Self-managing or autonomous teams are the
newest hype in the organizational landscape. This structure promises
greater involvement and motivation, togethers with a better wellbeing of
employees as self-regulating power increases. Certainly in comparison with
our traditional hierarchical organization, more empowerment
is clearly a step in the right direction. But too much
naivety leads to accidents. Not everyone is able to function with a large
autonomy.
If we try to put that into practice
by providing a list of competences that people should have to be self-managing
is helpful. Using this kind of criteria contributes probably to the success of
that team. After all, we live in the age of competences. (1)
Domain knowledge
It is essential that people work, and have
the necessary knowledge for the job. Purely theoretical knowledge is
insufficient here; practical experience is needed.
Context insight
Knowing the work is not enough. The
circumstances in which the work must be done always play a major
role. After all, the context determines which actions are appropriate, how
to approach things, how to involve people, etc.
Targeting
A clear insight into the objective, and
that may be ambitious, is necessary. But also the ability to keep an eye
on that goal, and not to lose oneself in non-relevant lateral problems, is
essential. There is no need for exaggeration in the form of excessive
ambition, but focus is needed.
Emotional stability
Perhaps the greatest temptation to become
unproductive is the emotional pressure that comes with working in a
team. This can be due to the difficulty of the assignment, but also due to
the relationships in the team. If that emotional pressure absorbs
attention and energy, then there is no longer space of productive
behavior. All energy is lost in the lack of emotional stability and the
survival reflexes related tot it.
Relativizing capacity
Not all matters are equally important and
can be tackled at the same time. Moreover, the styles, the knowledge, the
beliefs, the personalities in a team are very different. Team members who
want everything 'now' and 'perfect', probably cannot live and work with this
complexity. Their rigid attitude will undermine team focus.
Learning ability
If a team gets a lot of autonomy, it must
also evaluate itself. And this should not only lead to putting things into
perspective and social support, but above all to learning from the mistakes and
shortcomings. Gaining new insights, and retaining them for the future,
converting them into agreements and continuing to refer to them, are very
necessary competencies. Being able to change beliefs and cultivating other
habits are visible outcomes of this competence.
Communication
The team members must communicate
productively in order to get the necessary coordination about objectives,
working methods, work distribution, etc. Individual communication is the
building block. And so it is much more than talking or ventilating. There
is a need for focused coordination, dealing with difficult issues respectfully, give
and receive feedback.
Listening skills
To work together, one must be able to
listen. If that is not possible, there will be too much focus on winning
the discussion, and colleagues will soon give up trying to make agreements.
Complexity management
As soon as situations have to be assessed
and the relative importance of certain aspects has to be determined, complexity
is a challenge. People who cannot handle complexity, and who tend to judge
things one-dimensionally and binary, will violate this complexity.
Critical attitude
A team that has autonomy will have to
evaluate itself, in whatever area. If its just keep repeating the same
thing, the quality of self-management will suffer.
Organizational
insight
Organizing oneself is perhaps the basic
assignment for a self-managing team. A minimum of practical insight into
how the tasks are best organized to make something work is
essential. Whoever has a difficulty with that, will quickly be seen as a
problem in the team.
Cost awareness
Autonomy inevitably means that decisions
must be made with financial consequences. These must of course be properly
managed to respect the available frameworks.
Self confidence
Those who lack self-confidence probably
also lack the ability to actively participate in team meetings. Compliance
and passivity could result, and that is not a contribution to self-direction.
Passive people risk to be seen as non-productive by their colleagues.
Modesty
All too self-confident people, who
overestimate themselves and their ideas, are a problem in a self-managing
team. To achieve a good solution together, each team member should be
aware of their own limitations. Dominance from a team-member is a serious
threat to cooperation. If you try to eliminate the negative effect of dominant
leadership by introducing self managing teams, you school be aware not to
create the problem again within the team.
Openness
In order to come to good consultation and
good self-evaluation, it will be necessary to discuss matters, even the
personal ones like styles and competences. Everything that determines
results must be included in agreements and evaluation. A lack of openness
means that an employee cannot participate in this process, and therefore
becomes a brake on teamwork.
Flexibility
Self-management requires the team to adapt
to the possibilities and limitations. Adhering to fixed routines too
strongly will create a structural limitation in the team, especially in the
longer term.
Collaboration
Many of the abovementioned competencies
determine the ability to work together. It is essential that goal-oriented
collaboration is strong enough for each of the team members.
Experience with reorganizations in the
direction of self-management (soft tilt of organizations (2)) shows that
failures are often the result of poor approach and organization by the
management of the organization. But honesty sometimes forces us to see the
cause in the inability of the team members to effectively use the space
offered. It is a too naive view of people not to see that the required
competencies are sometimes not sufficiently present.
By the way, I suspect some managers wanting
to get rid of their leadership responsibility. If one feels that one fails
in this role, it is sometimes tempting to believe in the possibilities of
self-management. If it then fails, at least they have provided visible
evidence that they were in line with the modern trend, and that the error
therefore clearly lies with the team. To be clear: with empowerment,
estimating the ability of the team members to use the provided space of
autonomy, is a responsibility of the management! The fact that most people
overestimate their competences, is a pitfall, and a bad excuse for being naïve
in the process of introducing self-management.
To make a good estimate, each team member
should be judged on these competencies. Roughly speaking, in using this
list as a judging tool, a score of 7 out of 10 appears to be the average, with
no scores below 5. Naturally, this standard depends on the degree of
autonomy. Team autonomy is not a binary choice, all or nothing. It is
about a precise agreement of responsibilities and powers that lie within the
team. A learning process has to be part of the plan.
Hugo Der Kinderen
(1) See for a realistic analysis of the
use of competences in HR in a separate contribution.
(2) See separate contributions on
‘tilted organizations’
No comments:
Post a Comment