Volker Kleinert
Overview
The client, a manager in an international pharmaceutical group, had a problem: although she had good employees in her team, they were not willing to prepare job descriptions to be given to people covering for them during their time off work. There were a number of reasons for this, such as increased workload, restructuring, and parallel projects. In addition, new management systems had been implemented that required some changes and adaptation.
All employees were specialized in their roles, were skilled and did a good job. Another consulting company had not made any progress with structured interviews and the employees maintained a stand-offish attitude toward trainers, consultants, and coaches. Some even categorically rejected team-building programs. Moreover, the manager reported poor communication across the group because team members who were not working on smaller focused projects (because they were tied up in global projects) were only shouting things in “from the outside.”
Topic: We need job descriptions and successful communication
One thing was clear: these one and a half days were going to be tough. Together with the manager and a team member, we conducted a two-hour needs analysis session using the “Training-Needs Canvas.” The aim was to clarify any unresolved issues and to accurately pinpoint the purpose of the team-building event. The goal was for the employees to realize that a job description and task checklists were useful, while still feeling that they were the experts. In addition, gaps and pitfalls in communication were to be identified and ways found to reduce them.
Staging StackMan: “Let’s build a system”
We started things off casually with ScenarioCards. The question we asked was, “Which picture best expresses the mood you are in in your team?” This gave us a wonderful overview of the different perspectives and moods. This was followed by brief input on the developmental stages of teams and a survey of where the team saw itself. We worked with the Tuckman Team Model and the Drexler-Sibbet Model in order to find out what was missing. Parallels emerged in the two models presented: roles were unclear and task allocation was unclear. In other words, there was no system in place. So what could we do? – Build a new system!
a. Preparation
Two large tables were placed together at two points in the room so that the eight participants had enough space to carry out the task. Facilitation material was at hand for the participants to use should they wish to. A flip chart displaying the rules for the process had been prepared and positioned in such a way that the participants could see it at all times. We had decided against setting a time limit for the entire task. In addition, we had prepared the next phase of the task: swapping roles. I was also prepared to remove one person from the group, if necessary, and make him or her an observer. This person would then use the Observer Pad to perform a special task.
b. Performance
All participants stood together: “We all recognize this from our daily business lives: old systems are outdated and new systems are coming that apparently can do everything better. But this is not without its pitfalls. It’s not so easy when you’ve just gotten to grips with something and now you have to rebuild it somewhere else … and I’m really curious to see just how well you will master the following task.
In front of you are components to be assembled in a specific way according to the building plan. As soon as your system is ready, you will hand the plan back. After all, you are the experts. Then, your task is to dismantle your system and reassemble it at another location. The system must be completely disassembled for transport and each person must be involved in the reassembly. That is, each person must have held at least one part. You have one minute to rebuild the system. The clock starts ticking as soon as you place the first parts on the work surface or assemble them at the new location. I’m really curious to see just how much commitment and creativity you will use to accomplish this task!”
c. Progression
The team got down to work. They agreed on who would move the parts and who would be responsible for the process. They assigned roles and designated locations, and a sound process started. Assembly using the plan went well and the participants were very careful about how they dismantled it, so that finishing within the time limit was no problem at all. They celebrated and were eager to beat their time. But then an “unplanned” development occurred:
“You have been very successful and have put everything together fantastically. You have performed superbly! But now a decision has been taken to change each of the jobs, which will result in different tasks. In addition, there may be further changes of position in the future. It would be good to be prepared for this. I’m extremely curious to see how well you all rise to this challenge.”
The participants thought about how they could prepare for the change. When one of them said, “We can simply make descriptions of what each of the roles is required to do and write down the process somewhere so that everyone can see it,” the manager looked at the trainer with a smile, shook her head, and continued working enthusiastically. The participants fetched a large facilitation board, drew outlines on it, attached facilitation dots to the individual parts, which they numbered, and wrote the corresponding tasks for each position on the board. They were a little slower during the next assembly, but they were once again able to keep within the prescribed 60 seconds.
Transfer to the real World (StackMan)
| Elements in the learning project | Elements in the real world |
|---|---|
| StackMan | Complex processes that are clearly regulated |
| Change of location | Continual change in specifications |
| Change in positions and tasks | Permanent change in responsibilities; lack of clarity as to who is required to do what |
d. Finish
In the first brief reflection, the participants stated that, although they were the specialists for their own jobs, with a good plan they could also do a good job in other positions. This ended the learning project and the overall reflection, and we transferred the learning to their daily working lives.
Reflection
This was followed by a structured analysis with the following questions:
• How do you rate the team’s approach?
• What solutions that you found in the project could be helpful in everyday life? (Note: In addition to workplace descriptions, other important elements were mentioned here)
• What could real and effective changes in everyday life look like?
They collectively drew up an action plan to address the specific changes. They assigned tasks and also set a completion date.
During the learning project, the participants saw first-hand how they worked as a team and realized that it was not a bad thing for someone else to take over another person’s role. At the same time, it was clear that each individual was still an expert in his or her own field. The individual participants found it easier to share knowledge and ensure that their own work was transparent. In addition, their individual experiences enabled the team to see the benefits of collaboration and job descriptions, something that had not previously been achieved through purely cognitive persuasion.
Topic: Our communication has further potential
From the very start of the training, it was clear from the ScenarioCards choices that communication was perceived as a problem by all participants – whether consciously or unconsciously. During the stressful working day misunderstandings occurred again and again. In the team, information did not arrive in full or it was distorted. Tasks were communicated, but often misunderstood.
To lead into the topic of communication and the learning project, I asked: “What do you need in order for your cooperation to work as successfully as you have just shown in the task?” The answer from the participants was: communication. I added that we often assumed communication would be successful. “But is that really true – or doesn’t the communication in your team have more potential?” The participants were of the opinion that there was more potential to be gained
Staging FutureCity: “Building the City of Goodwill”
a. Preparation
The group of eight people was divided into a team of “Visionaries” and a team of “Doers,” allocated by randomly drawing four chocolate bars of two different varieties from a bag. This was to prevent deliberate group formation. The FutureCity cards had already been pre-sorted so that three buildings were to be constructed and the corresponding perspectives were ready and waiting.
b. Performance
I addressed the group: “In turbulent times, it is not so easy to build something new. Changing contact partners, changing goals and sometimes a little stress due to lack of clarity in communication: all of this presents us with challenges. How can we still see the good in this situation? But particularly in such times it is important to treat each other with goodwill. This will make a lot of things much easier. That is why you are now going to build the ‘City of Goodwill.’
But there is something you need to keep in mind here: there are Visionaries and there are Doers. The Visionaries can see the buildings that are to be built. But they are not allowed to discuss with each other. They are only allowed to tell the Doers what to do. And just like in the real world, each Visionary is allowed to say something to each Doer. On top of this, the Visionaries are not allowed to actively help with the construction, but only to steer it in the desired direction through the use of communication. I am really curious to see how much creativity, goodwill, and excellent communication you will use when you rise to this challenge.
Transfer to the real world (FutureCity)
| Elements in the learning project | Elements in the real world |
|---|---|
| Assigning roles to Visionaries and Doers | Assigning roles to (internal) clients and those carrying out the work |
| Wooden blocks | Different process-steps that need to be consolidated |
| Picture cards | Plans that are only made available to the clients and not adequately discussed |
| Rule that all Visionaries are allowed to speak to all Doers | Multiplicity of demands on team members, which can come from many parts of the corporate group at the same time |
c. Progression and finish
The participants were pushed to their limits. The Visionaries talked frantically to the Doers. Finally, one participant said: “It’s just like in our company. Everyone wants something from you, but no one gives you time to do it.” This brought the learning project to an end.
Although this initially gave the impression they had failed, it was in line with what the participants wanted, as they were sure that this would provide them with a useful learning effect. In addition, they then shared the plans and jointly examined how it should have looked. And in the process, without being asked to do so, the participants did exactly what was important in daily working life: setting and reviewing joint goals and plans, trying things out, and so on.
Reflection
The reflection was structured around the following questions:
• What obstacles or difficulties were encountered in communication?
• Which of these do you recognize from your daily working lives?
• What could help to reduce the frequency of these difficulties in everyday life?
• They then offered some good ideas that could be implemented in the team’s daily routine. To ensure that this would actually happen, we then discussed the roles and tasks in the team. A suitable action plan was drawn up and “appreciation interviews” were held.
Conclusion
It was impressive to see and feel how “eureka moments” occurred: moments where the participants sensed how helpful and wonderful other ways of working can be, and how this can result in an even greater sense of solidarity and appreciation.
I felt that understanding the problem and transferring it to another world was the key to success in bringing about change in the real world. Changes that developed out of wishes expressed by the participants themselves, even though they had for so long previously been resistant to them. In the modern world of work, this approach succeeded in doing exactly what Galileo Galilei had recognized more than 300 years ago: “You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself.”
This was clearly demonstrated in the case study I describe: all cognitive interventions, endless attempts at explaining and even direct orders aroused nothing but resistance. Only self-awareness, personal realization and jointly developed solutions to personal issues made cooperation and moments of insight possible, and enabled a breakthrough.
Playful learning and discovery leads to ideas and approaches that have for so long previously been rejected. What sounds easy in theory is not always easy to achieve in practice. Because with “difficult” teams in particular – if we are to believe that such teams exist – there is sometimes a thin line between success and failure. In this particular case, however, it succeeded.
There are two elements underpinning the good results achieved from complex team development programs of this type: a good needs analysis and always having the end in mind. It was important for me as trainer to prepare both for the expected and for the unexpected.
It is not the tools themselves that should be the focus, but they should be selected with an eye on the problem to be solved. In addition, it is important to think about what you want to achieve in the reflection. Good opportunities for transferring learning to the real working world must be found. After all, when people with different needs, perspectives and ideas come together, it is important to direct their attention accordingly.
Last, but not least: it should be fun! That was the case during these one and a half training days – for all participants. This was expressed particularly clearly by one participant who initially did not want to take part at all: “I never thought I would say this about such a training event – but it was really fun and helped us move forward. Thank you very much!”