ETM 5221 Engineering Teaming Application and Execution Nicholas

ETM 5221 Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Nicholas C. Romano, Jr. Nicholas-Romano@mstm. okstate. edu Paul E. Rossler prossle@okstate. edu ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 1

Week 4 April 23, 2002 Group Dynamics ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 2

Agenda • A quick review of difficulties with groups • Helping direct group dynamics • Jelled teams and productive workplaces • The mythical man-month • Key features of the Group System Concept ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 3

Meeting purposes: Almost 2/3 involve complex group processes (Monge, P. R. , Mc. Sween, C. , & Wyer, J. 1989) ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 4

Look who’s talking • Traditional Teamwork – Boss talked 33% of time – Next person 22% • Technology Supported Teamwork – Boss talked 5 % – Next person 8% (From Romano) ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 5

A quick review of difficulties with groups • Some tasks are simply not well suited for group methods or processes • Often develop preferred ways of looking at problems that can inhibit innovation • Synergistic effect can be absent – For example, brainstorming doesn’t exceed performance of individually produced and combined results ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 6

Difficulties (continued) • Politics, power, and position can dominate methods or results – Or can suppress contributions of others • A group fulfills social needs, but group seldom has ways of regulating amount • Fairly reliable characteristic of groups to get off track and get stuck there ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 7

Difficulties (continued) • Groups tend to have relatively low aspiration levels with respect to quality of solutions accepted – Once some level of acceptance is inferred, little further search happens • Often lack concern and method for dealing with way to best utilize and communicate members’ knowledge ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 8

Difficulties (continued) • Strongly influenced by cultural norms – In natural groups, members tend to be conservative, circumspect • If the group’s efforts do not appear reinforced, effort is reduced • As group size increases, effort contributed by each individual member tends to decrease ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 9

Difficulties (continued) • Reliably exhibit norms against devoting time to planning their methods – Move immediately to attacking problem, relying on implicitly shared methods – Considerable likelihood that method is poorly adapted to task and only modestly effective – Seldom have ability to change the method when things not going well ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 10

Effective use of roles and process help direct dynamics • Group process management roles • Group process member roles – Task – Maintenance – Non-productive • Group process communication patterns • Team member roles ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 11

An input-process-output model of teamwork Group Task Process Outcome Context Technology ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 (Source: Doug Vogel) 12

Artificial Intelligence Sensemaking ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 13

Satisfaction as a Function of Task Hi Idea Generation Idea Organization Prioritizing 1 1 1/2 Policy Development S a t i s f a c t i o n Lo Time ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 1 -2 14

AI Categorizer • Analyzes semantic content • Finds and clusters like ideas • Performs as well or better as an expert human ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 15

Group process management roles • Leader – Plans agenda (including what’s offline) – Decides process – Ensures closure and continuity ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 16

Group process management roles (cont’d. ) • Facilitator – Uses group processes to help group » Engage in divergent thinking » Survive stress relief, catharsis stage » Formulate creative proposals » Bring agreements to closure – Ensures procedural fairness ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 17

Group process management roles (cont’d. ) • Recorder – Assists facilitator – Captures action items and decisions • Process observer – Makes note of roles played by group members – Notes communication patterns – Comments on process quality when appropriate ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 18

Task Roles Initiating Activity – Proposing solutions – Suggesting new ideas, problem definitions, approaches, or organization of material ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 19

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Seeking Information – Asking for clarification of suggestions, requesting additional information, or facts ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 20

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Seeking Opinion – Looking for an expression of feeling about something from members – Seeking clarification of values, suggestions, or ideas ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 21

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Giving Information – Offering facts or generalizations – Relating one's own pertinent experience to the group problem to illustrate points ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 22

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Giving Opinion – Stating an opinion or belief concerning the value of a suggestion or one of several suggestions ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 23

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Elaborating – Clarifying, giving examples or developing meanings – Trying to envision how a proposal might work if adopted ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 24

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Coordinating – Showing relationships among various ideas or suggestions – Attempting to draw together activities, ideas, or suggestions of various subgroups or members. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 25

Task Roles (cont’d. ) Summarizing – Restating suggestions after the group has discussed them ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 26

Maintenance Roles Encouraging – Being friendly, warm, responsive to others – Praising others and their ideas – Agreeing with and accepting contributions of others ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 27

Maintenance Roles (cont’d. ) Gatekeeping – Trying to make it possible for another member to make a contribution to the group ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 28

Maintenance Roles (cont’d. ) Standard Setting – Expressing standards for the group to use in choosing its content, procedures, decision making – Reminding the group to avoid decisions which conflict with group standards ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 29

Maintenance Roles (cont’d. ) Following – Going along with decisions of the group – Thoughtfully accepting ideas of others – Serving as audience during group discussion ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 30

Maintenance Roles (cont’d. ) Expressing Group Feeling – Summarizing what group feeling is sensed to be – Describing reactions of the group to ideas or solutions ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 31

Combination Task and Maintenance Roles Evaluating – Submitting group decisions or accomplishments to comparison with group standards – Measuring accomplishments against goals ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 32

Combination Task and Maintenance Roles (cont’d. ) Diagnosing – Determining sources of difficulties, appropriate steps to take next – Analyzing the main block to progress ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 33

Combination Task and Maintenance Roles (cont’d) Mediating – Harmonizing – Conciliating differences in points of view – Suggesting compromise solutions ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 34

Combination Task and Maintenance Roles (cont’d) Relieving Tension – Draining of negative feelings by jesting – Putting a tense situation in wider context ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 35

Combination Task and Maintenance Roles (cont’d) Testing for Consensus – Tentatively asking for group opinions in order to find out whether the group is nearing consensus on a decision – Sending up trial balloons to test group opinions – Purpose is not necessarily for decision making but rather to suggest where effort needs to be focused ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 36

Managing agreeement • Endorsement – “I like it” • Endorsement with minor point of contention • Agreement with reservations – “I can live with it” • Abstain Kaner, S. , Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. 1996, Gabriola Island, British Columbia: New Society Publishers. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 37

Managing agreement (cont’d. ) • Stand aside – “I don’t like this, but I don’t want to hold up the group” • Formal disagreement but willing to go with majority • Formal disagreement with requirement to be absolved of any responsibility for implementation Kaner, S. , Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. 1996, Gabriola Island, British Columbia: New Society Publishers. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 38

Ways to poorly manage agreement • Agree on top 20 priorities • Delegate a job to someone who is already overworked • Establish a policy that has no accountability built into it ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 39

Ways to poorly manage agreement • Create a committee to do the same work over again • Make an agreement that will be vetoed by someone who is not present • Agree to “try harder” from now on ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 40

We don’t vote here, we arrive at a natural consensus 41 ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002

Nonproductive Roles Being Aggressive – Criticizing or blaming others – Showing hostility against the group or some individual – Deflating the ego or status of others ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 42

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Self-Confessing – Using the group as a sounding board – Expressing personal, non group-oriented feelings or points of view ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 43

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Competing – Vying with others to produce the best idea, talk the most, play the most roles, gain favor with the leader ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 44

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Blocking – Going off on a tangent – Citing personal experiences unrelated to the problem – Arguing too much on a point – Rejecting ideas without consideration ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 45

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Seeking Sympathy – Trying to induce other group members to be sympathetic to one's problems or misfortunes – Deploring one's own situation – Disparaging one's own ideas to gain support ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 46

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Special Pleading – Introducing or supporting suggestions related to one's own pet concerns or philosophies, lobbying ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 47

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Horsing Around Seeking Recognition – Attempting to call attention to one's self by loud or excessive talking, extreme ideas, unusual behavior ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 48

Nonproductive Roles (cont’d. ) Withdrawal – Acting indifferent or passive, resorting to excessive formality, daydreaming, doodling, whispering to others, wandering from the subject ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 49

Patterns of communication 1. Who talks? For how long? How often? 2. At whom do people look when they speak? a. Single-out individuals, possible potential supporters b. The group c. No one ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 50

Patterns of communication (cont’d. ) 3. Who talks after whom? Who interrupts whom? 4. What style of communication is used? ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 51

Roadblocks to effective team dynamics • Lack of a Proper Foundation – Unclear mission – No ground rules or overarching policies or processes • Failure to Communication As a Team • Poor Conflict Resolution Thoman, S. , Roadblocks to effective team dynamics in the IPPD environment. Program Manager, 2000. 29(4): p. 104 ff. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 52

Roadblocks to effective team dynamics (cont’d. ) • Unrecognized Gender Differences – In listening, methods of interruption, linguistic styles • Differences Between Military Personnel and Civilians • Insufficient Team Recognition ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 53

Behaviors that help a team • Focus on the goal • Work toward consensus • Speak up • Use conflict constructively • Respect age diversity Kamberg, M. -L. , The dynamics of team interaction. Women in Business, 2001. 53(2): p. 42 ff. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 54

Behaviors that help a team (cont’d. ) • Do your share -- and then some • Carve out your own niche • Cooperate • Evaluate ideas • Exhibit team spirit ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 55

Behaviors to avoid • Talking too much • Beating a dead horse • Being unclear • Changing the subject Kamberg, M. -L. , The dynamics of team interaction. Women in Business, 2001. 53(2): p. 42 ff. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 56

Behaviors to avoid (cont’d. ) • Making criticism personal • Taking criticism personally • Dragging out action points ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 57

A jelled team exhibits synergy • All members buy into common goal – Strong personal incentive vs. reliance on professionalism • Purpose of team is goal alignment, not goal attainment • The probability of success greatly increases • Don’t require traditional management or motivation (Source: De. Marco and Lister) ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 58

Signs of a jelled team • Low turnover during project planning and execution • Strong sense of identity • Sense of eliteness • Joint ownership of the product • Obvious enjoyment ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 (Source: De. Marco and Lister) 59

Chemistry for team formation • Make a cult of quality • Provide lots of satisfying closure – Take pains to divide work into pieces • Build a sense of eliteness • Allow and encourage heterogeneity ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 (Source: De. Marco and Lister) 60

Chemistry for team formation (cont’d. ) • Preserve and protect successful teams • Provide strategic, but not tactical, direction – Network, not hierarchy ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 61

Guidelines for who to invite to meetings • Relevant experience • Must be in on decision • Are crucial to implementation • Most affected by the problem addressed Summarized in Romano, N. C. and J. F. Nunamaker. Meeting analysis: Findings from research and practice. In Proceedings of 34 th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 2001: IEEE. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 62

Guidelines for who to invite to meetings (cont’d. ) • Responsible to resolve or implement decision • Direct responsibility and authority over topic of discussion • Enough knowledge to contribute meaningfully • Information unavailable elsewhere ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 63

Developing an agenda Handle before meeting List potential topics Define goal for each Handle during meeting Prioritize topics and specify success for each Handle after meeting Based on Kaner, S. , Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. 1996, Gabriola Island, British Columbia: New Society Publishers. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 64

Team performance depends in part on the workplace Source for this section: De. Marco, T. and T. Lister, Peopleware: Productivity Projects and Teams (2 nd Ed. ). 1999, New York: Dorset Hourse Publishing Co. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 65

Major problems not so much technological as social • Most managers agree, but then don’t manage this way – Background and training – High tech illusion » Mostly in human communications business – Easier to do ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 66

Development inherently different from production • Encouraging some errors (experimentation) vs. squeezing out errors • Working smarter vs. pressure to work harder • Unique, skilled knowledge work vs. routine production or service work ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 67

Development inherently different (cont’d) • Dynamic effort vs. steady state • Effectiveness (doing right things) vs. efficiency (doing things right) ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 68

People under time pressure don’t work better, just faster • More per hour of pay or more per hour of work? • The push of delivery dates and tight schedules • The pull of other places, other things • Overtime less Undertime equals zero • Risk of increased turnover • Productivity as benefit divided by cost ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 69

Quality leads to higher productivity • Market derived quality standard make sense only if effects on builders ignored – To builders, tied to self-esteem, pride of work – Builders chided for tinkering, then blamed for poor quality ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 70

The new converging conference room walls 71 helped make meeings short and to the point. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002

High quality, low cost: like having cake and eating it too • Improved quality often requires significant investment • The power of veto over delivery ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 72

Organizational busy work tends to expand to fill day • Parkinson’s Law – work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion – Doesn’t apply to most people – Research suggests programmers more productive when setting own schedule » And even more productive when set by systems analyst » And still more productive when no estimate prepared – When to apply schedule pressure? ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 73

A million ways to lose a day, but not one to get it back ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 74

Physical environment affects performance • Best outperforms worst 10: 1, median 2. 5 to 1 • Two people from same organization tend to perform alike ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 75

Physical environment affects performance 1 st Quartile 4 th Quartile Dedicated workspace 78 sq. ft. 46 sq. ft. Acceptably quiet? 57% yes 29% yes Acceptably private? 62% yes 19% yes ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 76

Physical environment affects performance (continued) 1 st Quartile 4 th Quartile Silence phone? 52% yes 10% yes Needless interruptions? 38% yes 72% yes ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 77

Roughly a third of the time people are noise sensitive • Knowledge work requires flow • Flow hours vs. body time hours • E-factors – Uninterrupted Hours / Body-Present Hours ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 78

Quantity of hours easier to measure than quality • Gilb’s Law – Anything you need to quantify can be measured in some way that is superior to not measuring at all • Effective use requires that management cut itself out of the loop – Individuals inclined to use data for improvement ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 79

Typical objections to rearranging physical space • People don’t care about glitz – Doesn’t mean they don’t care about any workplace attributes • Cheaper ways to deal with noise – The effects of lost creativity are cumulative ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 80

Typical objections (cont’d. ) • Enclosed offices don’t make for an interactive environment – Group offices or suites are alternatives ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 81

Cost varies as function of people and time, progress doesn’t Unpartitionable task Time Perfectly partionable task People Source: Brooks, Jr. , F. P. (1975/95) The Mythical Man-Month. Addison Wesley. ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 82

The mythical man-month Task with Complex Relationships Time Partionable Task Requiring Communication People ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 83

Key features of the Group System Concept • Parallel Processing (simultaneous contributions) • Anonymity (promotes equal participation) • Focus on content not personalities • Triggering (stimulates thinking) ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 84

Anonymity Eliminates Power Intimidation ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 85

Key features (cont’d. ) • Synergy (integrates ideas) • Structure (facilitates problem solving) • Record keeping (promotes organizational memory) • Output from one software tool can serve as input to another ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 86

What makes this productive? • Parallel Processing • Organizational Memory • Meeting to Meeting Support • Access to External Information • Addresses Behavioral Issues that Impact Meeting Productivity ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 87

Some of you may be having trouble with the concept of “Groupware. ” ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 88