Virtual Teams: Explained.

Virtual teams will soon simply be called “teams.” Yet, and unfortunately, the extent to which virtual teams are utilized in corporations has exceeded the research done on the topic. Virtual teams consist of an interconnected group – this interconnectivity comprises shared goals or expected outputs from organizations. Virtual teams are dispersed throughout the nation, or world, and this trend is increasing as globalization continues to prosper. RW CultureWizard (2016) completed a survey consisting of 1372 business respondents from 80 countries; 85 percent of the participants worked on virtual teams. 85 percent! The extent to which virtual teams are prevalent points to the necessity of continued support for managers, and employees alike, under this virtual framework.

I recently spoke with a peer who was promoted several months ago. She shared with me her new manager is unaccustomed to managing from afar. In fact, the notion of managing a virtual team member is as foreign to him as the German language is to me. This points to the reality that managers who are being asked to manage virtually need just as much advice and/or coaching as the team members who are virtual. 

There are a lot of benefits of virtual teams. Geographic variation can contribute to less time in transit for client travel (think of territory allocation), diversity in teams increases creativity and problem solving (interested in the literature?), and productivity can increase due to time zone variation.

But, I would be remiss if I did not mention the disadvantages. Team engagement can suffer as a result of less frequent communication, disjointed (non-media-rich) narratives, damaged trust due to miscommunication, confused staff responsibility, minimal empowerment, and managerial-staff conflict.

At the root of it all? Communication. If you have been managing a virtual team, take a moment to reflect with me. What cadences do you have in place to communicate with each team member? What is the frequency? What process ensures communication among team members (needed for camaraderie and collaboration)? Now, what is the intent of those meetings? Is each and every conversation goal-oriented and work-specific? Or do you work diligently to incorporate the development of “human stuff” -- AKA interpersonal relations?

Each and every team is different; thus, I cannot say the issues you face are going to have a similar resolution as another group. What I can say is this: even researchers are busy getting to the theoretical undertones of what makes a virtual team effective. Do not despair, there are plenty of tried and true ways to work in a virtual environment. A couple of my favorites include (a) leveraging technology wisely, (b) putting your people first, and (c) understanding the necessity of unifying your team.

The best approach to understand what challenges you face require gathering information – this is true for both virtual and non-virtual teams. Knowing where you are – comprehending challenges, opportunities, and perception — will give you significant insight into blind spots, areas for improvement, and empathy for the challenges virtual team members face.

An area research has identified to be relevant for virtual management is the behavioral profiles of those who lead virtual teams. Since these managers must counteract the absence of a face-to-face dynamic, his or her ability to be even more engaged (and engaging) becomes front and center. The ability to facilitate member engagement, appreciate cultural diversity, and build trust, are paramount. Remember, media-richness is not on your side. Utilize tools that are the next best thing e.g., video chat and group discussion forums. If this is all too new, let’s come up with a plan. If you are facing some challenges within your virtual team, we can tackle one at a time to verify team alignment and maintain accomplishment.  

Hacks to Increasing Team Effectiveness

Effective teams lead to greater productivity, better use of resources, sophisticated problem solving, and an increase in innovative ideas or creativity. Then, why is it, we struggle to craft these invaluable cohorts?

As you prepare for the New Year, consider the following to help you reset the stage for managing your team.  

Clarity in Goals.
I know, I keep coming back to this (but it’s essential!). Removing ambiguity and providing clarity is very powerful in management. To that point, team goals need to be just as clear. Why? First off, team members can tell whether performance objectives have been attained. Second, without clear team goals, several obstacles are likely to get in the way. These include (a) team members setting their own goals that may be in opposition to what the team needs to accomplish (b) personal agendas may get in the way of identified targets, (c) power issues can and will contribute to personality conflict and dilute time allocation.

Vague tasks leave team members questioning the details and unsure about the overall necessity of what they’re aiming to achieve. A compelling and shared purpose not only motivates team members, but it also requires full engagement of their talents.   

Competency.
It seems logical, but team members need to be made up of the right types of people. Technical aptitude cannot be replaced – each person needs to possess the right level of competency to achieve team goals. Further, members also need interpersonal and teamwork skills. A common mistake (and this goes back to clarity): an assumption is made that people have the technical and/or interpersonal skills to be effective in their assigned roles. Team leads need to not only set expectations about technical and interpersonal capability but must identify the normalcy and helpfulness in continued education. If a team member is underperforming in one of the areas above, he or she needs further direction. Make sure they understand why they need it and come up with a plan to help them get it.

Collaborative Climate.
A collaborative climate may seem like a no-brainer. If you want a capable team – you need to have collaboration. What allows a collaborative environment?

1. A space that allows for healthy but respectful debate

2. Active listening skills

3. Empathy

4. Honesty

Each team member has their uniqueness; they bring with them different perspectives, opinions, and expertise. It’s about channeling differences to ensure discussion. Team members must take ownership of wanting a collaborative environment. If collaboration is failing, it’s a two-prong failure. 1) The team needs to coordinate their individual contributions and look to items 1-4 to achieve improvement. 2) Effective team leaders can facilitate a collaborate climate by managing their own need to control, ensuring a safe space for communication, and guiding the team into this problem-solving framework by also integrating items 1-4 into group dynamics and expectations. [This framework is correlated to the need for clear norms of conduct: how are people expected to behave?]

Support and Recognition.
As discussed, a clear goal is needed to ensure accomplishment. But once accomplishment is reached, what then? New goals can be crafted and implemented, but too, recognition of success needs to take place. Take note: if the team is truly functioning as a team – team performance and accomplishment should be recognized and rewarded, not individual performance; this can cause a divide among team members.

Additionally, a widespread mistake is to assign challenging feats, but not provide adequate support to accomplish assignments. Researchers Hyatt and Ruddy found that having systems in place to support teams e.g., clear direction, data, resources, rewards, and training, enables teams to be more effective and achieve goals.

Principled Leadership.
It is up to the team leader to implement programming that supports the collective. If you’re a team leader and you are realizing the number of goals set for your team may be overwhelming, look to see what can be removed, clarified, and reintroduced to the team. Further, if you are concerned about competency, look to your leadership to ensure resources will be provided to help your cohort succeed. Ultimately, it’s up to you to create an environment that is collaborative. If you’re struggling on how to implement changes, approach the people you report to, or are generally unsure about some challenges, let’s schedule a time to speak.   

As we enter the holidays, I am going to take a several-week break. I look forward to sharing leadership and management recommendations as well as proven tactics for improvement when I return in 2019!

Flat Structures: Why They Work… Until They Don’t.

Flat structures have a special lure. “Come work for us, we have a flat organization.” It’s almost as if those words insinuate no explanation is needed! It’s a flat org! Get excited, people.  

In retrospect, the organizations I worked for that claimed they were flat, were in need of some serious direction, structure, and unit empowerment.

Structural options have less to do with the classification, and more to do with how companies interpret the benefits. Further, it has to do with how the organization wants teams to behave within their cohorts.

Let’s start with the types of organizational structure. The most often defined is a traditional hierarchy. This stems from the “modernized” working age that occurred in the industrial revolution. Even before that, though, the government emphasized the chain of command. The order was clear, and often age was associated with relevant experience. For a constantly changing global workplace, a one-size fits all approach is no longer good enough. New structures were considered for the evolving workplace. Flat organizations came to be, then flatter organizations, and then holacratic frameworks (to name the primaries).

The traditional hierarchy:

The traditional hierarchy maintain the bureaucracy many of us have learned to despise. The red tape of checks and balances remove the ability to get work done. Traditional hierarchies mute critical thinkers and, regretfully, empowerment suffers. In the process of minimizing productivity – coinciding with the speed to communicating – companies become less competitive. The ability to pivot becomes a memory of the past.

Some company owners fall into the traditional hierarchy without meaning to. And, as the company scales, no one stops to reconsider if the structure is supporting company goals. The first check and balance: Each year, look at the reporting lines and consider other frameworks. Is there another that better aligns with the goals of your organization?  

The Flat Structure:

I alluded to this – the flat structure has previously been seen as sexy. Here’s the thing: a true flat structure means there are no job titles, no seniority, no reporting formalities, no executives. Come one, come all, we are equal. So, if you’re reading this thinking, hmm, my company is “flat” but there are indeed seniors, executives, and clear titles, word to the wise: your org isn’t flat.

Some companies are able to make flat organizations work splendidly; if an employee wants to start their own project, then they are responsible for securing funding and building their team. In a way, they are part owners (without the equity). This takes ample trust. If you’re comfortable with this construct, proceed!

Most typically, flat organizations are doable with a young and small company. Think of it this way, when you start your company, you may be able to have everyone report to you. However, when there are 15-20 people on board (and still growing) there simply aren’t enough hours in the day for everyone to report to you. Your time will not be used efficiently, and you will end up working twice as long in the workday.

Holacratic:

The primary goal here is to empower and enable decision making. This term is best known thanks to our friends at Zappos. Holacracy has with it its own rules and guidelines; if you’re interested in a deeper look, check out this resource. The way I see holacratic structures is like this: reporting structures are in place, but rather than everyone rolling up, teams roll laterally or diagonally. Leaders are empowered to approve decisions in their respected areas, and every decision does not need to go up the ladder.

The truth is, any hierarchy that ensures empowerment will function very differently than bureaucracies as we know them. Structure helps maintain order and minimizes ambiguity. But, as conveyed, too much structure leads to a stifled and slow-moving work environment. If we look at structures as a tool for leadership development, we can reinvent how hierarchies are defined. Note: I find flatter organizations and holacratic structures have some some overlap. My preference? Take parts from each that work best for you.

At the root of all of this is people management, not organizational line management. If you want your workplace to be collaborative and dare to encourage creativity, as well as question the status quo, enforce a structure that promotes collaboration (flatter or holacratic structures) but doesn’t require only one, or few, people’s omnipresence (flat).  

Acknowledgement In the Workplace: A Retention Strategy

Following my Manager Trapdoors: Four Themes to Correct post, I promised to address the relevance of acknowledgement in the workplace. Identifying acknowledgement as a necessity to contentment at work may seem like a no brainer, but it easily falls through the cracks. Let’s look at the importance of acknowledgement, as well as some easy steps to implement acknowledgment into your day.

The days go by, your teams produce work, and life goes on. Do they feel appreciated for their work? This is a question worth asking.

Acknowledgement not only builds trust, it energizes people. Without a trustworthy environment where motivation is fostered, disengagement is painfully relevant. Gallup estimates that U.S. productivity loss, as a result of disengaged employees, is about $500 billion a year. Further, disengaged employees take an average of 4.5 more sick days per year than actively engaged employees. When the Society for Human Resource Management polled participants for the number one reason they leave a job, the answer was a lack of appreciation.  

Acknowledgement, Recognition, and Appreciation

Judy Umlas, author of the Power of Acknowledgement identified recognition and acknowledgement as two distinct actions.  Recognition is the appreciation of an action. This is the “job well-done” commentary. Thank you for completing a task on time. Think of actions, and their associated result. Conversely, she identifies acknowledgement as the heart-felt appreciation for the person as a whole. This requires a manager to really know their team member. Thank you for being an exceptional listener in that client meeting or I appreciate your natural ability to be genuine. This isn’t the surface-stuff. It’s the underlying behaviors.  

Appreciation, on the other hand, can be accomplished by both acknowledgement and recognition. If we are seeing people flock away due to the absence of appreciation, we have many options in correcting the virus.

To that point, any deficiency in acknowledgement, recognition, and appreciation, contributes to disengagement. Gallup has identified the following:

-       About 30 percent of currently employed people are actively engaged. This is the type of person we should want to see in our organizations. These individuals work with passion, want to succeed, and are committed to their jobs.

-       About 50-52 percent are not engaged employees. They are checked out. Energy is lacking and they do the minimum. (Anyone surprised by this number? Me too.)

-       Then, it’s suggested 18 percent are actively disengaged. The negativity is venomous. From irresponsibility, to speed to criticize, and blatant unhappiness, we’ve all seen a person or two in our careers who demonstrate these behaviors.  

Steps to Take

As a quick background on just one leadership theory, the behavioral approach focuses on what leaders do rather than who leaders are. The behavioral approach suggests that leaders engage in two primary types of behaviors: task behaviors and relationship behaviors. In my work as a management consultant, I have identified the best leaders are focused slightly more (and sometimes significantly so) on relationship behaviors. Can managers be leaders? Absolutely. But the core definitions differ. (Get some more clarity on the difference here.) The point here is this: relationship-oriented leaders and managers will opt to engage in appreciative behaviors more often than their task-oriented counter parts. Unsure where you fall? I can share a great assessment tool with you for self-exploration.  

If you find a team member demonstrating some disengagement traits, try the following.

• Acknowledge them (see above for an example!)

• Recognize them (see above for an example!)

• Listen to them. True listening is a form of acknowledgement. It is validating and truly helps team members feel they are an important part of the team.  

• Adjust your behaviors; try implementing a practice to recognize each of your employees at least once (everyone can do that!) a week.

Have you done all these things and still no luck? Drop me a line.

Until next time –
Brielle