Building and Shepherding Effective Teams

Building and Shepherding Effective Teams Aaron Friedman, M.D. Rubin-Bentson Chair of Pediatrics University of Minnesota University of Minnesota Amplat...
1 downloads 0 Views 440KB Size
Building and Shepherding Effective Teams Aaron Friedman, M.D. Rubin-Bentson Chair of Pediatrics University of Minnesota University of Minnesota Amplatz Children’s Hospital

October 2010

1

Disclosure • Neither I nor any member of my immediate family has a financial relationship or interest with any proprietary entity producing health care goods or services related to the content of this CME activity. • My content will not include any discussion or reference of any commercial products or services. • I do not intend to discuss an unapproved or investigative use of commercial products or devices.

October 2010

2

A team is…. a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. The Wisdom of Teams Katzenbach and Smith, 1993

October 2010

3

When to use a team… • Need for experience, ability, perspective of others • Need for flexibility of smaller group • Work cannot be done by one person • Working together more effective than working alone • Group accountability in larger organization October 2010

4

Advantages of Teams • • • • • •

Involves more people Distributes workload Capitalizes on varied skill sets/intellect Broadens perspective Provides opportunities for development Accomplishes more output

October 2010

5

Disadvantages of Teams • • • • •

More difficult to structure Takes time to develop Can be high maintenance Can be inefficient at times Balance of individual vs. group

October 2010

6

Why do teams perform well? • • • •

Complementary skills Flexibility and responsiveness Unique social dimension More fun

October 2010

7

Why do some resist teams? • • • •

Not convinced Negative experiences Discomfort Climate wrong

October 2010

8

Becoming a Team Groups become teams through DISCIPLINED ACTION. They • • • • •

SHAPE a common purpose AGREE on performance goals DEFINE a common working approach DEVELOP high levels of complementary skills, and HOLD themselves ACCOUNTABLE for results

-Katzenbach and Smith

October 2010

9

Why performance goals? • • • • • •

Define team’s work product Facilitate communication/constructive conflict Maintain focus Level playing field Permit small wins Invite commitment

October 2010

10

Team Leaders • Keep purpose/goals/approach relevant and meaningful • Build commitment and confidence • Promote collaboration • Strengthen others • Do real work

October 2010

11

Effective Team “Leaders” • • • • • •

Are characterized by attitude and belief Develop new skills Don’t make all the decisions Don’t know all the answers Can’t succeed without others Aren’t the primary determinant

October 2010

12

Symptoms of a Sick Team • • • • • • • •

Loss of energy/enthusiasm Sense of helplessness Lack of purpose/identity Lack of candor Agenda trumps outcome Cynicism and mistrust Personal attacks Finger pointing at management

October 2010

13

Diagnosing a Sick Team • • • • • •

Weak sense of direction Lack of performance goals Insufficient or unequal commitment Critical skills gaps Leadership problems External confusion, hostility, indifference

October 2010

14

What are the Five Dysfunctions? • Absence of trust (Fear of being vulnerable) – Great teams admit their mistakes, their weaknesses, and their concerns without fear of reprisal

• Fear of conflict (Artificial harmony may exist) – Great teams engage in open, constructive, ideological conflict

• Lack of commitment (Lack of clarity and focus) – Great teams commit to a plan or decision

• Avoidance of accountability (Compromised behaviors and performance)

– Great teams commit to a plan or decision

• Inattention to results (Individual goals trump collective success) – Great teams focus on results instead of individual recognition

October 2010

15

Treating a Sick Team • • • • •

Revisit the basics Go for small wins Inject new information and approaches Take advantage of facilitators or training Change membership and/or leader

October 2010

16

References 1. Katzenbach JR, Smith DK. The Wisdom of Teams. New York: Harper Collins, 1999 2. Wenger EC, Snyder WM. Communities of practice: the organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review. Jan-Feb 2000; 139 3. Taylor D. Creativity that lasts. Spirituality & Health. Spring 2000; 36 October 2010

17

Tool Kit 1.

Defining a Project • Backwards Imaging • Is/Is Not 2. Defining a Team • Team Selection • Responsibility Charting • Operating Agreements 3. Assessing Function • Team Audit

October 2010

18

Backwards Imaging 1. Imagine a point in the future when the project has been very successful. 2. Find words to describe what you would see, hear, fell as you observe key constituents functioning in the new, changed state. 3. Collate, debate, reach consensus, “test” on others & modify. October 2010

19

Tool: Is/Is Not Tool: Is/Is Not Exercise- This tool helps a team clarify, in more detail, the boundaries of the initiative.

IS

IS NOT

• • •

• • •

Uses:

Timing:

Often projects, because they are not well defined, are too large in scope. This tool helps a team think through the scope of the project by more clearly defining what it is and what it is not. This is used during the definition phase of a project. It can also be used later when the team is stuck on the definition of the project and needs to be refreshed on it boundaries.

October 2010

20

Tool: Team Competency /Influence Tool: Team Competency – A useful tool to help the team determine if they have the right team members relative to the competencies necessary to execute the initiative. Competency/Influence

Team Member

High

Uses:

Medium

Low

This exercise is particularly useful for two situations: (1) when initially forming the team, it can help the sponsor and/or team leader determine who should be on the team; (2) if the team is already in place and they may be struggling due to lack of ability to do certain facets of the initiative, this tool can be used to determine if adjustments in team members are

Timing:

warranted. Before starting the initiative and/or anytime during the initiative when the team seems to be struggling due to lack of competency. This often occurs when a new phase of the initiative begins.

October 2010

21

Responsibility Charting Tool: A systematic and participative technique to: • Identify work steps (activities, tasks & decisions) that have to be accomplished for effective operations • Clarify roles and individual levels of participation in relation to each of these work steps • Develop best methods for individuals to fill these roles

The Type, or Degree, of Participation Can Be Defined in Four Roles Responsible “Doer”

• Individual(s) who perform an activity – responsible for product

Accountable “Buck Stops Here”



The individual who is ultimately accountable includes yes/no and power of purse

Consulted “In the Loop”



The individual (s) to be consulted prior to a final decision or action is taken. 2-way communication

Informed “FYI”



The individual(s) who needs to be informed after a decision or action is taken. One- way communication

October 2010

22

Operating Agreements Tips: 1. 2. 3.

There is no precise way to set norms for a group. The key is to recognize that it happens naturally and works even better if the process is one in which everyone can contribute. Norms for a meeting would be called “ground rules “ and are usually agreed upon as part of the orientation process. Norms for a whole organization usually reflect the “values”

Steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Describe the value of a group having general agreements on preferred or “normal” behavior. Generate a list of possible norms on a chart Discuss each item for clarification. Ask what that norm would look like in the team’s work. Norms must be understood to be useful. Have individuals or small groups rank the norms in order of importance Consolidate the results and decide which of the norms should be posted Return to the norms for review to make sure they are the most critical ones

October 2010

23