Not all Teams are the Same

Now that we have an understanding of the background of teams and potential strengths of individuals that can be utilized in a team environment, we can begin to explore how these can begin our exploration into what types of teams there are and how they can be best utilized.

This is important, because, just as a cricket team would certainly lose against a baseball team in a game of baseball and vice versa, this concept applies equally to the work place. The different types of teams that exist in the workplace are crucial for achieving organizational goals and maintaining organizational health. And each team has varying roles to accomplish tasks, solving problems, and drive innovation.

“A cricket team would certainly lose against a baseball team in a game of baseball and vice versa.”

This is not to say that employees cannot be on more than one team in the same workplace. Humans are quite versatile, especially when they feel respected. Businesses will always be in competition, and most leaders understand the importance of adapting in order to continually move forward. This is naturally merged with an understanding that there are basic things that are mostly static that must be achieved to maintain the existing system, while there needs to be a certain amount of research and development for the business to remain sustainable in the future.

A well-known example of managing this was Google’s implementation of the ‘20% time’ policy^[1]. Google allowed its employees to dedicate 20% of their workweek to pursue self-directed projects of their choice. This policy aimed to provide individuals with the autonomy and freedom to explore their own ideas and passions, even if unrelated to their current job responsibilities. Notably, projects such as Gmail emerged from this initiative, showcasing the potential for breakthrough innovations when employees are given dedicated time for personal exploration.

The employees’ other work hours were spent on existing projects that were either already bringing income into the company, or projects that had been signed off by upper management in the hope that they would become profitable in the future.

We are not advocating that all companies should follow this same formula, but for Google, through combining these two concepts, they were able to create an environment that embraces both structured teamwork and individual autonomy. This balance also helped to foster a culture of collaboration, empowerment, and continuous improvement.

“People can be part of multiple teams with multiple team structures and management goals.”

So following this example, we have categorized teams into two broad groups: Project Teams and Self-managed Teams. Each of which are then delineated into sub-teams.

Project Teams

Project teams are made up of a number of individuals who work together to accomplish a common goal or objective. They enable the organization to work in a precise and quantifiable manner. They make it easier to delegate precise timelines, team roles, and duties. Depending on your team’s goals, you can choose project team members who are informal, self-teaching, and self-mentoring by blending people with and without expertise.

The team categories: functional, cross-functional, matrix, and contract teams all fall under project teams.

Self-managed Teams

Self-managed teams, as the name suggests, are generally self-directed teams or autonomous teams, where a group of individuals within an organization who have the authority and responsibility to manage their own work processes and make decisions collectively. In self-managed teams, traditional hierarchical management structures are minimized, and team members are empowered to take ownership of their tasks and collaborate to achieve shared goals.

Virtual and operational teams fall under this category.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Functional Teams

Teams with diverse tasks from the same department form functional teams, which are permanent in nature. Each team member reports to the assigned manager, who is responsible for overseeing the team’s activities. These teams are commonly found in businesses that follow traditional project management practices.

In our ever-evolving and specialized world, project teams often find the need to collaborate. For example, a development team may come up with a groundbreaking concept. However, an R&D team may be required to assess the idea’s feasibility and determine the most effective implementation method. Subsequently, the marketing department is needed to introduce the resulting product to the market. All of these steps must be completed before the sales team can actively promote the product.

The process of functional teams collaborating can be likened to passing a baton in a relay race. A manager plays a crucial role in overseeing the entire process to ensure its smooth operation. The manager ensures that there are no obstacles hindering the transfer of work between teams and that each team is aligned with the same end objective.

“Functional Teams are generally a traditional project management team structure liked to passing a batten in a relay race which requires direct manager oversight.”

Advantages

• Executes routine tasks
• Projects are under the direction of line management
• Combines professional and technical knowledge

Disadvantages

• Difficult communication across areas
• Pushing the decision-making process upwards
• Inflexible

Cross-functional Teams

Cross-functional teams are formed when individuals from multiple departments collaborate on a single project. These teams are frequently formed to carry out projects that call for various specialties in order to achieve the specified goal. In this increasingly complex world, the necessity for cross-functional teams is growing globally, but not without issues.

Although an outlier, the Manhattan project, which started in 1942 under the management of Oppenheimer illustrates the difficulties in cross-functional teams.

This project was one of the most significant scientific and engineering endeavors in history where the concept of a multidisciplinary teams played a crucial role in its success. In a collaborative effort of scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and various other experts from diverse fields, the project’s objective was to develop the world’s first atomic bomb during World War II.

Recognizing the complex nature of nuclear physics, the project leaders understood the need to bring together individuals with a wide range of expertise. Physicists, chemists, metallurgists, and engineers worked collectively, leveraging their respective knowledge and skills to overcome the intricate challenges involved in atomic bomb development. The multidisciplinary approach fostered innovation, as experts from different fields shared insights and perspectives, leading to breakthroughs in scientific understanding and technological advancements. This integrated team structure ensured that the Manhattan Project could draw upon the collective expertise of numerous disciplines, resulting in the successful creation of the atomic bomb and profoundly shaping the course of history.

However, it should be noted that the development of the atomic bomb during the Manhattan Project faced challenges as teams were not always allowed to be fully informed about the progress and projects of other teams. This lack of transparency and information sharing sometimes resulted in slower progress and duplicated efforts within the project.

Though the Manhattan project is an outlier in the extremities in which teams were not always made aware of all available information or the true goal, it still holds true that in all organizations, there is a degree information that cannot be made public for various reasons. Further, each department have their own management or leadership which can result in team members having to work with more than one set of expectations or at least report to multiple persons which can easily lead to frustration or decrease motivation in the work place.

“Cross-functional Teams are formed when individuals from multiple departments are needed to collaborate on a single project.”

There will always be issues to consider and be intentionally aware of when working with cross-functional teams.

Advantages

• Quicker execution of tasks
• Capable of managing a variety of projects
• Source of unconventional ideas

Disadvantages

• Cohesion takes a long time to build
• Management can prove to be challenging
• Conflict can result from diversity

Matrix Teams

Matrix Teams are an offshoot of the matrix management^[2] methodology where team members report to numerous managers for different aspects of the task.

Let’s imagine your company designer was tasked with creating a design for a new product that marketing had come up with and that R&D had determined was possible. By being a part of this project, your designer now has two managers: a project manager who is primarily concerned with getting the design done, and a functional line manager who is in charge of their training, career development, and daily tasks.

Employees frequently experience the difficulties of dual command. Your designer now has to report to two managers, who may give him conflicting instructions, which causes confusion and frustration while management feels they are successful in maintaining control over the project without being involved in day-to-day decisions, employees frequently face these dual command difficulties.

In the iconic film Office Space, there is a scene that resonates with many viewers. The office worker and protagonist, Peter Gibbons, is called to face the two consultants, Bob Slydell and Bob Porter, affectionately known as the Bobs. What follows in this particular moment in the movie, though using hyperbole, perfectly illustrates the frustrations that many of us encounter in our own work lives.

During the interview, Peter is asked about his current work situation, and he responds with refreshing honesty. He reveals that he is burdened with the responsibility of answering to not one, not two, but a staggering eight different bosses. This revelation strikes a chord with anyone who has ever felt overwhelmed by the demands of multiple supervisors, each with their own unique set of expectations.

Peter goes on to explain the detrimental effects of this convoluted management structure. The multitude of bosses leads to confusion and a lack of clarity, making it nearly impossible for him to prioritize tasks and meet everyone’s demands. This lack of efficiency and coordination not only hampers productivity but also dampens job satisfaction.

While this this scene is shown in a comedic fashion, his frustration is relatable to many individuals working in the corporate world, and serves as a reminder of the challenges faced when navigating a complex chain of command, which can often feel overwhelming and demotivating.

“Matrix Teams are an offshoot of the matrix management methodology where team members report to numerous managers for different aspects of the task.”

By highlighting this common workplace issue, Office Space illustrates how having more layers of management can have a negative impact on employees morale and overall organizational effectiveness.

This is not to say that teams should not work in this fashion. Only that managers should be particularly aware of the negative issues that may inadvertently be created.
Advantages

• Favorable to established managers
• Flexibility for personnel who are assigned
• Operations management oversees projects but stays out of day-to-day operations

Disadvantages

• Multi-way reporting
• Team leaders generally have no control over who will work on the project
• Complicated performance review

Contract Teams

Contract teams are external teams that are hired to complete a specific portion of a project and are bound by a contract. They are generally specialized or focused clearly on a well defined objective. Once the project is finished and the contract expires, the client has the freedom to sever all relations with the team without any questions asked.

The key to success in project teams lies in the project manager. They are responsible for maintaining constant communication between the client and the team, especially in cases where contract teams are working remotely or on non-visual tasks. Additionally, the project manager must take full accountability for the success or failure of the project.

Gerald M. Weinberg, an American computer scientist, author, and teacher specializing in the psychology and anthropology of computer software development, has provided valuable insights on contract teams. His most renowned books, “The Psychology of Computer Programming” and “Introduction to General Systems Thinking,” are highly recommended for study.

His renown gained strength after he had been working in the computing industry at IBM in the 1950’s where he later participated as Manager of Operating Systems Development in the Project Mercury with NASA which aimed to put a human in orbit around the Earth. His books now today are still sought for by those interested in systems management, and consulting.

Weinberg’s philosophy regarding contract teams can be summarized by his belief that temporary, well-defined teams with explicit agreements are an effective approach to organizing work. He recognized that traditional team structures often face challenges such as unclear roles, power struggles, and communication issues. In contrast, contract teams operate based on explicit contracts or agreements that clearly outline the team’s purpose, objectives, roles, and responsibilities.

Weinberg advocated for the use of contract teams to leverage the expertise of individuals with specific skills, ensuring that each team member’s contributions align with the project’s goals. By clearly defining the boundaries and expectations of a contract team, he aimed to minimize conflicts, enhance productivity, and drive successful project outcomes.

Furthermore, Weinberg emphasized the significance of effective communication and negotiation within contract teams. Open and transparent communication channels, coupled with a collaborative mindset, were deemed essential for resolving conflicts, clarifying expectations, and fostering a positive working environment.

“Contract teams are external teams that are hired to complete a specific portion of a project and are bound by a contract. They are generally specialized or focused clearly on a well defined objective.”

Advantages

• Experts’ employment is simple
• A group may utilize the current management structure
• No client education is required

Disadvantages

• Client assessment of project progress is challenging
• Difficult to resolve political and organizational issues
• The sole determiner of success is the client

Autonomous Teams

Self-managed teams typically consist of coworkers who work for the same company and, despite having a variety of goals, are united in their pursuit of the same goal. Since there is no manager nor an authority figure, it is up to the members to establish the guidelines and standards, deal with issues as they emerge, and share accountability for the outcomes.

Valve Corporation, which started in 1996 to create games is one of the best examples of this. They made fame world-wide with the release of their first-person shooter game Half-Life in 1998 and quickly realized that if they were to grow while also maintaining the energy and creativity of staff, they were better off sacrificing some positives allowed from a traditional management in order to allow staff to flourish.

By 2012 Valve employed approximately 300 people who do not have established job descriptions or superiors. Instead, they were required to work together on individual or group projects and are responsible for providing their own customer support.

In their publicly available Employee Handbook (see bibliography), they explain that “In 1996 we set out to make great games, but we knew back then that we had to first create a place that was designed to foster that greatness. A place where incredibly talented individuals are empowered to put their best work into the hands of millions of people, with very little in their way… Although the goals in this book are important, it’s really your ideas, talent, and energy that will keep Valve shining in the years ahead. Thanks for being here. Let’s make great things.”

On following pages, and most importantly, “When you’re an entertainment company that’s spent the last decade going out of its way to recruit the most intelligent, innovative, talented people on Earth, telling them to sit at a desk and do what they’re told obliterates 99 percent of their value. We want innovators, and that means maintaining an environment where they’ll flourish. That’s why Valve is flat. It’s our shorthand way of saying that we don’t have any management, and nobody ‘reports to’ anybody else. We do have a founder/president, but even he isn’t your manager. This company is yours to steer—toward opportunities and away from risks. You have the power to green-light projects. You have the power to ship products.”

It’s important to note that Valve is not a publicly listed company which allows them their own autonomy outside of share holders or investors etc., which has probably allowed them to create this mantra company wide. For organizations that have stake holders, it may only be possible to create autonomous teams in specific areas rather than across the entire spectrum.

However, Valve’s ability to do this does show that it can be done with positive results. Because they are a private company, there is also is no evidence that self-managed teams are necessarily more productive, however, research has found that members of autonomous teams feel more valued at work and regard their jobs to be more gratifying.

When creating a self-managed team, you must consider the level of accountability required, and how much independence should be granted to them.

“Autonomous Teams are self-managed teams which typically consists of coworkers who despite having a variety of goals, are united in their pursuit of that goal with no manager or designated authority figure.”

Advantages

• Employee motivation is enhanced by autonomy
• Team members have the ability to manage their own time and complete work as they see fit
• An office is not always necessary
• Pride in a team’s accomplishments is engendered by shared accountability

Disadvantages

• When hierarchical authority is lacking, personal relationships may take precedence over sound judgment
• It may result in uniformity, which stifles imagination and critical thinking
• Taking on an additional level of responsibility takes time and demands abilities that some people just don’t have
• Due to a wider range of responsibilities, training time and expenses are higher

Virtual Teams

Virtual teams are made up of members that work remotely and mainly rely on communication tools to accomplish their goals. Virtual teams enable business owners to hire the greatest subject matter experts, even if they are located on another continent, and give team members a better life-work balance.

WordPress developer Automattic is one of the companies that has had the most success with utilizing a virtual staff environment. P2, one of their WordPress plugins that enables real-time communication between employees, is used by hundreds of people world-wide to work on open source code to continually develop and create new initiatives for the company. Due to the cost savings in office space and furniture etc., new hires receive the newest MacBook, a $2,000 stipend to upgrade his home office, and an open ‘time off’ policy that they can use if or when they need to.

Although it might seem improbable, this philosophy is one of the main reasons Automatic has been successful. Today, WordPress powers a significantly large portion of websites worldwide.

Most may consider virtual teams to be a recent phenomena, but Automattic has been working with these conditions since the early 2000’s. And even more staggering is that this concept actually began the 1970’s. Called telework at the time, and was later adopted by many technology based industries (though not company wide like Automattic) in the 80’s and 90’s, including Dell, IBM, Xerox, AT&T, Sun Microsystems, and Accenture Solutions.

It’s important to understand that remote employee monitoring is so different from monitoring staff in a traditional office environment. It demands greater trust, the ability of staff to intentionally have efficient communication channels set up. And lastly, it can often be more difficult to read a person’s emotions or level of confidence.

Further, the main characteristics of virtual teams that should be considered when trying to work in this environment are the times people work due to time zones for instance, where the location of workers are that may restrict in-person meetings or delivery of items etc., and finally, the culture of those working. Race, language, occupation, education, country, as well as political, social, religious, and economic elements can all influence how workers communicate with each other.

“Virtual Teams consist of members who work remotely and mainly rely on communication tools to accomplish their goals.”

Advantages

• Global talent pool allows firms to hire the finest candidates for certain tasks regardless of location.
  Lower office, utility, and infrastructure costs since team members work remotely.
• Improved work-life balance for team members, who can choose their own schedules and work from home or remotely.
• Reduced workplace interruptions and the freedom to work during their most productive hours can make virtual teams more productive.
• Team members in different time zones can work around the clock, enabling continuous operation and faster turnaround times.
• Having diverse team members can generate more ideas and creative solutions.

Disadvantages

• Lack of face-to-face engagement can cause misinterpretation, misunderstandings, and problems forming team relationships.
• Coordinating team meetings and activities across time zones might delay decision-making.
• Internet connectivity and software issues might impair teamwork and production.
• Team members may lose trust and feel less accountable when absent.
• Isolation can reduce morale and teamwork.
• Cultures and languages can hamper communication and collaboration.
• Virtual teams depend on technology, so system failures or cyber attacks can disrupt work and endanger data security.
• Virtual teams often struggle to build team spirit and culture.

Operational Teams

Operational teams play a crucial role in translating strategic objectives into actionable plans and ensuring their successful implementation. These teams are responsible for coordinating various operational functions, including human resources (HR), production, logistics, customer service, and quality control. The specific functions may vary depending on the industry and nature of the organization’s operations. By working together, these teams strive to optimize processes, improve efficiency, and meet operational targets.

Typically, these teams are involved in back-office processes that tend to remain fairly static. For example, the HR department is not assigned specific projects but is responsible for tasks such as candidate vetting, interviews, and hiring. However, in a dynamic environment, HR may need to quickly identify a replacement for a key team member who departs to ensure uninterrupted workflow.

Moreover, operational teams, with their well-defined roles and responsibilities, can also function as project teams. For instance, the accounting department may create a timetable, assign tasks, and track deadlines if tasked with producing an annual financial report by a specific date.

Given the need to manage accounts, staff, and other core business needs, operational teams are indispensable in all organizations. While we will discuss the advantages and disadvantages below, it is highly likely that operational teams will be a necessary component of your organizational structure.

“Operational Teams are typically for those involved in back-office processes and tend to remain fairly static.”

Advantages

• Operational teams streamline and simplify repetitious duties.
• Team members’ role-specific talents improve output.
• Standardization ensures consistency and reduces errors.
• Operational teams have clear goals and KPIs, making progress and success easy to track.
• Team members’ strengths determine task distribution, optimizing resource use.
• Daily collaboration builds teamwork.
• Repetitive jobs enable opportunities for skill growth.

Disadvantages

• Task repetition can bore and demotivate team members.
• Operational staff may be less creative, impeding innovation.
• Burnout or dissatisfaction can result from repetitious duties.
• Dependency on a few experts can leave the team vulnerable if they’re absent.
• Due to their focus on processes, operational teams may resist new approaches or technologies.
• Process rigidity may slow the team’s capacity to adjust.
• Teamwork can be disrupted by absence or skill gaps.

Conclusion

Not all teams can be identical, as the diversity of tasks, goals, and challenges in the workplace necessitates varying team structures and approaches to successfully accomplish organizational objectives.

In order to effectively achieve the goals of an organization, it is crucial to recognize that teams cannot be uniform. The tasks, goals, and challenges faced in the workplace are diverse and demand different team structures and approaches.

Each team within an organization must be tailored to suit the specific requirements of its assigned tasks. By acknowledging the unique nature of these tasks, goals, and challenges, teams can be structured and approached in a manner that optimizes their effectiveness.

Furthermore, the success of an organization relies on the ability of its teams to adapt and respond to the ever-changing demands of the workplace. By embracing diversity in team structures and approaches, organizations can ensure that they remain agile and capable of meeting their objectives.

In conclusion, it is imperative to understand that not all teams can be the same. The dynamic nature of tasks, goals, and challenges necessitates diverse team structures and approaches to effectively achieve organizational objectives. By recognizing and embracing this diversity, organizations can enhance their performance and ensure long-term success.

“Not all teams can be identical, as the diversity of tasks, goals, and challenges in the workplace necessitates varying team structures and approaches to successfully accomplish organizational objectives.

Choosing your team types

There number of things should be taken into account when choosing the appropriate team for a certain work. The selection process can be aided by considering some of the following things.

What is the team’s objective? The greater your ability to pinpoint the knowledge and abilities necessary to properly complete an objective will always help to increase the speed and quality of the project. So remember to keep clear definitions.

How many individuals are required, and who will play what roles?
Tasks are allocated more efficiently when team members are aware of their respective roles and duties as well as the right team size.

Do the members of the group need a strong leader or are they able to rule themselves? While some teams benefit from self-governance and collaborative decision-making, others could gain from having a designated leader to offer leadership and direction.

Is the team’s concentration in one place essential? The need for physical proximity or the capacity for remote work may affect team makeup depending on the nature of the assignment.

Is the relationship a permanent one or just passing? Take into account if the group will collaborate on continuous tasks or just one particular project. Team dynamics and the degree of familiarity among team members may be affected by this.

Choosing your preferred team based on emotional preferences or the above variables, is also often insufficient. Identifying a team’s effectiveness is also crucial. Key traits in your team should try to include other subtlest. Through important, they can be difficult to track or access.

For instance, team members should be receptive to teaching one another and supporting one another’s development to create a learning environment.

Teams who clearly express ideas, help the team to function cohesively, and collaborate successfully. The better the team can effectively communicate openly with a degree of trust and transparency, the more likely that workflows will run more smoothly.

Motivation amongst peers is also incredibly important in order to maintain high morale and to keep inspiration flowing. Especially on complex projects. These are essential for maintaining momentum and overcoming obstacles.

Team members who are willing to complete gaps for others is a huge benefit to the project. When members support and enhance one another’s abilities in terms of skills, time management, and the ability for the team to adapt to diverse situations greatly increases the likelihood for success in a timely manner.

While all persons have individual power and abilities, more will always be achieved as a collective force. It’s recognized that each team member should be proficient in their specialized fields, but understand that team’s overall power is greatly increased with better synergy and thus increases its effectiveness.

Ultimately, the ideal team will be determined by the particulars of the task at hand, the abilities required, the interactions among the team members, and the environment in which they will be working. Though these points through research indicate that they may be universal truths, we understand that it is impossible to create a perfect team. Considering that humanity wishes to be free and the speed of which humanity changes in language, culture, and business, most businesses will find that they need to use a hybrid of some sort when developing teams. However, those who are involved in developing teams will be able to achieve higher performing teams if they have knowledge of the underlying factors as described in this chapter.

Think time

• What type of team(s) are you currently part of?
• Do you feel the team is the right setup to achieve the current objectives?
• Do you have a preference for what sort of team you like to work in? Can you provide reasons?
• If you are, or would like to be a leader, what team would you prefer to lead? Can you provide reasons?

Notes

1. Though many are aware of Google’s 20% time policy; they were not the innovator of this concept. 3M for instance has been implementing similar policies for decades.
2. Developed and utilized in the space race in U.S. aerospace in the 1950’s, and later achieved wider adoption in the 1970’s when Japan made great strides in quality industrialization.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Statistics, Science, and Assumptions

On the playground in my pre-teens my best friend and I were never picked for the football (soccer) team in the top 50% when selecting teams during lunch breaks. And there was also one or two clumsy guys who were always picked last. This is probably a familiar story for many of you.

We used to play five per side on a netball field, but eventually my friend and I realized that all the other kids would run after the ball like a herd of sheep, so we used to take one of the the clumsy kids as a keeper and with my friend and I taking one side of the field each, we would just pass the ball to each other whenever the heard of sheep came close, while continuing to run run forward we inevitably scored. Even though many of the opposing team had better foot kills, provided that at some point we could get control of the ball winning was pretty easy.

Notably the other kids all believed if they had the ball, because they had better foot skills, then they would be able to score and win. Obviously we all know that this cannot happen, they continued playing this way for two or three years. However, when they reached their teens they had learned to pass rather than just chase the ball, and I don’t remember winning many more games ever again.

Assumptions are easy to make at any age. After hearing this childhood story, it’s easy to think ‘we’ll I’ve grown up now, and I don’t make silly assumptions any more’. This is far from the truth, and I want to recap the story from Moneyball where Billie Bean has to fight against traditional assumptions in order to beat the status quo.

Though baseball has fewer variables than teams in the work place, it can still offer useful glimpses into what is possible, especially with utilizing math and an understanding of statistics rather than only social science studies.

Though the movie Moneyball makes it appear that this was a short experiment. Bean and his economics Harvard educated Paul DePodesta with stengths in mathematics and psychology acutally had more than a decade of data and previously researched opinions to build upon. The book rather than the movie provides the full picture for those interested.

The issue began when a baseball fan Bill James began self publishing pamphlets in the 1970’s arguing that the stats which Major League Baseball (MLB) was keeping on fielding had no value at all when trying to assess the quality that the players gave to the team.

With DePodesta’s help, using statistics that were now becoming more readily available due to the internet, eventually they were able to narrow all assumptions of what a good player is for a team down to a single thing. How often can a player get on base, which is a direct correlation to how often they can hit or walk without striking out. Though many of the expensive big hitters could hit harder, faster, and further, they tended to strike out more often resulting in bringing down the average team runs.

When Bean was scouted in his teens, he was quickly brought into the Major Leauge due to having better stats across all perameters required at the time. As a teen he never lost, but being placed so quickly with seasoned players, his fear of failing got the better of him and frustrated his performance on the field. As a manager, he saw that this was true of many players, and he continually makes it clear to his peers that people are who they are, and that personality matters when measuring performance.

Bean was finally vindicated when the Oakland A’s drew a crowd over 50,000 to watch them win their 20th game in a row, breaking the record while having the lowest budget in MLB.

However, despite the statistics both in developing the team, and their ability to win so often with such a low budget, most managers of other MLB teams continued to think that their science was bunk. Basically, they wanted to continue in their assumptions rather than look at the new data collated over the previous two decades. Some even continued in their traditional assumptions while losing money over their seasons.

We’re using this example of Moneyball for the reason that due to the low variations because of sports rules, it is easier to ascertain a truth. This is not true in a work place where there are more variations than can be calculated than chess for instance, due to requests and needs by multiple parties and then multiplied by differing personalities.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Team Roles in the Workplace

Using baseball as a metaphor is great for an introduction or for a motivational speech, but the Oakland A’s story cannot provide the same solutions to a work environment where the variables can be infinite. So after our little baseball warm-up, we want to introduce Dr. Raymond Meredith Belbin’s findings, who since the 1960’s has been working with respected academia institutions, major companies, and government organizations all for the one purpose of understanding team dynamics for the sole reason of trying to define why a team is successful or failing. This naturally led to discovering what is needed in a team to make it successful.

Interestingly, Bean and Belbin, though having completely different research methods in completely different fields of study (sports and workplace) ultimately came to the same conclusion. That an All-Star team was never as good as a team that was selected for their roles to compliment each other to achieve the goal at hand.

And this is where Belbin’s story begins.

The All-Star Assumption

Due to Belbin’s already advanced knowledge of team work, he was asked to be involved in the Apollo study as a researcher for NASA. The study was designed to analyze the performance of teams involved in the Apollo space missions, with the aim of identifying the factors that contributed to successful team performance in high-pressure environments.

Belbin was tasked with observing and analyzing the behavior of teams involved in the space missions, with a particular focus on the interactions between team members and the roles they played in achieving mission objectives. He was interested in understanding the dynamics of effective teams, and how teams could be structured and managed to maximize their performance.

Having selected All-Star performers for Apollo teams to play against more regular persons. The initial expectation that they would perform significantly better. However, the findings fell far short of expectations. Instead of achieving victory with ease, teams consisting of All-Star members often underperformed against regular teams and was less effective than it ought to be.

Belbin’s observations of the Apollo teams are summarized as follows:

They spent excessive time in abortive or destructive debate, trying to persuade other team members to adopt their own view, and demonstrating a flair for spotting weaknesses in others’ arguments. This led to the discussion equivalent of ‘the deadly embrace’^[1] .

They had difficulties in their decision making, with little coherence in the decisions reached (several pressing and necessary jobs were often omitted).
Team members tended to act along their own favorite lines without taking account of what fellow members were doing, and the team proved difficult to manage.
In some instances, teams recognized what was happening but over compensated by avoiding confrontation, which equally led to problems in decision making.

Basically, Apollo teams had trouble coming to a consensus and lost sight of the important goals. This phenomena was later dubbed as ‘Apollo Syndrome’, and is still largely used in academic circles and work places to this day.

In rare instances there were successful Apollo teams. however, these teams were characterized by the absence of highly dominant individuals, and a particular style of leadership where the leaders were suspicious and skeptical, who sought to impose some shape or pattern on group discussion. This led Belbin to doing further research to define and test team roles in the hope to create teams with peak performance.

The Apollo study helped to validate Belbin’s contribution to research and understanding of team roles, and led to his ideas being adopted more widely in organizations and businesses around the world.

Belbin Team Roles

While the Apollo team experiment failed to achieve the initial assumption that these All-Star teams were bound to win in the team competitions, it allowed Belbin to observe that it demonstrated the need for a balance of roles to create an effective team. Belbin  threw aside his assumption that an All-Star team was best and continued his research over the years to identify nine team positions that better help to create higher performing teams, with each divided into three groups.

Action-Oriented Roles

Action-oriented roles prioritize meeting deadlines, executing ideas, and enhancing team performance.

Shaper – an extrovert who challenges presumptions.
Implementer – instills discipline among the group.
Completer Finisher – attends to even the tiniest details and ensures that everything is done correctly.

Thought-Oriented Roles

Thought-oriented roles are those who are able to assess possibilities and offer technical knowledge.

Plant – develops ground-breaking, novel solutions.
Monitor Evaluator – objectively and analytically evaluates the team’s decisions.
Specialists – who are subject-matter experts.

Selecting Roles

Though this is a total of nine possible roles, we explained earlier in chapter three that teams tend to communicate and work together best in sizes of approximately six people. Therefore, these roles should be carefully selected for the purpose of the goal that the team is trying to achieve.

Here though, Belbin was far from finished. Just as Bean and DePodesta understood that the psyche of a player could drastically alter his performance, Belbin discovered that the personality of a person with each of these could differ, which further created variables in a creating an ideal team.

Searching for the Ideal Team

Since it was impossible to use all roles in a team while keeping within the constraints of having a small team. Belbin looked elsewhere in his studies to understand further why some teams with the same roles worked better than others. Through these studies, he was able to observe that successful teams were not just made up of people with the right skills and knowledge for the job, but also individuals with complementary personalities.

Belbin began to explore the idea of team roles as a way of understanding the different personalities and behaviors that were needed to make a team successful. He observed that different team members had different strengths, weaknesses, and preferred ways of working, and that these differences could be harnessed to create a more effective team.

By mixing personalities with team roles, Belbin was able to create a framework for building more effective teams than just by focusing on roles. He recognized that team members needed to be aware of their own strengths and weaknesses, as well as those of their colleagues, in order to work together more effectively. By assigning team roles based on personality traits and preferred ways of working, teams could be structured to maximize their potential for success.

Through his studies he was able to define personalities using Extroverted and Introverted as his core with each also being divided into Anxious and Stable.

Following is the full list with their pros and cons:

Stable Extroverts – Make great communicators. They work best as salespeople or human resources directors.
Anxious Extroverts – Perfect for fast-paced workplaces. They are most frequently employed as editors, works managers, and sales managers.
Stable Introverts – These people make for strong, cohesive teams. They typically work as administrators, attorneys, public servants, and business planners.
Anxious Introverts – Excellent at solitary tasks requiring self-direction and perseverance. These are highly inventive individuals who work as research scientists and specialists. Teams were formed out of various members of each group.

When teams were formed out of various members of each group, extremes in behavior and outcomes were brought to light, and the personalities of the individuals would then effect the general dynamics of the team as a whole which could be categorized the same as the individual personalities. Belbin found that extroverted teams were generally more successful than introverted ones. However, because each group had both strengths and shortcomings, the outcomes varied and resulted in the following pros and cons:

Stable Extrovert Teams – These teams are resourceful, love working in groups, have a flexible approach, and function well together. They have a tendency to be lethargic and euphoric, though. Overall, they had accomplished good outcomes, yet they are interdependent.
Anxious Extrovert Teams – These teams are energetic and entrepreneurial, adept at seizing opportunities, and prone to constructive conflicts. However, they are easily sidetracked and tend to get off topic. In rapidly shifting circumstances, they produced exceptional outcomes, but were completely erratic at other instances.
Stable Introvert Teams – Their strong points include excellent planning and solid organization. But they frequently move slowly and fail to take into account fresh information. Team members weren’t very concerned about the outcomes, good or poor.
Anxious Introvert Teams – These teams are capable of producing good ideas, but they frequently lack team cohesion and have a propensity to become distracted. Naturally, they got bad outcomes. In certain instances, various teams within the same group came to varying conclusions.

After further investigation, Belbin found that all teams that produced a discernible outcome shared one trait: one of the team members had adopted the position of an Implementer.

The Implementer

Remember that the Implementer instills discipline among the group. and Belbin writes further that “Implementers were not simply team members who only did or arranged things (most work involves both). In behavioral terms, they were people who essentially worked for the company, rather than in pursuit of self-interest, and did so in a practical and realistic way. They could identify with the organization and would accept and look for goals in work that fell in line with its ideals and aspirations. There was never any question that jobs would not be done because they did not feel like it or it did not interest them.” (Belbin, Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail.)

He further defined traits of the Implementer as:

Disciplined who completed their work quickly and methodically.
Hard-headed, practical, dependable, and understanding of others.
Responsible and conscious of commitments to others.
Respectful of the circumstances and viewpoints that already exist.
Self-controlled and possessing a strong sense of self-image.

Almost going back to the drawing board. Belbin wanted to see if a team of implementers would make the perfect team. However, similar to the Apollo project, there were enormous expectations. And again, like the Apollo project, these groups of ideal workers ended up being a letdown. The results showed that they at most achieved ordinary outcomes. Although dedicated and well-organized, implementers lacked any original ideas. They had a tremendous commitment to anything they started, yet they became upset if things went differently.

Simply put, they put in good effort but didn’t get the desired results.

This helped to further prove his previous conclusions that a well balanced team of selected roles of people with complimentary personalities created teams with the highest success rate.

Conclusion

Creating an All-Star team, whether it’s collating the best educated, the best hitters, or the best implementers resulted in the worst performance.

Utilizing too many of any of the same roles generally also resulted in a net loss versus having a mix of team roles that complement needs to suit the project.

Teams who performed best generally had a core of three roles which included the implementer, plant, and coordinator. Other roles were selected to complement the needs of the project.

The personality of those included in the team should not be overlooked and should be selected to suit the environment and purpose of the desired goal that the team is trying to achieve.

Think Time

What role and personality do you think you possess?

Take the test to see if you are correct. Find links at howtoteamwork.com

Can you think of an example where changing the dynamics of a team you were in increased or decreased the productiveness of the team?

Was your above example due to the roles of the teams changing, a change in the personalities, or a mix of both?

Notes

1. The Deadly Embrace is a crippling condition when two or more programs are each waiting for the others to complete – or even just to produce a data value – before proceeding. Thus all programs involved come to a halt.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Enabling Effectiveness

Everything is continually evolving, and so it’s important to remember to recognize that teams are guided by a dynamic process, even if we wish for them to remain constant. Now with the rate of change nowadays in the digital and science world seemingly on a non-linear rise, it’s likely that team members are even more subject to change than they were in the past. As Heraclitus was recorded by Plato as saying “The only constant in life is change,” over two millennia later, we can see clearly that he was right.

This idea of constant change however can make it difficult to set scopes to develop teams that can be taught and used by leadership or managers over a longer period of time. This chapter will focus on what enabling conditions a team needs, while still allowing for a dynamic process.

In the 1970s, organizational behaviour pioneer J. Richard Hackman began researching teams across many disciplines including The Boston Symphony Orchestra, The Apollo 13 Mission Control Team, The U.S. Navy SEALs, Pixar Animation Studios, and working with US Intelligence in war games on Project Looking Glass. These are only a few examples of his studies.

Through studying teams across so many disciplines, Hackman was able to make revolutionary discoveries during his tenure. While there were some differences in what made these teams successful, he was able to observe and codify three broader core themes relevant to all teams in all disciplines that helped enable each team to perform.

Hackman observed that the team members’ personalities, attitudes, or behavioral styles are not what matter most when it comes to teamwork. Instead, what he calls ‘enabling conditions’ are what teams require to succeed. He codified these as the team needing a compelling direction, a strong structure, and a supportive context.

While these are the core fundamentals which can be encouraged and supported externally. There was an internal study in 2012 by Google ‘Project Aristotle’, led by Dr Meredith Belbin, which questioned why some of the work teams were more high performing and sustainable than others. The results to this in-depth study showed that teams who feel comfortable enough with each other to take risks, produce more, and achieve better results than teams who do not. So instead of members thinking in terms of ‘me vs. you’, or ‘us vs. them’ they had a common mindset that trust between members was very important. Google called this concept Team Psychological Safety (TPS) which was first proposed by Amy C. Edmondson in 1999 who argued that “A shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking, creates higher performing teams.”

As noted earlier, due to creativity in the computing and sciences sectors changing so fast, trust has become more important than ever between members in this fast changing world.

Though we have shown briefly what core conditions help to enable a productive team environment, to maintain these core conditions, there needs to be continual reviewing of the external structures and internal evaluation of the teams. This is best done in an off-handish manner to continue allow for the dynamic process and productivity of the team. This will be discussed at the end of the chapter before the conclusion.

“The increasing speed in the dynamic change in teams makes it difficult to determine core needs cross-disciplinary team types, but human nature allows for a base start point to allow positive development from that point.”

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Enabling Conditions

As we delve more deeply into Hackman’s enabling factors below, we want to emphasize that we’re focusing on productive teamwork. But here we will also introduce the need to consider the level of trust, empathy, commitment, and accountability in teams if we want to build high-performing teams, which will be discussed more in following chapters.

The most important lesson to be learned from this chapter is that teamwork is influenced by a continuous sophisticated set of dynamic difficulties, but that just a small number of enabling factors can significantly affect the success of a team.

Compelling Direction

Having a goal that motivates and engages your team is the cornerstone of effective teamwork. Firstly, if team members are unaware of the goals they are working for, then what should they begin working on? It is impossible to be inspired in this sort of environment. Further, the more compelling the goals are, the more inspired the team can become.

Pixar Animation Studios is a great story of a smaller outfit who was able to compete with other major competitors to become one of the greatest animated feature movie producers we have ever seen. In his book ‘Creativity, Inc.,’ Pixar co-founder Ed Catmull describes how the studio’s first film, ‘Toy Story’, had a clear and meaningful goal: to make the world’s first computer-animated feature film. This goal was both tough and achievable, as it had never been done before but was within the realm of possibility with the technology and talent available. The team members were passionate about reaching this goal, as they believed that they were breaking new ground in animation and storytelling. This goal motivated and engaged the team, and they were able to produce a groundbreaking film that paved the way for many more computer-animated films.

In today’s more scattered teams, it can be challenging to ensure that all members have a clear understanding of the team’s goals and that they care about reaching them. One way to address this challenge is to provide extra guidance and communication to team members. This can be used to help provide meaning to the objectives, and whether they stand to obtain benefits (like recognition, money, and promotions) or intrinsic rewards (like contentment, success, and a sense of purpose). So it is important for team members not only to be clearly aware what the goals are, but also to remember that the more compelling the goals are, the more motivated members will be to achieve.

Be aware also, that the clearer these things are communicated, the easier it is for teams to act in sync. For instance, the more varying perspectives on the team’s mission, each member may place different value on varying objects. One may place a higher priority on product quality accuracy, while the other might be more concerned with increasing a product’s price competitiveness.

Thus the goal should be clearly communicated and understood by members, and the more compelling the story about the goal is, and the belief that it can be achieved, the greater the motivation of team members to succeed will be.

“The more clear and compelling the goal is, and the greater the belief that it can be achieved, the greater will be the motivation of the team members to succeed.”

Strong Structure

Having a strong team structure is another essential enabler for effective teamwork. The team’s size and makeup are critical, as discussed in the previous chapter. A well-designed team structure includes the right mix of members with the necessary skills, tasks, and processes, as well as standards that promote positive behavior and discourage negative dynamics.

To function well together, teams require a good balance of technical and interpersonal skills among their members. It’s not necessary for every member to excel in both areas, but having diversity in expertise, opinions, viewpoints, age, gender, and race is beneficial as it helps to prevent groupthink and fosters creativity.

Teams with individuals from diverse backgrounds tend to have an advantage in this regard. According to study done for the World Bank by Hass Martine and Mark Mortensen, teams with members who have ties to the area and speak various languages, as well as those who have lived in different nations, perform their duties more successfully. While locals provide national knowledge and insight into areas like politics, culture, and organization, cosmopolitan members bring technical knowledge, skills, and expertise that are applicable in various circumstances.

To acquire all skills necessary, expanding the team size is not always the best course of action and can incur costs. It’s essential to maintain the team at the smallest size possible for all of the required skill sets. When a team requests new members, the leadership should inquire about what additional abilities or contributions are needed to strengthen the existing team. If the team has reached its capacity, a team member may need to be replaced.

The distribution of team tasks is also crucial. The team leader must keep the group engaged, especially since not every assignment requires a lot of creativity and inspiration. Giving the team control over how to manage the work and making them responsible for a significant portion of the assignment from start to finish fosters a strong sense of buy-in.

As organizations grow, teams tend to expand and can more easily result in creating new or more unhealthy team dynamics such as clichés, hiding information, too many opinions, groupthink, evading duties, casting blame, or free-riding etc.

Though it is not the only solution, Jack Welch achieved this by enforcing a yearly 10% staff reduction across all General Electrics companies and departments. Later some stuff could reapply to different positions, but it forced a restructuring of teams, goals, and responsibilities amongst stuff.

When teams get too large, it can result in your performing members to become resentful of their position due. So it’s important to remember to continually try to keep teams as small as possible for the required skillset to achieve the desired goals.

“Continually try to keep teams as small as possible for the required skillset to achieve the desire goals. But note that this can only work if a strong structure is in place.”

Supportive Context

Supportive context refers to the resources and conditions that enable team members to perform effectively. According to Hackman, supportive context includes three key components: adequate material resources, a reward system that recognizes team performance, and organizational support.

Adequate material resources refer to the physical resources and equipment necessary for the team to perform their tasks effectively. This includes everything from access to appropriate technology and tools to adequate physical space for the team to collaborate.

The reward system is an essential component of a supportive context. A reward system should be designed to recognize and reward team performance rather than individual performance. This helps to promote a sense of collective responsibility and encourages collaboration among team members. Rewards can include anything from bonuses and promotions to public recognition and praise.

Organizational support is the final component of a supportive context. This includes both the formal and informal support systems within the organization. Formal support includes policies and procedures that enable teams to function effectively, such as clear communication channels and standardized processes. Informal support refers to the social networks and relationships that develop within the team and the broader organization. These relationships can provide valuable emotional support and help to facilitate collaboration and knowledge sharing.

Thus, for leadership, this entails keeping up a system of rewards that encourages high performance, a system of information that gives users access to the data required for the tasks, workshops, and, of course, acquiring the physical resources needed to fulfill the tasks. To achieve this, appreciation and constructive criticism are crucial and unfortunately, are frequently ignored components.

Supportive environments for the team themselves help to open up a completely new avenue where team members unreservedly support one other and keep each other accountable.

“Supportive environments for the team themselves help to open up a completely new avenue where team members unreservedly support one other and keep each other accountable.”

Shared Belief

It’s critical that team members develop a similar perspective. We propose that establishing teams that believe in trusting each other as their core perspective can give the group a shared identity and understanding while avoiding groupthink. Team leaders can encourage this.

We believe that trust is the base foundation in creating high performance teams. If members cannot trust each other, it only pushes members further apart. Note however, that achieving the previous three enablers core for channeling the ability to nurture this in team members to get to a position where they feel they can trust each other because all members know that they have the support from their leaders, managers, and the organization.

The atmosphere has evolved from the days when teams were made up of a consistent group of homogeneous team members who collaborated in person and shared a common worldview. These days in the work place, instead of seeing themselves as a single unified group, teams tend to see themselves as a smaller subgroup. As corporations became larger and teams became more complicated, cognitive team members responded by breaking the group into smaller groups and being more critical of all the smaller groups they are a part of. Thus enabling the first three issues by upper management will allow teams to focus on trust within their members so they can focus on achieving together.

Trust is such an important part of teams that we will dedicate a chapter to team psychological safety later in the book.

“Trust is the base foundation in creating high performance teams. If members cannot trust each other, it only pushes members further apart.”

Reviewing

Regularly evaluating teams is crucial to ensure continuous progress and effectiveness. Evaluation should focus on team psychological safety, individual growth, and collaborative production. One way to accomplish this is through routine light-touch monitoring, with more thorough checks performed if issues arise.

To conduct light-touch continuing monitoring, brief evaluation meetings with the team can be held every two months, with a focus on each of the four enabling circumstances and the team effectiveness criteria.

When a crisis or poor performance occurs, it is recommended to conduct an intervention evaluation, closely examining the connections between the team effectiveness criteria and the low-rated situations. As a manager or leader, you can identify distinct connections and offer forward-thinking solutions.

If intervention is necessary, convening a large-scale workshop with the entire team is the best course of action. This allows participants to compare and discuss their evaluation findings, emphasizing conflicting data points and divergent points of view.

“Evaluation should focus on team psychological safety, individual growth, and collaborative production. But mostly should be off-handish.”

Conclusion

Teams are guided by a dynamic process and subject to change, requiring enabling conditions for success.

The three enabling conditions for teams include a compelling direction, a strong structure, and a supportive context.

The more compelling the goal, the more teams are inspired to perform.

A strong structure involves clear roles and responsibilities, accountability, and effective communication channels.

A supportive context involves resources, rewards, recognition, and a positive team climate.

High-performing teams require trust, which can only be achieved if upper management are supportive of the enabling conditions.

Reviewing of teams is important but should be a light-touch approach unless there is a crisis.

Think Time

What did J. Richard Hackman identify as the three main enabling conditions for successful teamwork? Does your team lack or excel in any of these?

What is the compelling direction in your current team?

If you ask other team members about the compelling direction, would they have the same answer as you?

How do you see your current team structure? What could be improved?

Would you consider yourself a team member that needs support or provides support?

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Size Matters

For centuries, societies and military organizations have grappled with the challenge of determining the ideal size for a group. Interestingly though, across all cultures, societies tended to from similar sizes. For instance, pre-modern villages around the world tended to grow to approximately 300 people and where roughly 20 miles apart, which was close enough to walk to and back in a day in order to visit a doctor or achieve something that could not be done in your own village. In military, the smallest Roman cohort started with 10 men consisting of 1 leader, 7 soldiers and 2 slaves. These days a Marine squad consists of 13 soldiers divided into 3 teams of 4 with a squad leader.

Historical examples suggest that there is a limit to how many individuals can effectively communicate and coordinate with one another. But the question of how many is too many is not just an issue of social organization or military strategy. It also has important implications for innovation and problem-solving in modern workplaces, where interdisciplinary teams are increasingly being relied upon to generate new ideas and tackle complex challenges. And yet, as with any group, the ideal team size sometimes remains elusive, and is influenced by a range of factors including the team’s primary aim and the relationships between its members. In this chapter, we’ll explore some of the key considerations when determining the ideal team size, and offer some practical strategies for assembling effective teams in a variety of contexts.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Too Much or Too Little

Determining the ideal team size involves considering various factors. The primary aim of the team is one such factor, as certain projects may require smaller or larger teams with the necessary skills to accomplish the mission. However, the relationships among team members are also crucial to team dynamics and potential.

When examining team size, it is important to consider both the total number of people on the team and the number of relationships among them. The latter is significant because team member relationships can greatly impact team performance. For instance, while members A and B and members B and C may work well together, this does not guarantee that member A and C will work well together on a certain project. In a team of nine people (including the team leader), there are 36 connections to consider, which can be overwhelming and impact team performance.

Ultimately, too few team members can lead to lack of diversity, lack of bandwidth in brain storming, and difficulty in succession. Conversely, too many team members can lead to divisive behavior, longer meeting times, less ownership of decisions, free-riding, and poor communication.

To prevent an excessive number of connections, the ideal team size is typically 6 or 7 members. Teams larger than 9 may divide into sub-teams because not every member will always work with the same people. When assembling a team, it is crucial to consider whether the necessary abilities and viewpoints can be achieved with the current team size before bringing on a new member, as each new member alters the team dynamic. For larger teams completing activities that require collaboration, it may be helpful to divide them into smaller sub-teams.

Real collaboration occurs with teams of six or seven people. In larger companies, teams can be formed for specific tasks and then reorganized for subsequent assignments. Ultimately, the ideal team size depends on the task at hand and the necessary skills and viewpoints required to complete it effectively.

Conclusion

• Determining the ideal team size is crucial for effective teamwork and project completion.
• Historical examples suggest that there is a limit to how many individuals can effectively communicate and coordinate with one another.
• The ideal team size is typically 6 or 7 members to prevent an excessive number of connections and ensure effective collaboration.
• The relationships among team members are also crucial to team dynamics and potential.
• For larger teams completing activities that require collaboration, it may be helpful to divide them into smaller sub-teams.
• Ultimately, the ideal team size depends on the task at hand and the necessary skills and viewpoints required to complete it effectively.

Think Time

What is your current team size?
How many connections are there within the team?
Do you think your team is the optimal size, and would you expand it or reduce the number of members and for what reasons?

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Ambiguity

With a firm understanding of what teams are, we can begin discussing what it is that actually helps to make teams work together well.

It seems that all industries now accept that team work is important. For instance, it is common for job advertisements to include requirements for a ‘team player’ or ‘team worker’. This implies that the company desires that the successful candidate will be able to work effectively with others and contribute to a positive work environment. This is commonly used in job advertisements across a range of industries, as teamwork and collaboration are important skills in many professional settings.

So, even though the term team work is used frequently, it is unfortunately often used in an ambiguous manner, usually to sell an idea rather than to achieve something tangible. These terms are often used in a manipulative manner in advertising, and especially in employment contexts.
Managers, Human Resources, or job advertisements often use these terms to appeal to people’s desire to work collaboratively and to emphasize the team-oriented nature of a job or company culture. So obviously it is something an employee may like to hear because they feel that it would be a safe environment to work in. However, after working some time in their new position they discover that there is no structure or guidance in the work place to create a team environment.

Though it is often used ambiguously across all industries and departments, throughout this publication we will only be using it in the positive sense and with the understanding that the reader or users have a genuine desire to create and maintain healthy teams for the benefit of all.

Getting back to definitions, there are many publications written in the past few decades on teams, how to lead teams, teamwork, and how to establish a team etc., but there is not yet a universally accepted one. Not that we are arguing for a centralized definition. But by the end of this chapter the reader should have a clear understanding of what teamwork is, what are the most desired traits in a team that makes that team work well, the benefits of teamwork, and some drawbacks to be aware of.

“Healthy collective cooperation within a group is necessary for the group to transform into a team that works efficiently. Understand that the goal of cooperation is crucial.”

Some definitions

Working cooperatively with a group of individuals to accomplish a goal is the process of teamwork. Despite any interpersonal conflicts, teamwork entails that participants will make an effort to work together while utilizing their unique strengths and offering constructive criticism.

Some definitions commonly referenced in academic publications includes Scarnati, J. who posits that “Teamwork is a cooperative process that allows ordinary people to achieve extraordinary results.” Harris, P., and Harris K., however define it as “Teamwork relies upon individuals working together in a cooperative environment to achieve common team goals through sharing knowledge and skills.“

Due to the lack of a single, universally accepted definition, it is clear that understanding the goal of cooperation is more crucial than trying to define it.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Six Essential Teamwork Qualities

Though many organizations now recognize that healthy teamwork is essential, they do not necessarily know how to establish a culture to nurture it and help it flourish. To achieve this, we have identified some of the most crucial characteristics needed to nurture in a team for it to really become effective. These qualities ensure that team members work effectively together, complementing each other’s strengths and weaknesses to achieve shared goals.

Shared objectives and dedication to achievement

If team members are dedicated to the group’s success, shared beliefs and common aims should exist. Even if different departments strive to focus on the common aims, it will increase productivity. It’s very easy for each department to focus on their own internal problems and forget that a larger goal is being played out which requires the focus and interest from all.

Interdependence

Everyone on the team experiences success and failure equally. If the team is unsuccessful, then no individual member will be successful. For instance if the engineers are able to produce a high-performance product, but the commodities required to produce the product can’t be delivered in time, or if the website is not functional, then everyone loses.

Personality traits

Respect, encouragement, and realistic expectations between team members are essential. For instance, the team cannot expect a junior web developer with less experience to perform at the same level as a senior one. Also, companies have also observed that older professionals tend to take longer to complete projects but make fewer mistakes. If both can work together well, then it is more likely to achieve maximum potential from both skill sets.

Honest dialogue

It’s crucial to provide and accept feedback and to foster constructive criticism. For instance, a new designer who may still have great energy for creativity and a better understanding of current trends but voluntarily accepts advice from a more seasoned colleague may enhance their overall performance, which will be advantageous to the team.

Suitable team balance configuration

Teams should have a healthy balance in the various team positions because different tasks require different abilities and skills. Both teams with and without a leader will struggle to work effectively if the skill sets of each member has not been selected well or delegated properly.

Responsibility and team leadership

Team members will receive a certain amount of decision-making flexibility in return when they commit to the leadership and are responsible and accountable for their activities. When the team leader assigns tasks and monitors progress, each individual can use their skills more effectively and endlessly to produce greater results.

“To achieve an effective and productive team, there are some specific important qualities that should be nurtured.”

Benefits of Teamwork

Companies generally like to focus on the product or service that is the ‘money maker’. So it can the idea of investing in developing a healthy team working environment can sometimes seem counterintuitive. This thought is erroneous, for investing in this provides numerous benefits for the company.

Beyond the obvious advantages of mutual support and increased sense of accomplishment, it can also lead to greater creativity, improved decision-making, enhanced problem-solving skills, and increased productivity. By fostering a collaborative environment, you can encourage your team to share ideas, learn from each other, and work together towards common goals, ultimately leading to greater success for your business. So, instead of asking why you should invest in teams and collaboration, consider how it can positively impact your business and take proactive steps to promote collaboration within your team.

Increased effectiveness

When team members apply their expertise, specialization, and skill sets together, targets can be reached more easily, quickly, and with fewer mistakes. Not everyone excels in every endeavor. Individuals can complement their deficiencies with the strengths of other team members to achieve the greatest results. For instance, having a team member who can make judgments and move projects along may be beneficial if you are a perfectionist who consistently misses deadlines.

Gains from constructive conflict

Conflict in a healthy team will be productive. Note here, that we are referring to a healthy team. Conflict in a non-healthy environment tends to result in negative results rather than positive. When team members can discuss conflicts openly, it can be utilized as an opportunity to innovate and enhance current procedures.

Lower staff turnover

It may seem obvious, but people like to stick around people and places where they feel comfortable and happy. Achieve this, and it’s like that your organization will see lower staff turnover which in turn, decrease hiring expenses. If you can create the right environment for your teams to flourish, it can only help your business’s cause, and better, the staff feel safe.

Expansion and adaptability

Promoted collaboration provides the chance for quicker learning and development. When you promote people to new jobs, you have additional flexibility because team members benefit from each other’s skill sets. Teams with diversified skill sets are more adaptable to carrying out various tasks.

“Benefits can see improvement in efficiency, productivity, staff retention, and adaptability.”

Teamwork Drawbacks

Although working in a team is very advantageous, there are potential drawbacks to be aware of. So it is vital to recognize, and important to adjust or allow considerations for that.

Groupthink

George Orwell’s concept of groupthink in his novel ‘1984’ highlights the dangers of prioritizing the maintenance of a group’s consensus and cohesiveness over critical thinking and independent judgment. While team bonding and collaboration are important for achieving shared goals, the phenomenon of groupthink can emerge when team members prioritize conformity and unanimity over creative problem-solving and innovation. In such situations, team members may show little initiative, and their judgments and agreements may go unchallenged within the team, leading to a lack of diversity of thought and ideas. Ultimately, this can result in a decrease in creativity and productivity within the team, as members become less willing to challenge assumptions and explore new approaches to problem-solving. Therefore, it is crucial for teams to actively encourage diverse perspectives and dissenting opinions, and to foster an environment where individual thinking and independent judgment are valued and celebrated.

Making procedures challenging

When all or some members wish to have a say in every step can cause procedures to become sluggish. Consider a meeting where everyone wants to ensure that their ideas are carried out but there is no defined agenda. The correct mix of team roles may not always be simple to identify, which makes forming the team a challenging procedure.

Conflict

The effectiveness of the team will suffer if there are significant differences in opinions and working styles among team members that prevent unbiased discussion. Conflict becomes an unwelcome focus for those who are surrounded by ambiguity and lack of urgency.

Assessment of each individual’s contribution

It can be challenging to assess whether an individual has performed above or below expectations because teams share accountability. Employee unhappiness can occasionally result from this problem: if the person has over performed, he will be unhappy because he hasn’t been adequately rewarded; if he has underperformed, his coworkers will be angry and may rebel against his lack of performance.

“Recognize that there are also draw backs when working together and the need to actively adjust, and allow considerations for that.”

Conclusion

Healthy collective consciousness within a group is necessary for the group to transform into a team since it produces teamwork, and understanding that the goal of cooperation is crucial.

To achieve an effective and productive team, there are important qualities that should be nurtured. Focus on shared objectives and interdependence while recognizing differing personality traits which can be achieved with continual honest dialogue so that members can use their skills and abilities in the most profitable way. And lastly, members need to be willing to be accountable to the leadership and monitoring of those who are in lead positions for relevant tasks.

Benefits can see improvement in efficiency, productivity, staff retention, and adaptability. It can also help people overcome their weaknesses and finish tasks faster and more accurately and can spur innovation and improvement. From a purely fiscal point, companies will see a reduction in staff turnover, and existing diverse teams can handle more tasks.

Recognize that there can be draw backs to people working together and the need to actively adjust or allow considerations for that.

Think Time

Describe the advantages of working with your current team.

How would you define the concept of teamwork?

What do you find most difficult about working in a group?

What are three drawbacks you can see in your experience of working with teams?

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Genesis

For millennia, flora, fauna, and human-kind have had the need to do things in groups to achieve objectives in order to survive and develop. So it is no surprise that a word such as ‘team’ developed in many languages and has become a commonly used term across many disciplines; from sport, to academia, in the work place and even in family life. It is always used when we are grouped together with the intention to try and achieve something.

Interestingly, the word team derives from our human ability to control beasts direction in order to achieve a mutual beneficial objective such as travel, farming, or war etc. In the 1500’s, bridling of beasts together would allow the driver to fully control the direction that the beasts would move as a group, and by the 1800’s this collective action took on the meaning as ‘driving a team’ or ‘to come together as a team’.

Over time this became synonymous with horses rather than all beasts, and to this day a group of horses are still called a team. Just like a flock of geese are called so, due to their desire to congregate in a flock, even a group of wild horses tend to team together when unbridled.

By 1886, the term began to become less bridled when ‘team player’ began to be used to describe baseball players who chose to work with their team mates to win together rather than try to just be the hero of the game and make the paper.

Reflecting on our history, we find that our active language has naturally concluded that we needed a word to describe a group of people who work together in order to achieve a mutually accepted outcome.

As an unbridled species, it is important to note that those in a team are unified in fulfilling a goal despite coming from varying backgrounds and having differing opinions and skillsets. Let us put this aside for the moment, and for now, for the remainder of this book, let our definition of a team to be ‘a collection of people who cooperate together, in order to achieve a common goal.’

“A collection of people who cooperate together in order to achieve a common goal.”

This definition has an active proponent to it. To achieve something, means that something must be done. Unlike a group, which can have a passive feel to it. No one calls friends to team up for coffee, and even if they did, all casual observers would say “what a large group of people all drinking coffee together”. Though drinking coffee together may be a goal in itself, it isn’t very active or productive.

A group of persons does not automatically become a team. The group might exist without a unified purpose, aims, or goals, and with disparate attitudes and ways of thinking which they may refuse to deviate from.

This all may look like unnecessary semantics, and to an extent, it is. Defining differences between these words in this case, is only used to show how important it is to understand the definition of term ‘team’ that should be understood by the reader as it will be used for the contents of this book.

The famous French philosopher Voltaire often said “If you wish to converse with me, define your terms.” And abiding with this sensible rule, a glossary of important terms that may be ambiguous are provided in the back of this book.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Importance of Teams

Media and story telling has always surrounded our lives, and in many ways influence the way we perceive things or interpret them. For instance, innovators like Elon Musk are frequently in the news and usually portrayed in a positive sense, just as people like Steve Jobs and Thomas Edison were during their times, can result in a perception of a hero-type persona.

This type of media interpretation can make it difficult for us to remember that to achieve what they did required thousands of other individuals working in teams to bring these hero’s visions to life.

Unfortunately in modern media, such as Hollywood, the hero story seems to be the main theme across most storylines which then can influence the way we perceive things. Conversely, in most storylines where there is a team, it is usually told in terms of contention, power struggles, or internal fighting within the team. According to linquist Deborah Tannen, in her book ‘Argument Culture’, this is purposely done due to this type of media having higher ratings which translates into higher earnings.

In real life however, continual conflict in a team would actually be more stressful for those involved, leading to being less productive. This is why it is important to remember that to achieve an organization’s overall ambitions, objectives, and goals, teams are crucial, and that all hero’s have strong teams working together to make their vision a reality.

“Visionaries and organizations need strong capable teams to bring their visions to fruition.”

Strengthening Organizational Cohesion

Developing a healthy culture in teams encourages intimate relationships, inspires motivation, and increases loyalty. Employees put in more effort and show greater consideration for one another.

Each team member has a unique set of skills, abilities, and weaknesses. Developing a culture of the importance of teams will make it easier to accomplish the overall goals and objectives.

When healthy teamwork is not encouraged, people tend to focus on competing with one another for personal success which only increases the number of obstacles when trying to work towards accomplishing corporate goals.

When positive teams are encouraged and achieved, the entire group is inspired to collaborate well together toward a common objective. And thus, helping to strengthen the overall organizations ability to achieve its objectives.

“Positive collaboration inspires everyone to work toward a common goal. Helping the organization realize its goals.”

Viewpoints and Feedback

It is well established that one of the greatest traits of the human-kind is our ability to be creative.

In his book ‘Free Culture’, Lawrence Lessig, a former Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, argued that it was impossible for someone to be creative without at some point having some sort of outside inspiration. This lead him to successfully develop the Creative Commons initiative for people to be allowed create things for public use without fear of existing copyright regulations.
Malcom Gladwell also discovered this, explaining in his book ‘Blink’, that people tended to better problem solve if something appeared momentarily in their peripheral that may trigger the answer. All test subjects then believed they had come up with the answer by themselves despite having been intentionally triggered.

This shows that we all benefit from the viewpoints, creativity, problem-solving techniques, and diversity of thinking of others. And if this is allowed to be structured in an organization, when properly set up, it will encourage groups of people to brainstorm together, which in turn improves their ability to solve issues and come up with ideas.

This results in a faster appreciation of different viewpoints and feedback, which allows for new likelihoods of learning by all, which then inspires greater effectiveness and productivity.

The better this can be achieved in a team, the faster decisions can be agreed upon together which boosts output, which in turn creates faster feedback loops to better improve again on any current targets.

Ultimately this creates a competitive edge against others who are unsuccessful in implementing this into their teams.

“Appreciation of different viewpoints and feedback, allows for new likelihoods of learning by all, which then inspires better effectiveness and productivity. Then leading to faster product feedback loops.”

Greater Effectiveness and Productivity

When a team uses collaborative techniques and strategies, it enables workload sharing, which eases individual pressure. If cooperation tactics are implemented, there may be advantages in task completion, time management, goal achievement, and increased job satisfaction.

Both working collaboratively and in cooperation ultimately results in greater effectiveness and productivity. A definition of these terms can be found in the glossary.

Possibilities for Learning

Working in teams enables us to learn from one another’s mistakes, gain understanding from other viewpoints, and comprehend ideas from colleagues’ experiences.

Additionally, it gives people the chance to broaden their skill sets and learn new perspectives from their colleagues, which leads to the development of more efficient methods of performing or achieving. This learning experience develops the future ability to articulate ideas, foster creativity, and solve problems creatively.

Encourages Synergy

Working in teams fosters cooperation, encouragement, shared goals, and mutual support. This creates team synergy, which promotes a sense of accomplishment, fosters a sense of shared accountability for results, and inspires people to work.

Team members will be motivated to share the same vision, beliefs, and goals when they are aware of their own duties and responsibilities as well as how much the rest of their team depends on their production. As a result, an atmosphere of cooperation, respect, trust, and camaraderie is fostered at work.

It is easy to hinder the success of creating, formulating, and putting new and inventive ideas into action if you lack the capacity to work effectively in a team environment. Reduced problem-solving skills, as well as a decreased capacity for achieving goals and objectives, all of which impair one’s ability to create a profitable business.

Think Time

Consider the best team you have ever been a part of.
What were the essential components that made it effective?

Consider the worst team you have ever been a part of.
What were the main factors that contributed to its failure?

Consider a team that you would like to be a part of.
What would be the top items on a team’s wish list, according to you?

Why is collaboration and cooperation different? And what is the benefit of each?

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Teambuilding has existed for decades, with the earliest known teambuilding programs dating back to the 1950s. However, it has become more prevalent in recent years due to the changing nature of work and the increasing emphasis on collaboration and communication in the workplace.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

In the past, work was often done in a more hierarchical structure, with clear lines of authority and a focus on individual achievement. However, as the business world has become more competitive and fast-paced, companies have realized the benefits of having teams of employees who work together effectively. This has led to a greater said emphasis on teambuilding as a way to improve communication, collaboration, and overall productivity.

Additionally, technology and remote work have made it easier for teams to communicate but also harder to build trust and cohesion, which is another reason why teambuilding activities are seen as even more important.

With over 20 years experience in professional teambuilding, training, and workshops for world leading companies, we have observed that teambuilding only really addresses part of the issues that modern-day organizations wish to tackle. For this reason, for the remainder of the book we will migrate from the traditional notion of teambuilding to an understanding of teamwork in order to incorporate the many other tools that can be utilized when forming a great working team.

Although, usually we provide these ideas as products and services to our clients, we feel that humanity can greatly evolve if these practices can be made available to all, but especially graduate students and managers.

In recent years, students have begun to realize that what they learned in class has failed to teach important skills such as how money is created and what money is. And this allowed us to realize, that although nearly everything currently relies on people working together in teams, there is a very limited focus on this. Currently, when students leave university, or employees get promoted to managers, though they may have the needed professional skills for the job, they remain unfamiliar in how to work in a team, or manage a team to maximize each participants potential.

For this reason, we decided to create this book to compile our learned knowledge to share with others for practical purposes. Due to the audience and the fact this topic is generally not addressed in educational institutions, it is written in two styles; partly non-fiction and partly textbook. The reasons for what makes a good working team are given in non-fiction style for easy reading and interesting anecdotes, but conclusions and side notes are provided for those who already have experience in this field so they can use it as a reminder, a way to teach others, or to quickly find the sections in which they have not yet the knowledge or wish to have a deeper understanding or practical examples.

Though this text was created for a print version, much of it is made public on howtoteamwork.com and practical facilitation for teambuilding, teamwork, and other training activities can be found at proteambuildingasia.com.

As language changes frequently, especially since the internet and the rate of change in humanities’ understanding of ourselves, remember to continue to check the glossary to better understand the intended concepts correctly.

These articles are our first draft to be later published in print and digital format.
Any enquiries can be placed via this website.

Copyright © 2023 by Reinier Jansen & Luke Fechner
Distributor | Pro Team Building Asia Co., Ltd
Publisher | Global Notions Co., Ltd.

Innovative Team Building Chiang Mai. – www.tabtourasia.com – Fendi participated in our innovative team building activity in Chiang Mai. This Amazing Race Style Treasure hunt showed them the local culture, architecture, markets and religion while enhancing their team work efficiency. Interact with locals while improving strategy, leadership, team work and communication.

Unique tablet based team building that keeps all teams updated about the performances, locations and activities in a live updating team event.

Chiang Mai Amazing Race Style Treasure Hunt Team Building. ACS participated in our innovative team building activity in Chiang Mai. This Amazing Race Style Treasure hunt showed them the local culture, architecture, markets and religion while enhancing their team work efficiency. Interact with locals while improving strategy, leadership, team work and communication.

Unique tablet based team building that keeps all teams updated about the performances, locations and activities in a live updating team event.

Innovative Team Building Chiang Mai. SCIEX participated in our innovative team building activity in Chiang Mai. This Amazing Race Style Treasure hunt showed them the local culture, architecture, markets and religion while enhancing their team work efficiency. Interact with locals while improving strategy, leadership, team work and communication. Unique tablet based team building that keeps all teams updated about the performances, locations and activities in a live updating team event.