Header Space reserved for Publication
LEADERSHIP GUIDELINESFOR PROMOTING MATURITYOF PROJECT TEAMS
Yuta Nakayama Takeshi Kaneko
Musashi Institute of Technology
1-28-1 , Tamadutumi , setagaya , tokyoJapan
ABSTRACT
While human resource management is listed as one of the important managements of project, it is becoming increasingly more important for recent projects that are more advanced and complex, to organize a team rather than to enhance individual skills. Preceding studies show that there is a process to organize a team and as the process progresses, the achievement of the team becomes greater. Therefore it is important for manager to understand the changing characteristics of the team clearly, leading by leadership suited to each stage. In this paper, we reconsider the maturity model of team based on various case studies of projects, aiming at establishing indexes that enable us to recognize each stage objectively, and at the same time at clarifying leadership and external factors that promote a team to move up to the next phase, that will lead to a success of project by maturing a team more efficiently.
Keywords: Teambuilding, Leadership, Organization Theory
BACKGROUNDAND PURPOSE
There are many factors that determine if a project succeeds or not, and many people from companies we have interviewed answered that management of human resources is one of the most hard and difficult managements. In addition, it is true that we can achieve better results thateach individual could not achieve by organizing a good team than by improving the skills of each of member. The recent more advanced and complex projects require a strong team more than the skill of a single person for success (Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith, 1993)
Here, a method for increasing team organizational capability gaining attention lately is the “team building” method. Team building is defined as building an organization in which people can easily aim for a common goal and so exchanging observations with colleagues while drinking once a week or participating in company sports events is good example of this. A process that is often used when developing teams to increase the team organizational capability is the “Tuchman model” that Tuchman, a psychologist, advocated for the evolution of organizations(Bruce W. Tuckman, 1965).
In this model, he says that many organizations mature through ①“Forming”, where one thinks that every thing will turn out all right, ②“Storming”, where the future is not clear and the organization falls into confusion and trial and error, ③“Norming”, where comprehensive normalization occurs and, ④ “Performing”, during which there is continuous growth. He also says that it is clear there are some phases where a team will mature to the point it is ready for “performing”. By Mr.Jida, he uses this Tuchman Model to research the 6 effect appropriate leader-ships for each phase and is verifying their validity (Jida Tsuneo, 2006). He states that Coercive leaders in the “Forming”, Coaching leaders in the “Storming”, Affiliative and Democratic leaders in the “Norming”, Democratic leaders and Coordinators in the “performing” are effective in each stage. So, a manager who controls a project needs to understand the characteristics of the team in the process of maturing correctly andtaking leadership according to the character that is called for.
However, even though a manager knows the model and the leadership he should take, he cannot effectively demonstrate his leadership without an indicator to identify which phase the team is in at that time.Moreover, to move a team up requires not only leadership but also many kinds of outside factors like incidents in a team that are thought to influence the team, so identifying these outside factors willbecomeimportant.
In this paper, by reexamining the team moving up model from many cases of the project, ensuring there is an indicator we can use to distinguish each phase objectively, and clarifying the leadership and external factors that promote a team moving up to the next phase, we aim to mature teams matured more effectively to make the project succeed.
SUBJECT PROJECT
Advanced and complicated IT system projects mostly end in failure in 70 percent of cases because of time-for-delivery delays, cost overruns, and other factors, so wetargeted the software industry for its great need of management. We also set the term of this project at more than 6months using a small groups around 5 to 20 members to allow easy control by managers.
THE TEAM MATURITY MODEL
Creation of the Team Maturity Model
Weconducted interview to reexamine the Team Maturity Model because it was not possible to determine if the existing model is suitable for the software industry, which is the subject of this research.
Seven managers with more than 5 years of management experience were asked to cooperate and were mainly asked about the change in attitude and behavior of followers over time, and together with them a model was created. (hereinafter called the “Team Maturity Model”).Further, a questionnaire survey base on the team maturity model was conducted, and this model was corrected based on the responses received from 20 companies. The results are shown in the following diagram
Figure 1 –The Team Maturity Model
When a teamis first formed, membersmake judgments based on preconceptions from external information such as rumors and facial expressions, so this is the "Uncertain judgment of others stage" where a member cannot understand others correctly and is in an unfamiliar state.
Next, a team moves up to “the first opposition stage” where people begin to convey their intentions and opinions while tending to cause misunderstandings and conflicts or “Role formative stage” where the unconscious actionsthat attempt to reconstruct and adjust the rolesandcommand structurewhile agreeing to the unset roles of the members. Because the trouble with communication for sharing information usually happens here, the team cannot move up to the next phase without “agreement on unset form roles among the members” before the “Role formative stage”
Next, a team moves up to“the second opposition stage” which occurs due to changing roles or changing environment, such as increase of the operation level, or “Self-assertion stage” where members insist on their intentions and opinions without hesitation.
And then, to move up to the "Self-assertion stage", they need “To have confidence in themselves and be admitted” and “Recognize the existence value of other members”.The reason why the former is necessary is that self-confidence from many kinds of achievements will activate of their will and assertion, recognizing the existence of others will lead to acceptance of this assertion. In the case of the latter, the objectives and goals will remain the same even if the roles or environment changes while making it easier to head in the same direction and express opinions and ideas and mitigating opposition. Moreover, finding the gap between the present condition and the target and communicating about how to reduce this gap, will lead to more support from and better understanding by others.
And finally, a team moves up to “Intention understanding and cooperation stage” where they understand what other members intend to say and can achieve results through cooperation. In this case, they cannot make the move up without “Building a relationship of trust among members”, because if a leader does not trust the followers, he cannot delegate authority and tasks must always be performed under the management of the leader. This increases the burden on the leader andprevents followers from taking autonomous action, so the team cannot function.In addition, without trust among followers, there will be doubts and concerns that will prevent cooperation.The study thus showed that teams mature though the above process.
Detailed explanation is shown in Table 1 below.The subject of the phrases in the table is the follower.
In addition, this model does not always necessarily start from the “Uncertain judgment of others stage” of Phase1 when a team is formed but way start from Phase2 or Phase3 depending on the proficiency of the followers, how well the members know each other, etc.
Table1– Details of the Team Maturity Model
Uncertain judgment of others stagePhase1 / Directed toward / Character
Entire team / Followers judge other members based on external information,such as rumors, facial expressions, behavior, and so on. In addition, it is not possible to judge and evaluate a person correctly due to preconceived ideas. Therefore, it is hard to convey intentions and opinions, and the team members are unfamiliar with each other.
Followers to leader / ・Followers cannot understand the leader correctly due to their preconceived ideas having heard rumors, evaluations and so on before the project team was formed.
・Followers are not willing to collaborate with the leader.
Followers to followers / ・Followerspay attention to external information, such as facial expressions and utterances, and are trying to understand each other .
・Followersare sensitive about interacting with other followers. People are passive to give their opinions
↓
Role formation stagePhase2 / Entire team / The work roles are unset but agreement on roles occursspontaneously among members, such as followers who are trying to be helpful and those that are waiting for instructions. Therefore,unconscious actionsare being taken to reconstruct and adjust the roles and command system. Information sharing and other communication is achieved without difficulty.
Followers to leader / ・Followers are largely divided into those that want to be helpful and those that are waiting for instructions.
・The followers obeys instructions without any particular dissatisfaction.
Followers to followers / ・Followers recognizes their role within the team.
・Followers are careful not to burden other followers.
↓
Self-assertion stagePhase3 / Entire team / Members have confidence and pride in their work and can clearly share their thoughts and ideas because they have deepened their understanding of others. They work to compensate for the weaknesses of other members without tasking themselves.
Followers to leader / ・Followers strive to communicate smoothly with the leader..
・When a follower gives a progress report, he gives an in depth report that is better and with more answers than before. （Able to self-identify the risks）
・Give a good explanation of his stance on the things he thinks are wrong.
Followers to followers / ・They work to compensate for the weaknesses of other members without tasking themselves.
・Followersstrive to communicate smoothly with other followers.
↓
Intention understanding and cooperation stagePhase4 / Entire team / Except for those things that clearly cannot be determined, members understand what other members are saying or thinking without the need for much communication. In addition, members are cooperating and contributing for other members without hesitation..
Followers to leader / ・Followers are cooperating and contributing to the leader even if it burdens themselves.
・Followers understand what the leader is saying or thinking without the need for much communication.
Followers to followers / ・Followers cooperate with and contribute to other followers even if it burdens themselves.
・Followers provide information to other followers if they think they need it regardless of whether doing so is beneficial to themselves.
・ Followers understand what other followers are saying or thinking without the need for much communication.
※This opposition Phase 1 can occur between Phase 1 and Phase 2..
The first opposition periodOpposition Phase1 / Entire team / Members begin to a certain extent to understand the humanity of other members, which in turn allows them to communicate their thoughts and opinions. Conversely, however, this often causes opposition and misunderstanding and makes it easy for members to feel distrust. People try to take care of things themselves because they do not trust the others.
Followers to leader / ・Regular progress reports are given, but there is no desire to provide information at one’s own initiative.
・Easily feel dissatisfaction if their opinion differs from that of the leader.
Followers to followers / ・Became irritated with those of different opinions and tend to oppose them.
・Do not interact with each other.
※This opposition Phase 2 can occur between Phase 2 and Phase 3.
The second opposition stageOpposition Phase2 / Entire team / Changes in environment, such as the changes of roles since team formation or a higher work level, tend to cause confusion and opposition. However, transition is easier than in Opposition Phase 1.
Followers to leader / ・Followers do not report the details.
・Followers have difficulty thinking and acting for themselves and tend to wait for instructions.
Followers to followers / ・Followers have no desire to move forward and cooperate at their own initiative.
・Do not interact with each other.
Validity of the Team Maturity Model
I conducted a questionnaire survey of people with project manager experience at 8 companies to evaluate the validity of the Team Maturity Model. In response to the question about “Has an actual project team matured generally as shown by the Team Maturity Model in Figure 1?” for which the four answers of “Mostly the same”, “Almost the same”, “Not really the same”, “Not at all the same” were prepared. Seven of the 8 companies answer “Mostly the same” showing that the model closely resembles reality. In addition, the comments space asked if there were any major differences from the actual process, but no points requiring change were observed.
Comparison with the Tuchman Model
Here is shown a comparison of the Team Maturity Model and the Tuchman Model.
Figure2–The Tuchman Model
In the Tuchman Model the team matures uniformly and passes through “Storming”, but actually if management is done effectively, it is possible to avoid “Storming,” giving rise to the ramification shown in Figure 1. Moreover,since the conditions for moving on to the next phase as shown in “agreement on unset roles among the members”, “have confidence in oneself and have it be recognized”, “uniform awareness”, and “build a relationship of trust among members” located between each phase, this serves as an index to allow managers to easily tell in what phase the team is in. Here, by comparing these phases we will be able to learn that “Forming” corresponds to the “Uncertain judgment of others stage” and “Storming” corresponds to the “First opposition stage” of Figure 1. In addition, according to the Tuchman Model definition, in "Norming" roles and positions become clear and it is easier to be assertive, but, conversely, there is resistance to the project, so “Role formation stage”, “The second opposition period” and “Self-assertion stage” are all included. Finally “Performing” will correspond to “Intention understanding and cooperation stage”. There is no great difference, but it is clearer using the proposed model.
FOLLOWERSHIP REQUIRED FOR EACH PHASE
Necessity of followership
It is not possible to talk about team maturation by only talking about leadership. That is because no matter what the manager does for the team, the team cannot mature without the influence of the followers... That is to say, it is impossible to mature the team if the manager fails to bring out a followership through his leadership. (In this paper,followership is defined as “follower autonomous actions”.)
I conducted an interview survey to investigation what kind of followership managers want from followers, and then the extracted items were organized using the affinity diagram method.
The items were organized in to the 4 levels of large, medium, medium-small, and small, and the results for the medium item are shown below. These followership items will be used in the discussion hereinafter.
Table 2– Followership Items
1. Toward the leader: Strive to accurately hear instructions.2. Toward the leader: Show expectations by making suggestions.
3. Toward the leader: Show enthusiasm for the work.
4. Toward the leader: Be obedient.
5. Toward the leader: Check if there are differences in perception and direction.
6. Understand the leader's instructions, thinking, etc...
7. Toward the leader: Gives reports before a problem occurs.
8. Toward the leader: Always thinks about what the team needs and makes suggestions.
9. Toward followers: Encourages others to be valuable people.
10. Toward followers: Understands the status of the other people and adjusts the work accordingly.
11. Toward followers: Cooperates with others to make the work successful.
12. Toward all members (including the leader): Tries to understand the characteristics of others.
13. Toward all members: Provides information so that information is shared in common.
14. Toward all members: Expresses own opinion without being discouraged by the opinions of others.
15. Toward all members: Takes action that inspires closeness among members.
16. Toward all members: Takes action that maintains trust among members.
17. Is careful not to inhibit the work of all other members.
18. Toward all members: Shares things about himself or herself with others (Talks about his or her daily life, interests, strengths and weaknesses, etc.)
19. Toward all members: Voluntarily works to lighten the burden on others.
20. Toward all members: Voluntarily communicates knowledge and information to be useful to others.
21. Enthusiastically engages in the work to achieve the goals.
22. Has confidence and a pride in work.
23. Voluntarily takes on challenges without fearing the risk.
24. Not only does what is instructed but also acts on own initiative to achieve the goal.
25. Strives for self-improvement even if short of time.
26. Takes pride in the work the team is doing.
27. Enjoys being part of the team.
28. Talks with others until they are satisfied.
Determining the followership necessary for each phase
It was hypothesized that managers require different followership for each phase of the Team Maturity Model, so a questionnaire survey was conducted to clarify the followership required for the move to Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Correspondence analysis was applied to the data from 14 employed persons using frequency data cross tabulation with the phase on the horizontal axis and the fellowship items on the vertical axis. The results are shown below.