Blog - Horizons Unlimited

Team Development Part 2: The Puzzle - What if the piece doesn't fit?

Sun, 29 Jan 2012 00:00:00 -1100

For a word with only three letters FIT is a very big concept. From our first jigsaw puzzle we learned that to create a perfect whole we needed to find the right piece for each spot. No amount of pushing and shoving could make a piece fit where it didn’t belong. The same is true of a well functioning team, and yet so often we see teams where poor fit goes undetected, tolerated or bullied to fit through submission.

Teams are complex organisms – all those individual pieces that must collectively create an outcome. Organisations engage in team development work in search of alignment between the self, the team and the organisation, to form that perfect puzzle that is the high performance team. Ironically the very process of team development can glaringly expose the pieces that don’t fit. Which is why leaders must brace themselves to confront and contend with issues of fit if they want team development work to go beyond a talk fest and a group hug.

Effective team development work always begins with establishing awareness of the self and the team. At Horizons Unlimited we use individual profiling and one-on-one interviews to tease out each individual’s understanding of themselves, their position within the team and their alignment with the vision, mission, values and strategy of the organisation. We then play back an overview in our first group meeting and start to build team awareness.

It is at this stage that those submerged issues of fit can no longer be overlooked. As the team works to put the puzzle together, the pieces that don’t fit are going to stand out. This is painful for everyone. Individuals feel threatened; the team feels discomfited; the leader is often unsure how to address the growing disquiet. As the process continues the pressure will mount and it will be apparent to all that change is essential.

Leaders who take their team into development work must be prepared for the discomfort and must be ready to act. Recognise when poor fit is hindering the team, understand the issues that are shaping the problem and deal with it. Failure to respond quickly enough on problems of fit is the number one leadership regret we encounter. The paradox is that not acting merely prolongs and escalates the pain, while dealing with it is painful at the time, everyone is relieved, once the fit issue is resolved.

Generally there are three things at work when a person fails to fit in their role. Role-specific technical skills may not be up to the expectations of the team. Weak interpersonal skills may be hindering communication. Non-alignment with the vision and purpose of the team may prevent the individual from feeling inspired by their role.

When deciding how to act consider the root cause of the misfit and then consider three possible courses of action:

Structural Change: Change the way the pieces fit together
A change in the team structure, placing individuals in roles better suited to individual abilities and motivations, may alleviate the problem.

Individual Coaching: Reshape the piece to fit the puzzle better
If the issues relate to interpersonal skills or alignment, individual coaching may be effective in improving communication and changing beliefs.

Exit the Team: Take the piece out of the puzzle
Often an exit from the team is self-selected as the team development process becomes increasingly uncomfortable for the individual. Where it is not, and where structural change or individual coaching are deemed inappropriate or fail to change things, the leader must be prepared to exit the person from the team.

Team development work sounds like a feel-good process, but in fact issues of fit very often make the work extremely uncomfortable. It is the leader’s role to feel that pain and to act quickly to relieve it.

If you are concerned about issues of fit or seeking to build your team’s alignment and enrolment please call us to discuss the ways we can help you to establish a high performance team.

Why the Australian military should consider Reverse Mentoring

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 -1100

Today most Australian newspapers ran headlines announcing that a naval officer had been found guilty of spanking a junior female officer. This is yet another embarrassing headline in a year that has exposed deep cultural concerns within the Australian Defence Forces. The headlines began in late March 2011 when the “Skype sex scandal” broke. The allegations of a young cadet in the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) led to a media storm, forced leave for the head of the ADFA and the establishment of no less than six inquiries, including a review of the treatment of women at the academy and a “cultural stocktake” of social media use within the academy.

The first of these reports was published in October and not surprisingly its 31 recommendations call for sweeping cultural change: the type of change that requires strong and committed leadership. But more than that, it calls for leadership with a deep and genuine understanding of gender and generational issues.

Herein lie the questions that may plague the success of proposed cultural changes in the military. How can a 50-something, male, senior-ranking army officer ever really understand the problems encountered by young women entering a male dominated armed forces? How can a busy commander, raised in another time, ever genuinely grasp or control the social media environment in his command?

The answers may lie in a little known type of mentoring; know as “reverse mentoring”, which sees junior and middle management acting as mentors to senior executives. It’s an idea that may be difficult for the hierarchical armed forces to accept, but it’s one that is proving successful with a number of leading corporations.

Take the case of Procter and Gamble, who wanted to reverse a growing turnover amongst women in junior and middle management posts. A typical response would have been for senior executives (predominantly male) to adopt more junior protégés and nurture their progress. Astutely the company recognised that this approach would only reinforce a potentially patriarchal culture that may be at the heart of the problem. Instead they implemented the “Mentoring Up” program that matched senior male managers with junior female mentors, who were tasked with providing informal, non-threatening feedback on issues specific to women. In other words, their job was to help management to understand diversity issues at a human level. The program enabled women to develop quality relationships with senior executives, to become more visible within the organisation, and to be heard: not surprisingly retention rates amongst women increased.

Consider also companies such as General Electric, Ogilvy & Mather and Cisco Systems, all of which have implemented reverse mentoring programs with the specific objective of bringing senior management up to speed with new technologies. In these cases young mentors are teaching their older and more senior mentees the secrets of Facebook, Twitter and the latest Smartphone Apps. These companies have discovered that the advantages flow both ways. Senior management can tap into the latest technological trends in a safe environment, while more junior staff members gain access to top brass and a sense of purpose and belonging that leads to improved morale and retention.

These corporations have recognised two important facts: Genuine understanding is critical to cultural and generational change and understanding cannot be gained from behind the doors of the corner office or the badges of senior rank. “Reverse mentoring” forces leaders into a world of challenging dialogue with those further down the ladder.

Reports and policy statements are an important first step for the Australian military, but the next step must be to ensure a deep and genuine understanding of gender and generational issues by Defence Force leaders. Reverse mentoring is no doubt a terrifying idea for an institution so firmly rooted in hierarchy, but it is potentially its best hope for the meaningful cultural change needed to prevent further embarrassing headlines.

For more on Reverse Mentoring and tips on how to establish a program refer to “Reverse Mentoring” or call us to discuss in more specific terms how reverse mentoring could benefit your organisation.

Team Development Part 1: The Matrix

Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:00:00 -1100

Team Development
Part One: THE MATRIX

Team development models, systems and workshops are gaining increasing popularity in our organisations, and with good reason, for “the team” is ultimately the organism that delivers the outcomes desired by the organisation’s key stakeholders. Yet too often we embark on team development programs without first appreciating and respecting the incredible complexity of the system we refer to as “team”.

Every team operates within a complex and multifaceted network of relationships and expectations. The speed and scope of technology, the sheer scale of human activity, and the belief that we will continue to achieve ever more with depleting resources creates an intricate backdrop for all human activity. Within this global network, we operate in multiple personal networks: community, family, work, religion, friendships and so on. Each system shapes our beliefs and skills, each morphs and evolves with time, each creates tension with the others, setting up conflicting expectations and convictions. Even within the organisation itself individuals will operate within multiple networks: functional groups, divisional silos, social networks, leadership teams. It is worth remembering that the team you have decided to “develop” is just one small part of this complex system in which each of its members operates.

To further complicate the equation, at the same time as we are adapting to multiple networks, we are also trying to self actualize: to establish our sense of individuality and purpose. We continue to play within the team for our own complex set of reasons. To understand the team one must recognize the individuality of each of its members and their unique drivers. Frank comes to work for social status, Mary needs the income to keep her kids in private school, Angela seeks a sense of belonging. A simplistic view perhaps, but it is important to remember that we do not all play on ‘the team’ for the same reasons or with the same expectations.

Do you remember the movie The Matrix? In the film we discovered that human reality was a dream and that, without realizing it, humans were all part of a complex energy system fueling machines. With the exception of a brave few, most people operated within their own reality, completely unaware that the ‘Matrix’ even existed. Unfortunately the same can often be said of ‘the team’. Given the intricate and unique web within which our individual beliefs and aspirations are formed it is hardly surprising that tensions exist within communities, organisations and teams. Yet most people are unable or unwilling to step back from their individual perspective and attempt to understand the broader matrix, to see the strands and filaments that are woven into other team members.

In the movie the hero takes a little red pill and is suddenly able to learn the truth of The Matrix. Sadly, no red pill is available for our organisations’ leaders. However, before embarking on a team development program it is recommended that leaders study the matrix: consider the influence of global forces, community and organizational demands on your team; take account of the individual perspectives and objectives that you and each member brings to the team; appreciate and respect the complexity of this being we call ‘the team’.

Posted by Graham Richardson