by Joan Cook
Interesting article in HBR—an interview by Diane Coutu with J. Richard Hackman, a professor of social and organizational psychology at Harvard and a “leading expert on teams.” The title is somewhat misleading; turns out teams DO work, as long as they adhere to a set of 5 conditions Dr. Hackman’s research revealed, most of which anyone who’s ever been on a team will recognize from experience:
1. Teams must be real – people have to know who’s on the team and who isn’t.
2. Teams need a compelling direction – members need to know, and agree on, what it is they’re doing together.
3. Teams need enabling structures – the right tasks, members, norms.
4. Teams need a supportive organization – they can’t be effective or successful if the organizational context (reward system, HR system, info systems) is organized around individuals rather than teams.
5. Teams need expert coaching – as a group, in team processes.
In the teambuilding work we do we make sure that team members:
1. Participate in assessments and exercises designed to foster team trust.
2. Develop, and then periodically revisit, team norms, particularly around those behaviors that drive people crazy or tend to derail the team process.
3. Have a formal process for integrating new team members.
4. Have one or more overarching business goals that will not only bring the team together but drive business-critical projects, processes or strategy forward.
5. Have the skills they need to give and receive feedback so they can hold one another accountable, handle conflict and run effective meetings.
6. Have a deep understanding of the difference between task and process, and what team roles are required for each.
And absolutely, teams need coaching on team process!
Here’s a key question: the work we do with teams takes place in the classroom, working on the fundamentals of becoming a functioning team. Having participated in numerous experiential teambuilding activities over the years myself (ropes courses, games, etc.), I appreciate the strong sense of camaraderie that develops over the course of the experience. It would seem that a combination of the two: classroom and experiential—would be ideal. If all a group of people ever experience in coming together as a team is a ropes course or a game, where/how do they learn the skills for the long haul? Similarly, I wonder if classroom team training should be enhanced by or integrated with experiential exercises that drive home the learning and anchor the feeling of what it means to be a team. And then, how do you convince a client to invest in the latter approach?
Please let us know your thoughts.
Comments