|
Business Improvement Specialists |
|
Business Improvement Specialists |
About Teams |
|
There are several issues that must be addressed and agreed upon before the initiation of Team Building. To begin the prework to launching teams, the first step is for leaders to create and agree upon a set of consistent business objectives that all employees can understand and affect. Business objectives form the backbone of the organization and create a powerful energy-aligning force. With all due respect to the notion of empowerment, it is absolutely appropriate that strategic issues such as business objectives are set by the leaders. This does not say that input from others is taboo, however, it is ultimately the role of the leaders to set direction, strategy and objectives for the organization at large. After the business objectives are set, specific and measurable goals should be created. For example, if one of the business objectives is to reduce cycle times of core business processes, it may make sense to set a goal such as reducing the time it takes from when a customer places an order until the time they receive the order by 50%. If one of the business objectives is to reduce costs, it would be appropriate to set a goal like: reduce the amount of rework due to quality problems in Department A by 25%. If one of the business objectives is to increase the degree of value-added services for customers, you may set a goal like: decrease the number of steps through which a customer has to go to complete a business transaction with our company by 30%. Based on the nature and breadth of identified goals, the first step is to decide whether or not a team is the best approach for each goal. All initiatives do not require or even thrive under a team approach. There are a few questions leaders can ask to help clarify whether or not a team is the best approach for a given situation: Will the result of this initiative be more productive if we utilize a combination of people who have a vested interest in the outcome rather than have an individual work toward accomplishing the goal? Knowing that teams have a definite start-up period during which task productivity is generally low, is there enough time available to utilize a team approach? Is the scope of the issue so broad that the best ideas and solutions will require more than one viewpoint or approach? Is it highly critical that people support and buy-in to the outcome of the initiative? Are those sponsoring the team willing to truly give the team decision making power within negotiated boundaries and let the team implement data-based efforts even if the sponsors think another way might be best? Is the organization willing and able to provide a team with the necessary training resources and ongoing support they will need to be successful? Are those sponsoring the team willing to truly give the team decision making power within negotiated boundaries and let the team implement data-based efforts even if the sponsors think another way might be best? If the answers to these questions are yes, then a team may be the right approach. If the answer to any of these questions is no, the team approach should be re-evaluated. If a team approach is agreed upon, the next step is to create the appropriate team to work toward the objective. In the simplest terms there are two major types of teams: natural work teams and cross-functional task teams. A natural work team is a group of people who regularly work together on an daily basis around a shared output. Some departments are analogous to natural work teams. They share a common purpose that is ongoing. They generally rely on each other for success of the whole group. Cross-functional teams generally come together around a specific goal and then disband once the goal is accomplished. These types of teams include teams who focus on larger business process initiatives such as product development, customer service, order fulfillment, and order generation. Each member brings with them a perspective from their part of the process. The goal is typically larger than any one of the team members or their respective departments. With natural work teams, it is important to discuss and agree upon the purpose of the work group. For example, an Information Systems Department's purpose may be to: provide timely and accurate information to internal clients which supports business decisions that add value to our customers and help to exceed their expectations while increasing operating efficiency. Measurable goals should then be established. These should be specific improvements that the natural work team achieves to fulfill their purpose. These improvements are typically in the 10-25% range, although there are certainly no preset limits. As the team matures, they select their own continuous improvement goals, measures, and timeliness. Regarding team member selection, those closest to the identified process or problem often generate the best ideas for improvement. Many breakthrough improvements come not from upper managers and supervisors, but from those people who do the work on a daily basis. Again, the nature of the goal should direct member selection. It is often not appropriate to have front-line employees form a team to create corporate strategy nor would it be appropriate to have a team of vice -presidents deciding how best to operate the front-line. Once team membership has been agreed upon, each team that is to be launched should be formally chartered. A Team Charter gives the team purpose and direction. Teams that are not formally chartered spend a great deal of time figuring out why they exist, what they are expected to achieve, and how they are going to accomplish their objectives. Some teams actually disintegrate at this point and never achieve anything. In our experience, the most helpful thing a sponsor group can do for a team is create a thorough charter. The team members should have the opportunity to discuss and ratify the charter as they see fit. Ultimately, the sponsor group and the team must negotiate the expectations and address the concerns of the team before the team can even think about becoming productive. |
|
Teams |
|
Burns Associates |