Is creativity generated by partial disagreement in a team?

The four stages of a team

Every new team is bound to pass through four main stages before reaching what we could call a "productive maturity", namely Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing.

Forming

Forming is the first stage of a team when people are selected and assigned. Team members start to know each other, usually in a low-engagement and low-trust environment. The stage is characterized by an artificially quiet mood, and people do not enter spontaneously into heated (and sometimes productive) debates. 

Storming

Storming is the second stage of a team. Now heated discussion starts to happen and people begin to get hurt by each others edges. 

It may appear a paradox but the storming phase is when the members of the team lay the foundation of trust. People are keen to confront each other openly just when they start to feel trusted and safe in the environment in which they work.

Storming is also a very delicate phase; if clumsily managed, the team may never be able to get to the next step, remaining stuck in an endless Forming purgatory.

Norming

Trust is established, safety validated, and people start to work together as a team. There is again some gray area to be explored, and some boundary have not been trespassed yet but results start rolling in with consistency.

Performing

The team is in its "productive maturity", and performances are consistently maintained. 

And then...What happens next?

In many cases, we can observe a kind of "performance plateau".

Throughput does not increase with time anymore, rather, it can decrease slowly but steadily.

Non-professional relationships strengthen, empathy increases, complicity gets in the way, and the team lacks the healthy level of antagonism which allows creativity to thrive.

Can too much harmony kill creativity and conscientiousness? 

It may seem so.

How can good performances be maintained in the long run?

The project manager shall keep alive the professional pride which allows excellency. It can be done in several ways

• Turnover If possible, let new professionals enter the team. The suggested approach will force the team to step back a little from its evolution plateau. My advice is to carefully select the new members of the team and not to exceed the number of new entries, otherwise, the team may run the risk to step back into the Storming phase.
• Training Push the members of the team to take training on project related topics. Moreover, encourage them to give presentations about their new competencies to other members of the team. The approach will stimulate good competition and, as a side effect, will benefit the project itself.
• Manage Conflict Do not suffocate conflicts, let them flare in a controlled and safe environment. Responsible and effective conflict management is the key to a team's cohesion. Please refer to my previous posts (Link1, Link2) on the topic.
  Also, I suggest reading the great book "The Five Dysfunctions of a Team" by Patrick Lencioni.
• Gamification Introduce gamification in some of the activities of the team, replicating in the work environment the very exact stimuli that keep people motivated in playing games.

Quest' opera è distribuita con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Unported.

Project Management and Locus of Control - Part 02

Introduction

In the first post of this series we have introduced the Locus of Control, and we have examined some of its applications to project management.

We have seen that Locus of Control  describes the vision we have on our capability to influence outcomes. 

• External Locus of Control An individual that has an outside Locus of Control believes that every event in his/her life derives from factors outside his/her control. These factors can be summarized mainly as other people actions, luck, destiny… This kind of individuals tend to blame or to praise other people or circumstances for whatever success or failure they experiment in life.
• Internal Locus of Control An individual that has an inside Locus of Control believes that every event in his/her life derives from factors under his/her control. This kind of individuals tend to blame or to praise themselves for whatever success or failure they experiment in life.

The Locus of Control interacts with the way we perceive ourselves in relation with the external environment. It changes the perspective under which we interpret successes and failures. It biases our judgements on personal and other people’s performances and achievements. 

Locus of Control and project management processes

The Locus of Control is accountable for another insidious pitfall, since it can change and distort the focus on our project management processes. 

Please, take a look at Figure 1. The arrow depicts the position of the locus of control. The far right of the arrow indicates an extremely external position of the Locus of Control, while the far left indicates an extremely internal position. As we have seen in the previous post, these are both undesirable locations and are marked in red on the chart. The central part of the arrow represents the best possible location for the Locus of Control. The green zone represents a Locus of Control positioning that allows the project manager to achieve a well-balanced interpretation and assessment of successes, failures and performances. The Orange zones represent intermediate situations. Here I want to suggest a correlation between the Locus of Control position and the way in which we interpret events. As we can see from the graph, the more we move toward the right (external Locus of Control) the more we feel that our actions do not determine outcomes and, as a consequence, randomness governs projects. On the contrary, the more we move towards the left (internal Locus of Control) the more we feel that everything is almost under our control and, all of a sudden, everything can be considered deterministic.

Locus of Control - Extreme Right Positions

If the Locus of Control is on the far right side of the graph, the project manager will be inclined to blame or to praise other people or circumstances for projects’ success or failure. This could generate a sense of fatalism and the feeling that projects’ performance are completely random. That is extremely dangerous because if we believe that projects’ performance are completely random, or completely out of our control, there is no point in maintaining and enforce project management best practices. 

Locus of Control - Extreme Left Positions

If the Locus of Control is on the far left side of the graph, the project manager will be inclined to blame or to praise just himself for projects’ success or failure. This could generate a sense of almightiness (success) or dismay (failure) and the feeling that projects’ performance are completely deterministic. That is extremely dangerous too, because if we believe that projects’ performance are completely deterministic, or completely under our control, there is not a firm effort in maintaining and enforcing project management best practices.

Locus of Control and risk management

The biases toward processes triggered by Locus of Control position could manifest itself more powerfully in risk management processes, than in other areas. Not an unexpected consideration, since Locus of Control position constantly jams with what we perceive we can monitor and control.

Therefore, an external Locus of Control could lead toward enormous expenses in risk management related processes, since almost every aspect of a project become all of a sudden an aleatory event, or something whose impact can be estimated, but not entirely, controlled.

On the contrary, an internal Locus of Control could lead toward severe underestimation of risk management contingencies since almost every aspect of a project is considered completely deterministic or manageable.

Quest' opera è distribuita con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Unported.

Project Management and Locus of Control - Part 01

Introduction

Last week I paid a visit to a couple of friends. They recently gave birth to a beautiful daughter and, with the help of some friends, I organized a small surprise party to welcome the newborn. During the evening, the newbie father told me, with a touch of bitterness, that any of his present project team members had organized something like that, nor congratulated with him for the birth nor even asked news about the baby. My friend was clearly upset by his colleagues’ behavior. He felt he didn’t deserve this attitude after months of close collaboration and blamed his team members for that. They simply had not been fair in his regards, since that particular team was used to organize recreational activities for occasions like this one. 

While I was going back home, I kept thinking about what my friend told me, and I felt a little sad about that. I do not know anyone of his colleagues personally, and I assume (yes I know...assumptions are tricky...) that he was right to be disappointed. After a little, I realized that I was watching just one side of the coin, and I tried to change the perspective.

Following this line of thought, I started to consider the extent in which we can actually influence outcomes and the extent in which outcomes are instead influenced by the environment we operate in.

Suddenly I started to think about the reason why some people are more prone to blame or praise others for their success or failure while other people tend to blame mainly themselves. Where is the balance? Are these behaviors always positive or negative?

The Locus Of Control
The  Locus of Control describes the vision we have on our capability to influence outcomes. 

• External Locus of Control An individual that has an outside Locus of Control believes that every event in his/her life derives from factors outside his/her control. These factors can be summarized mainly as other people actions, luck, destiny… This kind of individuals tend to blame or to praise other people or circumstances for whatever success or failure they experiment in life.
• Internal Locus of Control An individual that has an inside Locus of Control believes that every event in his/her life derives from factors under his/her control. This kind of individuals tend to blame or to praise themselves for whatever success or failure they experiment in life.

In Figure 1,  we can see an image that depicts a possible interpretation of the Locus of Control applied to project management. On the x-axis, there is the position of the Locus of Control for a given project manager. On the y-axis, there is a measure of the success or failure of a given project. The four quadrants represent how the project manager will explain success or failure as a function of his/her Locus of Control position.

Figure 1.  Interpretation of the Locus of Control applied to project management.

Locus of Control - Extreme Positions

If the Locus of Control is on the far left or far right side of the graph in Figure 1, the project manager will tend to read success and failure in an extreme way. He/She will build a distorted perception of himself and will experience feelings that could seriously impede the execution of a project or could get in the way during team management activities. The project manager could consider himself

• Almighty - Strongly internal Locus of Control and success - I have everything under my control. I am solely responsible for the outcome of all project’s activities and accountable for the outcome of the project as a whole. I can manage any project respecting any given constraint. The project team is pretty much irrelevant.
• Incompetent - Strongly internal Locus of Control and failure - I have everything under my control. I am solely responsible for the outcome of all project’s activities and accountable for the outcome of the project as a whole. I am obviously a poor excuse for a project manager. I can virtually doom any project that I put my hands on.
• Opportunist - Strongly external Locus of Control and success - There is nothing I can control. I cannot be liable for the outcome of any project’s activity and for the outcome of the project as a whole. I take credits that I do not deserve. Other people should be praised for this.
• Frustrated - Strongly external Locus of Control and failure - There is nothing I can control. I cannot be liable for the outcome of any project’s activity and the outcome of the project as a whole and yet I am wrongly accountable for success or failure.

Locus of Control - Mild Positions

If the Locus of Control is on the near left or near right side of the graph in Figure 1, the project manager will tend to interpret success and failure in a proper way. He/She will build a balanced perception of himself and he will experience feelings that could aid the execution of a project and team management activities. Furthermore, since feelings in this part of the graph are far less extreme than those experienced in the extremities, they are not mutually exclusive. Chances are that the project manager could experience a full range of feelings and could consider himself as a balanced set of the four categories below. Project execution will be largely and positively affected.

• Proud - Internal Locus of Control and success - I have many things under my control. I am partially responsible for the outcome of all project’s activities and accountable for the outcome of the project as a whole. I can manage projects respecting and balancing reasonable constraints. The project team is fundamental.
• Motivated - Internal Locus of Control and failure - I have many things under my control. I am partially responsible for the outcome of all project’s activities and accountable for the outcome of the project as a whole. I am not infallible. There is room for improvement, and I want to allocate time to professional development.
• Grateful - External Locus of Control and success - I have not many things under my control. I cannot affect the outcome of all project’s activities, but I am accountable for the outcome of the project as a whole. Other people in the team greatly contribute to the project’s success, and I have to praise them for their efforts.
• Helpful- External Locus of Control and failure - I have not many things under my control. I cannot affect the outcome of all project’s activities but I am accountable for the outcome of the project as a whole. Other people in the team can contribute to the project’s failure, and I have to help them to realize their true potential. I have to contribute to their professional development in as many ways as I can.

Where is our Locus of Control?

I do not know if it is possible to measure the exact position of our Locus of Control and I am not sure that we can change it in some way. What I am certain about is that a too extreme position of the Locus of Control can severely impact the ability of a project manager to effectively and  efficiently manage projects and teams. So I believe that is of the greatest importance that every project manager try to estimate his/her Locus of Control position each time he/she is bound to evaluate project’s performance, to avoid polarization in his/her judgement. 

Every time I have to evaluate my performances regarding success or failure of some activity, I always try to localize my Locus of Control, asking myself “Are you sure to be absolutely not polarized? Are you objectively evaluating the chances you got to influence this outcome? Have you done everything that you could have done?”.

Feedbacks from our peers and our project management team can be of the greatest help in this kind of activity. As a matter of fact, the localization of the Locus of Control is a very difficult activity, since this is something that is at the very core of our way to perceive reality.

In the next post, we will examine another hidden trap, related to the Locus of Control that could threaten proper management of projects.

Quest' opera è distribuita con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Unported.

Are your processes fair enough?

Let me play a little game with you, just to introduce the subject of this post.

I am a project manager and you are a member of the project team. 

I have put in place all sorts of management processes and I have bound team members bonuses and prizes to the outcomes of these processes.

This is one process that I put in place and that now you will have to apply.

Your quarterly bonus depends on the fact that I will consider reasonable and satisfying the outcome of the process.

Follow this process. You can use a piece of paper and a pen.

1. Choose a number between 1 and 9. write it on the piece of paper.
2. Double it.
3. Add 8 to the result obtained in point 2.
4. Divide by 2 the result obtained in point 3.
5. Subtract your original number from the result obtained in point 4 and write the result on the piece of paper. 
6. Convert the result from point 5 into a letter in the English alphabet (es A=1, B=2, C=3,...)
7. Choose a U.S.A. state whose name begin with the letter you have found.
8. Add 1 to the result obtained in point 5 and write the result on the piece of paper. 
9. Convert the result in point 7 to a letter with the same method you have used in point 6.
10. Choose the biggest animal you can think about whose name start with the letter you have found.

Now...well...I am very very very disappointed from your performance.

there are no elephants in Delaware...very unsatisfying... you can kiss goodbye your quarterly bonus.

Are you disappointed? I think you are. You have plenty of reason to be disappointed.
Many mistakes have been made in implementing this process, but we will focus on what I judge to be the worst four.

Give measurable targets

At the beginning of the post I wrote that I would have granted you a bonus if, and only if, I would had found “reasonable and satisfying the outcome of the process”.

So? What is this supposed to mean? Nothing.

If you put in place a project management process and you bind your team members bonuses and prizes to the outcome, be sure to give measurable objectives.

Otherwise every denied bonus will be seen as an arbitrary punishment and every granted bonus as an unjustified gift. Each case you will be experimenting a sudden collapse of trust among your team members.

Give team members a chance to influence the outcomes they are evaluated against to

You had no control on the output of the process that I put in place and that I forced you to follow.

Every input you would have given would have led you to the same result. So what is the point in binding your bonuses on that? 

Again, as in the previous point, every denied bonus will be seen as an arbitrary punishment and every granted bonus as an unjustified gift. You will be experimenting a steady collapse of trust in the team and you will grow harsh criticism about every step the management will take. Discontent will spread.

Always perform a sanity check of your processes

The process that I forced you to follow was corrupted (How could I possibly knew your answer otherwise...). Look at the equation you have implemented following my process

1. Chose a number between 1 and 9. write it on the piece of paper. Let’s say the number you chose is X and the result you obtained is Y.
2. Double it. Ok, now you have Y=2X.
3. Add 8 to the result obtained in point 2. Here we obtain Y=2X+8.
4. Divide by 2 the result obtained in point 3. Now Y=(2x+8)/2=X+4.
5. Subtract your original number from the result obtained in point 4 and write the result on the piece of paper. Y=X+4-X=4.
6. Convert the result from point 5 into a letter in the English alphabet (es A=1, B=2, C=3,...). The letter you got was D.
7. Choose a U.S.A. state whose name begin with the letter you have found. There is only 1 U.S.A. state whose name starts with D. Delaware.
8. Add 1 to the result obtained in point 5 and write the result on the piece of paper. The number you got was 5.
9. Convert the result from point 7 to a letter with the same method you have used in point 6. The letter you got was E.
10. Choose the biggest animal you can think about whose name start with the letter you have found. Elephant is a good choice.

If you put in place a project management process and you bind your team members bonuses and prizes to the outcome, be sure that your process is flawless.

Otherwise two things could happen

• Your team members will not follow your process, because they want achieve their bonuses and prizes and because your process outcomes go to detriment of the project.
• Your team members will follow your process and contextually will experience a lot of frustration. You are sure to have an high degree of disengagement...and probably a lot of elephants in Delaware.

Either cases lead to the same result.

The project will rapidly go out of control and disappointment will spread among all of your stakeholders.

Always check that your processes are fair

Make another little experiment. Buy a cookies box and tomorrow morning, as soon as you enter the office, gather three of your collegues and offer them some cookies. You will offer four cookies to two of them and you will say to the third one that he/she can take just one cookie.

Chances are that the third collegue will ask you why he/she can get just one cookie.

There is no point in asking, since cookies are yours and you do not owe nothing to your collegues. You can share your cookies if you want to and decide freely how many cookies offer to whoever you want but still, the third collegue will ask you about it, maybe laughing, but he/she will ask. Maybe even the other two collegues will enquiry you about your behavior. And you know why?

Beacuse deep inside they feel that your process is unfair. Even if they have been prized in this occasion, they know that they cannot trust your process. They know that they cannot trust you.

My point is to always check that your processes are fair.

People can stand almost every situation and deprivation, but just if they feel that the processes are fair.

Quest' opera è distribuita con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Unported.