Putting self-direction into practice is challenging because it requires serious adjustments in the roles of managers.
How would you like to be tied to a partner to compete in a three-legged race, and then find out the course is a marathon? If you can identify with the frustration and pain that would accompany such a contest, then you can empathise with the many work teams that are told to be self-directing and empowered to improve results while still shackled to systems and structures that do not fit their charge. Results suffer when structural integrity is lacking among values, style, and systems.
Typical examples include:
- People are put in "teams" arbitrarily and expected to show synergy, even though their tasks are unrelated.
- Teams are expected to improve their results, yet those results are not controlled by the team alone.
- Teams are expected to solve problems, and yet the requisite knowledge and skills are located elsewhere.
- Teams are expected to be self-directing and to adjust course even when authority and feedback are kept from them.
In short, self-direction and empowerment won't work unless structure and systems are shaped and aligned.
Consider the following examples of two self-directing teams.
Team A is a group of twenty-five people who totally operate a manufacturing plant from the time raw materials enter to the loading of the finished product. Team members operate and maintain equipment, monitor quality, conduct maintenance tasks, train one another, and keep all records. They submit project recommendations to save costs and then implement these once approved. They have operated this way for years and achieved world-class results.
Team B was formed to improve the profitability of their product line. This team has fifteen members who represent critical functions and geographic markets. They haven't operated as long as Team A, but they have made quite an impact. They performed a quality analysis of each step in their business process from idea conception to end use by customers. Because of the practical knowledge of each member, the team has focused on actual problems that cause duplication, rework, poor quality, and bad service. Soon after Team B was formed, a raw material shortage increased product costs dramatically and wiped out its profit margin almost overnight. The team convened, quickly identified alternative savings, and restored the profit margin to its pre-crisis level. Team members completed each savings project to make the business profitable again.
Both teams have strong values around improving their products for the benefit of all stakeholders. They work for companies that seek ways to empower their people, and they implement design changes consistent with their values to boost performance to best-in-class levels.
Design principles
Four principles of team design provide structural integrity with the values of self-direction and empowerment.
- Members of self-directing teams are interdependent to produce a common outcome.
What distinguishes team sports from individual sports is the interdependence among team members. It's the same for work teams.
Interdependence occurs when many efforts must be pooled; when efforts are sequentially linked; and when there is a reciprocal relationship, meaning two or more parties add value by alternating tasks in a series of cycles. Interdependence is reinforced when each team member makes some unique contribution.
Physical proximity is also important. Individuals who work successfully alone or isolated, without any interaction with colleagues, will find the call for teamwork to be disruptive and frivolous. But teamwork is natural when real interdependence exists.
- Self-directing teams have a whole task to do.
In forming basketball teams, we wouldn't think of putting forwards on one team, centers on another, and guards on yet another. And yet many work teams are expected to do only part of a whole job. To correct this situation, identify all the tasks required to deliver a discrete product or service and place them within the team's boundary. Whole tasks provide teams with a meaningful purpose and reinforce the notion that members aren't just operators or specialists, what they do makes a difference.
- Self-directing teams don't depend on others for resources.
Any time your team depends on one member or someone in another department or area to perform one of its critical daily tasks, you reduce your responsiveness and flexibility to handle challenges. Members of effective self-directing teams develop all the knowledge and skills needed to control their operations. Cross-training and rotation of assignments within the team and with critical special functions allow this to happen. Ideally, every team member eventually becomes competent in every team position and specialises in several interface areas, thus enhancing the team's flexibility.
- Team members are interdependent in leadership as well as operational tasks.
Every championship team has members who make critical decisions in the heat of battle and provide leadership on the floor. Designers of work teams often create interdependence around work tasks and develop needed skills to do them, but then they fall into the trap of creating dependence around leadership tasks. They insist on calling all the plays from the sidelines. Or they appoint a "straw boss" who does exactly what a supervisor would do. Either choice fosters dependence because the team will not become broadly skilled or truly interdependent in its leadership. It must rely on the indispensable few for leadership.
Also, resentment can build for those who have leadership privileges, weakening team spirit. Effective self-directing teams have the authority to manage their daily activities and get needed feedback to know the impact of their decisions and where they stand against their goals. They develop broad skills and interdependence around leadership tasks by sharing them. One member might lead the team's safety efforts, while others lead training, quality, special projects or daily work processes.
Leadership assignments might be rotated to reinforce the idea that team members must cooperate. One can't ignore a teammate's call for support in safety when he or she will need that person's support later for quality.
These four principles create structural integrity for self-directing operations, allowing self-directing teams to finish what they start. Putting self-direction into practice is a major challenge because it requires serious adjustments in the roles of managers who are used to supervising more than coaching. In the past, hierarchical structures have fostered dependence, not interdependence, at lower levels.
The final step to achieve structural integrity for self-direction is to help managers learn their new roles and to find different ways to add value to the work process. Self-direction requires both managers and team members to push into unknown territory. Much like the three-legged race, it will feel awkward at first, but when the principles of self-direction are observed, the awkwardness lasts only for a short distance, rather than turning into a marathon.