Group of iron filings shaped by a magnet under a piece of glass

Conditions for High-Performing Teams, Part 1

Group of iron filings shaped by a magnet under a piece of glass
Team performance is an emergent quality you cannot directly control. In the same way that a magnet’s magnetic field shapes iron filings, the conditions a team operates within shape team performance.

Team performance is an emergent phenomenon. You can’t control it, and attempting to adjust it directly will likely have perverse effects and unintended consequences. As with any complex system, your best option for influencing it is by managing constraints. Instead of thinking about “What do I do to create high-performing teams?” shift to considering, “How do I foster the conditions in which teams are more likely to become high performing?”

Continue Reading→

A chart of team performance assembled out of wooden blocks

What is a High-Performing Team?

A chart of team performance assembled out of wooden blocks“Oh, my teams are definitely high-performing.” I’ve heard this from countless managers in numerous organizations. Sometimes I wondered where they were keeping all the low-performing teams. Understandably, managers responsible for developing teams want to be seen as doing a good job. Isn’t the promise of high performance the reason we form teams? Without a clear definition of what “high performance” means, it’s easy to defend describing many teams with that term. And if a team is already high-performing, they don’t need to get better, right?

Continue Reading→

Three sailboats racing in a sailing regatta

Not All “Teams” are Real Teams

Three sailboats racing in a sailing regatta
On a team, members are all in the same boat together. Individual success is inseparable from team success.

Few words in the corporate world are abused and misused more than “team.” All the people who report to the same manager? They must be a team – even though their work doesn’t require them to collaborate. All the people working on a product? They must be a team – even though they all have different objectives and incentives. Most “teams” are collections of people that someone has drawn a somewhat arbitrary line around and said, “You’re a team.” Calling something a team doesn’t make it one. Teams have three essential qualities that set them apart from other collections of people.

Continue Reading→

Arrows pointing in different direction change to the point in the same direction

Getting Aligned Through Shared Understanding

“We want to know how aligned people are around the new product development strategy. How can we do that?”

Arrows pointing in different direction change to the point in the same directionA group of senior leaders at a software company asked me this question as I was helping them to prepare for their annual kickoff meeting. They’d just completed a challenging year of development on a new product initiative. While it had generated some impressive results, they recognized that they needed to approach the following year differently. They were bringing the core team of twenty-five or so key contributors – usually distributed across the United States – together for several days to roll out their plans for the new year. They’d brought me in to help plan and facilitate the event. I knew what I needed to do: help them create a shared understanding of the new strategy.

Continue Reading→

Four of inkblots inspired by the Rorschach Test

Clarifying Impacts

 

Four of inkblots inspired by the Rorschach Test
Vaguely described impacts are like the inkblots of a Rorshach Test – people project all kinds of things onto them.

We often describe the impacts of decisions, challenges, and plans in desirable yet vague terms. Projects will “improve communication,” “make us more customer-centric,” or “increase innovation.” This vague language obscures the importance and urgency of these actions. Why they matter here-and-now isn’t clear, so they don’t motivate people and don’t help people make decisions. Perhaps worst of all, vague language hides a lack of alignment by making us think we agree. Avoid these drawbacks by clarifying the impacts you want.

Continue Reading→

Global Listening When Remote

Many people are working from home at this point and this will obviously continue for a while. Many organizations had already been working remote. I’ve worked on a number of remote teams and with a number of remote organizations well before the current situation we are in. I’ve done remote work as a coach, trainer, product manager, and team member well before the current situation we are in.  Each of those instances I found myself enjoying some aspects of the work and also wishing for aspects to be in person. One of the most challenging things to do remotely is to listen.

Continue Reading→

Agile Leadership Myth #3: Leaders & Managers will figure out what their agile role is magically

We have done a huge disservice to leaders and managers, as well as teams.  There are plenty of people that will say we don’t need managers and leaders. People can lead themselves. While there is an aspect of this that may be true, there are a lot of steps to get close to that idea.

This article will explore what leaders and managers need to do to succeed as they get started with agile or to help teams move from individuals to a team or even a high-performance team. It builds on Agile Leadership Myth #2: Self-Organizing Teams Don’t Need Any Help.

Continue Reading→

Agile Leadership Myth #2: Self-Organizing Teams Don’t Need Help.

Self-organizing teams do need help. Self-organizing teams are not instant, automatic, or magically created, despite what is often implied. There is a process to become this type of team, and it is rarely, if ever, a straight line.  The help they need differs from more traditional directive assignments and task management.

To unravel this myth, we must look at what self-organizing means, what teams and managers experience, and what you can do to shift your help to a more ROI-friendly approach!

Continue Reading→

Agile Leadership Myth #1: Telling people “You Are Empowered” Actually Works

A major challenge we run into when helping organizations shift or improve is leadership misconceptions. Agile leadership myths cause a lot of these misconceptions. We need to help avoid falling into the trap of these common myths because they limit our success. A root cause of many of the myths is that people simply don’t know what else to do. For example, Myth #1: ‘telling people “you are empowered” actually works.’  Leaders often don’t know what else to do, other than tell teams they are empowered. We see this with Development Teams, Scrum Teams, Delivery Teams, AND Leadership Teams.

A bit of background — there are many agile leadership myths out there. These myths (or assumptions) limit leaders ability to improve, help others, and succeed. Many myths seem to occur at a nonconscious level, meaning they function like many biases. People are not even aware, consciously, that they are happening.

Continue Reading→

Scientific Management does not work

Limit Engagement, Limit Success – Scientific Management Problems

We require environments where people can provide input and ideas. If we limit engagement, we limit success. We still have organizations that either believe or act like they believe some types of workers are “stupid.” This idea dates back to the ideas surrounding Scientific Management, Fredrick Taylor, and Henry Ford. The concept of the stupid or unskilled worker that I mentioned was common in the early 20th century. In various writings about agile and agile ideas, we often refer to or see references to avoiding Scientific Management, Classic Scientific Management, or Taylorism. These management ideas limit engagement from people, which is going to limit success.

Understanding the past can be quite helpful to see where you might be able to improve today. 

Continue Reading→