The Right Way to Do Teamwork

In this May’s issue of HBR, there is an article called Why Teams Don’t Work, which sort of caught me by surprise with the negativity. Because I know a good amount of teams that DO work. But as I read through, I realized I’ve been part of more failed teams than I originally thought.

Two brains are better than one. Unless the two brains can’t communicate. Says the article, “research consistently shows that teams underperform, despite all the extra resources they have. That’s because problems with coordination and motivation typically chip away at the benefits of collaboration.”

5 Basic Conditions of Effective Teams (from Leading Teams)

1. TEAMS MUST BE REAL – Know who is on the team and who is not
2. TEAMS NEED A COMPELLING DIRECTION – Leader must provide direction and inspire members to agree on the mission
3. TEAMS NEED ENABLING STRUCTURES – Well-designed tasks, productive norms, the right members
4. TEAMS NEED A SUPPORTIVE CONTEXT – Reward system, HR policies, and IT tools must facilitate, not inhibit collaboration
5. TEAMS NEED EXPERT COACHING – A focus on individual performance is not enough to improve team performance

I think the simplest (yet most difficult) thing to do from the list above to ensure greatest impact is to have the right people on the team and make it clear who’s in and who’s not. Just because people will feel left out is not a good enough reason to include them on the team if you want results.

Another quote to think about…

How good are companies at providing a supportive context for teams?
Perversely, the organizations with the best human resource departments often do things that are completely at odds with good team behavior. That’s because HR departments tend to put in place systems that are really good at guiding, directing, and correcting individual behavior. Take a personnel system that has been honed by industrial psychologists to identify the skills of a particular job and test individual employees on those skills. In such a system, the HR department will set up training to develop the “right” people in the “right” way. The problem is this is all about the individual.

The entire time I was reading the article I couldn’t help but interchange the word “team” with “company.” In fact, the book I’ve been reading has similar principles, applied to organizations:

1. LEVEL 5 LEADERSHIP – Magic combo of personal humility and professional will
2. FIRST WHO, THEN WHAT – People are not your most important asset, the right people are
3. CONFRONT THE BRUTAL FACTS – Be realistic about your situation, yet optimistic about your future
4. THE HEDGEHOG CONCEPT – The intersection of your passion, your talent, your economy
5. A CULTURE OF DISCIPLINE – Rigor and structure that enables entrepreneurial spirit and creativity (aka, manage the system not the people)
6. TECHNOLOGY – Accelerates (rather than creates) success

Who, What, How…. People, Thought, Action…. Leadership, Strategy, Process - how many times can this be repackaged?