This is the second course I've delivered to Group A from the City of Tallahassee. This level is about the dynamics of working in groups and teams. What is the difference between a work group and a team? This class will explore this issue and learn that our traditional metaphor of a sports "team" gets in the way of the development of a team approach. Working in groups and working in teams are not the same. We go from a collection of individuals - to a group - to a team. At each stage of development there are different human behaviors needed. We will get a chance to see the dynamics of this model of teamness played out in class and will realize that to develop teamness requires more maturity than one would normally have without training.

Help me answer the question:   What percent of organizations in industry, service, and government sectors have implemented a partial or fully team based approach to their organizations?  Please email me with your response!!!!!!!
 

We saw the HBR film entitled "The Discipline of Teams"  some learnings the participants gained were:

Upper management must empower and support this process.
Clear goals and measurable outcomes are necessary.
Carte Blanch is not believable and must be reiterated.
There must be a bottom line advantage to the creation of teams.
Attention to relationship processes within teams is a top priority.
Teams need to be small.  Between 5- 7 or so.
Teams must be made of people directly involved in the work processes to be improved by team.
Management support for both task and process is very important.
There is a natural struggle between management and teams.
Teams require a different culture than that created by the old top down command and control structure.
Teams need to celebrate.
Ownership is critical.
Teams can be wonderful for motivation and learning.
 

Accepting atmosphere
    Participating, creating, listening, respecting, helping
Teamwork
    Listening, talking, waiting, sharing, compromising, planning
Diversity of opinion
    Disagreeing, discussing, sharing, exploring differences, challenging, proding
Synergy
    Listening, repeating, responding, accepting
Effective communication
    Listen actively, clarify, verbalize, no non-verbal signals, Not interrupting, asking, listening, responding, paraphrasing, offer feedback
Respect
    Listening, Don’t act condescending/non-judgmental, Acknowledge effort and success, Learn about cultural diversities, Seek diversity, Involve members, ask opinions, and listen/ Implement /use non-threatening verbal body language
Inclusivity
    Listening, talking, waiting, sharing, compromising, asking, inviting
Shared leadership
    Participating, creating, listening, respecting, helping, initiating, sharing, asking, clarifying
Positive attitudes
    Don’t act condescending, Be non-judgmental of others, Acknowledge effort and success, Encourage participation, celebrate
Consensus
    Listen, Empathize, Don’t interrupt, Ask opinions of those not offering outwardly—involve all members, Keep/use eye contact, Clearly I. D. goals, Do not resort to voting
Trust/honesty
    Respect for others, reputation of dependability, commitment for group success, objectivity and unbiased attitude, Ask opinions of those not offering outwardly—involve all members, Learn about cultural diversities, Seek diversity, Celebrate, Keep/use eye contact
Commitment
    Involve others, this leads to ownership, which leads to commitment.
Creativity
    Use brainstorming to help us think outside of the box.
Constructive criticism
    Use the rules of giving and receiving constructive feedback.
Goals/objective
    State mission, identify resources, limitations, establish time lines
Knowledge
    Research, educate, explain everything clearly, and participate
Diversity
    Tolerance and acceptance of different opinions, create atmosphere of respect
______________________________________________________________

We participated in a decision-making activity, which called on the participants to make a consensus decision heavily based on personal values.  Each group made choices about a futuristic community and its inhabitants.  Each group had a set of learning from this activity.  Here are the ones they wanted to share.

• Value-related issues are difficult to discuss.
• Consensus takes time.
• Individual values and preferences strongly influence our value assigned to people and things.
• We learned that our group started to put in the initial planning of vision, mission, and goals that was needed   to make group choices.
• Even things that we agree about on the surface need to be discussed.
• Our personal style inventory categories strongly influenced the manner in which we completed the assignment.
• We need to make a concerted effort to offset the influence of our “J’s”.
• Determine clear goals and objectives before making discussions.
• Discuss areas of agreement as well as disagreement.
• Process should have structure that is agreed on first.  This should help in making decisions later.
• When values of people are challenged, consensus takes more effort.
• Consensus is easier when skills and abilities are discussed.
• Different people see the world from different perspectives.
• A group decision is much better than individual viewpoints.
• It is always better to look at the bigger picture when making decisions.

CRITIQUE

One of the ways we learned that a group can improve itself is through the process of critique.  To demonstrate the importance of critique, we talked about the Blue Angels performance flying team of the US Navy.  The Blue Angels spend more time critiquing their performance than they actually spend performing. Let me say it another way.  The Blue Angels spend more time critiquing their performance than they actually spend performing. The Blue Angels spend more time critiquing their performance than they actually spend performing. The Blue Angels spend more time critiquing their performance than they actually spend performing. The Blue Angels spend more time critiquing their performance than they actually spend performing.   I guess you understand the importance of critique by now.  Below is an example of a critique one group made of itself.  From this critique, the team can learn and improve.
 

GROUP Performance Critique:

Structure:   Generally, the group decided to use an organized approach by listing choices and noting the agreement among members’ choices.  One member assumed the role as facilitator and recorder of group decisions.  The way in which choices were made was in process of elimination

Climate:   Everyone was willing to listen to each other, explain their positions and choices.  Initially, people spoke with a matter-of-fact tone, but as we got more into the process, we became more excited and passionate about building our community.

Facilitation:   The group processed itself.  Everyone was encouraged to give his or her point of view.   If a person didn’t initially get to say something, the members, during discussion, encouraged them to have an opportunity to get their two cents in.

Dysfunction:   Sometimes, a member would get quiet, but would retreat only to think about a different approach.
 
 

Just a note to the managers at the City of Tallahassee:
This is my schedule with the City, I will be delivering:
Level I to group C August 17 & 18 and 24 & 25  (TJ Moroney - Guest Facilitator - Lottery)
Level II to group A August 19 & 20 and 26 & 27 (Howard Rasmussen - Guest Facilitator - FCPM)
I may do more with the City, but it will be after the new year.

Please submit your CPM outside requirement work on "work process improvement" to the Davis Award
Panel.  You can find a nomination form on the web page: http://www.floridataxwatch.org/

Don't Forget to visit the CPM Web Page for our schedule:  http://www.fsu.edu/~cpm/
Visit Sterling's webpage to see how other organizations improve: http://www.floridasterling.com/

Don't forget to read Improvement Driven Government and to write the application.  Also, look at the comp Exam and begin that process also.  I hope to hear from you again soon.  Send me an E-mail.