In a Nutshell
Some work teams develop
to a stage where they're cohesive and achieve impressive synergies of the
team members' efforts and capabilities. The process of building such
teams requires members to get to know each other and negotiate roles and
norms. The negotiation process can involve frustrating interpersonal
conflict. On the other hand, some teams don't have enough conflict
because they don't engage in a healthy debate of their ideas, and they
do a poor job of decision making as a consequence. To promote synergies,
managers need to guide teams through the sometimes-difficult stages of
team development.
Developing a high performing
team will be quite a challenge for the University of Kansas' new men's
basketball coach, Bill Self. In addition to a having a new coach,
Kansas will have to fill the void left by the graduation of the senior
leaders, Nick Collison and Kirk Hinrich (in white on the left and right,
respectively, in the photo above), of the past season's team. The
basketball team will have to dramatically reorganize and develop quickly
if it's to realize its full potential. (REUTERS photo by Peter Jones;
e-mailed to me from Yahoo! News, news.yahoo.com)
In This Issue
Developing a High
Performing Team at Kansas
Top basketball coaches can
make the challenge of team development look easy, but it's actually quite
complicated. Coaches have to decide which plays their team has enough
talent to execute, and they have to teach their players to work together
to execute those plays. For instance, the bigger players must learn
when to expect the smaller players to shoot (so that they can get into
position for rebounding) and when to expect a pass. In addition,
all players must learn when and how to help each other while playing defense.
When basketball season starts next fall, Coach Bill Self will have to do
a lot to develop effective coordination among the players on his team at
the University of Kansas. Although the Kansas team that just finished
the 2002-2003 season was excellent, most of the key players will be in
new roles and Coach Self will be new to the team. He was announced
as the Head Basketball Coach of the University of Kansas' men's basketball
team yesterday. He has his work cut out for him.
Nevertheless, many of us
expect Bill Self to be successful at the University of Kansas. In
his first season (2000-2001) as Head Coach at the University of Illinois,
he took the team to the final eight of the post season championship tournament.
Demystifying
Synergies
Achieving synergies is the
primary reason why business organizations use teams. In the absence
of synergies, team members might be more effective if their team was disbanded
so that they could work independently.
Are you having trouble visualizing
team synergies? A textbook definition doesn't always help: "A process
gain that occurs when members of a group acting together are able to produce
more or better output than would have been produced by the combined efforts
of each person acting alone."1 What makes it worse is
that corporations have recently used "achieving synergies" as a euphemism
for laying people off after a merger. Synergies come from the coordination
of efforts and the positive effect that teamwork can have on members' motivation.
Coordination.
This scenario illustrates what I mean by synergies: Imagine that you manage
a small furniture store, and you have two employees who make your deliveries.
When you sell a sofa, one of the first things a delivery driver has to
do is take it out of storage and place it on a truck. Because a sofa
is so big and heavy, a delivery driver can't really lift and carry the
whole thing at once. He or she can only lift one end at a time, pivot
that end around, and then go to the opposite end and do the same.
Working alone, it might take 60 second and lots of lifts to move a sofa
25 feet. By extension, it would take 60 seconds for two delivery
drivers who work independently
to move two sofas 25 feet. However, two delivery drivers working
together
can carry one sofa 25 feet in about 10 second. Working together is
simply what I mean by coordination; (a) they each take responsibility for
one end of the sofa, (b) they agree to lift at the same time, and (c) they
agree on where and when they will put it down. By coordinating their
efforts they can move two sofas in 20 seconds, and in 60 seconds they can
move six sofas. Their greater efficiency and productivity is an example
of synergies.
Analogous synergies can
be achieved in intellectual work. In one month, a cross-functional
team with members from marketing, R&D, manufacturing and finance can
collaborate to develop new product strategies that are more useful and
feasible than the new product strategies that any one of them could ever
produce when working independently. The members have diverse areas
of expertise, and by coordinating their efforts they can create and implement
excellent plans.
Motivation.
In addition to coordination, team members' motivation can lead to synergies.
The sofa-lifting example above demonstrates synergies achieved through
coordination. Employees' motivation can also be increased through
teamwork. As the June
20 LeaderLetter points out, variables such as cohesiveness,
norms and roles can boost team members' motivation. People often
work extra hard so that they won't disappoint their fellow team members.
Unfortunately, teamwork
can also undermine motivation because it can obscure the value of the efforts
of individual members. When members don't see a connection of their
efforts to the team's overall performance, there's less satisfaction associated
with the hard work. And of course, there are the free-riders who
intentionally let the other team members do all the work. Finally,
when team members spend a lot of their time disagreeing as to who should
take which responsibilities and how the group's work should be performed,
synergies are less likely to emerge. Thus, teams are formed to achieve
synergies, and many teams do so through coordination and motivation, but
not all teams are able to get members to coordinate their efforts or maintain
a high level of motivation. Improving coordination and motivation
is the challenge for team development initiatives.
Leading
Teams Through the Stages of Team Development
The dominant model of team
development comes from the research of Bruce Tuckman. His model may
be more "dominant" than accurate though. Many of us have been taught
Tuckman's model, and it does has intuitive appeal. But, I'm sure
some of you have had team experiences that don't really fit his model.
(Connie Gersick also has a model of the phases of group development that
seems to fit project teams much better than Tuckman's does.) Nevertheless,
Tuckman's model is a convenient framework for organizing a discussion of
team development.
Forming.
When teams are formed, members' initial reactions are typically apprehensive
and guarded. Unless members are already familiar with one another,
they can't be sure how the other team members will react to them.
It often takes awhile to figure out whether they have similar interests,
priorities, problem solving styles, work ethics, etc. The process
of becoming familiar with and trusting each other can be slow. Members
might also be uncertain about what they're supposed to accomplish and how
they will proceed.
Leaders can help teams progress
through this "forming" stage by encouraging ice-breaker discussions and
discussing the task to be accomplished. As the LeaderLetters
from August 29 and August 22 explain, constructive
communication and effective
listening can help members feel accepted and can promote open communication.
Storming.
Before roles and norms are defined, there is often conflict over who will
perform which roles and what norms should emerge. Roles are a set
of expectations for an individual who has a particular position (formally
or informally) in a group. Norms are a set of behaviors that are
expected of all members. Accepting roles and complying with norms
involves some sacrifice of autonomy. People naturally resist that
sacrifice. Consequently, teams can experience tension and conflict
before they settle on roles and norms.
Leaders can help teams progress
through this "storming" stage by mediating conflict and encouraging collaborative
problem solving (see the January
7, January
12 and February
15 LeaderLetters). Leaders should be suspicious of teams
that seem to never have conflict. Sometimes disagreements aren't
voiced, and some members acquiesce to avoid conflict. There are problems
with that superficial type of agreement. First, everyone's ideas
and concerns are important and should be tactfully presented and considered.
Members who don't raise their concerns simply aren't giving the team all
that they have to offer. Second, conflicts that aren't addressed
initially can get worse and lead to a blow-up later. Leaders need
to ensure that they're getting everyone's insights and listening to their
concerns even if that involves disagreements and tension. After all,
addressing and resolving conflicts can actually build trust and closeness
in teams.
Norming.
Most teams survive the storming stage and begin to settle into their roles
and norms. This is not to say that their roles and norms will necessarily
promote a high level of performance. For instance, a norm of giving
minimal effort to perform tasks is clearly a norm, but one that doesn't
contribute to top-flight performance. To achieve the highest levels
of performance, teams need to develop a sense of identity and cohesiveness.
As the March
19 LeaderLetter indicates, there are several things that leaders
can do to promote cohesiveness:
In Summary ...
The process of building
high performing teams requires members to get to know each other and negotiate
roles and norms. Team members must learn to coordinate their efforts
in a way that uses the individuals' strengths and works around their weaknesses.
The best teams develop strong bonds; that is, they become cohesive.
But cohesiveness should not be achieved at the cost of healthy debate,
because everyone on a team should feel free to raise concerns and voice
opinions in a constructive manner.
Notes
1 From George, J. M. & Jones, G. R. (2002). Understanding
and managing organizational behavior, (3rd ed). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson, p. 370.
Sources
Carey, J. (2003, April).
Self set to replace Williams at Kansas. USA Today, dated April
21 on Yahoo! News (news.yahoo.com), accessed on April 22.
George, J. M. & Jones,
G. R. (2002). Understanding and managing organizational
behavior, (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Stewart, G. L., Manz, C.
C., & Sims, H. P. (1999). Team work and group dynamics.
New York: Wiley.
About
the Newsletter and Subscriptions
LeaderLetter is written
by Dr. Scott Williams, Department of Management, Raj
Soin College of Business, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio.
It is a supplement to my MBA 751 - Managing People in Organizations class.
It is intended to reinforce the course concepts and maintain communication
among my former MBA 751 students, but anyone is welcome to subscribe.
In addition, subscribers are welcome to forward this newsletter to anyone
who they believe would have an interest in it. To subscribe,
simply send an e-mail message to me requesting subscription. Of course,
subscriptions to the newsletter are free. To unsubscribe,
e-mail a reply indicating that you would like to unsubscribe.
E-mail Your Comments
Whether you are one of my
former students or not, I invite you to share any insights or concerns
you have regarding the topic of this newsletter or any other topic relating
to management skills. Please e-mail
them to me. Our interactions have been invaluable. Every
week, I learn something new from LeaderLetter subscribers!
Let's keep the conversation going.
MURPHY'S LAWS ON WORK