Beehive Management - Don't Get Stung

The first couple of years of youth soccer can be comical and frustrating.  The tendency for new players is to chase the ball around the field in a beehive formation.  The coaches and parents are yelling, “spread out, play your position, don’t bunch.”  There are times at work when I want to shout the exact encouraging directions, “not everyone is needed at this meeting, don’t send that email to everyone, and why is so-n-so working on this?”  Managers and senior engineers are often guilty of being attracted to problems like eight-year-olds to a soccer ball.

I submit that beehive management is indicative of a total lack of teamwork often due to one of the following: a poor responsibility matrix, members lack confidence in their team members, and the leader recognizing superstars above collaboration.  The first one is easy to fix.  Every project leader should have a simple and communicated responsibility matrix as part of their project charter.  A responsibility matrix is also a great visual aid.  Post it, refer to it, and if necessary, enforce it.

As for team cohesiveness, get out there and coach.  Encourage good lines of communication.  Set examples of what general information the entire group needs and what detailed information should be worked on by the responsible individuals.  Develop a team that is reliant on each other.  Apply Lean to the team’s communication and meetings: do your daily team meetings, reduce the number of send-to-all and reply-to-all emails, and coordinate meeting attendances.  Communication is the first step towards trust.

Finally, develop a championship team.  I want a team that can respond quickly and efficiently independent of vacations, illness, or over commitments.  Team members’ responsibilities should be clear, but do not let a responsibility matrix become an excuse for not having coverage; rotate assignments so that others will learn the different aspects of the team, designate back-ups, do what works best.  The goal is to develop a team and processes, so members understand their responsibilities, know how to backup teammates, and are confident in their team performance.

Expectations

I had what may be referred to as a significant personal experience associated with setting high expectations.  After graduating from college, I attended the Air Force Officer Training School (OTS).  I was assigned to a small group with 15 other officer candidates, and our first task was to set our team goals.  So on our first day, we discussed what our goal at OTS should be and came to a consensus that our goal would simply be a 100% graduation rate.  At the time, it seemed reasonable; we were all there to become officers, so if everybody graduated, we would achieve our objective.

OTS emphasizes teamwork but rates the candidates individually- just like the real world.  The entire 12 weeks of training is an immersion in competitive teamwork as nearly all assignments are given at the team level. However, officer candidates are eliminated based on their personal academic and physical performance.

Upon graduation, we commissioned ten officers.  We lost a third of the class over twelve weeks.  Our primary reason for failure was our low expectation of a 100% graduation rate.   It was a very competitive environment.  We could have set goals to be the best team overall, the best team for 30% of the time, or to graduate 50% of our team in the top 10% of the entire class.  We could have chosen to set the bar high, but instead, we set it at the acceptable minimum level.  We had no margin for error.  When the going got tough individual survival came ahead of the team, even when better teamwork would have made individual survival easier.

The teams with a 100% graduate rate also had high team expectations.  In trying to meet their team expectations, the candidates had to raise their performance, and the team recognizing the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses needed to support personal improvement.  Setting high team expectations is the first step in a vicious improvement feedback loop.  In addition, it’s a lot more fun to win.

-Neal

Morale and Feedback

We had a team meeting to discuss the Employee Survey earlier this week.  It was a good discussion on how some interpreted the questions, the events that had influenced their responses, and most importantly, who’s paying attention to the survey results.  And in that question of “who is paying attention,” I think I found the most important nugget.  Morale is closely tied to feedback and recognition.

Now I know that isn’t a surprise to anyone; we all know that feedback is essential.  But how many of us are really living it.  How many times have we gotten an emergency request for a fast answer?  How about the big report or memo that you sent out?  Did anybody read it?  Did it help?  Unfortunately, positive feedback, in my experience, is limited.  How often do you hear that we need to cut costs, reduce schedules, make fewer mistakes, and in general, just do things better?  I would rate that as negative feedback since it focuses only on our weaknesses.

While correcting mistakes and making improvements are necessary, identifying and recognizing our strengths are also important.  Moreover, it is essential for good morale.  It is easy to become disillusioned and discouraged if all we ever hear is that we need to do better without ever hearing we are doing something good, or right, or even (dare I say) outstanding.

I propose that we improve any situation faster, reduce costs, shorten schedules, and make fewer mistakes by recognizing our strengths, our jobs well done, and by saying thank you, your efforts have made a positive difference.

Dialogue

Dialogue from the Greek word dialogos: Logos means ‘the word,’ and dia means ‘through.’ I picture a stream of meaning flowing through and between us. There is a flow of meaning, concepts, and ideas rushing and swirling around us. In a river, a clenched fist does little to control the water. But, a relaxed hand and body will float, making navigation easy.

The objective of dialogue is not to win an argument or trade opinions. Instead, in dialogue, we suspend our beliefs and hold them before us for examination, listening to everybody’s thoughts, exploring and looking at our personal and group meaning. 

I imagine suspending an opinion for examination is much like catching up with an old friend.

“We have always been together. No, not always? When did we meet? Oh, that day; not the best of days. But, you have been with me through thick and thin ever since! Ok, well, that shouldn’t count because that situation was different. When do you think we work best together? I like having you around because it’s easier when you’re here. May I ask you a personal question?”

Sometimes, just like old friends, we take our opinions for granted. But, our opinions are the truth -  aren’t they? My opinions are true and based on the facts that    I    have     chosen. Chosen?

“Two people, by challenging and responding to one another, may come closer to the truth than either one could alone.” ~ Plato

When each person participates, partakes, and seeks to understand the whole meaning of the group, that is genuine dialogue. That is truth engaged.

~Neal

Silence is an Action.

"Silence is an action—you're complicit. You're complicit," Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo responded when asked whether the other three officers involved with restraining George Floyd would be arrested. This statement has weighed on me since watching Chief Arradondo's interview on TV. "Silence is an action—you're complicit. You're complicit."

How do I add my voice to promote justice, fight racism, and address inequalities? How can I make a difference? This past week I've observed many leaders making corporate expressions of concern and businesses restating their nondiscrimination policies. I've watched the demonstrations and protest marches where people shout their slogans for justice. I've listened to community and celebrity leaders say we need to have open discussions about justice. I agree; one of the most important first steps is acknowledging the injustices experienced by people of color. However, I believe the real challenge is grasping how deep that acknowledgment needs to go. 

I facilitated a Peacemaking Circle this past week to share how current events impacted us. It struck me how easy it was to see the shared acknowledgment of social injustices; the surface awareness was evident. Yet the undercurrents were so turbulent and murky as to make the social injustice surface look calm. Individually we have below-the-surface feelings of uncertainty, pain, guilt, fear, rage, grief, and confusion concerning social justice. Awareness and sharing of these feelings are possible within a circle of trust. But, I wonder, is it possible to make the circle of trust big enough to encompass a community discussion on injustice?

Business and team leaders, I believe it's essential to create an environment where members feel free to broach topics about injustices, racism, and discrimination. We need to take the first steps of acknowledgment, hopefully leading to action. Yet let's not kid ourselves; if there are no tears, we are only addressing the surface issues.

However, let us not be deterred from talking because the topic of justice is too big or too personal, but allow ourselves to begin before we are ready. Let us speak honestly from our hearts and listen devoutly with our hearts. I'll conclude with this quote from Rachel Naomi Remen in her book Kitchen Table Wisdom: "I suspect that the most basic and powerful way to connect to another person is to listen. Just listen. Perhaps the most important thing we ever give each other is our attention. And especially if it's given from the heart. When people are talking, there's no need to do anything but receive them. Just take them in. Listen to what they are saying. Care about it. Most times caring about it is even more important than understanding it."