1 Object Oriented Development ΥΠΕΥΘΥΝΟΣ: Θ. ΜΑΝΑΒΗΣ [email protected] Teams and...

50
1 Object Oriented Development ΥΠΕΥΘΥΝΟΣ: Θ. ΜΑΝΑΒΗΣ [email protected] Teams and Roles

Transcript of 1 Object Oriented Development ΥΠΕΥΘΥΝΟΣ: Θ. ΜΑΝΑΒΗΣ [email protected] Teams and...

1

Object Oriented Development

ΥΠΕΥΘΥΝΟΣ:Θ. ΜΑΝΑΒΗΣ

[email protected]

Teams and Roles

2

What is a team?A team is a small number of people, with complementary skills, who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they are mutually accountable."

(Katzenbach and Smith, 1993)

People working together in a committed way to achieve a common goal or mission. The work (may be) interdependent and team members share responsibility and hold themselves accountable for attaining the results."

- MIT Information Services & Technology

3

Apollo Syndrome

The Apollo Syndrome is a phenomenon discovered by Dr. Meredith Belbin and is described as a condition where teams of highly capable individuals can, collectively, perform badly.

“When the sum of parts is Less than the whole”

4

Apollo TeamsBelbin’s criteria for selecting his teams used ability and aptitude tests to select those with high analytical skills.

The initial perception of Belbin's Apollo teams was that they were bound to win in the team competitions. However, the results were quite the reverse, and the Apollo teams often finished near the bottom of eight teams.

5

Why did they fail ? (what can we learn)

• They spent excessive time in abortive or destructive debate, trying to persuade other team members to adopt their own view, and demonstrating a flair for spotting weaknesses in others' arguments.

• They had difficulties in their decision making, with little coherence in the decisions reached (several pressing and necessary jobs were often omitted).

• Team members tended to act along their own favorite lines without taking account of what fellow members were doing, resulting in teams that were difficult to manage.

• In some instances, teams recognized what was happening but over compensated - they avoided confrontation, which equally led to problems in decision making.

6

But they can work….The successful Apollo teams were characterized by:

•The absence of highly dominant individuals, and

•A particular style of leadership.

Successful leaders were skeptical people who sought to impose some shape or pattern on group discussion, and on the outcome of group activities.

They focused attention on the setting of objectives and priorities, and shaping the way team effort was applied. The successful leaders were tough, discriminating people who could both hold their ground in any company, yet not dominate the group.

7

The Stages of Team formation

Psychologist Bruce Tuckman first came up with the memorable words:

forming, storming, norming and performing

in 1965 to describe the path to high-performance that most teams follow.

Later, he added a fifth stage that he called “adjourning” (and others often call “mourning” – it rhymes better!)

Stages of Team Development

FormingForming

StormingStorming

NormingNorming

PerformingPerforming

AdjourningAdjourning

Get together, introductions involved - “ritual sniffing”

Voice differences, jockeying for

position

Begin to share common commitment and

purpose

Team is “buzzing”

Group disperses / completion of task

Tuckman, B. & Jensen, N. (1977)

9

Forming

Teams initially go through a "Forming" stage in which members are positive and polite (some members may be anxious, as they haven’t yet worked out exactly what work the team will involve). Others are simply excited about the task ahead.

As leader, you play a dominant role at this stage: other members’ roles and responsibilities are less clear.

10

Forming

This stage is usually fairly short, and may only last for a single meeting at which people are introduced to one-another.

There may be discussions about how the team will work, which can be frustrating for some members who simply want to get on with the team task.

11

Storming•Decisions don't come easily within the group.

•Team members vie for position as they attempt to establish themselves in relation to other team members and the leader.

•Clarity of purpose increases but plenty of uncertainties persist.

•Cliques and factions form and there may be power struggles.

•The team needs to be focused on its goals to avoid becoming distracted by relationships and emotional issues.

12

Storming – Reality Sets in

Your authority may be challenged as others jockey for position as their roles are clarified.

The ways of working start to be defined, and as leader you must be aware that some members may feel overwhelmed by how much there is to do, or uncomfortable with the approach being used.

Some react by questioning how worthwhile the goal of the team is and resist taking on tasks.

Honestly: This is the stage when many teams fail...

13

•Agreement and consensus is largely formed within team (and they respond well to facilitation by leader).

•Roles and responsibilities are clear and accepted.

•Big decisions are made by group agreement. Smaller decisions may be delegated to individuals or small teams within group.

•Commitment and unity is strong.

•The team may engage in fun and social activities.

•The team discusses and develops its processes and working style. There is general respect for the leader and some of leadership is more shared by the team.

Norming

14

Performing•The team is more strategically aware - they know clearly what they are doing and why .

•They have a shared vision and can stand on its own feet with no interference or participation from the leader.

•The team has a high degree of autonomy. Disagreements occur but now they are resolved within the team positively and necessary changes to processes and structure are made by the team.

15

Performing•The team is able to work towards achieving it’s goal

•They deal with relationship, style and process issues along the way.

•Team members look after each other.

•The team requires delegated tasks and projects from the leader (they no longer need to be instructed or assisted)

•Members might ask for assistance from the leader with personal and interpersonal development.

•The Leader delegates and oversees

16

Teams: Types of analysis

Teams – some types of analysis

• MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicators -1979)

• Berne’s Theory of Transactional Analysis

• Belbin Team Types - Self Perception Inventory

Teams - MBTI

resulting in 16 personality types

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - instrument for measuring a person’s preferences

(1) extraversion/introversion

(2) sensate/intuitive

(3) thinking/feeling

(4) judging/perceiving

16 Personality Types

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ

ISTP ISFP INFP INTP

ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ

Population Distribution

http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/population-gender/

Test

• http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jtypes2.asp

Temperament

• Temperament predisposes us to certain ways of thinking, understanding, conceptualizing and acting.

Extraversion

• More interested in the external world of people and things

• They derive meaning from connections with the external environment

• They maximize interactions

Introversion

• Interested more in the internal world of ideas and concepts

• Enjoy solitude and introspection

• Prefer to withdrawal from external activities

Sensing

• A tendency to perceive by relying on observable facts or happenings through the senses

• Persons with this preference are inclined to use practical fact oriented approaches

Intuition

• Emphasizes concepts, theories, relationships and possibilities

• Values inspiration

Thinking

• Make decisions impersonally, logically assessing cause and effect relationships related to data

• These people evaluate ideas and data objectively and value inferences reasonably drawn from events and circumstances more than any other type of evidence.

Feeling• They emphasize the effect

the decision will have on people and interpersonal relationships

• The attend more to human than to technical aspects of problems and value these concerns more than any other type of evidence

Judging• Prefer a structured, scheduled,

planned and controlled environment

• Tend to be organized, deliberate and capable of making decisions with a minimum of stress.

• They are usually scheduled, develop fixed ideas of how things should be done.

• They push strongly for closure.

Perceiving

• Prefer a flexible, spontaneous and adaptive environment.

• They tend to continue to collect information rather then make a decision.

• Have a wait and see attitude.

• Spontaneous lifestyle

Extravert/Introvert at Work

• Extraverts may see introverts as secretive, unfriendly aloof, self absorbed, slow and awkward– When dealing with Extraverts, allow them to think out loud, use

verbal communication, expect action, keep the conversation flowing. Let them work in groups and make oral presentations.

• Introverts may see extraverts as superficial, too talkative, loose canons, overwhelming, pushy and rude– When dealing with Introverts ask a question and then stop to

listen. Give them time to work alone, to finish their sentences, to learn through structure, to reflect, to communicate in writing first.

To Marin for providing the at work slides

Sensors/Intuitives at Work

• Sensors can regard intuitives as unrealistic “Space cadets,” new age, careless about details, unrealistic– Work with an intuitive by talking about the big picture,

possibilities, implications, analogies, before talking about details.

• Intuitives can view sensors as resisting new ideas, boring, unimaginative, “old school.”– Work with a sensor by drawing on past proven experience, focus

on practical applications, and step by step solutions.

Thinkers/Feelers at Work

• Thinkers may see feelers as illogical, too emotional or trying too hard to please– With thinkers: Be organized, consider cause and effect, pros and

cons, focus on consequences, appeal to fairness

• Feelers may see thinkers as insensitive or distant or self-involved– With feelers: mention points of agreement, focus on their core

values, appreciate their contributions, state legitimacy of their feelings, discuss emotional impact of situation

Judgers/Perceivers at Work

• Judgers may view perceivers as wishy-washy procrastinators, unproductive, unreliable, not serious– With judgers: be on time, come with agenda and conclusion,

stick to plan, organize

• Perceivers view judgers as rigid, controlling black and white, stubborn, trigger happy– With perceivers: focus on process, be open to new information,

expect questions, allow for discussion

35

Belbin’s team roles

Team Roles (Belbin) “A tendency to behave, contribute and

interrelate with others in a particular way.”

(Dr Meredith Belbin, Henley Management College)

Roles Action-oriented roles

– Shaper, Implementer, and Completer-Finisher People-oriented roles

– Co-ordinator, Team-worker and Resource Investigator Cerebral roles

– Plant, Monitor-Evaluator and Specialist

Team-Role Descriptions: the Parts People Play in Effective Team operations

Team Role Contribution Allowance Weakness

Plant Creative, imaginative, unorthodox. Solves difficult problems.

Ignores Incidents. Too pre-occupied to communicate effectively

Resource Investigator

Extrovert, enthusiastic, communicative. Explores opportunities. Develops contacts.

Over-optimistic. Loses interest once initial enthusiasm has passed.

Co-ordinator Mature, confident, a good chairperson. Clarifies goals, promotes decision-making, delegates well.

Can be seen as manipulative. Offloads personal work.

Team Role Contribution Allowance Weakness

Shaper Challenging, dynamic, thrives on pressure. The drive and courage to overcome obstacles.

Prone to provocation. Offends people’s feelings.

Monitor Evaluator

Sober, strategic and discerning. Sees all options. Judges accurately.

Lacks drive and ability to inspire others.

Team-worker Co-operative, mild, perceptive and diplomatic. Listens, builds, averts friction.

Indecisive in crunch situations.

Team-Role Descriptions: the Parts People Play in Effective Team Operations

Team Role Contribution Allowance Weakness

Implementor Disciplined, reliable, conservative and efficient. Turns ideas into practical actions.

Somewhat inflexible. Slow to respond to new possibilities.

Completer Finisher

Painstaking, conscientious, anxious. Searches out errors and omissions. Delivers on time.

Inclined to worry unduly. Reluctant to delegate.

Specialist Single-minded, self-starting, dedicated. Provides knowledge and skills in rare supply.

Contributes on only a narrow front. Dwells on technicalities.

Source-Belbin, R.M. Team Roles at Work, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1993

Team-Role Descriptions: the Parts People Play in Effective Team Operations

Belbin – Dominant Traits

Cerebral RolePlant

Monitor Evaluator

Specialist

Cerebral RolePlant

Monitor Evaluator

Specialist

PeopleOrientatedCo-ordinator

Resource Investigator

Team Worker

PeopleOrientatedCo-ordinator

Resource Investigator

Team Worker

Action Orientated

ShaperCompleter/Finisher

Implementer

Action Orientated

ShaperCompleter/Finisher

Implementer

A functional role (determined by their professional

and/or technical knowledge) A team role (determined by their characteristic pattern of team interaction).

According to Belbin …

Each team member contributes towards achieving the team’s objectives by performing: -

The team needs an optimal balance in both functional & team roles

That balance is dependent on the goals & tasks that the team faces.

The effectiveness of the team will be promoted by the extent to which members correctly recognise and adjust themselves to the relative strengths

of the team, both in expertise and ability to engage in specific team roles.

Belbin’s Ideal Team

• One Co-ordinator or one Shaper• One Innovator• One Monitor-Evaluator• One or more

– Implementer– Team worker– Resource Investigator– One Finisher-Completer

43

What can you do as a leader ?

44

What are the best qualities of a leader

Strong, decisive and knowledgeable or

quiet, supportive, cooperative

Leaders should have two main concerns: people and production

High concern for people motivates the team and they become more productive,

High concern for production creates sense of achievement and satisfaction

45

What’s your style ?

46

The CommanderCommanders make and influence most decisions.

The downside of this leadership style is that the leader can demotivate and annoy people.

Often decisions are not optimal - they don’t consider all available information, options and perspectives. This style is effective in short-term, in long-term it could be dangerous for people and projects.

47

The CoachThe coach is needed when team lacks focus, expertise and understanding what should be done and how.

Coaches tend to be concerned with growing people, creating and enabling a trusting environment.

This leader makes decisions collectively with a team while explaining rationale behind decisions. They listen and provides feedback.

Coaches encourages personal growth and looks to build long-term capabilities in an effort to prepare the team and individuals for independent work.

48

The SupporterSupporters are needed to help teams.

They help remove barriers and coordinate activities.

The Supporter is an ego-less, quiet leader and facilitator.

They tend to make joint decisions with the team as equals, delegating majority of decisions to the team.

In addition, the Coach is concerned with the creation of harmony and balance between team members.

49

The Self Organizing Team

A motivated and confident Team doesn’t need formal leaders.

The team makes most decisions. Any member could step in and become leader in specific areas and situations. People on these teams tend to be highly capable, committed and self-driven.

Teams will transcend through previous steps and become truly self-organized after experiencing victories and failures, growing and gaining experience together.

Πηγές

• Matt Ganis - [email protected] Building Effective Teams, powerpoint presentation

• Florida State University College of Law Research Center Workshop Spring 2010

• the article: Peters, Don, Forever Jung” Psychological Type Theory, The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Learning Negotiation, 42 Drake Law Review 1 (1993)