Previous | Next |
Some individuals take forever to move beyond resistance in team
building. They will do what ever it takes to ward off changes when the
only reality is change. Not only do they practice the art of self-sabotage
bit they assist in the sabotage of others on their team. Fear and denial
feed their resistance to team building.
Collaboration also does not come easily to the spirit of most team
members. There may be a lack of conviction that teams work better.
Resistance to teams may be viewed as too time consuming, requiring many
meetings and generate many complaints. Teams may even threaten the personal style of many long term
professionals who value individual responsibility. They may fear
submitting their fate or exposing their flaws to team performance or
scrutiny.
A concern for internal politics or external public relations can
discourage the conditions in which teams can achieve and flourish. An
environment that undermines mutual staff member/employer trust and
openness upon which the teams depend and thrive will reduce the team
building concept to little more than management rhetoric.
Organizations buy all the latest equipment and technology for
bringing change to their environments. This change process is the very
tool that will enable them to be competitive in today and tomorrow’s
markets. Consultants and trainers are brought in to execute the
“latest.” Management believes it has done its part. Now it’s the staff
member’s turn to implement the transition. Yes, the tools are there but
it’s the staff members who are the gatekeepers. They become the
gatekeepers of the change. If the staff members don’t buy in, then the
“latest” is sabotaged. The adage, “try it, you might like it,” isn’t always an instant
fit. It takes time, practice and lots of training for change to take place
in any work environment or clinical setting. This is rarely an overnight
process. Often, staff members in an organization feel that if they just hang on
and do nothing that things will just settle down and go back to normal.
This is not dealing with reality! Looking at
Constraints
Constraints
can be considered any barrier that impedes the progress of building a
team. The first may be a perception that there are “brick walls” in
the way with examples being the various health regulations, standards,
state or government guidelines. What is important to staff members is to
examine these closely and decide how relevant these are.
Staff members may also be victims of self-imposed constraints based
on their attitudes, perceptions and prior experiences. These may partly be
based on fact but generally embellished by imagination. In this case some
valid questions to ask may be; which of my assumptions are valid or how
willing am I to experiment or take a risk?
With a move to self-managed teams, many staff members may have
difficulty adjusting to the idea of working without a traditional boss or
supervisor after so many years of dependence. The emphasis on team values
may not only threaten their traditional views of work but also their
approach to life.
There may also be distrust among the ranks. With a history of
management induced fads and poor management of relations, some
organizations have no immediate credibility with first-line employees,
especially unionized employees, to earn the trust needed to implement the
team process. If management sees team development as an expense rather than an
investment and staff members see teams as another attempted shift to co-op
staff members to the views of management, then a shirt to teams will
likely fail. Its not a surprise then that many stories of successful team
efforts have come from threatened organizations where staff members and
management were forced to confront and discard traditional distrust in
favor of teams. For some managers, a shift to teams and to the corresponding flatter
organization reduces their opportunities for advancement in the
traditional organizational hierarchy. Certainly, there are economic
factors, not a movement to teams, that have threatened the career
prospects and aspirations of many managers. Downsizing and delayering will
continue whether teams are used or not. There may also be the constraint of lack of empathy and understanding on
the part of management. The formation of self-managing teams requires the
ability to listen, to change views, to empathize, and to change basic
behavior patterns. Without an adequate investment in the training and the
development of social skills, team development will be retarded. Further, managers who have
been trained in a forceful or threatening way may not readily accept the
conce0t of teams. The change to a team approach results in a variety of
responses to the traditional, hardcharger manager.
Another view may be the inflexible constraints often considered in
any organization. These may include the policies, procedures or practices
affecting everyday operations set by upper management or the organization
itself. Examining these issues may require exploring to see if the various
policies or procedures are still in effect or how much influence will they
really have on staff members involved. Team Problems
The staff members have successfully been put into teams, so why aren’t
they working? There is not usually a simple answer to this question. Teams
are complex and each team is unique, so it is impossible to know what will
work for all teams in all settings. But it is not impossible to
diagnose specific problems they apply strategies to help teams overcome
hurdles and successfully accomplish their goals. Before you decide what to
do you must figure out what’s wrong, not what you think might be wrong,
but what is actually wrong! There are several ways to gather information about the team. The methods
you choose will depend on your role (as team member, manager or
consultant), time and resources available. ·
Observe ·
Interview ·
Survey There are some basic questions you should ask to discover areas of
concern within your team. Open-ended questions like the following that are
listed below will cover a range of topics that will help guide the
diagnostic process. ·
How
does the organization support team work? ·
How
does the manager’s leadership style affect the team’s work? ·
What
does the team see as stumbling blocks to getting the job done? ·
What
interpersonal problems exist on the team? ·
How
is conflict being handled? ·
How
are problems solved? ·
Does
the team have a spirit of trusting and caring? ·
Where
and to whom do team members go for help? ·
Do
they feel free to seek help within their team and from their manager or
supervisor? After you have figured out the issues and concerns, you are in a
position to address them head on. In many situations, the problems can be
addressed by the team for the team. The do-it-yourself approach is good for teams that are far enough along
in their development to talk about problems openly and solve them.
However, some teams may not need a more structured solution that involves
team building by a manager or consultant. Following are some suggested
guidelines for working through team problems. ·
Prevent
problems. ·
Treat
problems as team problems. ·
Choose
the right intervention. A first and important step in helping teams is to accurately diagnose
team problems through observation, interviews, and surveys. Once you know
what is plaguing the team process, you can provide the appropriate help or
resources.
All teams
can have problems at one time or another. These problems can range in
scope and significance. Philip Lancaster has identified potential team
problems listed below: ·
Floundering ·
Dominating
Team Members ·
Reluctant
Team Members ·
Digression ·
Feuds ·
Insufficient
support from corporate management ·
Setbacks
resulting from frequent personnel changes (downsizing, mergers, layoffs) When problems are identified as a result of the symptoms being present, a self- evaluation is indicated. Is the manager playing a role in the conflict or is there a system to reward undesirable behavior? Possibly, there might be certain behaviors or personalities that can lead to conflict. In order for many conflicts to be resolved, some common causes and cures could be explored. Floundering Floundering refers to long delays, lack of progress, or failure to
finish a particular project. Team members often have
trouble starting and finishing a project and may get stuck at different
phases of a project. Consider some of the following common causes of team floundering: ·
Goals
and assignments are not clear. ·
The
team is overwhelmed by the scope of the project. ·
Processes
for planning, making decisions, or solving problems have not been firmly
established. ·
Leadership
is too weak or controlling. ·
The
group does not know what to do next. ·
Some
group members want to maintain status quo. ·
The
team is reluctant to show its results, fearing rejection. ·
The
team is reluctant to disband at the end of a project. Some of the strategies listed can be utilized as cures to get a floundering team moving again. ·
Review
the project goals. ·
Review
the project plan to figure out what to do next. ·
Figure
out what’s needed for the next steps (e.g., data, support, approval or
resources). ·
Take
a critical look at how the project is being run. ·
Identify
unfinished business that needs to be finished. ·
Develop
a procedure plan for the next steps. ·
Clarify
and confirm team member assignments. Dominating Team Members
Dominating team members are those who consume a disproportionate
amount of time. They talk a lot, and their constant talking inhibits
others. Dominators are a problem because they pollute the communication
process and impede progress. When dominators rule, some team members get
discouraged, and others may get very angry.
Some possible causes of dominant team members may include the following: ·
The
dominators may need attention and recognition. ·
The
dominator may be vying for the leadership role. ·
Discussions
of issues may not be structured enough for the dominator. ·
The
leader has not set limits. Some of the following strategies
may be effect in having the person involved play a less dominant role: ·
Structure
discussions and encourage equal participation. ·
Get
the team to establish discussion guidelines. ·
Praise
the dominant person when appropriate. ·
Jump
in and direct the discussion, an example may be “Now let’s here
from…..” Reluctant Team Members Reluctant team members are the opposite of dominant team members, they rarely speak. While there is nothing inherently wrong with the ability to speak often and with a great deal of freedom, the reluctant team member is at, and risk of fading into the background.
Problems can develop if the reluctant team member is never
encouraged to participate. As a result, the team fails to benefit from
this member’s input.
Some possible causes for a reluctant team member could include: ·
Some
reluctant participants are naturally shy and may need time and
encouragement to participate in-group settings. ·
The
reluctant members may feel he performs best when he/she listens. ·
Reluctant
team members may not know the goal or the task at hand. ·
Reluctant
team members may not know or understand of know their roles. Some strategies
or cures for
the reluctant team member may include the following ideas: ·
Structure
discussions and encourage equal participation. ·
Make
sure the reluctant team member knows his or her assignment. ·
Assign
individual reports. ·
Ask
the reluctant team member to give an opinion. You may even want to use
this example, “Ed, what do you think?” Digression Digressions can be the tangents and off-topic paths that the team can travel. Some digression starts as an innocent side comment or anecdote that leads to other comments, and before you know it, the team has spent time talking about something totally unrelated to the task at hand. Some digressions are intentional manipulation of a discussion by team members who are trying to avoid a subject.
Some possible causes
for
digression could include: ·
Team
members may be bored. ·
Team
members are floundering. ·
The
team is spending too much time relaxing and having fun and not dealing
with the problems or issues at hand. ·
There
is no agenda. ·
Discussion
rules have not been established or are not enforced. ·
A
member is trying to avoid a sensitive topic. If digression is a problem with your team or team members, the following
strategies may help: ·
Structured
discussions with a written agenda. ·
Be
sure sensitive or difficult topics are put on the agenda. ·
Direct
the discussion back on track by saying, “We’ve strayed from our topic
or we were talking about…….” ·
Establish
and follow discussion guidelines. Feuding Team Members Some teams are burdened by conflict among its members. Feuding should not be confused with productive disagreement over team issues. Feuding is a personal battle between team members. The danger of feuds is that they can create factions when other team members are dragged into the fight. At the very least, feuds decrease morale, and drain team time and energy. Possible causes
for feuding
could include: ·
The
feud may predate the team (grinding the old axe). ·
The
feud may be based on a power struggle. ·
The
individuals that are involved with the feud may truly dislike each other. Cures and strategies
for some of the feuding individuals may include the following: · Prevent the problem by selecting team members carefully. · Establish and enforce ground rules for managing differences. · Confront the individuals involved in the feud and encourage them to discuss the issue outside the team. ·
Make sure that the individuals involved in the feud get help
(if needed) to neutralize their conflict. Insufficient Support from Corporate Management
Many organizations underestimate the amount of ongoing training and
support needed by teams and their members. These organizations establish
teams without committing the necessary personnel, time, and resources to
help teams succeed. The same organization may take team success for
granted and fail to give them adequate recognition and rewards for their
accomplishments. As a result, teams often flounder and get discouraged or
fail.
Some possible causes of insufficient support may be: ·
The
organization was not well prepared to use teams. ·
The
organization suffers from communication breakdowns. ·
Management
pays lip service to teamwork and continues to manage the old way. They do
not “walk their talk.” ·
Management
is not committed to the ongoing team development. ·
The
organization has not allocated funds for ongoing training and support. ·
The
organization has unrealistic expectations for the teams. Some strategies
for team
members to deal with insufficient support may include: ·
Confront
senior management about system problems that are undermining team success. ·
Appoint
a team representative to represent to make specific presentations and
requests to management (including senior management) about unmet needs. It
is important that this individual be polite, organized and specific about
the issues. · Give feedback to team members. Let management know what it is doing that hinders and helps team progress. ·
Let
management know when and why the team is stuck, especially if it can help
get the team unstuck. ·
Explain
how broken promises impede the work of the team and its progress. Be very
specific. ·
Keep
management informed about the teams progress. Demonstrate how the team is
helping the organization accomplish its goals. ·
Invite
management to visit with the team and open the lines of communication. Setbacks Resulting from Frequent Personnel Changes (downsizing, mergers and layoffs)
During periods of downsizing, mergers, and layoffs, teams are
likely to lose some team members or get a few new ones. During the stages
of team development, it is reasonable to assume that any changes in team
composition will affect how the team operates. This effect may be short
lived and inconsequential, or it may be dramatic and long lasting. Some
well established teams have procedures for handling membership change, but
even with procedures in place, there is no guarantee that the new members
will fit quickly and smoothly.
Some possible causes for frequent changes in an organization could be: ·
Layoffs ·
Mergers ·
Downsizing ·
Change
in top leadership ·
Reorganization ·
Redesign
of organizational structure Possible
cures
for chaos created by
changes: ·
Prepare
the team and give them as much information as possible to assist them in
facing the organizational changes head on. ·
Give
teams time to adjust to new membership, realizing that teams may revert to
early stages for a while. ·
Assign
a mentor or preceptor to help new team members. ·
Establish
procedures for introducing new team members. ·
Identify
other departments, units or organizations that have had success with the
change process so team members can see that there is light at the end of
the tunnel! ·
Establish
procedures for reassigning tasks to fill gaps when members are removed
from teams. ·
Get
help for the team if it needs some specific team building intervention. As
example of a resource in this area could be an educator or clinical
specialist. ·
Confirm
and reclarify team goals and tasks. ·
Identify
some small gains that have influenced the organization in a positive way
from the change process already in place.
|