Effective Team Decision-Making and Problem-Solving

Previous ‘In-Touch’ articles have explored best practice approaches to ‘Leadership and Alignment’ in a team. Once a team has appropriate leadership and the direction, goals, and values have been agreed, a team needs to be able to deal effectively with issues and challenges along the route to its intended destination.

Problems, opportunities and decisions will need to be dealt with in a way that ensures the right things arrive on the agenda and are progressed in the best way possible.

To assist teams achieve this I plan to cover in the next three articles: Issues #7, 8, and 9, the following selection from this wide topic of ‘Effective Team Decision-Making and Problem-Solving”:

• Effective Project Management; (this article)
• Methods, processes and techniques that teams can use for Effective Problem-Solving and Decision-Making; (next article)
• Using ‘Red/Blue’ type meetings to progress a team’s monthly agendas. (third article in this series)

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.

I suggest readers use the Star like a topic finder, it helps to know where to look. Each Star point has a good deal of useful material in it for both managers and their advisors. In these articles other models and practical aids will be explained. If the Star point is the ‘where’ to look then the explanatory models are the ‘hows’ in order to put the ideas into practice.

The third Factor in the Star Model is now introduced.

TOP

Effective

The team is effective at decision-making, problem-solving and recognising opportunities.

Effective problem-solving and decision-making in teams is a complex combination of definitions, analytical processes, and often emotional, political and interpersonal dynamics.

To improve performance of the team in this area of activity each team member needs to understand these concepts and their current operation. The team should then discuss the processes and behaviours that will be most acceptable for future problem-solving and decision-making.

However, team members will need to bear in mind that this area is not about creating harmony. Essentially this is where the team should have vigorous debate (and potential disharmony) in order to increase the quality of its decision-making. Of course once the team has decided what to do in any given set of circumstances ideally it will harmoniously get in behind that decision.

Articles on achieving ‘Harmony’ (the opposite Star Factor in the model) will be presented later in the series.

Definitions

Some useful definitions (my own summary) include:

• A problem exists for a team when there is a mismatch between actual and expected performance and they are doubtful about how to resolve the discrepancy.
• An opportunity represents a chance to exceed expected performance.
• A decision occurs when the team, via some agreed process, makes a judgment about what to do about a particular problem or opportunity.

Effective Project Management

Teams regularly use projects as a means of solving problems, finding opportunities and making effective decisions. Since projects are now so all pervasive in organisations this article will attempt to cover some key project application questions that may benefit our ‘Friends of TMS’ network.

TOP

Over the past 15yrs there have been numerous assignments undertaken by TMS in Australasia facilitating Strategic Planning workshops. Such workshops represent a team/organisation pursuing ‘Alignment’.

In such facilitated workshops there can (and has been) anything from between 10 and 100 people. Sometimes the top team do this on their own and gradually, over subsequent strategic planning cycles, include more and more of the wider management group and other technical/professional team members. This achieves wider ‘buy-in’, more ideas and plenty of hands to do the work during and after the workshop(s) (can range between 2 and 8 workshop days per annum).

Earlier phases in any such workshop sequence will have had sessions to create or refresh the organisation’s vision, values, strategic direction and overall strategic imperatives. It is this earlier strategic formulation activity that creates the brainstormed project options that determine which projects need spotlighting by the workshop teams.

Essentially there are three parallel questions that need to be asked about Project Management in these situations:

1. Given that there will often be many projects simultaneously competing for resources and personnel, how can effective project prioritization and co-ordination occur?
2. How can a team start to effectively scope a particular project option identified from the strategic process?
3. Once a project gets the ‘green light’ how can its team members be trained/facilitated quickly to ‘Star’ perform?
   

1. How Can Effective Project Prioritization and Co-ordination Occur?

Generally speaking the most important projects will emerge from the process of strategic planning itself as outlined above and summarized here.

Project Prioritization Process

Particular strategies require particular projects. However, it is sometimes the case that a number of different projects can offer the same or similar results. For example, a growth strategy can lead to projects on product development or increased sales of existing products.

It is, therefore, advisable to develop an appreciation for different criteria that may help distinguish between projects A and B. One approach is to first divide Project candidates up into four categories as follows:

	Low Value	High Value
	Strategic Low Value	Strategic High Value
	Tactical Low Value	Tactical High Value

TOP

Strategic or Tactical

Since we are concerned here with strategic projects then we need a process of distinguishing them from the merely tactical. This is not to infer that tactical projects have no value but merely that they should be ‘parked’ in this process until we have clarified the truly important strategic projects. These are the projects that will ultimately make the difference to the organization’s long term prospects.

With a facilitated strategic workshop a presentation of the difference between these options has been a useful start. In essence a strategic project is one that has an obvious potential to affect the 3-5 year picture. It will probably be somewhat novel or different in that it gives a distinctive long term competitive advantage. This can be because we have decided to do something differently in the market place directly or that we need a breakthrough in terms of our capability – perhaps some new technological advantage, for example.

Tactical projects, on the other hand, are more likely to be reactive rather than proactive responses to short term pressures on the organisation. Instead of a cure they are perhaps more of a ‘sticking plaster’ approach.

For example, in response to increased market competition an engineering parts manufacturer could form a strategic response by entering into a strategic alliance with an engineering service provider. This could become a strategic project. A tactical response to falling sales might be to hold an end of year discount sale. This could become a project to decide which items etc. should be made and offered for this purpose. Potentially a useful project for this year’s budget but not a strategic response.

Having presented these ideas a discussion and vote on the project list should lead to clarification of those projects which are strategic and those which are not.

High or Low Value

The workshop participants now need to be able to consider the strategic projects having ‘parked’ the tactical options. An open discussion in a small group or some form of voting system in a large group can often lead to planning teams sifting out the high value projects. Generally some form of agreed criteria list can help with this. One that we have successfully used is called “Investment” , “ Pain”, and “Benefit” analysis.

The idea here is to score the “pain” and then score the “benefit” with one offsetting the other. An example format follows:

VOTING SHEET

The object is to score the strategic project items out of 10 where 10 represents a net “High Value” option for the organization’s future and 1 a net “Low Value” option. In doing this it is important to consider together the “investment”, the “Pain” and the “Benefit” in order to judge the net value.

The overall philosophy is that pain and investment are what you expend when implementing a strategy and the benefit is the return you receive for that.

The following examples are provided as prompts to assist your thinking. They illustrate the need to weigh simultaneously these three factors: investment, pain, benefit. After considering them and any other relevant points you can think of please use your judgment to assign a total score out of 10. This is for the level of net value you think will be associated with pursuing the strategic project in question after weighing the investment and pain against the benefits expected.

TOP

Together with the aforementioned analysis there should now be available to a planning workshop a list of prioritised projects.

Project Prioritisation Process

Further Project Categorisation

For the sake of illustration let us assume we now have twenty projects on our list. Experience suggests that workshop teams need to be configured differently depending on the type of project: ‘External Opportunity’ or ‘Internal Capability Improvement’ initiatives.

An external opportunity project is more concerned with ways of achieving growth in the market or expanding into new markets with the same or new products. Contrasted with these are the Internal Capability projects which are more concerned with improving internal processes and resource allocation.

Our flow diagram illustrates this progression:

Project Prioritisation Process

TOP

Co-ordination of Workshop Teams

With those projects looking outwards towards, for example, market growth then the workshop team’s make-up should ideally be cross-functional but with a bias and leadership coming from Marketing and Sales (or Business Development etc.)

However, the fact that members also include organisation representation from other departments allows for a balanced project perspective. It forces the team to keep a realistic ‘eye’ on implementation. An externally focused project towards a market or client needs to keep in perspective the complete supply chain, product development cycle and launch to market process.

Conversely, with those projects which are functionally concerned with Capability Improvement a less diverse team is recommended. For example, the ‘Improved Cycle Time’ project for say the product development process itself would benefit from project team members who have expertise in that area. Professional and functional expertise are essential in this type of team project, although a small representation from other areas may be useful. In this example, membership and leadership would come from the Product Development team, perhaps with a small Marketing and Production/Quality representation.

Key Point

The key idea here is the more department specific the project is the more expertise is needed from that area. A problem that arises with pure cross-functional teams for Capability projects is that some (non-expert) members become redundant and feel unable to contribute effectively. So in a real time workshop they will add most value in their own area of expertise working on a relevant Capability project.

Before the Workshop

Timing and project team membership is therefore a very important pre-workshop topic and is best agreed well in advance with senior management. For example, if vision, values and overall strategic direction takes 2 days, then project scoping can take another 2 days (one day on ten External Opportunity projects and the other on ten Internal Capability Projects). The teams need to be in place, leaders and others briefed and ready with laptops and project templates.

TOP

The prioritization process will point up the projects that are needed to be subjected to the scoping exercise. Punctuated discussion and presentations form part of this two day project scoping process. So having selected our projects and our workshop teams, some form of process is required to begin scoping each project within our two workshop days (continuing our illustration).

This involves each workshop team simultaneously working on their designated project to produce a draft ‘Project Charter’. It should be noted that the workshop team members may or may not become the members of the project team post the strategic workshops. Part of the scoping involves identifying the best options for project team membership.

Advantages of Project Scoping En-Masse

The advantages of scoping projects en-masse like this are as follows:

• It creates a momentum and motivation of its own all at the same time.
• It creates project champions.
• It avoids fragmentation and lack of communication between projects that often occurs where this is done ad hoc outside the workshop (here everyone in the workshop gets the overall picture of the key projects via report back mechanisms).
• It allows for a post-workshop sanity check by senior management to be sure that the projects to be proceeded with are really the ‘right’ ones in terms of the organisation’s imperatives. Sometimes once a project is scoped it can be raised or demoted in terms of its importance.
• Senior management can use the suggestions for project team membership contained in each project draft.
• Since all projects are scoped simultaneously a unified methodology creates efficiency and effectiveness. Everyone is clear on how to go about it – there is plenty of advice on hand.
• Finally, the workshop members become more willing project team members post the workshops to actually deliver the projects. This leads to the momentum (first point above) created lasting for longer such that strategic objectives are progressed significantly. To keep up this momentum regular project presentations to senior management are recommended.
  

Our task now is to launch the projects and get the teams off to a good start. There are many ways to do this but one successful method is to facilitate/train a project team in the use of the work (functions) or activity cycle (as adapted) that Margerison and McCann’s Team Management Wheel implies. This can be used as a useful training aid as follows:

Project Management System - High level Summary

Margerison McCann Types of Work Wheel

The idea here is that a team uses each segment and linking in the middle as a checklist and a series of touchstones in a facilitated session. It helps ensure that key project elements are not inadvertently overlooked. The first of these facilitated modules is highlighted below and provides the reader with an insight into how this can work.

TOP

Advising

• background/initiation
• objectives
• people: skills; team mix
• deliverables
• SWOT

These high level prompts can also be further expanded to create a road map of practical steps and questions for a project team to consider:

Background / Initiation

• What information is already at hand for this project?
• How was the need identified?
• What is driving this project?
• What are the sponsor’s desired solutions?
• Does it connect to other projects?

Objectives / Deliverables

• Define the overall purpose.
• Document defined and specific objectives expressed as outcomes to be achieved.
• What will be different?
• What will be done by when?
• What tangible products will be produced by the project?

People: skills; team mix

• Who is the sponsor of this project?
• Who is the project manager?
• What other skills and competencies are required?
• Who else should be involved in this project?
• Roles, goals and rules?

SWOT on this project

• Its strengths?
• Its weaknesses?
• The opportunities?
• The threats?
• What issues are raised?

The original Project Charter is re-visited and expanded out by the actual project team.

The ‘fast tracking’ option implied here for important projects is not to be underestimated by organisation leaders. For more information on how to ‘fast track’ project teams contact nathan@tms.co.nz

Conclusion

This first article in “Effective Team Problem-Solving and Decision-Making” has considered some tools and practical ideas on how to apply this maxim to Strategic Projects in particular.

Some key points:

• There is a need to spend regular quality time with the wider team in strategic formulation and strategic implementation.
• When translating strategy into projects/initiatives – prioritise.
• Use well thought-out teams to scope potential strategic projects.
• Apply sound process methodology to a series of facilitated workshops for larger groups such that the executive management team can play a leadership/mentoring role in the workshops.
• Beyond the workshops keep the momentum going through training, regular presentation updates and resource checks.
• Use the Team Wheel as a touchstone in project management for team and individual benefit.

The next article will consider in more detail general problem-solving and decision-making techniques for teams.

Would you like to become accredited to use the TMS profiles?
Would you like to investigate having TMS profiles facilitated for you and your team?

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

© 2003 Team Management Service