Ebook Project management (5th edition): Part 2

www.downloadslide.com C H A P T E R E L E V E N Managing Project Teams Estimate 5 Project networks 6 Schedule resources & costs 8 Define project 4 Reducing duration 9 Introduction 1 Organization 3 Managing risk 7 Monitoring progress 13 Project closure 14 Strategy 2 Leadership 10 Teams Outsourcing 11 12 Managing Project Teams The Five-Stage Team Development Model Situational Factors Affecting Team Development Building High-Performance Project Teams Managing Virtual Project Teams Project Team Pitfalls Summary 374 www.downloadslide.com The difference in productivity between an average team and a turned-on, high-performing team is not 10 percent, 20 percent, or 30 percent, but 100 percent, 200 percent, even 500 percent! —Tom Peters, management consultant and writer The magic and power of teams is captured in the term “synergy,” which is derived from the Greek word sunergos: “working together.” There is positive and negative synergy. The essence of positive synergy can be found in the phrase “The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.” Conversely, negative synergy occurs when the whole is less than the sum of the parts. Mathematically, these two states can be symbolized by the following equations: Positive Synergy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 10 Negative Synergy 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 5 2 (or even 22) Synergy perhaps can best be seen on a basketball court, a soccer pitch, or a football field where teammates play as one to defeat a superior foe (see Snapshot from Practice: The 2008 Olympic Redeem Team). Although less visible than in team sports, positive and negative synergy can also be observed and felt in the daily operations of project teams. Here is a description from one team member we interviewed: Instead of operating as one big team we fractionalized into a series of subgroups. The marketing people stuck together as well as the systems guys. A lot of time was wasted gossiping and complaining about each other. When the project started slipping behind schedule, everyone started covering their tracks and trying to pass the blame on to oth-ers. After a while we avoided direct conversation and resorted to e-mail. Management finally pulled the plug and brought in another team to salvage the project. It was one of the worst project management experiences in my life. This same individual fortunately was also able to recount a more positive experience: There was a contagious excitement within the team. Sure we had our share of prob-lems and setbacks, but we dealt with them straight on and, at times, were able to do the impossible. We all cared about the project and looked out for each other. At the same time we challenged each other to do better. It was one of the most exciting times in my life. The following is a set of characteristics commonly associated with high-performing teams that exhibit positive synergy: 1. The team shares a sense of common purpose, and each member is willing to work toward achieving project objectives. 2. The team identifies individual talents and expertise and uses them, depending on the project’s needs at any given time. At these times, the team willingly accepts 375 www.downloadslide.com 376 Chapter 11 Managing Project Teams SNAPSHOT FROM PRACTICE The 2008 Olympic Redeem Team* In the 2004 Olympics in Athens, twelve years after Magic Johnson and Michael Jordon led the U.S. Dream Team to Olympic gold in Barcelona, the U.S. Basketball Team composed of NBA stars lost not once but three times to international competition. For the first time in Olympic history the U.S. settled for a bronze medal in men’s basketball. Basketball was no longer America’s game. An autopsy of the debacle in Athens turned up a severe case of negative synergy. The causes were many. The team featured only three holdovers from the group that had qualified the previ-ous summer. Seven of the original invitees withdrew. In the end some 14 players turned down Uncle Sam, invoking excuses from family obligations to nagging injuries to the security situation in Greece. As a result, coach Larry Brown took charge of a team with an average age of 23 years, and it showed. Behind the scenes, problems of dress and punctuality festered and on the eve of the games Brown wanted to send several players home. The million dollar players were overconfident, and assumed that their individual brilliance would prevail. An over reliance on one-on-one basketball and poor team defense doomed them as they lost games to Puerto Rico, Lithuania, and Argentina. Enter Jerry Colangelo, 68, former coach, player, and presi-dent of the Phoenix Suns. “The way they conducted themselves left a lot to be desired,” he says of the 2004 team. “Watching and listening to how people reacted to our players, I knew we’d hit bottom.” Colangelo told NBA commissioner David Stern that he would only assume duties as managing director if he was given complete control. As a measure of how abysmal the situation was, he immediately got what he asked for. In 2005 Colangelo met face-to-face with every prospective national player, to hear in their own words why they wanted to represent their country. The few good men to set things right wouldn’t be paid or guaranteed playing time, much less a starting spot. A key recruit was superstar LeBron James who had been tagged “LeBronze” after his performance on the disappointing 2004 team. Colangelo says, “I got buy-in. Halfway through my talk with him, LeBron said, I’m in.” Kobe Bryant soon followed and all but two of the 30 top NBA stars turned Colangelo down. Mike Kryzewski, the college coach at Duke, was hired with one project objective in mind—win the gold medal. To do so he had to change the attitude of team USA. They had to subordi-nate their superstar egos and buy-in to the concept of team ball. A blessing in disguise was being knocked out of the 2006 world championship by a Greek team. The players came away © AP Photo/Dusan Vranic from that disappointment committed to team ball as extra passes became the staple in practices. The change in attitude was evident in more subtle ways. The USA on the uniforms was bright red, while the players’ names were muted blue. The players no longer referred to hoops as “our game” and spoke about how it had become the world’s game. Even the team’s official slogan (United we rise) and unofficial nickname (the Redeem Team) implied room for improvement. The team bought into a common objective. Team USA marched to the final gold medal game by beating opponents by an average margin of 301 points. Experts marveled not so much by the victory margin, but by how well they played as a team. “Our goal is to win a gold medal and be humble about it,” says Jason Kidd, six time all-pro point guard, “and if we do it by 50, to make sure it’s because we’re playing the right way.” Nothing exemplified the right way more than a moment in the final, in which flawless ball movement from the Redeemers for 16 sec-onds, without a dribble being taken, culminated with Dwight Howard receiving a perfect pass for an uncontested dunk. In the end, they didn’t dominate the gold medal game. Spain proved to be inspired opponents. They simply closed the game out and for the first time since NBA players have come to the Olympics the USA played as a team rather than showboating individuals. * Wolff, Alexander. “The Redeem Team: New nickname, new outlook for U.S. at Olympics,” http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ alexander_wolff/07/22/redeem.team0728/index.html Varkonyi, Greg. “The Redeem Team played like a dream in the Olympic basketball final,” http://www.sportingo.com/olympic-games/basketball/ a10072_redeem-team-played-like-dream-olympic-basketball-final the influence and leadership of the members whose skills are relevant to the immediate task. 3. Roles are balanced and shared to facilitate both the accomplishment of tasks and feelings of group cohesion and morale. www.downloadslide.com Chapter 11 Managing Project Teams 377 4. The team exerts energy toward problem solving rather than allowing itself to be drained by interpersonal issues or competitive struggles. 5. Differences of opinion are encouraged and freely expressed. 6. To encourage risk taking and creativity, mistakes are treated as opportunities for learning rather than reasons for punishment. 7. Members set high personal standards of performance and encourage each other to realize the objectives of the project. 8. Members identify with the team and consider it an important source of both professional and personal growth. High-performing teams become champions, create breakthrough products, exceed customer expectations, and get projects done ahead of schedule and under budget. They are bonded together by mutual interdependency and a common goal or vision. They trust each other and exhibit a high level of collaboration. The Five-Stage Team Development Model Just as infants develop in certain ways during their first months of life, many ex-perts argue that groups develop in a predictable manner. One of the most popular models identifies five stages (see Figure 11.1) through which groups develop into effective teams: 1. Forming. During this initial stage the members get acquainted with each other and understand the scope of the project. They begin to establish ground rules by trying to find out what behaviors are acceptable with respect to both the project (what role they will play, what performance expectations are) and inter-personal relations (who’s really in charge). This stage is completed once mem-bers begin to think of themselves as part of a group. 2. Storming. As the name suggests, this stage is marked by a high degree of inter-nal conflict. Members accept that they are part of a project group but resist the FIGURE 11.1 The Five-StageTeam Development Model Stage 1: Forming Project Activity Orientation to project Group Process Testing and dependence Stage 2: Storming Stage 3: Norming Stage 4: Performing Stage 5: Adjourning Emotional response to the demands of the project Open exchange of relevent information Emergence of a solution Dissolution of the group Intragroup conflict Development of group cohesion Functional roles emerge www.downloadslide.com 378 Chapter 11 Managing Project Teams constraints that the project and group put on their individuality. There is con-flict over who will control the group and how decisions will be made. As these conflicts are resolved, the project manager’s leadership becomes accepted, and the group moves to the next stage. 3. Norming. The third stage is one in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates cohesiveness. Feelings of camaraderie and shared respon-sibility for the project are heightened. The norming phase is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group establishes a common set of expecta-tions about how members should work together. 4. Performing. The team operating structure at this point is fully functional and accepted. Group energy has moved from getting to know each other and how the group will work together to accomplishing the project goals. 5. Adjourning. For conventional work groups, performing is the last stage of their development. However, for project teams, there is a completion phase. During this stage, the team prepares for its own disbandment. High perfor-mance is no longer a top priority. Instead attention is devoted to wrapping up the project. Responses of members vary in this stage. Some members are up-beat, basking in the project team’s accomplishments. Others may be depressed over loss of camaraderie and friendships gained during the project’s life. This model has several implications for those working on project teams. The first is that the model provides a framework for the group to understand its own development. Project managers have found it useful to share the model with their teams. It helps members accept the tensions of the storming phase, and it directs their focus to moving toward the more productive phases. Another implication is that it stresses the importance of the norming phase, which contributes signifi-cantly to the level of productivity experienced during the performing phase. Proj-ect managers, as we shall see, have to take an active role in shaping group norms that will contribute to ultimate project success. For an alternative model of group development see the Punctuated Equilibrium Research Highlight. Situational Factors Affecting Team Development Experience and research indicate that high-performance project teams are much more likely to develop under the following conditions: • There are 10 or fewer members per team. • Members volunteer to serve on the project team. • Members serve on the project from beginning to end. • Members are assigned to the project full time. • Members are part of an organization culture that fosters cooperation and trust. • Members report solely to the project manager. • All relevant functional areas are represented on the team. • The project involves a compelling objective. • Members are located within conversational distance of each other. In reality, it is rare that a project manager is assigned a project that meets all of these conditions. For example, many projects’ requirements dictate the active ... - tailieumienphi.vn