Team vs groups

3,775 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Education
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,775
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
24
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
189
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Team vs groups

  1. 1. Teams Vs Groups Wm. ( Chip) Valutis, PhD
  2. 2. Working Group• No significant incremental performance need oropportunity that requires it to become a team• Interact primarily to share information, best practices and/orperspectives• Make decisions to help eachindividual perform within his or herarea of responsibility• No realistic or desired commonpurpose, goals or joint efforts that callfor a team
  3. 3. Pseudo-team• Could be a significant, incremental performance needor opportunity, but it has not focused on collectiveperformance and is not really trying to achieve it• No interest in shaping a common purpose or set ofperformance goals, even though it may call itself a team
  4. 4. Pseudo-team (cont’d)• Weakest of all groups in terms of performance impact.• Tend to contribute less that any other type becausetheir interaction detract from each member’sindividual performance without delivering any jointbenefit • The sum of the whole is less than the potential of the individual parts
  5. 5. Potential Teams• There is a significant incremental performance need and it is really trying to improve its performance impact• Need more clarity about purpose, goals or work products, and more discipline in forming a common working approach• Not yet established collective accountability• Very common—teams make sense so many are attempted.• The journey between potential team and real team is quite steep
  6. 6. Real TeamSmall number of people with complementary skillswho are equally committed to a common purpose,goals and working approach for which they holdthemselves mutually accountable
  7. 7. High-Performance Team• Meets all the conditions of real teams, AND has members who are deeply committed to one another’s personal growth and success. This commitment usually transcends the team• Significantly out-performs all other like teams and out- performs all reasonable expectations, given its membership
  8. 8. 1. Small enough in numberA) Can you convene easily and frequently?B) Can you communicate with all members easily and frequently?C) Are your discussions open and interactive for all members?D) Does each member understand the others’ roles and skills?E) Do you need more people to achieve your ends?F) Are sub-teams possible or necessary?
  9. 9. 2. Adequate levels of complementary skills• Are all three categories of skills either actually or potentially represented across the membership : • Functional/Technical? • Problem-Solving/Decision-Making? • Intentionally?B) Does each member have the potential in all three categories to advance his or her skills to the level required by the team’s purpose and goals?
  10. 10. 2. Adequate levels of complementary skills (cont’d)C) Are any skill areas that are critical to team performance missing or under-represented?D) Are the members willing to spend the time to help themselves and others learn and develop skills?E) Can you introduce new or supplemental skills as needed?
  11. 11. 3. Truly meaningful purposeA) Does it constitute a broader, deeper aspiration than just near-term goals?B) Is it a team purpose as opposed to a broader organizational purpose or just one individual’s purpose (e.g., the leader’s)?C) Do all members understand and articulate the same way? And do they do so without relying on ambiguous abstractions?
  12. 12. 3. Truly meaningful purpose (cont’d)D) Do members define it vigorously in discussions with outsiders and frequently refer to it and explore its implications?E) Does it contain themes that are particularly meaningful and memorable?F) Do members feel it is important, if not exciting?
  13. 13. 4. Specific goal or goalsA) Are they team goals vs. broader organizational goals or just one individual’s goals (e.g., the leader’s)?B) Are they clear, simple, and measurable? If not measurable, can their achievement be determined?C) Are they realistic as well as ambitious? Do they allow small wins along the way?
  14. 14. 4. Specific goal or goals (cont’d)D) Do they call for a concrete set of team work-products?E) Is their relative importance and priority clear to all members?F) Do all members agree with the goals, their relative importance, and the way in which their achievement will be measured?G) Do all members articulate the goals in the same way?
  15. 15. 5. Clear working approach A) Is the approach concrete, clear, and really understood and agreed to by everybody? Will it result in achievement of the objectives? B) Will it capitalize on and enhance the skills of all members? Is it consistent with other demands on the members? C) Does it require all members to contribute equivalent amounts of real work?
  16. 16. 5. Clear working approach (cont’d)D) Does it provide for open interaction, fact-based problem solving, and results-based evaluation?E) Do all members articulate the approach in the same way?F) Are fresh input and perspectives systematically sought and added?
  17. 17. 6. Sense of mutual accountabilityA) Are you individually and jointly accountable for the team’s purpose, goals, approach and work-products?B) Can you and do you measure progress against specific goals?C) Do all members feel responsible for all measures?D) Are the members clear on what they are individually and jointly responsible for?E) Is there a sense that “only the team can fail”?
  18. 18. Work Group or Team: Which does “strategy” mandate?• Competitive advantage grows out of the entire system of activities. The fit among activities substantially reduces cost or increases differentiation.• It can be misleading to explain success by specifying individual strengths, core competencies or critical resources. The list of strengths cuts across many functions, and on strength blends into others.• The success of a strategy depends on doing many things well – not just a few – and integrating among them. If there is not fit among activities, there is no distinctive strategy and little sustainability.
  19. 19. Objectives of the TeamDevelopment Module • Raise awareness as to the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead • Build buy-in and commitment for the team and its development • Identify and prioritize developmental imperatives for the SST • Set the stage for the team and individual development component of the SST • Outline the first developmental initiatives to pursue
  20. 20. VALUTIS CONSULTING IS A FULL SERVICEMANAGEMENT CONSULTANT FIRM. OUR APPROACHIS TO INVESTIGATE AND UNDERSTANDORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES, CUSTOMIZE REALISTICSOLUTIONS AND DESIGN PRACTICAL STRATEGIES TOMOVE CLIENTS TOWARD THEIR SPECIFIC BUSINESSAND PERSONAL GOALS. OUR MISSION IS TO HELPOUR CLIENTS UNLOCK THE POTENTIAL OF THEIRORGANIZATION AND ITS PEOPLE.PLEASE FEEL TOCONTACT US WITH ANY QUESTIONS OR TOSCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT TO DISCUSS YOURORGANIZATION’S NEEDS AND HOW WE CAN HELP. CHIP@VALUTISCONSULTING.COM

×