Taking Stock of Your Team: An End-of-Year Assessment
As the year gallops into the final stretch, many of us look at this period of upcoming reviews and planning exercises as a series of hurdles to jump – just as we are fatiguing at the end of the annual race.
Reframed, this can be a time to generate excitement and fitness for the new year.
The Team Needs to be Developed in Three Dimensions
To make this happen, we want to think more broadly than planning a holiday party. To be clear, we are in favor of that, but it is just one component.
Too often we default to "team-building" events – fun parties, work-style assessments, awkward ice-breaking and other team games – while not addressing the more comprehensive architecture required for high-performing teams. Instead, we need to consider the team’s development against the following three dimensions:
1. Direction: Are we clear, aligned, motivated?
2. Organization: Do the team’s structure, process, authority and incentives support our goals?
3. People: How effective is the boss, the team members’ skills and working relationships?
If you are interested in taking the pulse of your own team as a basis for developing a high-performing team, we offer you a questionnaire on the following pages. It has been used and validated with many senior management teams.
Ask each of your team members to complete it, then discuss the results as a team. Invariably, you will find some room for improvement in all dimensions. The important thing is to make it feel safe to have the "more effective if" discussion.
This, by itself, will unleash enthusiasm, creativity and optimism. And you will find that those year-end and year-beginning meetings will be transformed into a platform for a more engaged, capable and productive team.
Directional Dimension
Clarity:
How clear is the long-term vision and strategy for the team’s enterprise?
No one clear □ Most are unclear □ 50/50 □ Most are clear □ Everyone is clear □
Is there a meaningful purpose and/or charter for the team as a team? Reasons that it can produce more/better as a team than as a collection of independents?
No one clear □ Most are unclear □ 50/50 □ Most are clear □ Everyone is clear □
Are the milestones and measures of progress clear for the team?
No one clear □ Most are unclear □ 50/50 □ Most are clear □ Everyone is clear □
Alignment:
Do all members share the same interpretation of the group’s vision and how to implement it?
All are misaligned □ Most are misaligned □ 50/50 □ Most are aligned □ All are aligned □
To what extent are individual member’s work goals mutually supportive versus conflicting or competitive?
All are misaligned □ Most are misaligned □ 50/50 □ Most are aligned □ All are aligned □
If each team member had to independently list the team’s top 5 priorities, to what extent would they be the same?
All are misaligned □ Most are misaligned □ 50/50 □ Most are aligned □ All are aligned □
Commitment:
How resilient is the team in finding solutions in the face of major challenges, multiple demands and shifting priorities?
Most are disengaged □ Some are disengaged □ 50/50 □ Most are committed □ All are committed □
How passionate is the team about achieving its goals and keeping its promises?
Most are disengaged □ Some are disengaged □ 50/50 □ Most are committed □ All are committed □
To what extent does the team demonstrate and foster the value of achieving outcomes once promised?
Most are disengaged □ Some are disengaged □ 50/50 □ Most are committed □ All are committed □
Organizational Dimension
Structure:
How clearly does the team’s structure reflect the organization’s needs, its strategic intentions, as well as its core functions: the products, customer segments and shared services?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor Ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
How able is the team to flex and adapt its structure to changes in priorities?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor Ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Is the team an effective size, finding the balance between a focus on execution (small) and inclusion (large)?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Management Process:
How effective is the team at surfacing and working through the most important, and difficult, issues?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
How efficient and productive is the team’s use of its time during its regular meetings?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
How effective are the team’s processes and practices of staying in touch with the larger organization?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Authority:
How well does the team’s decision-making process adapt to the needs of the situation - from consensus based to leader directed?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
How clear is the decision-making authority within the group? For any given responsibility, is it clear which individual or group has decision authority?
No one clear □ Most are unclear □ 50/50 □ Most are clear □ Everyone is clear □
How effectively does the leader hold individuals accountable for individual responsibilities and hold the team accountable for shared responsibilities?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Compensation/Reward:
Is the compensation/incentive program set appropriately to recognize shared achievement as well as individual contribution?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
For the individual component, how well is compensation/incentive linked to objectives within their control?
Not linked □ Barely linked □ Somewhat linked □ Linked □ Highly linked □
To what degree is the overall reward program perceived to be fair and achievement motivating?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
People Dimension
The Leader:
Competent: Demonstrates all the necessary skills, experience, and industry knowledge? Without a question, the right person for the job.
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Compelling strategist; Articulates a clear and convincing strategy to internal and external audiences?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Healthy relationships: Builds and enjoys trust, loyalty and candor from the team?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Skills:
What percentage of the team demonstrate outstanding skills and experience for their role? If you were to hire again for that position, you would hire the same persons?
Less than 50% □ More than 50% □ More than 70% □ More than 90% □ 100% □
Does the team have the appropriate mix and diversity of talent and perspectives for their charter?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
How effective is the process of managing and upgrading the team’s skills (assessing, hiring, firing, and coaching the team)?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Relationships:
To what extent do team members trust each other? Can they be honest about their weaknesses and mistakes as well as their strengths and accomplishments?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
How well does the team deal with conflict? Does the team confront tough situations and respectfully challenge each other when appropriate?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Does the team communicate openly and honestly share information, both good and bad?
Highly ineffective □ Ineffective □ Neither effective nor ineffective □ Effective □ Highly effective □
Overall:
How do you rate this team’s overall effectiveness?
Strong Underperform □ Underperform □ Average □ Outperform □ Strong Outperform □
Based in the San Francisco Bay Area, Chris Morgan is an experienced and trusted executive coach. He is a Partner at Morgan Alexander, and co-founder of Listentool, a real-time feedback software solution.
