Teams in trouble

The level of the team is often a good place to intervene rather than trying to find the one to blame or the two who are disrupting it for all.

testimonials10_nchra_teams.png

Teams experience conflict and it is not uncommon for them to develop unhealthy practices that together with the unresolved baggage of the past impede their ability to perform.

When this is the case, bringing the team together to clear the air and then articulate how they are going to work together moving forward, is often well worth the effort.

When working with teams, we follow a standard process that works well for teams of up to 10 members at the maximum.

The end product that the team walks away with is a set of working agreements that clearly define what they expect of one another especially as that relates to communication, decision making, team meetings and conflict resolution.

consensus.png

The importance of developing healthy conflict management practices and also of clarity around decision making are emphasized.

The standard process we follow is described below.

If you are interested in us supporting your team, please email John at john@johnford.com

facilitation1.png
“John Ford has worked with District staff on several occasions with excellent results. He not only helped teams resolve their conflict and get back to productive work, he also left them with improved skills that they can apply in the future..”

— Donna Weiss, Union Sanitary District

Process overview

PART A: Orientation and Training Meeting (Week 1: 2 hours)

To ensure that everyone is on the same page, and knows what to expect, a short orienting meeting will be held. It will also focus on team dynamics, communication (listening and expressing) and conflict resolution. This enables everyone to know what to expect while also providing relevant just-in-time training.

PART B: Interviews and One on One Coaching (Week 1: 4 hours)

Giving all team members an opportunity to share their perspective in private and to help orient them to the facilitation process is the goal of this stage. In addition, input will be solicited on which levels of management need to participate fully in this process. Each meeting will take between 30 and 40 minutes.

PART C: Group Facilitation: Acknowledgement Process (Week 2: 4 hours)

The first group meeting addresses any pain of the past through a carefully facilitated acknowledgement process and provides an opportunity for the team to reduce the emotional charge and clear the air. Setting the tone and preparing the group takes about 40 minutes and a further 40 minutes per team member is needed for this meeting.

PART D: Group Facilitation: Issue Identification and Problem Solving (Weeks 3-5: 9 hours)

Thereafter, the group returns to identify team maintenance issues and to problem solve them one by one. The hope is that the team commits to a clear set of norms that defines the quality of their interactions and specifically addresses decision making, role ambiguity, holding one another accountable, conflict resolution, collaboration and communication. A document with the team’s working agreements will be prepared. At least 3 meetings of three hours will be needed to support the problem-solving phase.

PART E: Follow Up (6 weeks: 1 hour)

Knowing that there will be a follow-up meeting serves as a motivator for everyone to stick to the new agreements that they make with one another. It also provides an opportunity to review what is working and what needs to change. The follow up meeting will be approximately 1 hour in duration and held about 6 weeks after the end of Part D.

Total Hours: 20 hours

Consensus decision making

Groups need a clear and explicit indicator of when a decision has been made.  The point of decision is the point that separates discussion from action: it is the point of authorization for the actions that follow.

Consensus is a decision-making process in which everyone discusses the issues and reaches a decision that all can support. It does not have to be unanimous (not everyone will be completely satisfied), but when reached consensus does signify an acceptance and willingness to cooperate in the implementation of the decision. It also means that participants are willing to publicly communicate their support of the decision.