Team vs. Individual Structure

Below is a simple diagram of the difference between a team based department or organization verses letting the associates drive the structure. I have witness both environments. Team is not a corporate buzzword, it is a key ingredient to successful company growth. Large teams consist of teams within a team.

Team Based	Individual Based
Develop Leaders	Anarchy
Staff Growth	Power Struggles
Member Contributions	High Turnover
Self-sustaining	Stagnant

Why Teams Fail

Lack of Management Support

Wrong member make up

Lack of correct tools to succeed

These elements are tried and true team based analysis and experience. Let me focus on the Team based structure, as the Individual based structure is counter-productive.

Teams can be functional or cross-functional:

• Functional - Specific expertise
• Cross-functional - Project driven areas

The goal of both teams is goal setting, process improvement, trends sharing, and subject matter collaboration. This list is by no means inclusive of all team elements.

The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) is streamlined operations or process efficiencies. Remember the profit equation contains two sides revenue and expenses. Although a department may not be revenue generating, it can add to the bottom line with performance efficiencies by having less overhead costs, i.e. fewer associates required output the current workload, or handling more workload, contributing to the revenue side of the profit equation.

I hope this blog entry will encourage you to recognize the benefits of a team base structure or review your current teams’ structure.

FOCUS

Are you inundated with communication? Emails, IMs, meetings, and if it still exists, phone calls. On any given day, I receive 30 emails an hour, averaging 1 every two minutes, a meeting every hour, sometimes every half hour and lately every 15 minutes, lastly a constant flow of IMs. I’m exhausted just writing about it. Maybe your day is not as bad, but I bet it can still be filled with over communication.

This blog post compliments my tagline, "People plus Process plus Technology." All three elements must blend to be successful at anything, manager, project management, educator, builder, everything. We must learn to balance them. I put the elements in order of importance, so don’t let today’s communication technology override the most important element - People.

Here are few of my communication rules:

• Emails – all cc’s do not require my response and may not even get read
• IMs – you really need a response now or used for multi-tasking (listening in a meeting, but not participating)
• I may, or may not, answer based on my role above
• Meetings (Skype or live) – require an agenda to determine priority and/or attendance
• Phone – if someone calls me, it is definitely a priority (and a preference)

Roll all these communication rules into one theme – FOCUS

Only a Super Human can satisfy every communication received, during the day.

Now, a message to management – consolidate information.

• Plan to send out your communication once a day, at a regular time would be best,  every morning or end of day even better to cover routine items, like process
• Advise your reports to prioritize their communications
• Assign specific areas of expertise to qualified associate(s) to reduce irrelevant communications to everyone (focus your team)

In the long term, productivity will increase. I promise.

It's All About People

The title of my website displays the convergence of People, Process and Technology, but nothing can occur without people.

Process and technology cannot function separate from people. People write and follow the process. People write and execute code. People communicate with people to achieve a goal. Teams cannot exist without people. Customers are comprised of people, whether internal or external of the organization. People are the key to any successful project. 

People skills should be the highest valued acumen, in any successful organization.

Leadership’s Role in Lateral Conflict

There is always a vertical manager hierarchy in every organization. Some companies this hierarchy is short, others can be quite layered. When it comes to problem solving protocol, there are typically rules to follow. One well known rule is you never leap frog your direct reporting manager. This is proven political and career ending suicide. I want to address a lessor known, or possibly not practiced, management protocol regarding lateral conflict resolution.

When conflict arises between intradepartmental team members, it’s leaderships’ role to resolve it, while retaining the team member’s relationship.

Here are the steps that have worked in my experiences:

1. One or both of the conflicting team members contacts their direct manager and explains the situation
2. The direct manager contacts the non-direct member’s manager
3. The two, or more, managers involved in the situation discuss resolution, independent of the team members (this does not exclude input from the team member)
4. These managers explain the resolution to their direct reports

The benefit from this conflict resolution approach preserves the day-to-day working relationship of the team members.

This protocol can be effective at any level of management. I would hope the higher up the leadership chain the conflict rises, the quicker the solution, based on all the factors contributing to this level’s position. Too often, conflict resolution is restricted to the team member and reporting manager. This eliminates the other parties involved in the conflict and reduces resolution success, at least in the long term.

Is it real or is it Rhetoric?

Companies love buzzwords. Every industry has them and many are common between them. What is their etymology? Is it generational? What is the purpose?

I’ve been involved with companies where buzzwords we literally comical. In a roundtable meeting with "C" level executives, the CEO would laugh at you, if you used a buzzword in your update. He even created on-the-rock glasses with the current buzzwords printed on them. Other companies have distributed posters to incentivize associates to be "team players" or "innovative."

The real question is "Why do buzzword exist?" In the case of motivation, are the effective? I have an answer, "It depends." I purport the axiom, "Put your money where your mouth is." Take the word "game-changer" or "disruptor" if the company takes an associate’s suggestion and implements it, then it’s real. Take the word "empower". This buzzword has been around for decades. If an associate takes an initiative and gets reprimanded, then it’s rhetoric.

Personally, I prefer quotations over buzzwords. The quote doesn’t need to be from a famous person, and least of all, from an actor. As long as it is positive, truthful, and/or inspires action, I like it. I’ll share two I came across in preparing for this blog.

There are only three measurements that tell you nearly everything you need to know about your organization’s overall performance: employee engagement, customer satisfaction, and cash flow.

Jack Welch

Always treat your employees exactly as you want them to treat your best customers.

Stephen R. Covey

How many companies adhere to these words of wisdom? Only the successful ones!

If you’re up for some more buzzword fun, here are two links I enjoyed researching this subject.

Business buzzwords to watch in 2018

List of Buzzwords from Wikipedia

Work/LIfe Balance

You can't help but to have heard this term before. The tech industry is showing both sides of this cultural spectrum, with Netflix offering unlimited maternity time-off for both the mother and father on one side and Amazon pushing their associates to their limits on the other. Work-Live-Play complexes are sprouting up everywhere.

The operative word here is "balance". Managing a company strictly by data eliminates humanity. Too much flexibility and productivity can suffer. Every humans' needs are different. As I have mentioned in a previous blog, management is responsible to learn what motivates their associates. So how do you create the perfect balance, when no two people are the same?

The basic factors:

• Data - In business you must have measurements, financial and productivity
• Competition - I believe that a certain level of competition is healthy among associates, as well as "constructive" conflict. This country was founded on free enterprise and has thrived on competition
• Family or social life outside of work
• Health - Physical, mental and financial

What's the magic formula for work/life balance? I don't think anyone has developed it, nor do I believe it exists. How can it exist, with so many factors? If I took the time to dig very deep, I could probably write a Doctorial treatise on the subject. This would take years of research on a constantly changing target, as society evolves and companies come and go. Not only are no two people the same; no two companies are the same.

The question that needs to be asked, when choosing a company culture, is, "How much does the company own you." You can state what a miserable workplace exists at Amazon, but they were just rated the most valuable retail company over Walmart. That doesn't mean you should work there. As a company, you may decide your most valuable assets, hopefully after your customers, are your associates.

Companies will continue to push associates. Associates will continue to push back. This is how change works.

Work and Fun

A poor company culture can not be solved by the HR department planning and executing a bowling day or an Office Olympics picnic. Creating fun is relative to the associate’s perception of the company, and more importantly, to their job. I’m not stating these actives are not fun, but they can have little influence on associate motivation. The concept is great, as it shows the company, on a global scale, they appreciate and reward those who contribute to their success.

This blog post is about drilling down to the individual associate. I see too many times where upper and middle management are oblivious to their direct reports feelings. Yes, I used the word “feelings”. Associates are human beings and possess emotions. The greatest of these at work is appreciation and appreciation is displayed by recognition and recognition leads to motivation and motivation leads to productivity. You get the picture.

My question to today’s managers, many of whom are young and/or first time managers, is “Are you in touch with your reports feelings about their job?” This leads to further review:

• How do you communicate? If you believe knowledge is power, do you share information or believe you need to use it to protect your own position?
• Do you disseminate timely performance factors, positive or negative?
• How often do you meet with your reports, individually and collectively?
• Do you know their significant other’s name?
• Do you know their birthday, without HR reminding you? Studies show that a person’s birthday is one of their most valued days.
• Are you consistently learning to be a better manager?
• If you manage managers, are you equipping them to improve their people skills?

HR should augment a positive company culture. Managers must be tuned to individual associate motivation, which varies person-to-person. If your feel your job is not fun, then no corporate event will change it.

There are managers out there that should not be managers. Just because you are skilled at your given vocation, doesn’t mean you can manage people with or without these same skill sets. Do management schools still teach the Peter Principle? I have seen managers with only one report. Where this exists in my company structure influence, I eliminate this arrangement. Supervising one person is a poor situation. This creates a conundrum for the manager-associate relationship to either be friends or enemies. A worse case is when it’s a “working” manager scenario. You both have the same function, but one is privileged and only associate animosity can result. Unfortunately, this is more common than you may realize.

One last thought. Corporate sponsored events should take place during the workday. People have their work life and their personal life. Making an evening or weekend event, will impose “force company socialization.” It devalues the company’s goal to show appreciation. People may, and do have, work friends, but let them decide when to socialize outside the workplace. This is not the company’s role.

What are your motivation techniques?

Great Quote

"The way you organize talent has an impact on a company's ability to innovate and evolve. Executives need to design structures that amplifiy, rather than encumber remarkable talent."

~Sam Yagan, CEO, Match, Inc.

This is my motto and basis for success at The J. Frost Group. It amazes me everyday, when I see companies inhibit their own talent with poor structure, and more importantly, poor leadership. Just because you're a genius, doesn't make you a great leader. Great leaders give power to associates, not take it away.

How do you empower talent?

What is your greatest strength?

You have all heard this question. If not, you have never looked for a job. This blog post is to update the question.

The strength question had a partner, "What is your weakness?" Regardless how you answer either question the response can be reversed. Say your greatest strength is team building. Does this mean your weakness in working independently. Most people will steer their answer based on the job description, or worse when answering their weakness, will attempt to make a negative a positive, i.e. "I'm a workaholic."

What about updating the question to, "What are your qualities?" Qualities are character traits that can define your work habits or your personality, which are both regarded important to fitting in the company's culture.

If your résumé clearly demonstrates you credentials, as it should, the interview process is to confirm and dig deeper into the position's specific skill sets. Depending on the interview process, at some point the interview will eventually be about "fit".

This post will not list qualities or provide a cheat sheet to answer the question. It's time for you to think about what qualities you can bring to the company. Remember, it's not about you. You can also apply this new thought to your current job for potential advancement, enhancement or just to save it.

Hiring managers, strongly consider this approach. You will discover more than just the best and worst of a person's traits (if the response is even reliable). You will discover multiple applicable "qualities" with potential and existing associates.

Year End Blog

2011 has displayed a very trying year for companies and organizations. High unemployment, Wall Street's obsession with profits and an acrimonious congress has dominated the U.S. business landscape.

From following organizational anthropology and personal experiences, I beg executives, managers and associates (employees) to evaluate your attitude. Yes, I said attitude. Attitude effects all aspects of your life. I end the year, not with pontifications, but self introspective questions. These questions are valid for all organizational levels.

- Do you recognize a connection between people's performance and profits?

- Are your hiring practices inclusionary or exclusionary?

- Do you perform your responsibilities with focus and effort?

- Do you listen?

- Do you discriminate? Think hard about this question.

- Do you have the right people in the right position, doing the right thing?

- Do you accept, deny, encourage or fear change?

- Are you happy? Why or why not?

Lastly, forget 3 or 5 year strategies. What are your goals for the next 3 to 5 months? Repeat: your goals, not the where you work.

You are the difference!