A team is simply a group that works together in common purpose. Without sharp purpose it is just a gathering, not a team. Teamwork matters if we want to achieve good governance. It drives a healthy organisational culture. Those attending board, committee and management meetings need to work well together. Where process, communication and team dynamics are poor governance suffers.
We all grumble about the meeting that was a waste of time, perhaps writing it off as just a talkfest favoured by people who like to hold the floor or keen to avoid the real work of the organisation. There are organisations where meetings are conducted standing up, least staff get too comfortable and prolong them unnecessarily.
An effective leader needs the capacity to work with people who are different and difficult. It is just too easy to blame others for the lack of teamwork, putting dysfunction down to disruptive and problematic personalities. Few of us invest sufficient time in analysing and enhancing the effectiveness of the teams we belong to.
A balanced mix of skills is the secret of a high performing team. Strong team culture is the result of bringing people together who complement each other. They have a broad range of knowledge and understandings, more than could ever be embodied in any one individual. Where there is too much ‘sameness’ a team is at risk of ‘group think’. This is the complacent consensus that happens where there is insufficient critical reasoning, limited awareness of consequences and a narrow consideration of alternatives. New voices can shake things up which is why diversity is such a valuable resource in organisations.
A high performing team comprises people who collectively cover off on the following roles:
Leader: The role is to provide clear direction, keep everyone on topic and to get the best out of the team. A leader requires qualities of decisiveness. They listen first and then succinctly sum up. They command respect because they value what each team member contributes.
Ideas: The role of the ideas’ person is to provide innovative spark. They think outside the box, seeing opportunities others don’t.
Planner: Their role is to translate ideas into concrete plans. The focus of the planner is on manageable practical tasks.
Networker: Their role is to attract the resources necessary to make things happen. They are a good communicator with lots of contacts. They are well connected with external and internal sources of support.
Unifyer: Their role is to maintain harmony. Their focus is on holding the team together and managing any conflict. The team is a source of identity and they imbue it with shared purpose.
Implementer: The role is to make things happen. They have the qualities of a project manager. Their systematic focus is on implementation, on time and on budget.
Appraiser: The role is to critically assess and evaluate ideas, proposals and performance. They are strategic thinkers. Their focus is on what works and avoiding mistakes.
Imbalance in team composition is a common contributor to poor outcomes. If your team is not performing, you might start to analyse why by identifying what roles are missing and what roles are over-represented? Set about bringing in new people when you can. For example, if a team is stagnating you may need an innovator? If the team is not getting things done perhaps a planner and an implementer are required? These are qualities we can recruit for.
In the short-term of course the composition of some teams is fixed because membership is constrained by function. The Managers Meeting, for example, might always be led by the CEO and it will not include people who are not managers. But even when introducing ‘new blood’ is not immediately feasible it is still possible to work on bringing out any latent hidden talents of those who are in the room.
Teamwork is strengthened where members can reflect on their own strengths and weaknesses and work on their self-awareness. As a member of a team, we suggest you think about what functional roles you play best? What are the areas where there is scope to improve your own contribution? A leader may be prone to being domineering and bossy. People with ideas can be overly sensitive when others don’t share their enthusiasm and they can simply overwhelm others with too many ideas at once. The networker risks confusing sociability with purpose, rather than as the means to an end. The planner can be perceived by others as lacking adaptability and flexibility. Similarly, the unifier may be so set on avoiding conflict that cohesion becomes their sole purpose and indecisiveness rules. The sense of urgency of the implementercan come across as impatience with others. Finally, what the appraiser regards as sound judgement can seem like negative criticism and condemnation to others.
The size of your team is also a consideration. The general rule is that an effective teams need a minimum of 4 people and no more than 10. Any less and it is almost certain some roles will not be filled. The team will be unstable and vulnerable whenever people leave. More than 10 people and the team becomes unwieldly and difficult to manage. People ‘up the back’ may feel they have little opportunity to contribute while those at the table dominate.
If you want resources to help your people to work together on building a stronger team Stephan Platt’s ‘Teams A game to Develop Group Skills’ (Gower Publishing 1988) remains as good an interactive training resource as ever. For those who wish to dig deeper into the topic a read of ‘Management Teams’ is recommended (Belbin, RM, Heineman, 1981). Or just Google ‘Belbin’ to bring up articles and discussions about team effectiveness.