HOE KAN IK MIJN TEAM LATEN GROEIEN? EFFECTIEF TEAMWERK FACILITEREN! STEFAN DECUYPER
Wanneer is deze studiedag voor jullie een succes?
Als ik interessant en recent wetenschappelijk onderzoek kan meepikken? Als de receptie en organisatie goed is? Als er vanuit deze studiedag iets verandert in mijn gedrag en mijn werk?
Als onze organisatie er door groeit?
Als ik iets nieuws leer? Als ik interessante mensen leer kennen?
?
Als ik me kan amuseren en ontspannen?
Als mijn team er beter van wordt?
Als onze klanten, studenten, cliënten, stakeholders, etc. er beter van worden?
WEETJES OVER HET LEREN VAN ORGANISATIES 1. Tenzij teams leren, kunnen organisaties niet leren! 2. Grootse teams hebben geleerd om groots te worden!
BOUNDARY CROSSING Gathering info
Filtering
Scanning
Buffering
Mapping
Impression management & molding
Coordinatin g, negotiati ng & feedback
OVERZICHT
Teamleren Leiderschapsstijlen Samenvattend model
T
INDIVIDUEEL LEREN Individuele leeruitkomsten
Collectieve leeruitkomsten
Individuele leerprocessen
Inputs
Collectieve leerprocessen TEAMLEREN
T
² Storage ideeën Info
Ervaring
‘Delen
Fouten
‘Constructief conflict’
Retrieval
Kritiek
Positieve feedback
‘Co-constructie’
Individueel leren
Organisatieleren
Boundary crossing
Context REFLECTEREN/ Team reflexiviteit PLANNEN
Team Taak
Team activiteit
Doen/ Experimenteren
T
T
L
Leiderschapsstijlen
L
‘Empowering’ leiderschap
Resultaatsgericht leiderschap
L
Training and development
Organization * Supra system 118 System domain Fabric
Values of industry Institutionalization Economies of scale Limits to growth
Larger social context
Values of society
External environment
Cultural and historical aspects
Terminology l
Research tradition
language
Calender time
discourse
country
company
Common method factor
Group rewards based on individual learning
Physical goods
Non monetary rewards
Turbulent environment
Investment in plant equipment
Support systems
Competitors
Product mix
Industry experience
Better equipment
Support for the opperation of teams
High cost of errors
Financial resources
Punishment for errors
budget
Sector/ professional discipline
Resource and development expenditures
Policies and Procedures Methodologies Cooperative learning methods Organisational tenure Organisational tenure diversity
Growth and underinvestment
Specialisation
Workload sharing Workload distribution Reflective role assignment by the leader Task specialisation Team type
Technology
Omitting feedback in time
Employee training
measurement
(social) facilitation (by means of principles)
Opportunity for knowledge management
Team empowerment
Values of the company
Organisational Culture
Communication barriers
Dyadic methods
Competition
Informal intuitive rules
Information systems
Virtual worlds
Explicit teaching of collaborative skills
Cooperation
Organisational strategy
Information
textbooks
Goal setting intervention
cooptition
Emphasis on global integration
Organizational authority structure
Asymmetric information
Reference groups
Valueing of working across boundary lines
Emphasis on local responsiveness
Authority relations
group competition
Coaching in the chosen method
Organizational mission
Organisational learning
Limited information (mental/ physical filters, expectations, paradigms)
Authority system
Power relations
Knowledge management systems
Subgroup strength Better selection of group members Group composition Team design for learning Zone of proximal development Team diversity
Social integration
Tenure diversity Age diversity Sex diversity Functional background diversity Educational diversity
Group decision making
Hierarchy Minority influence Authority relations Status team leader Power differences Power structure Team leadership
Recent experiences
Person – focused leadership
Cooperative group based experience
Encouragement to use knowledge management
Social comparison
Imrpoved methodology
Shared experiences
Problem solving method
Experience
Team past performance
Ground rules
Reflection process
Collective mind
Use of criteria for dialogue (self-correction, attention for context, scaffolding)
Integrating perspectives
Team vision
Model1/ model 2 behaivour
Learning goal
Shared cognition
Recognising and defusing defensive routines
Clearly perceived positive interdependency
Eroding goals
Product perceptual frame
Clear direction
Group web or matrix
Clear but flexible goals
Group memory
Team learning goals
Mutual knowledge
Leader accepting criticism
Substitutability Task interdependency Positive interdependency
Action strategy
Goal interdependence
Group norms/ norms Peer norms and sanctions Informal enforcement of norms
Colllective instructional efficacy Team efficacy Group potency
Team culture
Size of founding team
Social discourse
Climate for expressing objection
Team climate
Team tenure
Team learning orientation
Norms in favour of accepting task conflict
Inter personal climate
Adaptive problem solving orientation
cohesiveness
Single feedback loops Unscientific reasoning Stop action and reflect Error detection/ correction Diagnosis Error management visioning
Shared understanding of the problem
focus primary task
Recognition
Action Active work
Disruption
Managing reality Action research Repetition Action process Experimentation Result oriented activity Testing shared mental models Implementation failure Play (in stead of game) Controlled experimentation (inter)activity activity
Improved product design Relationshipconflict avoidance norms
Cummulative output Routinizaton of tasks
Model 1 / 2 values
adaptation
Model 1/ 2 strategies
Shared situational awareness
Theory
Awareness of colleagues expertise
Plan
Team member awareness of relevant situated knowledge
Trust
Cognitive problem-solving orientation
Double feedback loops
Multiple inclusions
Team psychological safety
crowding
Change of perspective
Flawed cognitive maps
Reward interdependency
Cost benefit for all
motivation of others
Collective culture
Shared vision
Team/ group goals
Operating principles
Task cohesion
Ambigue knowledge
Access to information
Integration and learning perspective
Level of general cognitive ability
Codified knowledge
codification
Team development
Average Collective ability
Group development
Collective expertise
Team adaptability
Team identity
Flexebility Level of agreeability Level of openness to experience
Perception of time
Compensatory behaviour
Length of time spent on learning
Role- taking status Social role
Expert in team Autonomous learner
Refresh decision making skills
Individual study
Member flexibility
Social identity
Level of appreciation
Openness
Creativity
Error hiding
Construction of meaning
Deception Game playing Individual expression
openness to experience
Self-disclosure
inducibility
Psychological safety
Attentional capacity
Individual problem solving
Team member skills
Systems thinking
Team member resources (knowledge, skills, abilities)
assertiveness
Inter personal skills
Personal vision
Small-group skills
Metacongition
Cognitive abalility
Self-monitoring
responsibility
Individual empowerment
ownership
Social position
Personal responsibility
Individual learner autonomy
Accept responsibility for learning
Emotional states
Individual accountability
feelings
envolvement
Invention
trust Asking for support observation
Self regulation and control
Group commitment of new members
Psychological energy Motivation
Pecieved self-efficacy Self-image Percieved potency Self-esteem Individuals feel important for the fate of the team
Positive cathexis
Individual cognition about the learning area
Appreciation for team work
Prior experience
Positive valuing of groups
Participation in meetings Observation Social network sharing Feedback loop within the organization Boundary crossing connectedness Relationships with key stakeholders Cross-functional cooperation External communication Crossing boundaries Between group co-operation Inviting experts in meetings Boundary spanning External integration, coordination and communication Frequency of external communication
Defensive routines Social loafing Free riding
Psychological health
Lack of individual team member knowledge Perception of lower ability of team members Private agenda’s
Motivation to learn Motivation to encourage others to learn Motivation to help gropumates to learn
Misperceptions of feedback
Dominant personalities
Image of others (teams, departments)
Personality (agreableness, assertiveness) Conscientiousness
Motivation for participation
Individual agreeableness
Willingness to reach a mutual understanding
Extraversion
Ability for knowledge management Member need for affiliation Member need for achievement Member need for power Member need for resources
Prior knowledge
Personal movement
Groupthink
Emotional stability
Motivation for knowledge management
Self-regulation
Technology transfer
Team synergy
Appropriability of knowledge
Individual formal power
Legitimate peripheral participation
Critical reflection by each memeber
Search for knowledge in environment
Social laboring
Individual * Subsystem 100 modeling
Learning by engeniers
Conflict escalation
Dynamic realocation of functions
Lack of team knowledge
Team maturity/ fase
Framing Co-construction Collaborative construction
Learning by suppliers
Performance monitoring
Group cohesiveness
Learning climate (activation energy, container, social quality of the interactions)
Constructive conflict Revolution from within Team conflict Conflict managemen Routine task conflict Relational conflict Affective conflict Cognitive conflict Constructive controversy Reframing Problem solving Discuss negotiation
Other group learning
Monitoring
Social cohesion
Innovative problem-solving orientation
Number of complaints Sharing and exchange Team communication Communication frequency Informal communication Communication patterns or styles (mutual) Feedback debate Communication Dialogue Face-to-face promotive interaction Frequent group processing (listen, question, clarify, prompt, revise, summarize, speculate, ypothesize) Responsive communication
Real time analyzing and drawing lessons
Mental model
Interdependency
Team size
documentation
(Peer)Evaluation
Shared mental model
Team leader coaching
Leaders framing the challenge
Accepting silence
Distributed cognition
Agreeing on problem solving method
Leader roles
Knowledge management (status of units, dyadic relations between units, pattern in relations between units)
Reflection and learning spaces
Distributed working memory
Common goal
Mission analysis
Ability for knowledge management
Reflective work Group cognition
Team viability
Mix of traits (ability, personality, demographic charateristics)
Stability of membership
reflexivity
Decision making authority Authority over decision making
Systems experience
Team leader capacity (sharedness, distributedness, collective social identity, connectivity)
Complex team tasks
Stability of fluctuation
Team reflexivity
Autonomy
Experience working together
Leader consideration
Task structuring
Team diversity perspective
Team autonomy support
Past experience
Empowerment by team leadership
modelling
Hjgh achievers in the group
Facilitator (mediating conflict, offering advice, challenging, etc.)
Work group autonomy
hierarchical differences
Leader participation level
Similar group members
Individual learning
Task design/ task instruction
Autonomy to determine the agenda
Ethnical/ race diversity
Tacit knowledge
Support for collaboration of teams within the organization
Teacher imposed structure
Diversity
Ideosyncratic knowledge
High quality outcome feedback
Think sheets
Demographic composition
Nature of knowledge
External leader performance management
(cross training, team coordination training, self guided correction training, assertiveness training, stress exposure training, scenariobased training, team building)
Tools and techniques
Nature of the task (variety, immediacy)
Product characteristics (complex, new, low experience, amount IP, familiarity with product)
Individualised team participation assessment
Technical systems
Community of inquiry
(autonomy, feedback, significance, identity, skill variety)
Training strategies
Global team output assessment
Supervisor high expectations
Senior management support for change
training
Representational systems
Objective instruction by the leader
Task characteristics
Modelling of managers for crossing boundaries
Team evaluation
Communication systems
Demographic heterogeinity
Good team task (completenesss, varied demands, requirements of interdependence and interaction, task significance, opportunities for learning, developmental possibilities for the task, intrinsically motivating)
Individual evaluation
Learning by management
Context support
Functional diversity
Roles/ team roles
Crisis created by existing management
Training in team learning processes, climate of exposing objection and support
Structural limitations
Reward or goal structure
Division of materials
(managerial attitudes, time and freedom, openness towards recommendations)
Debrief, project audits, after action report
Organizational structure
Team * System 296
Division of labour
Investment in training
Manager Turnover
Firm performance
goals
Cooperative incentive structure
Certificates
Human Resources
Firm experience
Interaction-discourse structure
Individual reward
Crisis in the environment
Organizational innovation history
Group communication structure
Diversity training
Reward system
Variation in the environment
Organizational history
Team structure (paired structure, divisional structure, functional structure)
Team training
Funding arrangement system
Collective reward
Demography
Dynamic complexity (time delays, unethical experiments, instability, oscilliation)
Better training of new members Incentives
Functional background
Average age
Educational background
age
Average ancienity in the organization
generation
L
TEAM PSYCHOLOGI SCHE VEILIGHEID Het gedeeld geloof dat het team veilig is voor riskant inter-persoonlijk gedraging
L
GROEPSPOTENTIE Het gedeeld geloof in de capaciteit van het team om te presteren
L
TEAM AUTONOMIE
De mate waarin het team controle heeft over haar situatie en zelf kan bepalen hoe het de dagelijkse taken aanpakt
L
TEAM Collection of individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, who share responsability for outcomes, who see themselves and who are seen by others as an intact social entity embedded in one or more larger social systems, and who manage their relationships across organizational boundaries. (Cohen & Bailey, 1997, p. 241)
L
METHODE Mixed method 136 werkteams (3-14 leden), 845 teamleden ‘Team’ volgens definitie cohen & Bailey Context: gezondheidszorg, onderwijs, ICT Vragenlijsten -> Pad analyse 41 interviews (24 teamleden, 17 teamleiders)
L
KWANTITATIEVE RESULTATEN Positieve relatie Team psychologische veiligheid
geen relatie
.51 ‘Empowering’ leiderschap
.46 .16 .35 Groepspotentie
Resultaatsgericht leiderschap
.18
.18 .45
.20 Team autonomie
Collectieve leerprocessen
L
KWANTITATIEVE RESULTATEN
L
KWANTITATIEVE RESULTATEN
L
KWALITATIEVE RESULTATEN
L
Kwalitatieve resultaten Hoe fnuiken resultaatsgerichte leiders teamleren? – Ze dringen eigen ideeën op – Ze staan weinig open voor ideeën van teamleden – Ze maken van fouten een taboe – Problemen komen niet rechtstreeks tot bij hen – Meningsverschillen worden gezien als problematisch
L
Kwalitatieve resultaten Wat doen ‘empowering leaders om teamleren te faciliteren? Ze treden op als… – Partners in teamleren – Coaches voor teamleren – Organisatoren voor teamleren
S
Samenvattend model?
S
WAT VRAAG JE EIGENLIJK VAN JE TEAMLEDEN?
S
- Zorg dat iedereen weet waarom en waartoe men leert 5 TIMING & BALANCE INTERVENTIONS CONTINUOUS FACILITATOR LEARNING 2 DIRECTION
4 MODEL
3 ALIGNMENT - Organiseer training voor het team en de teamleden - Installeer structurele condities
1 COACHING/ COMMITMEN T -Parachute/ psychologische veiligheid - Motiveer via team autonomy & group potency
S 1. Creëer een parachute
2. Zorg dat iedereen weet waarom het nodig is te springen! 3. Organiseer de vlucht
4. Geef het voorbeeld, spring zelf ook! 5. Spring enkel bij geschikt weer
