Picking teams 101: Stop the March into Madness

360 views

Published on

What does how we pick teams in our bracket have to say about how we pick teams at work? Take a look at this micro-case study related to March Madness and the madness of poor performing teams, the number one challenge as identified by business leaders.

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
360
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • How we work matters
  • Picking teams 101: Stop the March into Madness

    1. 1. Picking Teams 101: Stop the March into Madness P. Quake Pletcher 24 March 20133/25/2013 1
    2. 2. The Challenge: Picking Teams The first choice many leaders make is choosing the team. But the favorite choice by many is picking teams in the NCAA’s March Madness. What can our pastime tell us about our professional activity?3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 2
    3. 3. Team Selection Picking Tourney Teams Picking Work TeamsWho? Office Pool Diverse, Dispersed WorkforceWhat? Pick Game Winning Pick Teams that Win TeamsHow? Under Pressure / Time CrunchWhen? March Hourly, Daily, Weekly,Why? Glory/ The Pot Share or Stakeholder Value3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 3
    4. 4. Picking Teams: A Comparative Case StudyDaughter (7 years old)Business Method Madness Percent UsedFamiliar, Sentimental Where grandma lives (Arizona), home 49%Favorites of Disney World (Florida)No seedings available in Little Miss Chalk, by the higher seeding 23%work world. (Numerous)Old Diversity of Jenny’s, The buzz of the name (WSU Shockers) 17%Tyrone’s, Lin’s andMichael’sOther Guesswork 11%3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 4
    5. 5. Picking Teams: A Comparative Case StudyDaddy (Gen Xer)Business Method Madness Percent UsedLook at the Resume Recall history/tradition… (Kansas, 52% Louisville)Association with the Affinity for the Group (Every Big Ten 27%Favored Group or Indiana based team)Love, Bromance, office Alma mater, Hometown love 8%crush (Hoosiers, Butler)Other Expert Judgment 13%3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 5
    6. 6. Overall Performance Daughter DaddyRound of 64 18 of 32 21 of 32Round of 32 10 of 16 6 of 16First Weekend Results 58% 56%First Weekend Results 63%Sample Group Mean3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 6
    7. 7. Success By Method Daughter DaddyFavorites 74% Resume 60%Seedings 64% Association 27%Names 38% Love 75%Guess 20% Expert Judgment 33%3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 7
    8. 8. How do you pick teams? Love Guess Favorites Association Seedings Virtual teams fail to meet expectations up to 70% of the time! Judgment Resume Name diversity3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 8
    9. 9. What Works: Smart SystemsPicking Tourney Teams• NCAA Seeding system correct 71% of the time• Nate Silverman’s data-based approach significantly more successful than average Joe’sPicking Work Teams• Collaborative Workforce seeding systems non- existent• PeeqMe brings a smart system to picking teams3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 9
    10. 10. Join PeeqMe at peeqMes beta sign-PeeqMe’s up pageSmart AppSuccessful, Diverse Teams• Promote Innovation, Avoid Storms‘Read the Room’ with Groupviews of assessedstrengths, style.Social Recognition/Collaboration• Better Team, No SilosTeammates ‘catch each otherdoing good,’ use talent smarterEngage Gen Y• Open, Connected, Me-focusedMobile app, networked andindividualizedSignup at www.peeqme.me3/25/2013 Confidential Information of Quake LLC 10

    ×