5. Teams develop in stages. It is good for participants to be aware of these stages because they normalize the experience of growing and developing into a high performance team. The stages are as follows:
Stage A - This is the birth of the group and there is typically some excitement and anticipation about the potential and possibility of the group.
Stage B - This is when reality sets in about how group life can be demanding and hard work. It is no longer fun and there is finger pointing between employees. Mutual accountability by most is seen as an empty concept and team members look at who to blame. This is where most teams die and where there is the need for the most support and focus. Commitment needs to be generated to work through the issues. This is also where the employee’s love of the game is needed and counted. For most groups Stage B is where the real work counts and is necessary.
Stage C - Getting behind the game stage. This is when everyone begins to align behind the group performance and what needs to happen in order to allow the group to succeed. Real group performance results are for the first time seen.
Stage D - This is the high performance stage, where the team is really using its group structure to produce some remarkable results.
For help transitioning to Stage D, click here.
Showing posts with label work team. Show all posts
Showing posts with label work team. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The Fourth Truth About Teams
For help picking the right team for your project click here.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
The First Truth about Teams
1. The essence of good work team performance is not good communication or good relationships but a focus on performance and an agreed upon appreciation of what this means.
Typically in the work place people relate to each other socially. This means they are concerned with getting along and staying out of each others hair. This is not how team players relate to each other.
Basically, the difference is between how one relates to people at a barbecue and how one relates to the work group who is trying to win a big contract? The nature of the relationships is quite different. The first is based on the social context of let’s all just get along while the latter is based on the context of let’s get something remarkable done and perform together so that specific results occur.
Looking to create a performance oriented culture in your workplace? Click here.
Typically in the work place people relate to each other socially. This means they are concerned with getting along and staying out of each others hair. This is not how team players relate to each other.
Basically, the difference is between how one relates to people at a barbecue and how one relates to the work group who is trying to win a big contract? The nature of the relationships is quite different. The first is based on the social context of let’s all just get along while the latter is based on the context of let’s get something remarkable done and perform together so that specific results occur.
Looking to create a performance oriented culture in your workplace? Click here.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Teams: the 2nd Cornerstone of Performance Oriented Cultures
Have High Performance Work Teams throughout your company. Teams are powerful constructs, and high-performance ones do not spring up by magic. By the same token, business teams are not the answer for every performance issue.
In corporations, while the talk is about teams and working together, there is actually a focus on individual performance. For the most part, there is no formal practice designed to enhance or improve group performance.
High-performance teams are “a small number of people with complementary skills who are equally committed to a common purpose, goals, and a working approach in which they hold themselves mutually accountable.” This definition of real teams comes from the article “The Wisdom of Teams”, by Katzenbach and Smith. Real teams are basic units of performance, and members of the team are mutually accountable for the results. This is quite different from how most of the work world is organized.
When a group takes on mutual accountability for customers’ experiences, it can generate real customer-focused actions. From this, tangible and positive business results will occur. At my favorite restaurant, for example, the waiter greets me with my preferred glass of wine, letting me know that Chuck, the chef, has a special dish waiting for my beloved wife, Leslie. Then the bus boy appears and pours Leslie’s water without ice because that is the way she likes it. Everyone is clearly into giving us a personalized, pleasant experience, and we have not even ordered yet.
I have found that having a team design its structure allows the team to develop and perform more quickly. This is because in doing so, the team has to confront the performance issues it will encounter. The process allows for those issues to come to the fore sooner than later, which speeds up the overall process. Once this process is complete, it is important that the team honors and walks the talk that it designed.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
CMI’s ABC process
So many aspects of business are uncontrollable – the stock market, consumer demand, new competition – so what can businesses do to minimize their risks? One way to gain control is to build a work team that you can count on who perform. CMI’s ABC Process is designed to give your company both a people and a performance edge. Let me preface this by saying that I do not endorse management’s system of ranking employees. What I do endorse is only having outstanding employees.
Here are some suggestions for managers from CMI’s ABC process:
Here are some suggestions for managers from CMI’s ABC process:
- Educate your managers: Help them understand the definitions of A, B, and C players by reading some of the following:
- The ABC’s chapter from Front Line Heroes: Battling the Business Tsunami While Developing Performance Oriented Cultures by Bruce Hodes
- “A New Game Plan for C Players” by Beth Axelrod, Helen Handfield-Jones, and Ed Michaels
- Jointly gauge employee performance: Specifically, managers should jointly assess employee performance. Only those who interact directly with the employee should state their opinions. This allows the employee’s manager to get candid feedback. Avoid the grey - no plus and no minuses – managers must make a choice.
- Take action:
- Ditch the D & F’s: D & F employees will drag your company down. If you have more than a few D and F employees, sell the firm and do something to save yourself.
- Decide what to do with your C players: give them a new role, develop them in their current role, or let them go.
- Distinguish between A vs. B: The difference between A and B players is their ability to be promoted. B players are great and loyal employees. They are valuable and skilled at what they do. A employees have the drive and the focus to take all the great aspect that B employees have and bring them to the next level.
- Follow up: check on the status of the manager’s decision and actions
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
