Now that we've explored the types of misalignments teams experience and
why they can be so hard to diagnose,
let's look at how you can observe these issues happening in your own team.
The first thing to be aware of is that even though every
team is unique in specific ways, there are common types of team cultures
each with their own strengths and weaknesses.
By knowing your own team culture type, you can be especially mindful of the problems
that are more likely to show up in your group.
Team culture is mainly defined by two characteristics.
First is how hierarchical your group is.
This is basically all about how authority is distributed in the team.
Your group it can be more hierarchical with power concentrated in one or
a few strong leaders,
or you can have a flatter structure where team members get a lot of autonomy.
The second characteristic is the type of rapport or
relationship that your team has.
Some teams are more individualistic where people tend to operate in silos and
their relationships are a lot more transactional.
Teams on the other side of the spectrum are more cohesive.
They collaborate more closely and have warmer relationships.
If you put these characteristics together, you get two axes that make for
four different team types, each with their own strengths and weaknesses.
Let's take a look at each one.
The first type of team culture is more individualistic and hierarchical.
I call these teams troops,
because the traditional military structure is a good example of this type.
Troops are defined by strong leadership, but very little horizontal collaboration.
They follow the boss's orders and they generally operate in a silo.
The strength of this team type is in the common direction provided by
a strong leader.
The downside is the lack of feedback since team members work independently and
aim mainly to serve the person in charge.
If you have this type of team, you should watch for a lack of information flow
between team members and see if this is creating inefficiencies or blind spots.
Teams that are highly cohesive and hierarchical are called believers.
The teams that Volkswagen are good example of believers.
Because as we talked about earlier, they had a strong unified culture that was also
heavenly driven by family based leadership at the top.
As with DW, believer teams are often easy to energize and
rally around a compelling vision.
On the other hand, it might be difficult for team members to challenge each other
in productive ways, which can lead to poor decisions down the road.
If you have a group of believers, you might pay careful attention to whether
each person feels comfortable speaking up and offering opposing view points.
If you have a team of strongly individualistic people with little top
down authority, you're virtuosos.
The 2003 Lakers basketball team is a good example of this.
It featured legends like Gary Payton and
Karl Malone alongside future hall of famers Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal.
The team of big egos goes storm through the regular season and
playoffs, but spattered out in the NBA finals that year.
Winning only one game against the Detroit Pistons.
A team with much less star power, but a lot more team chemistry.
Like that Lakers team, virtuoso's shows benefit from having individuals who
are willing to challenge each other.
This helps them get the best ideas on the table, but the lack of team rapport or
a strong leader can cause them to pull apart under stress.
If you're working with virtuosos, you should consider whether you have
a strong enough common vision and clear roles to keep them all on the same page.
WL Gore is a great example of a culture of friends.
Which features high cohesion and low hierarchy.
This is one of the few large companies with very little top down structure.
The 10,000 employees make decisions on everything from projects to hiring through
self-managing teams of 8 to 12 people.
The goal is to give them a common set of values that bind them together and
then empower them to find ways to make the company successful.
This empowering approach can lead to great results in the long run since team members
become highly engaged and collaborative.
In the short run though, these teams get a slower start as individuals take time to
build trust in each other and get comfortable with their roles.
If you have this type of team,
you might consider whether you could have trouble making decisions quickly and
setting a new strategic direction when the situation calls for it.
In considering your team type, remember that there is no one right culture.
The important thing is to be aware of the tradeoffs with each one.
Shape your team rules to play to your strengths and
pay careful attention to the problems that are more likely to arise in your group.
This will help you observe and
diagnose team issues early on before they get out of control.
Derek Newberry, Ph.D.Lecturer
Dr. Aviva LegattAffiliated Faculty
