Dear Friend,
One of the projects I am working on right now is a US/UK modeling effort
across the businesses of a major pharmaceutical company.
We are accomplishing great things in a relatively short amount of time.
Part of the reason for that success is that the team leaders understand
the value of team dynamics, of getting team members to accept some useful
mental models, some agreed-upon ground rules, some norms of behavior.
Over several days time, Fred Racey (racey@appstate.campus.mci.net)
taught us some core concepts that have really made a difference, for all
of us on the project.
With Fred's permission, I'm going to share some of this material with
you in this issue of The Coad Letter.
Team-Development Cycle
Every team goes through a development cycle:
-
Forming (superficial relationships)
-
Storming (some barking, not biting)
-
Norming (now it feels like we're getting some work done)
-
Performing (it's amazing how much we've accomplished recently)
These steps are a sequence. You cannot get to norming or performing without
some storming first (those who think otherwise are only kidding themselves,
don't realize just how much more effective they could be).
You will drop back to an earlier stage every once in a while (perfectly
normal).
Knowing that storming is part of the process means that when the team
hears some barking, team members realize, "oh good, we're storming now."
All in all, a very useful mental model.
Norms
As a team, we discussed, agreed to, and then applied certain norms. Explicit
norms helped us interact with each other, providing some basic ground rules
on what we all agreed would help us be more effective, more productive.
-
Have fun!
-
Honor time limits.
-
One speaks; all listen. Listen to understand.
-
Everyone participates; no one dominates.
-
It's okay to disagree.
-
Anyone can call a timeout.
-
Reaching _consensus_ means that you are okay with a decision.
It does not mean that you like it.
It does mean that you agree not to talk down about it or quit
over it.
We keep this list in our meeting rooms, as a constant reminder of
the norms we've agreed to. And team members explicitly use these norms,
day by day, helping the group make adjustments along the way.
Now all of this might seem commonsense. Yet please note: we discussed
and agreed to these norms. Fred asked each of us to agree -- and made sure
we had consensus.
Surprisingly, explicitly agreeing to such norms really does help. In
meetings, people think twice before starting up a side conversation (one
speaks; all listen). If one person dominates a discussion, others remind
him to give others a turn (everyone participates; no one dominates). Generally
speaking, we start on time and exert an effort to do so (honor time limits).
Plus/Deltas
This is process improvement, packaged in a very practical way. At the end
of each day, whoever is playing the "facilitator" role writes this on a
piece of flip-chart paper:
Plus |
Delta
---------------------------
|
|
|
On the "plus" side: things we did that worked out well. People often
mention big things (we prepped our domain experts and it paid off) and
little things (the coffee arrived on time) that you're happy about, that
you'd like to do again, next time.
On the "minus" side: nothing! there is no "minus" side; there is no
room for griping about things that did not go well. Instead,...
On the "delta" side: things we can do to get better results, to make
our next time together even more effective.
Record the pluses and delta, review them at the start of the next working
session, and continually improve what you are doing along the way.
Working Session Roles and Responsibilities
We worked out several roles and responsibilities for our working sessions:
facilitator, group member, team leader.
Facilitator (we respectfully refer to this as the "Fred" role ;-)
-
Remain neutral.
-
Get and enforce agreements.
-
Help group focus.
-
Protect ideas from attack.
-
Insure opportunity to participate.
-
Write main ideas.
Identifying an explicit facilitator at nearly every working session really
helped us move along and make progress.
Group member
-
Focus on task.
-
Listen to understand.
-
Contribute ideas.
-
State concerns openly.
Leader
-
Suggest desired outcomes.
-
Make decisions as needed.
Straight Talk
These are some ground rules for saying what you mean and meaning what you
say.
Once everyone in the team agrees to use "straight talk" for communicating,
then these ground rules give team members a way to say, "we've agreed to
use straight talk so let's do so" and work out whatever is bothering them,
whatever the issue is that they need to address.
-
Now
rather than past or future
-
Personal rather
than impersonal
-
Specific rather
than general
-
I
rather than we, you, they, people, some, many
-
Feedback rather
than advice
-
Barking
rather than biting (causing harm)
-
Desired Result rather than intent
Hey, these are the kind of rules my spouse and I adopted long ago,
only we call them "fighting fair" rules (now, specific, bark don't bite,
don't assume evil intent). Try it; it works! ;-)
Sincerely,
Peter Coad
PS. Fred Racey is a class act. He works with teams as a task facilitator
(helps get a specific job accomplished) and as a developmental facilitator
(coaches, observes, gives feedback so team members and teams develop people
skills that will help them succeed together).
I _highly_ recommend his services. You can reach him at racey@appstate.campus.mci.net.
PPS. With special thanks to my friends and colleagues at a major pharmaceutical
company (you know who you are ;-)
