DAY 1
SUMMARY!
Unleashing the effectiveness and
  efficiency of Groups/Teams!
1. Necessary conditions of an effective group


2. Creativity and Brainstorming


3. Working in cross functional teams and
   Virtual teams
1.   A clear and elevating goal
2.   Results-driven structure
3.   Competent team members
4.   Unified commitment
5.   Collaborative climate
6.   Standards of excellence
7.   External support & recognition
8.   Principled leadership




 Source: Larson & LaFasto, F. (1989). “Teamwork: What must go right/What can go wrong”
The collaborative team member
                (a checklist)1
      Ineffective                                              Effective
   Defensive & closed                                Candid & straightforward
   Non-supportive                                    Supportive
   Passive                                           Takes action
   Negative                                          Positive
   Inexperienced                                     Experienced
   Unproductive                                      Productive



    1   Larson & LaFasto (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/What can go wrong. Sage Publications.
Threats to Performance




              Effort + Motivation

Knowledge +                         Coordination
   Skill
Anatomy of Group Decision Making
            A rational model of group decision-making


                                            Orientation
 Define the problem                       Determine the goal                          Plan the process



                                             Discussion
 Gather information                      Identify alternatives                    Evaluate alternatives



                                       Decision Making
                                        Make group decisions



                                       Implementation
Adhere to the decision                  Evaluate the decision                           Seek feedback




    Source: Forsyth, D. (1990). Group dynamics (2nd edition), p. 286. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Group Decision Making
               BENEFITS
(Compared to Individual Decision-Making)

         Breadth of information
        Diversity of information

         Acceptance of solution

         Legitimacy of process
 Was this a decision that
  called for a rational
  decision making process?
  [Y or N]

 Was your group process
  rational?

 If not, what did you do?
Group Decision Making
                 CHALLENGES
     (Compared to Individual Decision-Making)

p   Increased information processing demands
p   Greater necessity for complex decision rules
     n search for common ground
     n coordination difficulty
p   More complex interpersonal processes
     n range of knowledge, skills, and abilities
     n coalition formation
Hidden Profile Problem


  Superior decision alternative that is hidden
because each member only has a portion of the
   information that supports this alternative
Common Information Effect

 People are more likely to discuss information
  they have in common than unique information

 People trust information more when they have
  personal access to it

 Information that is broadly shared often gets the
  most weight in group judgments
Students to discuss
Information Silo Model



AGENDA                  DISCUSSION             AGENDA

OPINIONS                                      OPINIONS

 FACTS                                          FACTS


Team Member                                   Team Member

               AGENDA           AGENDA

              OPINIONS          OPINIONS

                FACTS            FACTS

              Team Member       Team Member
Hidden Profile Example


       A,B,C   A,B,F,H   A,B,C,D,E   C,D,E   A,B,F,G   A,B,C,D,E   F,G,H    A,B,G,H A,B,C,D,E




                                                               8    Jack

   # of independent pieces of positive information             5    Carol

                                                               5    Bob
Ineffective Strategies for
    Overcoming a Hidden Profile

 Increase amount of discussion
 Increase size of group
 Increase information load
 Accountability
 Pre-discussion polling (ask each group member to
  indicate their decision at outset)
   Confirmation bias
   Skewed interpretation of information
Effective interventions
 Re-direct focus of discussion: Search and consider unique information

 Maintain focus on unique information

 Define goal as a “problem to be solved” not a “judgment to be made”

 Suspend initial judgment – caution members against making a
   decision on their own

 Instruct members to record facts during discussion that justify decision

 Rank rather than choose

 Consider alternatives one at a time

 Heighten awareness of who might possess unique information
 Put structures in place that will allow complete
  use of group’s knowledge and the whole range
  of available expertise

 Find out what each person knows

 Express your true opinions and don’t just
  express what you think others want to hear

 Focus on solving the problem instead of
  pushing your own opinion
Guilford’s 3-factor model of creativity:


 1. Fluency: Quantity of ideas


 2. Flexibility: Diversity of ideas


 3. Originality: Rarity; novelty
Knowledge-Brokering Cycle
   Innovation: not about solitary genius; more about using old ideas as
                       raw materials for new ones

                                       Knowledge Brokering: taking
                                        an idea that is commonplace
                                        in one area and moving it to a
                                        context where it isn't
                                        common at all

                                           1. Capturing good ideas
                                           2. Keeping ideas alive
                                           3. Imagining new uses for
                                              old ideas
                                           4. Putting promising
                                              concepts to test
1. Expressiveness: Group members should express
   any idea that comes to mind, no matter how
   strange, weird, or fanciful. Group members are
   encouraged not to be constrained nor timid. They
   should freewheel whenever possible.

2. Non-evaluation: Do not criticize ideas. Group
   members should not evaluate any of the ideas in any
   way during the generation phase; all ideas should be
   considered valuable.

3. Quantity: Group members should generate as many
   ideas as possible. Groups should strive for
   quantity, as the more ideas, the better. Quantity of
   ideas increases the probability of finding excellent
   solutions.

4. Building: Because all of the ideas belong to the
   group, members should try to modify and extend the
   ideas suggested by other members whenever
   possible.
Leading Creative Organizations:
          Key Takeaways
1. Generate as many ideas as possible – quantity likely to
   improve quality (i.e., originality)
2. Think in terms of categories to promote flexibility
3. Use the 4 rules for brainstorming – have someone enforce
   them
4. Build off of each other’s ideas, combine and recombine –
   knowledge brokering
5. The support of key organizational players is critical for
   getting new ideas implemented
GLOBESMART
Real World Analog:
Mars Climate Orbiter Failure

  Failure investigation board concluded the
   following:

    Inconsistent communication
    Operational navigation team not fully informed on
     details
    Communication channels were too informal
    Verification and validation process inadequate
ROE
1.   Know the task focus of your team (e.g., creative, tactical, problem-solving)

2.   Be clear about the authority of the team (e.g., manager-led vs. self-directing)

3.   Focus on minimizing threats in big 3 areas (ability, motivation, communication)

4.   Be transparent about how you make decisions

5.   Create forum for “healthy” conflict (transform “personalized conflict” into
     “de-personalized” conflict)

6.   Capitalize on what teams are good at (convergent information-processing and
     getting buy-in); capitalize on what individuals are good at (divergent thinking)

7.   Keep in touch – virtually and/or face-to-face


8. Make sure the team’s goal is clear!
There seems to be a disconnect of what
 science knows and what managers practice
           in today’s workplace..


“Bridge science and management to address
 irrational business decisions and dangerous
     half-truths in organizational practices”
                                   -Heintjie Santos
Thank YOU!

Teams and Groups day 2

  • 2.
  • 3.
    Unleashing the effectivenessand efficiency of Groups/Teams!
  • 4.
    1. Necessary conditionsof an effective group 2. Creativity and Brainstorming 3. Working in cross functional teams and Virtual teams
  • 5.
    1. A clear and elevating goal 2. Results-driven structure 3. Competent team members 4. Unified commitment 5. Collaborative climate 6. Standards of excellence 7. External support & recognition 8. Principled leadership Source: Larson & LaFasto, F. (1989). “Teamwork: What must go right/What can go wrong”
  • 14.
    The collaborative teammember (a checklist)1 Ineffective Effective  Defensive & closed  Candid & straightforward  Non-supportive  Supportive  Passive  Takes action  Negative  Positive  Inexperienced  Experienced  Unproductive  Productive 1 Larson & LaFasto (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/What can go wrong. Sage Publications.
  • 15.
    Threats to Performance Effort + Motivation Knowledge + Coordination Skill
  • 16.
    Anatomy of GroupDecision Making A rational model of group decision-making Orientation Define the problem Determine the goal Plan the process Discussion Gather information Identify alternatives Evaluate alternatives Decision Making Make group decisions Implementation Adhere to the decision Evaluate the decision Seek feedback Source: Forsyth, D. (1990). Group dynamics (2nd edition), p. 286. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
  • 17.
    Group Decision Making BENEFITS (Compared to Individual Decision-Making) Breadth of information Diversity of information Acceptance of solution Legitimacy of process
  • 19.
     Was thisa decision that called for a rational decision making process? [Y or N]  Was your group process rational?  If not, what did you do?
  • 20.
    Group Decision Making CHALLENGES (Compared to Individual Decision-Making) p Increased information processing demands p Greater necessity for complex decision rules n search for common ground n coordination difficulty p More complex interpersonal processes n range of knowledge, skills, and abilities n coalition formation
  • 21.
    Hidden Profile Problem Superior decision alternative that is hidden because each member only has a portion of the information that supports this alternative
  • 22.
    Common Information Effect People are more likely to discuss information they have in common than unique information  People trust information more when they have personal access to it  Information that is broadly shared often gets the most weight in group judgments
  • 23.
  • 24.
    Information Silo Model AGENDA DISCUSSION AGENDA OPINIONS OPINIONS FACTS FACTS Team Member Team Member AGENDA AGENDA OPINIONS OPINIONS FACTS FACTS Team Member Team Member
  • 25.
    Hidden Profile Example A,B,C A,B,F,H A,B,C,D,E C,D,E A,B,F,G A,B,C,D,E F,G,H A,B,G,H A,B,C,D,E 8 Jack # of independent pieces of positive information 5 Carol 5 Bob
  • 26.
    Ineffective Strategies for Overcoming a Hidden Profile  Increase amount of discussion  Increase size of group  Increase information load  Accountability  Pre-discussion polling (ask each group member to indicate their decision at outset)  Confirmation bias  Skewed interpretation of information
  • 27.
    Effective interventions  Re-directfocus of discussion: Search and consider unique information  Maintain focus on unique information  Define goal as a “problem to be solved” not a “judgment to be made”  Suspend initial judgment – caution members against making a decision on their own  Instruct members to record facts during discussion that justify decision  Rank rather than choose  Consider alternatives one at a time  Heighten awareness of who might possess unique information
  • 28.
     Put structuresin place that will allow complete use of group’s knowledge and the whole range of available expertise  Find out what each person knows  Express your true opinions and don’t just express what you think others want to hear  Focus on solving the problem instead of pushing your own opinion
  • 30.
    Guilford’s 3-factor modelof creativity: 1. Fluency: Quantity of ideas 2. Flexibility: Diversity of ideas 3. Originality: Rarity; novelty
  • 31.
    Knowledge-Brokering Cycle  Innovation: not about solitary genius; more about using old ideas as raw materials for new ones  Knowledge Brokering: taking an idea that is commonplace in one area and moving it to a context where it isn't common at all 1. Capturing good ideas 2. Keeping ideas alive 3. Imagining new uses for old ideas 4. Putting promising concepts to test
  • 32.
    1. Expressiveness: Groupmembers should express any idea that comes to mind, no matter how strange, weird, or fanciful. Group members are encouraged not to be constrained nor timid. They should freewheel whenever possible. 2. Non-evaluation: Do not criticize ideas. Group members should not evaluate any of the ideas in any way during the generation phase; all ideas should be considered valuable. 3. Quantity: Group members should generate as many ideas as possible. Groups should strive for quantity, as the more ideas, the better. Quantity of ideas increases the probability of finding excellent solutions. 4. Building: Because all of the ideas belong to the group, members should try to modify and extend the ideas suggested by other members whenever possible.
  • 34.
    Leading Creative Organizations: Key Takeaways 1. Generate as many ideas as possible – quantity likely to improve quality (i.e., originality) 2. Think in terms of categories to promote flexibility 3. Use the 4 rules for brainstorming – have someone enforce them 4. Build off of each other’s ideas, combine and recombine – knowledge brokering 5. The support of key organizational players is critical for getting new ideas implemented
  • 36.
  • 37.
    Real World Analog: MarsClimate Orbiter Failure  Failure investigation board concluded the following:  Inconsistent communication  Operational navigation team not fully informed on details  Communication channels were too informal  Verification and validation process inadequate
  • 38.
  • 39.
    1. Know the task focus of your team (e.g., creative, tactical, problem-solving) 2. Be clear about the authority of the team (e.g., manager-led vs. self-directing) 3. Focus on minimizing threats in big 3 areas (ability, motivation, communication) 4. Be transparent about how you make decisions 5. Create forum for “healthy” conflict (transform “personalized conflict” into “de-personalized” conflict) 6. Capitalize on what teams are good at (convergent information-processing and getting buy-in); capitalize on what individuals are good at (divergent thinking) 7. Keep in touch – virtually and/or face-to-face 8. Make sure the team’s goal is clear!
  • 40.
    There seems tobe a disconnect of what science knows and what managers practice in today’s workplace.. “Bridge science and management to address irrational business decisions and dangerous half-truths in organizational practices” -Heintjie Santos
  • 41.