Myths That Hamper Team Performance

Writes Johan ...

For many top-level executives today, there is a set of strongly held beliefs about the importance and potential value of teams at senior and top levels of companies.

• 'Teamwork will lead to team performance'

This myth argues for more attention to the "4-C's" of effective teamwork i.e. communication - cooperation - collaboration - compromise. The reality is that teamwork is not the same thing as team performance. Teamwork is broad-based cooperation and supportive behaviours. A team is a tightly focused and disciplined performance unit.

By concentrating all it's attention on teamwork, the team is less likely to be discriminating about when and where it needs to apply the discipline required to achieve real team performance. Members of the group may improve their ability to communicate and support one another, but they will not obtain team performance without applying the needed discipline and skill.

• 'Members need to spend more time together'

This myth assumes that time spent together will lead to to team performance. The reality is that being a team member in the corporate world is in fact a Part-Time role. Time is of the essence and there is much less time for available this type of engagement.

Each member of a team has a primary job to perform in the organisation that will keep them occupied for most of the time.

• 'Building consensus will promote team performance'

Senior people have very little time to spare, and the idea of spending more time struggling to build consensus simply makes no sense to them. In fact, many decisions are better made individually than collectively at that level.

In addition, this myth suggests that building consensus is synonymous with reducing conflict - and that less conflict somehow leads to more team like behaviours. Conflict is inevitable and is part and parcel of the high performance process.

• 'Team competence will ensure team performance'

This myth assumes that competent people will naturally team-up and produce results on a sustainable basis. The truth is that a deliberate infrastructure and process are required to facilitate and drive the collective efforts of team members.

In addition, to make it sustainable. infrastructure and process will have to accommodate member changes which happens unpredictably and all the time today.

Simplify, Simplify - Part of my life philosophy

"Keeping It Simple"

Yes, I whole-heartedly agree.
As it is, teams are inherently complex and can get so easily entangled with their own issues. Especially when performance is sliding downwards.
Part of "keeping it simple" is to have some kind of mental model of how to make it work well.
If not, chances are pretty good that you could end up chasing your own tail.
It's seems to be no different in life. What is your model for living a successful life ?

The model I use with teams relate to only 2 dynamics i.e. 'Information' & 'Inspiration'.
They relate to the the world of "form" and the world of "spirit" in a team.
When a team is "in-form" it always performs best, the same with you and I.

A team is constantly "in- formation" i.e. nothing will ever stay the same, everything will change all of the time ! I would like to put it to you it's the same with us as people. Best we accept that reality and learn how to thrive on change. It is 'learnable' and exciting.

Becoming aware of and understanding the effects of the information we generate in that what we do helps us to manage it in a way that will give us what we want. It's all about who we are, our identity, how we define ourselves - no different with teams.

The other part of the model is the world of "spirit". The word "inspiration" comes from "insight" and "spirit". The path of the spirit is in our relationships. It is our spirit that gives "life" to us, no different in a team. When we are "inpsired" we do great things and accomplish 'miracles'.
Keeping the spirit 'alive and well' means simply we need to manage our relationships.
When the spirit goes, we die, it's the make or break stuff in any relationship and a team.

Relationships do not develop by chance, we have to "work at it" all the time. Keeping it simple is part of the the secret.
A team is a relationship institution and it applies there as well !

simplify, Simplify, SIMPLIFY ..1 ..2 ..3

Trevor writes:

From this post - MAD 7. It Only Takes 'HALF-A-DOZEN' Things! (extract below) - I am reminded that it is all to easy to fall into the trap of adding unnecessary complexity to ideas, projects, strategies, et al, that should be as simple as ...1 ..2 ..3

Too many people look to make the simple things in life too complex to understand.

Yes, most often it takes only a few things... 1, 2, or 3 things... just a 'half-a-dozen' things to ensure success in most projects.

I am resolving to simplify every idea, project, strategy I have into a 'simple as ..1 ..2 ..3' graphic presentation.

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 - 705-2790 - www.innercircleforum.com
trevor@innercircleforum.com

Articles On TEAMWORK

Trevor writes:

Just identifying some articles for interest:

1. When Different Work Cultures Come Together on a Team

2. Keeping your team working together well

3. Ants 'Hate Each Other' But Work Together

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 - 705-2790 - www.innercircleforum.com
trevor@innercircleforum.com

The Paradox Of Teams

'If you keep on doing what you're doing, but expect different results' is an act of insanity. Or put another way, 'if you keep on doing what you're doing, you'll end up having more of what you got'.

The same can be said about many team initiatives and processes. No wonder many companies shoot themselves in the foot, unwittingly, when it comes to teams. The problem resides within the minds of management and as a result in the operational environments they create.

Teams, effective teamwork and high team performance do not just happen - either by declaration, drift or default. Without some intentional development effort, the centrifugal force of individual interests and the lack of skill in how to effectively "team-up" will certainly guarantee that a team will never mature to perform.

The probability of a high performance team developing naturally is as unlikely as a good marriage developing naturally.

The hierarchical power structures, cultures and politics that goes on in companies are the problematic landscapes and challenges. The answers lie in a complete mind-set shift that will pioneer a totally different way of understanding and managing teams.

A team is essentially a volunteer organisation yet being managed from an autocractic point of reference. It is not going to work. Unless the point of reference is changed.

That will bring about an open process that is allowed to self-organise, sustain itself and grow in alignment with company strategy. In these self-organising systems, change is the organising force not an external problematic intrusion !

Highly Skilled & Innovative People

Writes Johan:

These types of individuals are for the most part not natural team players.

In fact, the idea of team is often perceived as “another day at the sheep dip” type of exercise and not attractive at all. However, they are part of the corporate audience and cannot be excluded.

Is it possible to get them involved voluntarily is the question?

The answer is yes, with effective leadership. That’s part of management’s responsibility not the IOSS 2 system.

The IOSS creates conditions for self-organisation i.e. allowing them to do it their way in alignment with corporate strategy

It enables and empowers people to be in charge of how they work and what they want to achieve.

They generate their own relevant operational information, measure their own progress, have unrestricted access and communication with each other in their own time and can showcase to the company their competence and how they add value.

In addition, individual participation, teamwork and team performance are usually incentivised by successful companies. That caters for “what’s in it for me”.

The Challenge of Team Management

Teams are made up of a bunch of individuals. The higher the skill and innovative capability the individuals have the harder they are to manage as a team. How does the IOSS2 system solve this problem?