Canadian HR Reporter

STRATEGIC CAPABILITY NETWORK'S PANEL of thought leaders brings decades of experience from the senior ranks of Canada's business community. eir commentary puts HR management issues into context and looks at the practical implications of proposals and policies. CANADIAN HR REPORTER EXECUTIVE SERIES 13 www.scnetwork.ca DECEMBER 2018 is Empowered by: is Empowered by: A Great Leader A Great Leader www.scnetwork.ca Networking, Mentoring, Peer-Peer Feedback Formal Online & Of ine Learning On the job experiences & challenges 20% 10% 70% Join SCNetwork, for a monthly dose of thought leadership and grow your community of peers in a collaborative space. We welcome all HR professionals who support business success through people. Cultivating the Power of Human Capital for 35+ Years! Looking for a way to achieve the 30% you need to become a great leader? PANELLISTS: • Jan G. van der Hoop, president of Fit First Technologies in Toronto • Paul Pittman, founder and president of the Human Well in Toronto • Sandi Channing, senior director of total rewards at Compass Group Canada Jan van der Hoop Paul Pittman Sandi Channing Fixing clarity to strengthen commitment ree SCNetwork members discuss Alex Vincent's presentation on teams Jan van der Hoop: e opening statistics grab your attention. Fully 80 per cent of teams in a wide cross-section of industries and company sizes are mediocre or weak, performing at fi ve-tenths or less. Over 90 per cent believe that high- performing teams are critical to an organization's success; just over 20 per cent would say any of their teams are high performing. But it's not for a lack of eff ort; there's a whole lot of activity go- ing on — just not always in the right direction. My boss used a metaphor that is appropriate here — a 50-watt light bulb will light a room because that energy is dif- fused in every direction; a 50-watt laser will cut through things be- cause that same amount of energy is aligned and tightly focused. Alex Vincent's prescription is deceptive in its apparent simplic- ity: It boils down to clarity and commitment (and if you fi x clar- ity, it goes a long way to strength- ening commitment). Clarity takes a lot of work, and it's the "slow down so you can speed up" kind of work that's an investment in time and effort today for possible returns in the future. Over the course of my career, that sort of investment has taken many forms, from thoughtful orientation and onboarding pro- grams, to company events that were heavy on "context" (with competitive and market updates, evolving strategies to address them, cascading objectives with clear line-of-sight, and whole- team incentives). I've been fortunate to work at organizations that did it right, but in today's remote work environ- ments — where project teams are thrust together from across time zones to address a problem, and then disbanded — the clarity chal- lenges are greater than ever. Paul Pittman: I have to say, I have always found "team perfor- mance improvement" to be one of those creative consulting solu- tions looking for a problem, and while Vincent did his best to dispel that notion, it was no epiphany, at least for me. Most of the presen- tation was spent addressing ob- served challenges that related to individual behaviour that should have been revealed elsewhere, and individual coaching. A second question mark for me is about homogenizing teams because they are used for diff er- ent purposes in diff erent orga- nizations: a systematic event for improving the next app in a tech organization, process improve- ment in a manufacturing context, obstacle resolution, professional development. Teams are an inher- ent part of the value chain in some organizations and in others un- block one-time barriers to value. Companies will select team members accordingly, and proj- ects of critical importance are going to attract (or demand) high-potentials who will increase the prospect of success. Process improvement is likely to be incre- mental, perhaps just as important but less "breakthrough." Which would you rather work on? So, assessing team performance is relative and expectations must be clearly defi ned, and I have to say that a numeric indicator, as was constantly referred to, with- out context is misleading. A good team manager will pro- vide context, and pick skills and personalities to fulfi ll a mandate. Others will usually determine its success. If the team is not deliver- ing on expectations, it will be dis- banded or the manager replaced — it's a team, so it's temporary, not a permanent function. at's why many organizations place im- portant challenges in teams rather than departments. I fail to see how inserting an ex- ternal (to the company) facilitator into what is essentially an internal application, notwithstanding the cost, is going to resolve a team problem fast enough or eff ectively. Team values need to align with broader organizational goals and if teams do not fundamentally embrace those goals, then that is a poor selection decision and will result in an equally poor result. Sandi Channing: My first experience working within a team was completing projects at a school level. Sometimes, the group would just meld together and the experience would be mag- ical — with support, commitment and equal levels of participation. More often, the opposite would occur and team members would not get along or do what they were tasked. is led to greater frustration and less productivity. Although there was clarity around the goal, the groups underesti- mated the importance of eff ective collaboration, confl ict resolution, and a strong team culture. Fast forward to today, and many of us now have the skills to be ef- fective team members but still 80 per cent of us are on teams provid- ing mediocre results. According to Vincent, fi xing the clarity will increase commitment, resulting in improved results. I'm not sure it's that simple. Overall, his research provides a strong convincing argument, but does it go deep enough? e key building blocks he describes are important components to driving improved performance, but what's missing for me is the importance of time and fi t, which should not be underestimated or overlooked. Team members are often ex- pected to join together based on technical expertise required for the project at hand. Initially there is no team — just individuals. ey need to get to know each other, establish roles and learn how to problem-solve jointly. Over time, trust, respect and sup- port develop and members spend their energy on collective goals instead of individual goals. Teams take time to develop and become eff ective — clarity can help but can't replace this process. Clarity, commitment, com- munication and collaboration — challenges for any team and, as Jan stated, increased for virtual teams. Where possible, consistency in team members would help over- come some of these challenges. is is not to say teams should re- main static but perhaps keeping chunks of teams together for var- ious projects and ensuring team fi t for the new members would increase performance. Research on the impact mem- bers' tenure and meeting frequen- cy have on team success would have been interesting. Van der Hoop: So, are we back to the old fundamental truth again, that the potential of an or- ganization is predetermined by the nature of its relationships and the quality of its conversations? My sense is that's a lesson hard- learned and even harder-applied in an ever-accelerating, increas- ingly transactional (tasks as well as relationships) business reality. How to break the cycle? I don't think it's another gizmo, app, tool or training program. What needs to shift in order for people to trust that if they focus on the relation- ship and the conversation fi rst, be- fore the task, that the tasks actu- ally generally get done better, with less eff ort and stress? Is it purely a question of leadership? What's HR's role? A good team manager will provide context, and pick skills and personalities. professional — but also about me as a person." In terms of workplace perfor- mance, peer feedback can be pow- erful, said Vincent. "Team members need to have honest and open dialogue with each other, and not have it be always the team leader that does that." Breaking down organizational silos to drive greater collabora- tion is also key, he said. "It's about teams being able to help other teams, and work with other teams and collaborate more broadly, so that they can collec- tively drive things forward." Each team has to have its house in order, said Vincent. "Each team has to be clear on their mission and their commit- ment so that they can contribute to other teams," he said. "You've got to make sure that your team is really solid and re- ally clear and really committed... And then we can collaborate more eff ectively with teams across the organization. And they could do the same with your team." Teams cannot operate in isola- tion and need to be clear on a whole bunch of things, said Vincent. "Being focused on a couple of things can actually move the nee- dle pretty quickly," he said. "And now we know which things for us to focus on, and for teams to focus on." Need to drive collaboration BUILDING < pg. 12

• Cover