The question, then, is how?

At Global Genesis, we believe that high performance teamwork is created through a number of different elements, depicted in a model we often use with teams to establish what that foundation might be. 

At the center of high performance teamwork – the kind of teamwork that yields synergistic results – is trust and respect.

First comes respect: the kind of respect that comes through observing action over time, values fulfilled, and competency revealed.

Then comes trust: trust that helps the un-discussable be discussed, that allows for an easy play and share of ideas, because everyone knows that their team mates have their back.

Creating respect and trust within a group of people is a dance; it comes over time and in response to how people approach the rest of the key elements for high performance teamwork.   In my experience, it is nearly impossible to enter a new group and automatically respect and trust those around you. It is sometimes even harder to do so with groups that have long histories.   Instead, it is through clarifying shared purpose and roles, clarifying roles, spending time to develop relationships, and fine-tuning teamwork that create room for trust and respect to grow.

So, how do we go about cultivating these other elements?  Below are some ideas for how we approach these essential pieces – and there are  many more.

1. Clarify shared purpose and vision. To help our clients clarify shared purpose and vision,  we like to refer to an article that Jim Collins and Jerry Porris wrote for the” target=”_blank”>Harvard Business Review on Change in 1998.  There they say that a practical, shared vision has the following components:

• Clear Purpose & Values
• Big, Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs) and Strategies to accomplish those.

When we work with clients, we typically customize our approach to working with these two paths.  They compose the largest parts of many strategic plans, and are essential to high performance teamwork.

One of my favorite ways to help clients clarify their purpose and values as well as their goals and strategies is to have them interview each other using the Appreciative Inquiry Interviews. Here, you ask people to take about 20 minutes each to question each other on what is most inspiring to them about their organization, what they know that works based on experiences they may have had in other arenas, and what are the exciting possibilities that they see on the horizon for their team.  In those conversations, which are characterized by active, open listening and reflection, both people have an opportunity to Discover (the first step in the AI methodology) new ways of approaching the challenge of uncovering the purpose and vision for the organization.

This is later compared with what other partners have learned, and is funneled into creative ways of expressing and uncovering the most important possibilities at hand.

We might also do some strategy work with the group, helping the group to analyze trends and opportunities at play in the micro and macro world around them.

Ultimately, this leads us to uncovering and clarifying shared purpose and values, and articulating compelling stretch goals – ones that are SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timebound) and that moreover will drive energy and direction for the group as it moves forward.

2. Clarifying Team Roles is the next essential component for creating high performance teamwork.  Particularly when a group is experiencing a lot of change, (adding a new member, losing a member, changing buildings, etc.) doing this well is fundamental to helping them move forward.  As facilitators, our job is to help them clarify expectations and the process for decision-making, as well as fine tune their handoffs and the flow of information.  Teams often get stuck here, creating an enormous amount of stress on the system and on themselves.

It can also be quite fun with a bit of creativity.  In one organization, I helped different departments give a “Day in the Life of…” skits; in another, I asked staff members to give short presentations that included the more prosaic information along with the lighter question of what cartoon character their position would be.

The key here is to help the team do more than simply read off their job description, by cuing them to share what kind of help they need from their team mates, what quirky things they should know about each other, and to find ways to raise the “dumb” questions that people have always wanted to know about their colleague’s work, but never dared to ask.

This leads well into the next key element, which is…

3. Developing team relationships. The quality of the relationships on a team are many times the key reason that a teambuilder is brought into an organization to begin with.   Relationships get stymied, stressed, side-tracked, or stifled for a number of reasons. Many times, clarifying purpose and roles can relieve this tension. The iconic book on negotiations and conflict, Getting to Yes, says that as negotiators, we must “focus on the problem, not the people.” Clarifying purpose and roles may address a number of the problems that can take a toll on the relationships of the team.

Ultimately, however, the success and quality of team relationships is determined by each member’s answers to the following questions:

1. Are you willing to commit to work on the relationship?
   
2. Are you willing to be accountable for your piece of the struggle in the relationship?
   
3. And, are you willing to take a wider view on the systemic stressor that might be affecting others in your team?

After everyone has answered those questions for themselves, the job of the teambuilder is to create a container for crucial conversations to occur, where the “Undiscussables” can be discussed with clear-sighted compassion and intelligence.

If the teambuilder has an opportunity to work with a group over time, they can help the group build their internal capacity to name those undiscussables, talk about them, and resolve them over time.  At Global Genesis, we might help the group build skills around managing the pressure of conflict, or work with them on inflammatory language, or help them question each others assumptions.

I work with one group who calls this “Identifying the Elephant in the Room.”  They usually begin these conversations, many times over lunch, as “There is an elephant in the room I would like to point out.”  They might then say how this is difficult for them or for the person who may be singled out, taking some of the sting out of the situation, and then proceed to clearly, kindly, and candidly describe what they are seeing in terms that make it clear it is their perspective.

This practice has improved tenfold their mode of operating together.

It also has a positive impact on the fourth key, Teamwork.

4. Building Teamwork. At Global Genesis, we define teamwork as “the ability to effectively, efficiently organize and coordinate action towards a common cause.” It is easy to see how these four keys to building high performance teamwork all fit into one another.  In a way, this statement summarizes the efforts of the last three keys.

At Global Genesis, we work on the “how” of teamwork.  This tends to be best done through experiential education: offering opportunities for the group to actually solve a problem together, and then to look at how they were doing, what they could improve, what they could build on.

My favorite place to work on this is at a challenge course or ropes course – a veritable paradise of opportunities to create physical, kinesthetic metaphors that have direct correlation to how we work in the workplace.  Here, we have an opportunity to see a group “in live action”, and perhaps dropping their guard a bit as we work through activities together that can then showcase the strengths and potential weaknesses of their teamwork.

However, without the good work done in clarifying purpose and roles, and clearing obstacles that might exist within the team relationships, a pure focus on teamwork can fall flat of the ultimate goal – to build a high performance team.

In my next article, I will discuss how all of this can be used to create the “dream green team.”

Great question!

Part of this question is answered by the qualities that the leader actually possesses. Talking about sustainability or any other change won’t be effective unless the change agent is trusted by the people she is trying to influence.

Influence, by the way, whether you have authority in an organization or not, is the only capital that really works to create long-term, behavioral change. Letting go of any ideas you may have about being able to enforce a change is helpful in this process – after all, as a colleague of mine, John Springer says -

You can lead by Inspiration, or Desperation. Which do you choose?

But back to strategies for change. We will talk more about leadership later.

The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook by Peter Senge et al., (a classic work on systems thinking in organizational development) makes the point that leaders want to create the commitment and focus that a shared vision can bring to an organization. Building a Shared Vision can do just that.

Bryan Smith’s article in The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook discusses 5 starting points for building shared vision. He notes that different organizations should start at different places, given the practical realities of where different companies are. (The following is a direct excerpt from his article, on p.314.)

1. Telling: The “boss” knows what the vision should be, and the organization is going to have to follow it;

2. Selling: The “boss” knows what the vision should be, but needs the organization to “buy in” before proceeding;

3. Testing: The “boss” has an idea about what the vision should be, or several ideas, and wants to know the organization’s reactions, before proceeding;

4. Consuliting: The “boss” is putting together a vision, and wants creative input from the organization before proceeding;

5. Co-creating: The “boss” and “members” of the organization, through a collaborative process, build a shared vision together.

He makes the point that before proceeding, you should objectively assess where your company is, and then make a plan for how to move to the next stage.

Figuring out Where You Should Start – A Case Study

I have a client who is transitioning from one leader to another leader. The old leader had a fairly traditionalist model; he asked people to do what they should do, and expected that they follow through with what he asked them to.

The new leader had a very different idea; while he wasn’t entirely sure how, he knew that he wanted his staff to work as a team; to be self-motivated to improve the company. We started with an executive team teambuilding, and from there, discussed how to help his whole company work differently.

He had a vision of teamwork – but had to go about it differently depending on who in the company he was working with. With his executive team, we had spent three days together building trust and respect, co-creating a vision for the company, agreeing on strategy. We then spent many months working together as a team over time. With them, he used a combination of testing, consulting, and co-creating. The Executive Team wanted strong leadership from him, as they had received in the past, but still usually wanted to consult – a significant change from how it had been in the past. But as the Executive Team itself became stronger, they also became stronger, more creative leaders with their own staff, and likewise more attached to co-creating together as an Executive Team. Now, they negotiate about when they will co-create, when they will consult with the leader, and when the leader will test with them, but reserve the right to make the decision.

But the company leader also wanted to change how the rest of his staff would work together. And the rest of the company was more accustomed to a strong authority figure who governed mostly through telling, as opposed to a leader who was willing to share some of his authority in exchange for increased creativity and commitment on their part. For his staff, this leader spends some time telling, a lot of time selling, and has been making inroads to testing and consulting, with specific individuals or committees, at specific times. Quite a bit of his tactic has been to negotiate the boundaries of collaboration over time, so that both he and the company get what they need to keep the company running. Some initiatives have worked well; some are still a work-in-progress.

So, how does this translate to creating a successful change initiative?

As a change agent, depending on the authority you have, you will have to assess for yourself who is ready for co-creating, and who is not. There are many factors that influence how someone is ready – the level of trust, the expectations and history between the parties, how willing the different parties are to negotiate their needs. It is a risky thing for a leader to allow his authority to be handed over to the decision of the group. In fact, in this case, there was a point when the Executive Team and Company Leader handed its authority over too quickly, without thorougly laying out the boundaries of what they needed to make sure the company stayed on track as a whole. Everyone ended up unsatisfied with the results, and the leaders had to back-track to telling. Fortunately, enough trust and respect had been built up at that point that the loss wasn’t nearly as significant as it would have been the year before.

Both the leader and the group have to be ready for co-creating. Both have to be practiced at asking for what they need, as well as giving in return.

However, there are ways to fast-track to co-creating a vision. Next posting – how do you create a vision? And how can you fast-track it to achieve long-term commitment and focus?