Back To The Future - Part I
Not everything from the 1880s is useful for us in the 2020s.
It's understandable that some of us can't wait to go back to the office and for things to go back to how they used to be. My hope for you and your team is that you don't go back to the way things were. There are two reasons for that:
Things can't go back to the way they were - at least not any time soon. The world is a different place and will be that way indefinitely.
The way things were wasn't all that great for many teams and organisations in any case
What am I talking about!? Things were so much better before all this chaos, right? In many aspects of life, that is definitely true. I'm not convinced that things were all that great in terms of team performance. Here is some evidence to back that up:
A 2019 report from Deloitte, refers to organisational performance as a “Team Sport”. In other words, the competitiveness of organisations in the current and emerging climate relies on the ability to operate in teams. The Deloitte research picked up some interesting trends - in particular, the gap between the opportunity presented by working through teams and the current reality. 65% of the survey respondents viewed the shift from “functional hierarchy to team-centric and network-based organisational models” as important or very important — but only 7 percent of respondents felt very ready to execute this shift.
65% wanted teams and organisations to shift, but only 7% felt ready. Let's not go back to that.
The reasons are many and complex. Many can be traced back to the assumptions on which we operate our teams. Let's look at two briefly.
Scientific Management
Many organisations are designed based on beliefs that can be traced back to the Industrial Revolution, where huge increases in productivity came about as more work was done in factories. In particular, the work of one man, Frederick Winslow Taylor and his approach of Scientific Management (sometimes referred to as Taylorism) has had a lasting legacy. Taylor analysed how work got done in factories and realised that there were huge gains to be made. His approach was based on his study of a Midvale Steel Company plant in 1881 (which, funnily enough, was just 4 years before Marty and Doc returned back to the Wild West in 1885!). Taylor's study led him to an approach based on the assumption that each worker needed to be equipped for their part of the process and that those workers needed to be subsequently monitored closely to ensure that they reduced any waste of resources (including their time and motion). While it wasn’t too popular with workers when it got implemented to its fullest extent, business owners seemed to love it. The assumptions held true at the time and led to incredible results. Much more was produced in less time.
Team structures
You can still see the legacy of Taylor’s thinking and approaches in the way that many organisations structure their teams in the 2020s. The assumptions that held true and served companies so well include that:
The work to be done is able to be rationalised to a series of steps or processes
Those processes are able to be well defined, observed and measured through a centralised or hierarchical management structure
Individuals in production roles are readily available and able to be strongly motivated through extrinsic measures such as money or status
Sound familiar? Almost every team in every organisation - small or large, public or private - applies some of these principles to some extent.
And yet, here we are with a huge gap between what we need from our teams and our ability to perform as interdependent networks who are greater than the sum of their parts. The world has changed. We know that know in the midst of a pandemic. It was true before then also and the way that our teams were operating had not caught up. Go through those assumptions again and consider how accurately they reflect the teams that you work in. Chances are, they are not a perfect fit.
What is required here? A deliberate approach to team performance that is fit for purpose. An investment of time explicitly helping teams and team members improve their collective performance.
It’s a commitment that requires effort, but the reward is significant. Whether you look at it financially, professionally or strategically team performance is a competitive advantage for leaders and organisations to adopt. The time is now for leaders who can step bravely beyond thinking of teams as simply a unit of resources under command and control to recognising teams as a dynamic collection of people who can be greater than the sum of their parts.
Some questions for you to consider as you reflect on taking your teams back to the next phase:
Before the impacts of COVID-19, what did you want to change about how your teams worked?
When will you get a better chance to make the changes?