges, holds cross-functional forums, and adds team recognition. For competence, she restores the training budget, matches stretch assignments to growth goals, adds real feedback conversations and development plans, and pairs mentors across units.