STRETCHED

The team is high output, high quality focussed

Introduction

Those readers who have been following this series will recall that the underpinning ‘Star Model’ is as follows (for those interested in research into the Star Model please go to www.tms.co.nz/research).

Star Performing Team Model

Broadly speaking the top half of the model maps the ‘hard’ or ‘performance’ factors necessary in teams whereas the bottom half of the model is more concerned with the ‘people’ factors.

Background

This is the first article in a three part series on ‘Stretched’.

• The theory and research that underpins the ‘Stretched’ concept (this article Issue #13);
• Practical tips for teams and individuals on how to benefit from being ‘Stretched’ without being distressed (next article Issue #14);
• Using the Star Performing Team Profile as a tool to ‘Stretch’ a team’s performance: Case Study in the Pharmaceutical Industry (Issue #15).
  

The theory and research that underpins the ‘Stretched’ concept

The whole idea with this factor is that the team develops a high achievement orientation, both collectively and individually. It becomes a value, a norm. Aiming high is seen as a way of working. Team and individual targets are deliberately and consciously a real stretch. Realistic but high targets are the key to success.

A number of recognised theories with supporting research explain this ‘Stretched’ concept. The key points and supporting theories are:

• Goal Setting - Teams who set specific, challenging and measurable goals achieve higher performance.
• Motivation Towards Goals – Individual team members will have different levels of motivation towards goals dictated by the energy they put into opportunities and obstacles.
• Expectancy – Motivation is also determined by the expectancy to be able to achieve goals. The ideal is a 50% probability of success.
• Feedback Loop – Some balanced way of looking across a wide range of measures (Business Performance, Customer Performance, Learning etc.) is required to distil a small number of targets that can be regularly reviewed for progress for the team and the organisation’s goals.
• High-Energy Teams – Teams need a regular additive process to review their people, dynamics, goals, methods, resources and rewards in order to keep focussed and energised.

Each of these will now be expanded.

TOP

Goal-Setting (Principle researcher Edwin Locke)

You have probably heard the phrase “Just do your best” many times. The problem is we never really know whether or not we have achieved such a vague goal. The research is quite clear that specific and challenging goals lead to higher performance. The goals of a team ideally should inform it what needs to be done plus indicate how much effort will need to be expended in order to achieve it.

However, the degree to which an individual team member will put energy into goal setting and then finding ways to achieve such goals is a question of motivation. Dick McCann, co-author of the Team Management System, has researched the differences in team member goal motivation.

Opportunity or Obstacles Focus (Principle researcher Dick McCann)

This research proposes that to a large extent a person’s goal setting and achievement orientation is directly related to their orientation towards risk.

All through our life we are faced with opportunities and obstacles; they crop up in every project we undertake no matter how much forward planning is undertaken. What determines peoples' risk profiles is the different emphasis they place upon either 'seeing the opportunities' or 'seeing the obstacles'. Some people treat obstacles as an opportunity to take a new direction whereas others use them as an excuse to give up. Some people treat obstacles as a stumbling block but for others they are stepping-stones to the future. However if we only focus on the opportunities we tend to ignore the obstacles and that's where major catastrophes, like company failures, can arise.

Figure 1: The Risk-Orientation Model

TOP

People who look mainly towards the Opportunities have a high Moving Towards Goals (MTG) Energy; that is they set challenging goals and regularly achieve them. When difficulties occur or blockages to their goals arise, they are quick to generate alternative pathways and move around the blockage, still focusing on the goal. As well, they are generally optimistic and full of hope that everything will turn out for the best. They tend to put less energy into finding faults with proposals, projects and people and usually have a positive attitude that enthuses those around them. For them, the future is a rosy place and one they want to be part of, because it is likely to be better than where they are now.

People who look mainly towards the Obstacles have a lower MTG Energy and are less able to generate pathways around obstacles. When blockages occur they are more likely to keep pressing forward down the same pathway and will quickly give up when their energy is expended. As well, they tend to be more pessimistic and will anticipate the worst scenario when problems arise. They will usually put a lot of effort into fault-finding, and this can be both a strength and a weakness. When faced with a new idea they may focus only on all the difficulties that might prevent the idea from becoming a reality. Obstacles-oriented people are also more comfortable with the present and past as, to them, the future is not a rosy place but one that is fraught with difficulties. Some even hanker for 'the good old days' when life was much better than it is now. In the context of MTG energy the above sounds negative and would work against ‘Stretch’. However, a team without anyone who is able to see and point out the downside of projects and targets would be at a serous disadvantage.

For ease of interpretation, scores on the Risk-Orientation Model are collapsed into one number called the QO2 (Opportunities-Obstacles Quotient). High QO2 scorers tend to seize opportunities and discount obstacles, whereas the opposite occurs for low QO2 scorers.

Dick McCann’s research on the Risk-Orientation Model has created a way to compare people in the workplace and analyze their innate approach to risk. Individuals' approach to risk can be measured by five subscales as shown in the model above. A personal profile mapping an individuals scores on these sub-scales, and coaching advice on how to balance where necessary is available from any TMS accredited consultant (or e-mail info@tms.co.nz).

Getting the balance right in a Star Performing Team is the key to satisfying the ‘Stretched’ concept and would probably have the following elements using the Dick McCann model:

1. Have high levels of MTG Energy. This is the energy people deploy in moving towards their goals. It is the energy that gives them the determination, enthusiasm and resilience to formulate and achieve the organizational goals. My ideal team member would have a high MTG Energy and be prepared to take balanced risks to seize opportunities.
2. View obstacles as challenges, not problems. When an obstacle arises, successful team members are able to generate lots of possible pathways and ultimately select the best one to effectively overcome the obstacle. People without Multi-Pathway skills tend to follow only a single pathway and this gives them less flexibility in problem-solving.
3. Be optimistic. Optimism is a characteristic that is the basis of positive thinking. It is a psychological resource that gives people a general expectancy that they will succeed in their endeavors. Expected success will in turn give people the will to expend more effort to realize their goals.
4. Spend time on 'fault-finding'. While it is important to expend considerable effort in looking for the opportunities, it is equally important to 'look for Murphy'. Murphy's famous law, 'If anything can go wrong, it will', seems to abound in this age of rapid change. Time spent on looking for all the potential pitfalls and preparing contingency and preventative action plans is a fundamental requirement of a successful team.

Focus on the future, but remember the past and learn from it. For successful team players the future is a 'rosy place'. Somewhere they want to be. They are full of hope because they believe that things can be better than they are now and better than they have been. However, they can also look back and see how the organization has moved from where it was to where it is now. They will build on this journey and link past success to the future.

Research shows that most people will focus on opportunities at least two times more than focusing on obstacles.

When formulating a ‘stretch’ goal too much focus on opportunities may lead to an overestimated target. This is not ideal since it creates an over-promise, under-deliver scenario. Likewise too much focus on obstacles may mean the target is conservative and too easy to attain. This may deliver the promise but the team may have been able to achieve so much more. Hence the ideal (from a stretch perspective) is a slight bias on the opportunities whilst also recognizing the potential obstacles.

TOP

Expectancy (Principle researcher Victor Vroome)

What this concept argues is that people’s motivation to get into action depends on three things working together. First, the degree to which they ‘expect’ their action will lead directly to a ‘given result’, secondly, how attractive that given result looks to them and finally, how likely it is that a given amount of effort will achieve the desired result.

So a team planning their agenda will only be confident (and ‘expect’ to succeed) when they know clearly and unambiguously what they must do in order to achieve the desired result coupled with a belief in themselves that they are likely to succeed. The ‘given result’ for a team can be financial success, security of tenure, a sense of belonging to a winning team, a large bonus or even enhanced reputation or image. There is an interplay here between succeeding as a team but also meeting individual needs.

As a hypothetical example let’s envisage an executive team of a medium sized business. They will have created a strategic plan with goals and targets that meet the approval of their shareholders. They know what is expected of them. They will then want to know and decide what programmes, initiatives and projects are required, their delivery dates and their expected added value to business performance. The team will also like to think that the amount of effort they exert towards their goals will be reasonably related to the results achieved for the organisation. This will also translate a positive financial result into a large bonus for each team member. The reason they work so hard is to earn top dollar for the company and themselves.

Consider a scenario where this ideal picture is disturbed. Despite the effort going in by the team and some previous history of successful performance suddenly this quarter’s results are down. The team may be upset, frustrated and perplexed. Their effort and tactics have always worked before. Several interesting things may be immediately noticeable in the team’s behaviour. Suddenly they are not so driven to ensure projects and actions are on time. The thrill of the chase has lost some of its sparkle. The team is lacking in motivation and may be quite downhearted.

Explaining this in terms of Expectancy theory looks like this. The effort put in by the team on its various initiatives is conditional on it achieving its goals i.e. high performance. The team believe this is the route for them to achieve a high dollar bonus and other benefits that accrue from being a successful team. The attractiveness of the reward attached to the outcome is also high. However, the team’s effort this time say, has not translated into goal success. Suddenly the performance- reward linkage is broken. If the economy is suddenly turning down, for example, yet the team has still worked hard they may no longer feel the performance-reward linkage is fair and could become de-motived. Add to this the team’s realisation that whatever they had done would not have achieved target then the effort-performance linkage is also broken – a further de-motivator. The reward system is no longer valid plus there is no way that current effort will achieve the desired results.

This is an oversimplification since other actions and strategies may emerge. Also it does assume that teams place a high importance on achieving goals, know what they must do to achieve the desired results and consider there is a high probability of their performing well should they exert a high level of effort. Nevertheless, it helps us to understand this linkage between effort and performance, between performance and rewards, and finally, between the rewards and team goal satisfaction.

In simple terms this is a theory of self-interest, the attractiveness of rewards, and the expectations of individuals and teams. It is irrelevant what is realistic or rational. The team’s expectations of performance, reward and goal satisfaction outcomes will determine the effort level not the outcomes themselves.

There has to be a belief by the team and its members that such goals and targets are attainable, at least at the 50% probability level. Then if the team just miss - they can see it was within their reach.

If, however, hard effort falls short dramatically of a target (i.e. one that was unrealistic) then this could later lead to lost confidence and failure rather than continuing success. There is a point beyond which targets that over-stretch can be at best de-motivating and at worst extremely stressful. However, well timed and directed high output and quality targets can be very motivating for a team and can become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Feedback Loop (Principle Researchers Kaplan and Norton)

In the area of setting and monitoring targets for senior management teams Kaplan and Norton suggested that what was needed to measure performance was a structured methodology for continually linking an organisation’s Vision, Strategies & Objectives with a set of predefined, quantifiable measurements. In a means-end chain the performance of each team (and each individual member) needs to accumulate into the goal achievement for the organisation. Taken to its natural conclusion each team needs to consider targets and feedback methods in the areas covered in the Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: The Balanced Scorecard

TOP

It is only by covering what Kaplan and Norton call the balanced scorecard that teams can ensure that they are stretched in all the key areas. Such a notion helps a team cover the right breadth and depth, plus it enables them to regularly check progress thereby strengthening the link between planned versus actual performance, and team member expectations of performance.

High Energy Teams (Principle Researcher Dick McCann)

Dick McCann in his research has uncovered a powerful development process or sequence for teams to go through that effectively will ‘stretch’ them because it energises them. In practice the sequence can be varied to fit a series of modular team development workshops. Where to focus the team’s development can also be diagnosed via the Strategic Team Development Profile.

The key idea is that a team should (in my experience at least once and ideally twice a year) ask itself eight fundamental questions about itself. By asking these questions and agreeing answers to them the team will develop a ‘stretched’ position. Even if only some of the more important questions (to that team) are used as workshop agendas then the desired effect will derive. So High-Energy Teams are created when the following model sequence is applied:

Figure 3: The High-Energy Team Model

TOP

Who are we?
Each person brings different strengths to a team and team members need to know ‘what makes each person tick’ so that individual differences can be harnessed to achieve maximum performance levels. The workplace behaviour of team members can be understood by examining their Work Preferences (Team Management Profile - TMP), Risk-Orientation (Opportunities and Obstacles Profile – QO2) and Values (Window on Work Values Profile – WOWV). The development of behavioural ground rules aligned with agreed shared team values is also important. Contact the writer for more information about these profiles and workshops to ensure the maximum benefits for any team.

Where are we now?
Before planning where you are heading as a team, it is useful to look at team balance, whether team members are likely to be risk averse or risk accepting, and whether conflicting values are likely to arise. A Situational Analysis will allow you to look at the team’s key Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats and to determine whether the necessary resources are available to achieve the team’s vision.

Where are we going?
To work with energy, commitment and enthusiasm, a team needs to know where it is going. It has to have a vision that is aligned with the organisation’s mission and goals. It needs to understand its purpose – what makes it different from other teams, what its outputs are and what outcomes they lead to. A Team Purpose Statement can be used as a structure for the team to determine its specific purpose and how that aligns with the organisational vision.

How will we get there?
To turn a vision into reality, it is necessary to systematically set objectives, action plans and measures of performance. It is important to plan the route from where you are now to where you want to be.

What is expected of us?
People find it difficult to perform if they don’t know what they are meant to be doing. All team members should fully understand their role in the team and what they are responsible and accountable for.

What support do we need?
Once the team finds answers to the first five questions it can then focus on what support is required to deliver results. This means evaluating training, development and team learning needs. Also the necessary resources and systems required will need consideration.

How effective are we?
A High-Energy Team is one that regularly reviews its effectiveness and continually improves its performance. Benchmarks for success can be established and procedures for learning from mistakes implemented. A regular process of ‘Questioning’ helps prevent complacency.

What recognition do we get?
In general, most teams will not attain high-energy levels unless there is adequate recognition for the accomplishments of all team members. This can be achieved through feedback, remuneration, fringe benefits and promotion.

LINKING SKILLS
The processes that ensure all eight questions are integrated and coordinated are known as ‘Linking’. Team members and particularly the team leader need to be effective at a whole range of Linking Skills.

Summary

Stretch flows out of alignment and is fuelled by it. The team in achieving alignment on its priorities needs to pursue realistic but bold goals and targets. Values, orientation toward risk, measurement and reinforcement techniques, and energising processes can all assist a team to maintain high quality and high output. Much of this activity and process needs to be driven collectively as a team. However, each individual team member also needs to pursue stretch aims with vigour. If a team is truly aligned in terms of its direction, stakeholders and values, then good leadership bridges the chasm between theoretical targets and a total stretch mindset which can lead to extraordinary performance.

TOP

Peter Robinson
Chief Executive Officer
Team Management Services Ltd.

P.O. Box 21-194, Henderson, Waitakere 0650, New Zealand
Tel: 64-9-836-5317 Fax 64-9-836-5318
email: peter@tms.co.nz
Website: www.tms.co.nz

© 2005 Team Management Service