Testimonials

High Performance Teams

When does Lean Six Sigma need High Performance Teams?

Lean Six Sigma doesn't always need High Performing Teams - sometimes a working group is fine and at other times we simply need a team that performs. What is important though is that we understand what these terms mean and how we can deliver the team that is appropriate to the task. There are 6 key components to a high performance team and this article provides a checklist for each of those areas to help us get the best out of the people at our disposal to deliver effective results in a timely manner.

Teams are central to most workplaces these days - we don't just work as an individual or as part of a "department", but as part of a team - often we may be a member of several teams at once, some long-term and ongoing, others short-term.

Lean and Six Sigma initiatives have great benefits but also involve significant investment. One area often overlooked is what type of group is needed. So when putting together the people who will be delivering Lean and Six Sigma initiatives there is good reason for leaders of to make sure for each project that there is:

• A clear and common understanding whether a working group or a team is needed.
• Agreement on ways of working that will create a high performing team.
• Identification of opportunities and challenges for the team to build high performance.
• An understanding of practical guidelines for behavior when working together.
• Increased commitment to continuous improvement not only of processes but in the way people work together as well.

What then are the differences between working groups and teams?

Working Groups

A working group is a group people that work together to share information, best practices and perspectives to make decisions.

The key elements of such a group are:

• Information sharing.
• Each member feels responsible for his/her contribution, not the overall group success
• Each member has his/her own motivation for participation
• One leader who takes responsibility for overall success
• No need for incremental performance

Teams

There are many possible definitions of a team and perhaps the simplest is "A group of people working together towards a common goal".

That's ok but a better definition I have found when working with mission critical teams in organisations is from the research of Katzenbach and Smith (published in their excellent book "The Wisdom of Teams"):

"A team is a small group of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose and performance goals, and have a shared approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable".

They also found that unlike working groups real teams knew that they really did have a significant incremental performance need.

This then leads to the following key elements for High Performance Teams:

• Skills
• Purpose.
• Objectives.
• Approach.
• Accountability.
• Commitment to each others' personal growth.

The following checklists are not exhaustive of course but they do help us to cover each of these 6 areas for high performance team development

Evaluating the Team: Complementary Skills and Preferences

• Are all skills you need represented in the team?
• Does each team member have potential to develop their problem solving, technical and interpersonal skills? (All three are important)
• If not how can we make sure we build on the strengths and overcome the blind spots
• Are all members dedicated to helping others to learn to develop their skills?

Evaluating the Team: Meaningful Purpose

• Does the team purpose constitute long term and short term aspirations?
• Is the team purpose in line with the broader organisation purpose and business strategy?
• Will team members refer to it in discussions with outsiders?
• Do team members feel it is important and exciting?
• Evaluating the Team: Specific Goals
• Are there clear organisation, team and individual goals ?
• Are they clear, simple and measurable?
• Are some realistic, some ambitious?
• Do they allow for small wins along the way?
• Do all team members agree with the goals and the way their achievements will be measured?
• Evaluating the Team: Working Approach
• Is there a common approach?
• Is it concrete, clear and understood by everyone?
• Does it require all members to contribute equivalent amounts of real work?
• Does it provide for fact-based problem solving and results-based evaluation?
• Do all team members define the approach in the same way?

Evaluating the Team: Mutual Accountability

• Is each member individually and jointly accountable for the purpose, goals, approach?
• Can you measure progress against the team goals?
• Are all team members clear on what they are individually and jointly responsible for?
• Is there a sense that 'only the team can fail'?

Evaluating the Team: Commitment to Personal Growth

• Do team members feel empowered to make things happen?
• Is there a practice of positive feedback, recognition and reward?
• Is there a mentality of exploring team member's talent and potential?
• Are team members committed to helping each other in learning?

There are good reasons for an emphasis on teams. Teams can accomplish projects an individual cannot do e.g., large, complex ones. They can brainstorm more options - different people looking at the same problem will find different solutions. A team can review ideas and put together a final solution which incorporates the best individual ideas.

If we try to create a team when a working group is all that is needed (no significant incremental performance improvement needed remember) then we are wasting our resources. If, on the other hand, we use a working group when we really need a team and a high performing one at that, then we will not achieve the quantum leap in performance that we need and reap the immense rewards that can be delivered from Lean Six Sigma.

It is often said "Well, there's no understanding people" and often we assume that office politics and resistance to change are a necessary part of organizational life. Well, it turns out that actually there are some simple yet profound ways of both understanding the people dynamics of organisations and also releasing much of that energy of resistance into the growth of the business.

Author Biography

Stephen Mathews - Leadership and Change Management Consultant

Stephen Mathews has more than thirty years' experience leading people development and corporate organisational improvement programmes.

Stephen's particular area of expertise is helping individuals and groups to improve the way they manage relationships to improve performance. He has gained a reputation for both an effective and efficient approach to Business Psychology through a variety of feedback methods in groups, between peers and in 1:1 mentoring to improve individual levels of satisfaction and the contribution of teams.

Using his unique skill set with board members, senior management teams, and individuals, Stephen enables successful organisational culture change, high performance team development and leadership development.

Stephen has worked worldwide, with companies of all sizes, in support of a wide range of business improvement initiatives, such as: Strategy Development and Implementation, Business Excellence, Six Sigma, Process Redesign, and Performance Enhancement. Stephen's business experience spans fields as diverse as: petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, banking, defence, education, food, engineering, telecommunications, and the public sector.

Having training delivered at your own choice of venue allows you to take advantage of a number of benefits compared to public training.

We regularly run programmes for our clients at their own site, or local venues, saving travel time and expense for your students. Read more on our Six Sigma Consulting.