[/caption]
“Build for your team a feeling of oneness, of dependence on one another and of strength to be derived by unity.” – Vince Lombardi
Over the course of the last twenty years I’ve been part of and put together dozens of teams. Over the last few years I’ve been putting together teams more often. I’ve found that it is important to recognize that teams evolve. They take on an identity. They have a culture. At the beginning of a project they are a collection of individuals, at the end of a project the team is far more than the sum of its people – in ways that are difficult to predict. At its essence, teams are organic entities which are grown as opposed to assembled or built.
Why do some teams succeed where other fail, sometimes dramatically so? While there are is no magic answer, there are several things I have learned along the way which increase the chance of a team being successful. None of what is mentioned below is revolutionary, but a few common best practices. The challenge is be able to execute against these best practices in environments which have many constraints and organizational dynamics which impede these practices from being put into effect.
Environment and structure. Success begins with setting the proper environment to be successful. There are many aspects to this, and will be different for every team. At its most basic, it involves a clear understanding of what success looks like to each of the stakeholders, understand the work that needs to be accomplished, and how it fits together. It may be necessary to drive awareness and commitment to higher levels of the company in the form of steering committees and/or advisory boards both for approval and “air cover”. This will be necessary as over the course of the team’s existence numerous threats to the teams time and commitment will occur and prioritization will have to take place. To be successful, the prioritization decisions have to move in the direction of the team instead of activities external to the team. Having said this, I’m not a big believer of structure for the sake of defining formal hierarchical reporting relationships. Structure, should be established for the purpose of communications to various stakeholder groups.
Find the right mix of players. It is a rare case when I have been able to hand pick my team. This is often the area where the greatest number of constraints occur. In the ideal world, I would be able to hand pick a team from not only my company, but also my client’s company and external third party expertise where required. We however, do not live in the ideal. Typically a negotiation is required where fewer resources are available than needed, of those I am able to secure there will be a blend of A, B, C players, and they all won’t be able to start when needed. Such is the nature of teams and projects. I’ve always tried to ensure that the highest risk areas on the projects are assigned to “A-players,” but don’t feel that a full team of A players is effective. A-players have typically been very successful in their past and have well earned egos. If everyone is a lead, there is no one to support them – and no TEAM.
Allow team to form in own way. Back to the organic nature of teams, a team is living entity. The changes within a team which take place between the beginning and the end of the project is in some ways amazing. It is important that these changes take place on a course of their own. Forcing this will be counter-productive. By allowing a group to establish its norms, culture, leaders and followers, methods of operating, and methods of interacting with others, it will establish its own identity and culture. The only constraint I typically place on a team is to ensure that they know what has to be accomplished in what time frame. How the team meets this contraint is up to them.
Enable teams and maintain accountability. Successful teams understand they are accountable for their deliverables. This goes far beyond the activities the team must perform (which is a common perception today). By enabling the team to make decisions in order to be successful, and holding them accountable for both their decisions and their success, a positive feedback loop is established which accelerates project progress and provides team ownership. It is this ownership that will drive the success of the project.
Pave the road and clear obstacles. Teams need to be focused on the day to day work. They also need to work on a track which is free from potholes. Potholes are inevitable – small ones which are irritations, and large ones which could potentially detail all efforts. All projects have potholes. It’s important that someone is living in the future and preventing the the teams from hitting the potholes. Usually this is a project manager, but not always.
As mentioned earlier, none of this is revolutionary. The reality of putting together successful teams is that it is far more of an art than a science. Every project is unique. The needs are different. The risks are different. The personnel available to work on the project are different. The environmental factors are different. The pressures are different. The art of building a successful team takes all of these factors into account.
Looking Forward.
Teams and team dynamics are changing. As larger and larger numbers of boomers leave the workforce and are replaced with the net generation, the overall concept of team and how to accomplish work is changing. Coupled with this is a new set of technologies which accelerate collaboration and communication. The net generation is not only fluent with these type of technologies, but expect them to be part of their work practices. The hierarchical checks and balances which are so comfortable to the established workforce are foreign and seen as a level of overhead that get in the way for much of the net generation. The new generation will look to a person’s Google, LinkedIn and Facebook profile for each person they are working with, as well as every new hire in the organization. Accountability is different with the net generation than with their more aged colleagues.
I can certainly see that in ten years the process of putting together teams will be radically different than it was in the prior ten years. The interesting time is in between these points in time when we are meshing cultures to achieve common goals.
I’m curious as to your thoughts and observations in this area.
Pingback: How to Organize For Success | Directionally Correct