Dear Bob ...
I've recently been introduced to an idea that I have never considered before - nor experienced - and I'm struggling with understanding it. The idea is that you can orchestrate the "jelling" of a team very early in it's lifecycle by taking the team members through a series of exercises/dialogues on team governance (e.g. how will we make decisions, how will we deal with conflict, etc.).
I've worked on many teams, some of them I would consider as being "jelled" teams. By "jelled" I mean that there was a significant level of trust among the team members resulting in very open and honest communication (as well as other qualities). But in my experience (albeit limited) those teams jelled because of how the work, circumstances, environment, etc. evolved and presented each of us with choices and shared experiences.
I have never been on a team that jelled simply through a series of somewhat-scripted exercises. (Having said that, I don't currently believe that a team has to be jelled to be effective - although I do believe that a jelled team is more effective).
What do you think? Can you jell a team very early in it's lifecycle?
Maybe the more interesting question is should you try to jell a team very early in it's lifecycle?
- Always room for Jello?
Dear Jello ...
Somewhere in here is an opportunity to steal a gag from "Whose line is it?" about the guy who stole a gun made out of Jello and was arrested for carrying a congealed weapon.
Or maybe not.
In my experience, the reality is halfway between. I agree, there's limited value at best in having a team catch trout together with a bent paperclip. But there is value in helping a team jell.
The "stages of team formation" have been known for decades - a researcher named Tuckman dubbed them "forming, storming, norming, and performing." Don't blame me.
The labels may be hokey but the insight is profound. Teams form with high trust but low alignment - in general, new team members are enthusiastic about the assignment and are willing to give each other credit for sharing that attitude, but while everyone might think they're on the same page, there are hidden misalignments - often, very significant ones - that are the inevitable result of imperfect communication, and differences in personal goals and motivation.
As those differences and miscues surface, trust plummets ("I thought we agreed on this a week ago!" "When I agreed, I thought you were saying something very different!"). This is the storming phase.
The storming phase can get ugly, but most teams get through it, clarifying language and understanding each other better. The result is stronger alignment within the team - the norming phase.
And as team members find they all really are now working on the same effort and really are on the same page, trust increases again, at which point you have a strong, performing team.
I've never seen a team miss a stage, although every team I've ever been on or led has thought it would be the first to manage it. What you can do, though, is take steps to accelerate the process. Some of the steps you describe will help. A perceptive leader can help more, by recognizing when a team thinks it's reached consensus but really has just swept hidden differences under the semantic rug.
The other, very important piece to helping a team jell more quickly is to make sure every member understands that they're going to go through all four phases. The only choice they have is how they react when the do. I once had a team member, after a particularly fruitless two-hour design meeting, ask me, "Was that 'storming'?"
When I assured him it was, he smiled and said, "I guess that means we're making progress."
Which, as it turned out, we were.
- Bob
--------Posted by Bob Lewis on October 15, 2004 04:40 PM
