Posts Tagged ‘Team’

I don’t think it matters what type of organization you work with, keeping your best people is important. I was looking back over some old resource material the other day and found (or re-found) an article from Entrepreneur.com that offers seven suggestions for how to keep good team members, as the economy improves. I think the suggestions apply very well to team members (I’m convinced that project success is really dependent on the individuals that make up the project team and the extra work many teams are doing now with minimal resources):

1. Revisit Old Promises: It’s important to address any benefit cuts or salary freezes which were agreed upon by team members due to economic conditions, but it’s also important to review any other promises made to the team that may have been forgotten. For example: the extra day off for working the weekend, the bonus that was promised but wasn’t realized, etc. The team will remember, so you had better remember too.
2. Take Action: If employees have concerns or complaints, don’t ignore them. If team members are asking for additional responsibilities, give them an opportunity to participate in an expanded role on the team. When team members feel that their voice matters, they are more inclined to feel satisfied at work.
3. Have Fun: A lot of teams plan activities outside of the office. If that works for your team, that’s great. However, it is possible to make the work environment a fun and enjoyable place to be. Focusing on "all work all the time" can make the job a drag. Sometimes all it takes is a 5-10 minute break during the day or bringing in a pizza once in a while to ease the tension and make the workplace fun. Be creative. One of the teams here spends time once in a while shooting hoops for a few minutes during the afternoon to keep everyone’s mind fresh.
4. Keep Talking: Keep the team up to date regarding the status of the company and its prospects. This can go a long way to ease fears about the future. Our company meets together every quarter to talk about our successes (and failures) during the quarter. We also get an update on our company’s health. I find this hour very valuable and appreciate that our CEO makes it happen every quarter. It may not be a company-wide meeting in your organization, but you can certainly keep your team up to date.
5. Be Transparent: Make sure to communicate both the company’s good and bad news without "sugar-coating" the bad news. It’s important to speak to every member of the team individually from time to time to let them know how they are doing and how they fit into the company’s (and the team’s) plans for growth.
6. Address Inequities: Rewarding employees based upon performance can be a good idea, but if there are significant pay inequities on the team, they aren’t a secret. Now is a good time to address pay inequities with raises where appropriate. As a project leader, you might not have the authority to implement a pay raise for a key employee, but you sure have some influence with who does.
7. Be Realistic: As the economy improves, you may very well loose some team members to the "bigger or better" opportunity. However, if you can show the team that they are important to the organization’s success, and are open and honest with them regarding what’s happening at your company and their future, they will more than likely stick with the team.

What do you do to keep your best employees?

Strategic Project Management

I started my career in the industrial business. I worked with contractors, machinists and other tradesmen who were building and maintaining factories, refineries and other such structures. I spent most of my time with mechanical engineers and their blue line drawings. It was a much different work from the high tech world I live in now.

Some time ago, at the recommendation of a colleague, I read the book Shop Craft as Soulcraft by Matthew Crawford. It was less a book about the author’s love of motorcycles and more about the psychology of work than I had expected, but I enjoyed it. Because of my experiences as a young man, I think I could relate to his descriptions of the tactile nature of the work done in the trades as opposed to the more esoteric work done by knowledge workers in the high tech world of software and computers.

In the chapter titled The Contradictions of the Cubicle, Crawford describes the difference between the way a team of knowledge workers is led and the way a construction crew is directed. I think there is something we can learn from his description:

"…In the trades, a master offers his apprentice good reasons for acting in one way rather than another, the better to realize ends the goodness of which is readily apparent. The master has no need for a psychology of persuasion that will make the apprentice compliant to whatever purposes the master might dream up; those purposes are given and determinate. He does the same work as the apprentice, only better. He is able to explain what he does to the apprentice, because there are rational principles that govern it. Or he may explain a little, and the learning proceeds by example and imitation. For the apprentice there is a progressive revelation of the reasonableness of the master’s actions. He may not know why things have to be done a certain way at first, and have to take it on faith, but the rationale becomes apparent as he gains experience. Teamwork doesn’t have this progressive character. It depends on group dynamics, which are inherently unstable and subject to manipulation."

I’m not suggesting that project leaders need to have the same type of expertise as those working on the project team (the master and apprentice relationship). However, I think we can learn something by how the master interacts with the apprentice. It’s definitely not from a private office behind a closed door.

I often wonder how much more effective a project leader could be if he or she stepped away from the computer, put down the Gantt chart and spent time with team members helping overcome obstacles and facilitating an environment where individuals on the project team could learn and succeed. I have met many project leaders who do this, and I observe that they are also very successful and an integral part of an organization’s success (unfortunately, they are not always the norm).
Over the last couple of years we’ve heard a lot about the "new normal" and how it is impacting knowledge workers, project teams and project success. To be an effective project leader, I think we need to embrace some of the practices that are considered successful among the crews that work in the trades.

In my opinion, an important part of leadership is a willingness to roll up the sleeves and pitch in on a regular basis. I know that I have appreciated the leaders I have had who were willing to do that during my career. What’s more, they seem to have a better handle on what I was doing and were better able to help me succeed.

Does it makes sense to lead a project team of knowledge workers the same way a master directs the work of an apprentice? Probably not, but there are things we can learn from that relationship—and I think we should.

Strategic Project Management

If you have read my blog for any length of time, you know that I work with a team of mostly young people. Except for the fact that I am a 50-something guy who rides a Harley rather than a 20-something guy that rides a bullet bike, I don’t think there’s a real generation gap among my colleagues. Of course there are some age-related differences, but for the most part they are minor things less associated with work and more related to fashion and other personal preferences.

On those rare occasions when my older colleagues and I talk about the younger people on the team, we talk about how their passion and energy is contagious. In fact, I think we universally agree that our younger colleagues keep us on top of our game (hopefully that doesn’t come across as condescending, it isn’t meant to be). The luxury of sitting back and resting on our laurels just isn’t an option.

In an article written for LSJ.com, Doug Stites writes, "Young, talented workers have fresh points of view and learn about progressive ways to make business better. They can offer newer and more innovative business practices, agenda-setting theories, issue attention cycles, crisis management and the top social media tactics needed to market your company."

I have to agree with Mr. Stites. Over the last five or six years, I’ve noticed that young people entering the workforce are more empowered and technologically savvy than any other generation that I’m aware of. Something else Stites suggests also resonates with me, "Also, learn about their work styles. Younger generations are focused on quicker, more efficient ways of completing tasks. This translates into the workplace in positive ways."

On numerous occasions I have literally been blow away by what the members of my team are able to accomplish when given the opportunity to contribute at a higher level. There’s a lot we can learn from our younger colleagues and as Stites suggests, we should "[g]ive these young workers the credit they deserve for handling substantial responsibilities."

Is there a generation gap within your project team? If not, congratulations. If there is, you may want to rethink the way you interact with the team. Part of being a project leader is to help and mentor younger workers. According to Mr. Stites, "Companies should be flexible in accommodating young talent. Having an open mind to new and progressive ideas will encourage the growth of younger and older employees."

Strategic Project Management

I think we can all agree that engaged team members are more productive, happier and more likely to contribute to the project team at a higher level, however a study conducted last year by Hewitt Associates suggests that employee engagement experienced the biggest decline in more than 15 years. Is this still true today? What do you see among your team?

"It’s hard to pinpoint exactly why employees are so disconnected from their work these days," writes Toddi Gutner for the Business On Main section of MSN.com. "Industry experts cite any number of reasons, including management distrust, lack of job mobility in the recession, and CEO turnover, among other things."

Gutner suggests that the most important thing to consider (and I agree), is the "toxic" effect that disengaged employees can have on the rest of the workforce. My biggest concern, and I don’t think I’m alone, is the upcoming talent migration that will negatively impact all those organizations that took advantage of their workforce or didn’t do anything to keep their employees engaged during the tough economic times. I’m starting to see some of this happening now as the economy seems to be improving.

The good news is that it isn’t money that keeps people engaged. Gutner writes about Teresa Amabile, a professor of business administration and a director of research at the Harvard Business School, who asked 238 people to write in an electronic diary every day for five months about how they felt about their work and how committed they were to do a great job. I think you might find the results interesting.

"We found that the most important indicators on employee engagement [were] not things that most managers think about," said Amabile. "The most important event that happened was simply ‘making progress in meaningful work.’ That’s not what we expected."

When Amibile describes meaningful work, she talks about "work where the person is contributing something of real value, something they care about. If they could find meaning to the work—even contributing value to the team or the organization—this would make a difference."

This flies in the face of those who suggest that team members simply need to complete the tasks on their task lists. As project leaders, regardless of the work management tools we use, we need to be giving team members the opportunity to contribute at a higher level. And this means making sure everyone on the team understands what objectives their project might be designed to obtain, what their individual contribution might add to the project and how their efforts impact the rest of the team as they work towards a common goal.

Citing Lynne Sarikas, director of the MBA career center at Northwestern University’s College of Business, Gutner writes, "There are two factors to employee engagement: How the individual feels engaged with their specific job, and how the individual feels engaged with the company."

When measured against that scale, how is your team doing?

Strategic Project Management

I don’t think there’s any question that when team members are engaged in what they’re doing, we get their best work. The evidence clearly shows that there is a strong connection between employee engagement and performance. With that in mind, the other day I came across the following questionnaire created by The Employers Council that will allow you to score your team. On a scale of 1 (almost never) to 5 (very common), rate your team:

1.  More than half of my team routinely exceed performance expectations
2. Team members regularly take on new challenges and learn new skills
3. Team members understand how their job fits with the objectives of the project and overall company strategies and goals
4. There is a clear sense of collegiality with the team
5. Team members routinely recommend the organization to others
6. Problems are proactively approached, rather than reactively addressed
7. A significant number of new and creative ideas have come from team members in the last six months
8. Customers are wowed by the service they receive
9. Managers are active advocates for their team members
10. Team members believe what their managers tell them
11. Managers understand the expectation to and deliver on actively helping their team members develop new skills for current and future positions
12. Managers structure jobs with clear expectations and take into account the interests of team members
13. Managers understand the different communication styles of their team members and adjust their communication to meet team member styles
14. The company retains top talent

Add up the total score. 70 is a perfect score. 45 is about average, which obviously leaves room for improvement. If you’re below 45, you probably need to take a good hard look at what you can do to better engage the members of your project teams.

How did you score?

Strategic Project Management

Vince Lombardi once said, "Individual commitment to a group effort—that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work."

I don’t think there’s any question that professional football coach Vince Lombardi became a national symbol of single-minded determination. During the nine years he served as coach of the Green Bay Packers, he led the team to five NFL championships and victory in the first two Super Bowls. Lombardi also said, "Once you have established the goal you want and the price you’re willing to pay, you can ignore the minor hurts, the opponent’s pressure and the temporary failures."

I think Lombardi’s advice is relevant to how we lead project teams. Earlier this week, I read an article written by Ken and Scott Blanchard for FastCompany where they suggest, "Management is about organizing people’s work so that people are actually doing things to help the department, or the organization as a whole, accomplish set goals. One of the important distinctions you need to address as a manager is whether you are sharing with people the actual results you expect them to produce, rather than just the activities they need to engage in."

Sometimes it’s easy to make assignments and get people busy without sharing the "why?" regarding what they’re doing. As a father, I quickly found out that "because I said so" was never a good motivator for my children. It doesn’t work in the office or on a project team any better. Yet there are many organizations that still take that approach.

"An aligned purpose and clear expectations are the foundation of an effective work environment," write Ken and Scott Blanchard. "All good performance starts with clear goals. Make sure that your people’s work is on track and on target. Connect the dots between individual roles and the goals of the organization. When people see the connection, they get a lot of energy out of work. They feel the importance, dignity, and meaning in their job. It’s good for you and it’s good for them."

Over the course of my career, I have come to appreciate that this is true. When I work with my own team, we sit down together and discuss the reasons why we are doing what we’re doing. Most people want to contribute to something meaningful. However, if your project teams don’t understand how their contributions relate to meaningful corporate objectives, it becomes difficult for them to "…ignore the minor hurts, the opponent’s pressure and the temporary failures."

Like Lombardi, I believe it’s the individual contributions to the group effort that make projects successful. As a project leader, what are you doing to make sure that everyone on your project team understands the value of their contribution to the meaningful goals and objectives of your organization?
Strategic Project Management

I had a great Scoutmaster when I was a boy. He drove an old Army Jeep and knew everything there was to know about just about everything in the woods (at least that’s what I thought at the time).

We bounced all over Utah in his old Jeep (which is probably why I enjoy driving a Jeep today). On one of those trips, while passing a herd of sheep, he whistled loudly and laughed as the sheep all started to run. He explained that when the sheep hear the whistle, they know the sheepdog is not far behind—if they start moving for the whistle, they don’t get snapped at by the dog. I’ve noticed a lot of work environments that operate the same way.

As many of you know, I’ve been reading Daniel Pink’s book Drive:The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. On this blog we talk a lot about empowering the team to contribute at a greater level, however maybe we should be talking about creating a more autonomous project environment. Pink describes the Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson brainchild, ROWE (results-only work environment), which I find fascinating and potentially very exciting.

"In a ROWE workplace, people don’t have schedules. They show up when they want. They don’t have to be in the office at a certain time—or any time for that matter. They just have to get their work done. How they do it, when they do it, and where they do it is up to them," writes Pink.

I’m sure to some business leaders (and probably project managers) this must sound like anarchy. I have to admit, it’s not something my boss would have even considered thirty years ago. However, Pink shares the experience of Meddius CEO Jeff Gunther and how implementing a ROWE workplace has been incredibly successful at his company.

"Some people (outside of the company) thought I was crazy," says Gunther. "They wondered, ‘How can you know what your employees are doing if they’re not here?’"

You might be thinking the same thing. In Gunther’s view "…the team was accomplishing more under the new arrangement," writes Pink. "One reason: They were focused on the work itself rather than on whether someone would call them a slacker for leaving at three P.M. to watch a daughter’s soccer game. And since the bulk of his staff consists of software developers, designers, and others doing high-level creative work, that was essential."

"For them, it’s all about craftsmanship," says Gunther. "And they need a lot of autonomy."

I have to admit, I’ve worked for people before who have watched the clock to see what time I came into the office and what time I have left every day—it is oppressive. If you asked my wife, she would tell you that she thinks I have always spent too much time at work, regardless of whether or not my clock-watching boss thought so. If I’m in the middle of something, I usually end up loosing track of time and working until I’m done. I don’t think I’m that unusual. I know a lot of people who validate Pink’s assertions and Gunther’s observations.

Over the course of my career I’ve noticed that most people take a lot of pride in what they do and the "craftsmanship" associated with it. Treating people like resources that need to be managed can stifle their motivation and turn a project team of creative problem-solvers into a group of mindless automatons. That’s not good for the project, the organization or the "collective."

I understand that most of us don’t have the authority within our organizations to create a ROWE workplace, but what can we learn from this experiment of Meddius that we can apply within our project teams? Do you work to create an atmosphere of autonomy among the team?

Strategic Project Management

I once worked with a guy who felt the need to take credit for anything good that happened within his department. If anyone noticed something the team had worked on in a positive light, he took credit for it. "Yeah, that was my idea," he would say. On the other hand, if it was something that wasn’t as positive, he would blame the team. Most of us had skid marks on our backs where the bus had slammed on the brakes for another pass.

Needless to say, it didn’t really take very long for him to expose himself as the fraud he was. Ultimately the team didn’t like him, his boss didn’t respect him and he was sent packing.

As a project leader (or any kind of leader for that matter) I think it’s important to appropriately recognize achievements. In a recent article titled How to Build Trust When Your Team Doesn’t Know Each Other, written by Wayne Turmel for Bnet, Turmel suggests, "There are many ways to show off the competence of team members. When you have message boards and social network tools, there are opportunities to answer questions, refer other team members and generally offer individuals a chance to shine they might not otherwise get. As the manager, take the chance to commend workers in ways that let the entire team know who did such great work."

In many organizations that espouse a top-down command-and-control management approach the only time anyone hears from the boss or their manager is when there’s something to do or something is wrong. I like the idea of making it a point to look for ways to show off the competence of my team—to share their accomplishments with my superiors. It creates an atmosphere where people aren’t afraid to speak with me and makes it a lot easier to have those sometimes difficult conversations when there are problems.

There’s nothing wrong with finding ways to shine the light on exceptional effort or an exceptional member of the team. What’s more, although money is a motivator for performance, it isn’t the only motivator. Most people leave their employment for reasons other than money. Maybe their commute was too long, maybe they didn’t like the job—but it’s more than likely they didn’t feel their contribution was recognized and appreciated or they didn’t like the boss.

Over the course of my career, I’ve noticed the times when I’ve been the most successful have been the times when I’ve been able to facilitate an atmosphere where individual members of the team could shine and be recognized for what they bring to the effort. When my need to shine is superseded by the ability of individuals on my team to shine, projects have been more successful, the team is happier and as a result, it reflects well on me.

As a side note, in most cases, praise for a job well done should be specific and public. Vague platitudes aren’t worth the wasted words. "Jones, the extra work you did to get the Acme project in on time really made the difference," is much more effective than, "Good work everyone."

Specific and public is how I try to address praise to members on my team as opposed to reprimand, which should be handled privately—unless you want to do irreparable damage to personal relationships (which are the foundation of project leadership in a world where most of the time everyone on the project team is usually a dotted line on the org chart).

What do you do to recognize exceptional work or exceptional team members?

Strategic Project Management

Last week I wrote two posts that asked some questions that have generated enough comments that I thought it was worth expanding the dialog a bit. Do Happy Teams Really Make a Difference and Work-Life Balance and the Millennial Generation. The comments ranged from, "I don’t know if it is that important that people are happy at work, but I’m certain that it is critical that people not be unhappy. In other words, the benefits of happiness may be unclear, but the costs of unhappiness are high," to "So, my theory is that ‘unhappy’ staff are created by management with poor leadership skills, who may (as the previous poster has said) have moved on to other management jobs before the impact of unhappiness is seen through staff turnover."

I don’t mean to beat a dead horse, but I think the evidence is pretty clear that happy people work harder, are more productive and more engaged in what they’re doing. I think Linda Mignone summed it up in a recent article published by CNN Money, "People who are happy at work put in far more effort, work longer hours, and are more productive than those who aren’t. They remain at their jobs twice as long and they work 25% more time than an unhappy employee works."

I’ve read a number of studies that suggest the same thing. You might now be asking, "If that’s true, why are you bringing this up again?" Which would be a good question. I guess I’m bringing it up because I think this is something important that project leaders should be aware of. And what’s more, I think we’re in a position to take action and do something that could impact the work our project teams are doing for the good.

Dave Garrett (@DaveG253) said, "In the context of a project however—I have seen situations where the requirements are very specific, there is an end point in sight and an unhappy team could effectively drive toward a well defined near term result. I think a lot of companies treat work as a series of unhappy sprints where some employees are replaced as they burn out. It’s not what we want to see happen, but it’s often the reality of the situation when we are in sketchy economic times."

This is sad but all too true. There are many companies that are intentionally driving people too hard knowing that jobs are hard to come by—and they know that they can abuse employees because they are just happy to have a job and won’t leave. Dave continues, "As the economy picks up however, employees motivation/enthusiasm/happiness will become more important again. All of these things speak to retention which will be much more important in the coming months and years."

This type of management style is not a good long-term solution. In fact, it’s not a good solution at all, unless of course your Attila the Hun. Speaking from my own personal experience, there have been times during my career when I have worked for the "Hun." Needless to say, I don’t work for him anymore.

Some of the comments that concerned me, and instigated this post, seemed to suggest that there’s nothing we can really do about whether or not our team members are happy, it’s up to them. I couldn’t disagree more. As project leaders we can foster an environment where team members can enjoy their working environment and ultimately be more engaged and more productive. Let me suggest the following as a starting point:

1. Encourage dialog among team members concerning time-lines and deliverables: Team members are more likely to engage if they have some input into the how, what and when of their contribution to projects. Instigate this dialog early in the planning process and you might be surprised at how accurate your project plans can become.
2. Set realistic expectations: Of course there will be times when a hard deadline is staring you in the face and your team may just have to buckle down and get things done, but it that’s always the case—somethings wrong. If your project plan always includes a lot of overtime to get things done, it’s not a good project plan, period.
3. Recognize extra effort: When putting in extra time or effort becomes expected, rather than recognized, it frustrates team members and does the opposite of motivates. People work hard for a number of reasons, one of which is for the recognition of being a consistent achiever (For many of us who have been in the workplace for a long time, we need to remember how it felt to be a younger member of the team trying to establish a foundation for our future career). A little recognition goes a long way. Don’t believe me? Just try it for a week or two and see how far you get with your team.
4. Never forget that work-life balance is important: If I cut out of the office a couple of hours early every day (leaving work un-done), my employer would feel like I was stealing that time from him or her. And he or she would be right. However, what’s the difference if an employer expects, nay demands, that a team member regularly work an extra hour or two each day without compensation? Does that equate to the employer "stealing" from them? My wife regularly accuses me of going into the office too early and staying too late, and she may be right. I enjoy what I do and have a large backlog of "stuff" on my plate. However, staying to get something done because I choose to is a lot different than staying because I am forced or expected to. Work-life balance is very important to team members (especially Millennials). If we regularly ignore this, we will see high turnover or worse—team members who stay physically, but aren’t really there mentally.

Although I can’t do anything to make people who are unhappy happy, I can nurture an environment where people can be happy if they choose to be. I can facilitate an environment where team members will "buy in" and "engage" in the projects I lead—making them more effective and successful. The beauty of this type of leadership style is that it isn’t rocket science, nor does it require herculean effort. It’s pretty simple.

What do you think? Can you add to this list? Don’t the gains associated with a happy workforce merit the little extra effort required on our part to make it happen?

Strategic Project Management

Several years ago I had a colleague declare to me, "I don’t think it’s important that you’re happy at work. It’s just a job anyway, why all the fuss to find happiness at work?"

He was a much younger colleague and was working in a field outside of his college education, so I guess he was trying to justify settling for his current job when he really wanted to be doing something else. I must disagree with him. Because I spend the lion’s share of each day working, it’s hard for me to imagine doing something that was unfulfilling or distasteful for the rest of my life. How about you?

In a recent article titled How to Build an Army of Happy, Busy Worker Bees from CNN Money and written by Linda Mignone, she writes, "Aside from it sounding sensible, recent studies have demonstrated that the happier a worker is, the more productive they will be on the job. While an employee may appear engaged in their work, they may not be as effective as they could be if they were happy."

I’ve observed this to be true during my career. She continues, "People who are happy at work put in far more effort, work longer hours, and are more productive than those who aren’t. They remain at their jobs twice as long and they work 25% more time than an unhappy employee works."

I’ve really come to appreciate what appears to be the culture at Zappos. They seem to be honestly concerned about the work environment and whether or not their people are happy. According to Zappos founder Tony Heisch, happiness at work begins with giving employees a sense that they are part of something bigger and that they feel connected to the work they do. I couldn’t agree more. I believe people have a fundamental desire to accomplish something meaningful.

Mignone suggests something I’ve been supporting for quite a while now, "Have the team establish their vision for getting to a solution, creating their own time-lines and benchmarks. It’s important to provide guidance along the way and hold them accountable, but the goal is to give them autonomy."

Quoting Jessica Pryce-Jones, CEO of HR consulting firm iOpener, Mignone writes, "People want more sense of control. [When organizations put] in more controls, they get the opposite of what they want." She continues, "Pride, trust and recognition from the company are critical factors in happiness. Give the team the resources they need to get the job done and provide them with recognition that they are part of an important project even before they begin."

Mignone also suggest that we give the team visibility at the highest levels of the organization and give them opportunities to present ideas to senior staff—and let them know that they are responsible for those ideas. "When employees feel like they have some control over the work they are doing and when they feel like they’re making progress, they are generally happier and more productive, and these feelings are often amplified when employees are part of a team." writes Mignone. "A team makes a bigger, bolder, richer sound, with more layers, like an orchestra. And the richest sounds come when the team feels they are part of something big; a big idea, a vision."

These are themes that I personally agree with. Unlike my discouraged colleague from a few years back, I believe it’s not only important for us to be happy at work, it’s critical that we create an environment within our project teams where individual contributors can feel like they are part of something important, gain recognition for their contribution and be happy.

What do you do to create a happy and productive environment within your project teams?

Strategic Project Management