Category Archives: Teams

Can’t or Won’t

Leave a reply

“My team seems to think there are some problems they face that will never be fixed,” Kari explained. “It’s always, here we go again. Same problem, different customer.”

“Do you think they can’t fix the problem or won’t fix the problem?” I asked.

“Can’t fix or won’t fix, what’s the difference? The problem still ends up on my desk, again,” Kari flatly stated.

“Often, people prefer a problem they can’t fix to a solution they don’t like.” **

Kari thought for a moment. “You’re right. To fix the problem, they have to stop production and figure out what’s going wrong. Instead, they would rather flare a few tempers and call for help.”

“This is where you have to decide if this is a matter of can’t or won’t. Often, someone who won’t solve a problem, or even try to solve the problem, feels like they don’t have the capability to solve the problem. They feel incompetent and give up. Your job, as a manager is not to solve a solveable problem, but to build the competence of the team to solve the problem.”
—
**Shades of Lee Thayer, Competent Organization

Multiple Paths

Leave a reply

“Stop with the frantic heroic efforts,” I said. “That is supervisor strategy. You’re a manager, now. Your strategy is a system focus. Stop working harder and longer and start working smarter. How can you see the work as a system?”

“You mean starting with when we get the work order from sales?” Paula wanted to know.

“That’s the way your team sees the work,” I disagreed. “As the manager, you have a larger scope than the team. You know the work starts way before the team gets it. The work starts back in sales, informal discussions about unsigned contracts in the hopper. Your system has to account for all the anticipated work volume AND the unanticipated variability in the work volume.”

“I can sit in on the sales meeting and get some visibility on projects in the works,” Paula nodded. “But, then what happens when the project gets delayed or completely scuttled?”

“Variability means variable,” I replied. “As the manager, you have to make contingency plans, multiple paths to the goal, anticipate what might happen and be ready to call an audible. A system not only has to account for the same characteristics of every project, but also has to account for the individual nuances that are different about every project.”

Go Find Out

Leave a reply

“So, what you are saying is that I am stuck with the team I have?” Paula floated, uncertain in her conclusion.

“Yeah, pretty much,” I nodded. “Unless you think you should fire them all and do the work by yourself.”

Paula huffed a little sigh. “So, if I am stuck with the team I have, where do I start? I mean, sometimes things get tight out there. We have deadlines and things going wrong. Sometimes, we need extraordinary effort just to get to the end of the day.”

“You seem to think it takes heroic effort to just keep up with the work on the schedule? That if you worked a little harder, or worked a little longer, you could stay above water?” I asked.

“But I can’t,” Paula protested. “I can’t yell at them any more than I already do and I can’t work overtime more than one hour per shift.”

“What if you could dispense with the heroics?” I wanted to know. “What if you could still meet your schedule, but things were dull and boring? What would have to change?”

“Not going to happen,” she put her hands on her hips. “We start the day, then get a priority rush job right off the bat, throws everything off schedule. I mean, if I knew we were going to get a rush job, I could have re-shuffled some of the work, pulled someone off another project. But, I never know.”

“And, why don’t you know?” I asked. “The day before, could you meet with the sales team and find out the unreasonable promises they were making with customers? You are the manager. You have the authority to re-shuffle resources to accommodate a rush order, if you only knew about it. So, get out of your office and go find out.”

Ordinary People

Leave a reply

“My team is a bunch of idiots,” Paula started. “They can’t get anything right. Everything they touch turns to rust.”

“Oh, really?” I replied. “When did this start?”

“Always been this way,” she said.

I nodded. “Before you were promoted to manager, weren’t you a member of this team? Were they idiots then? Were you one of the idiots?”

“Okay, okay,” Paula agreed. “Maybe I was an idiot, back then. It’s just so frustrating being a manager. I wish I could get better people on my team.”

“Why would that make a difference?” I asked.

“If I had better people, I could get better results,” she pursed her lips with a defiant look in her eyes.

“So, you think you would get extraordinary results if you had extraordinary people?” I prodded.

“Yes, absolutely,” Paula sat up straight.

“What if I told you there were not that many extraordinary people out there. That most people are just like you and me, more ordinary than brilliant. Your challenge, as a manager, is to get extraordinary results from ordinary people. If that were true, what would you do? What would you work on? By the way, if you WERE able to get extraordinary results from ordinary people, maybe your team wouldn’t look so ordinary.”

Contain the Steam

Leave a reply

Aspirations are good, but not the best measure of potential success. It’s not the aspiration of a developed skill, but the reality of the lowest capability on the team. You stand for what you tolerate.

When times are good, things are smooth, the flywheel turns over predictably well. We can tolerate a bit of underperformance, even cover it over, make excuses for it and little difference is noticed. It’s when the pressure cranks up, deadlines get tight, specifications to three decimal places, that underperformance emerges with its full impact.

Your team’s ability for success does not depend on your aspirations, but depends on the capability of the weakest, the newbie, the slowest, the person not paying attention.

Do not sing songs of inclusion. Select well, induct, train and test. For one day, the cork will seal the pressure cooker and everything will depend on the weakest seal to contain the steam.

Competence Distorted

1 Reply

How we fool ourselves. It’s not a question, it’s an observation. Each of us has a sense of our own competence. And, we have a version we keep tucked inside and a version we portray to the world. Woe to the person whose versions get too far apart.

Others can listen to your version of competence and in short order observe the difference in your story and reality. They may accept a slight space of difference, chalk it up to braggadocios. Or are willing to keep quiet about the distortion as a quid pro quo to their own sense of exaggerated competence.

The competent individual knows exactly what they are capable of and where they underperform or fail. The competent individual needs no distortion because their underperformance is not permanent. Each day, they make moves toward mastery, inch by inch, with a firm grasp of capability in hand, a fixed vision of the goal and the willingness to proceed in the face of failure. The competent individual, most importantly, possesses the competence of learning.

The competent organization, most importantly, possesses the competence of a learning organization.

Dimensions of Organizational Competence

Leave a reply

We watch sports on television to give us meaning. It’s an odd statement. Why do the Olympics attract such a large audience? We do not gather around our screens to witness mediocre performance. We can do that at our local park, where there are no throngs of spectators. Without competence, life is half-hearted. Competence is the spark that drives full throated experience.

Individual competence is a delight to watch. It is about repetition, training, discipline. Team performance brings new dimensions of coordination, sacrifice, humility, selflessness, celebration. Those are the elements of team competence, the competent organization.

Teams and Competence

Leave a reply

What does it mean to be a team player? This is not cliché. Most companies eventually find a great salesperson (or other important role) who makes rain, head and shoulders above the others, but simultaneously creates havoc within the team. They are a great individual performer, given leeway, slack, permission to dance around the rules, yet in the end are destructive to the organization.

You cannot build an organization solely focused on individual performers. The way the team works together becomes more important than any individual on the team. Yes, you need Steph Curry to drain a shot from downtown, but someone has to inbound and pass him the ball.

Building a competent organization goes beyond individual competence.

Individual performers have their own vision of the way the world works and how they intend to make their mark on the world. How do you capture that attention to get those individuals to work as a team? A dramatic shift occurs when we invert our understanding how goals drive behavior. It is not that a person has a goal, but that a goal has the person. It is not that the team has a goal, but that the goal has the team. It attracts the team, pulls them together in coordinated synchronicity.

We give short shrift to mission statements, vision statements, with flowery language. What is a marriage if it is only two individual performers under the same roof? Its mission must be more or the marriage will underperform. What is an organization if it is only a set of individual performers collected in the same room? Its mission must be more or the organization will underperform.

Without an ironclad focus, it will never become a competent organization. This is not a goal the team has. This is a goal that has the team.

Still the Team’s Solution

Leave a reply

“You are still going to use the team to solve their own problem, but you are going to provide leadership to make it happen,” I said.

“So, how am I supposed to pull them out of their malaise,” Rory asked.

“First, you have to be crystal clear with the work instructions.
People will follow general direction with general responses.. If you need specific output, your work instructions must be very specific.”

“So, this is on me,?” Rory clarified.

“Yes,” I said. “That is who I am talking to. You are the leader, this is on you.”

“Okay, what does it sound like?”

“First, does the way that you state the problem have any bearing on the way we approach the solution?” I smiled.

Rory nodded.

“Be crystal clear about the goal. The first step is to make sure there is no ambiguity about what the solution looks like. Then announce there may be several ways to get there. And, it is up to the team to generate those ideas. In that declaration, you have silenced their inner critic and opened the door to explore new paths to solve the problem.”

“I’m listening,” Rory said.

“With only one idea, everyone is a critic. With multiple ideas, we can discuss the merits, workability and effectiveness. Your team will not get there without you. That is your role.

A Question of Confidence

Leave a reply
“Why do you think your team is underperforming?” I asked. “I’m not sure,” Rory replied. “Well, let’s start with what you see,” I nodded. “If you stand back and just observe, what do you see?  What do you hear?” “Okay, if I just report what I see, the team second-guesses itself. They know the goal. They each stand around watching and waiting for someone to make the first move. Somebody eventually does. Then, there is the big question – Are you sure?  Asked in that way, everyone stops.” “Without direction, isn’t it prudent to ask that question?” I wanted to know. “Yes, but it’s not a question of clarification, it’s a question of confidence,”  Rory explained.  “Every member of the team is looking for the down side, to protect themselves, protect the team.” “Protect the team from what?” I probed. “Protect the team from failure, I guess.  I am a pretty easy going manager, so I know people are going to make mistakes, but, even still, when there is a setback, they can tell I get a little testy.” “It’s a natural reaction.  When we touch a hot stove, it’s a good idea not to linger.”  I squinted to look inside Rory’s eyes.  “Getting testy comes with the territory.  It’s a gut reaction to let us know something is wrong. The question is what do you do about it?” “What do you mean?” Rory asked. “Do you let the team wallow in ambiguity, wondering what you will do with your disappointment?  Or do you circle the wagons and work your way out?” “My question is the same,” Rory said.  “What do you mean?” “The team came up with one way to proceed, but didn’t have confidence in the direction.  You and I both know there are at least a half dozen different ways to get the job done, any of which will work just fine.  The team is afraid they will pick the wrong one.  This is not a matter of methodology.  This is a question of confidence, confidence to explore, confidence to debate, confidence to disagree, then agree and commit.  The question is what do you, as the leader, do about it?”