5 ms·

New Science on Building Great Teams

• dpritchett 12y ago
  As much as I like the scientific method in most other aspects of life, Taylorism has always terrified me.
  • programmarchy 12y ago
    If you're interested in well thought out criticisms of Taylorism (as well as Schumpeterism and other status quo models), check out Organization Theory by Kevin Carson. One interesting point in the book is that Taylorism suffers from the garbage-in-garbage-out problem. Large firms are islands of calculational chaos because they suffer from the economic calculation problem [1] pointed out by Mises and Hayek. Similar to centrally planned economies, large firms cannot intelligently allocate resources or make other managerial decisions because there are heavy distortions in incentives / price signals. He further points out that economic distortions occur not because of socialism per se, since large capitalist firms also suffer the same problem, but rather long hierarchies. He explores other modular and co-operative organizational models in the book also. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem
  • mdorazio 12y ago
    While I agree with you, I think it's also important to see that this sort of analysis can be used two ways: 1) Taken at face value, managers might try to directly change the positive metrics. For example, since face-to-face communication is shown to be superior to conference calls, ban remote work and mandate all meetings be in person. Obviously this probably wouldn't make people too happy. 2) On the other hand, understanding what is really driving the metrics can generally improve workplaces for everyone. For example, the article points out that instituting team-wide coffee breaks not only increased productivity, but also employee satisfaction at a call center. As with all research like this, some companies will make good use of it, and others will not.
  • wpietri 12y ago
    One helpful thing is to separate the power aspect from the measurement aspect. Taylorism is horrific because it's used by people with power, a managerial class, to micromanage and exploit workers. But measurement on its own isn't problematic; think of the quantified self movement, or athletes who used detailed self-study to improve their own performance. I've been on teams that did a lot of self-measurement, and it has generally been fine. But the problems I recall are when people with managerialist inclinations seize upon something measured and use it to try to sound smart or exert control. E.g., the time a CEO, on his occasional visits, noticed our project LoC measurement. We all knew the dangers of that number, and treated it very lightly. But he kept trying to do MBA math with it (e.g., $/LoC), and I ended up having to tell him that if he didn't knock it off, we'd stop displaying the metric.
• adunn 12y ago
  "For example, we now know that 35% of the variation in a team’s performance can be accounted for simply by the number of face-to-face exchanges among team members." As someone who lives in a rural area I see a distributed team as the way to go for hiring talented individuals. I also know that working remotely can hurt communication and collaboration if extra effort is not given. It would be interesting to see a similar study on distributed teams and a comparison of how effective their different strategies and communication tools are. Do any remote workers here have any observational evidence on this?
  • russelluresti 12y ago
    I was interested in this aspect as well. I'm a big believer in the ability for teams to work remotely and asynchronously at the same level of effectiveness as in-office teams; I wonder what the research would look like for those types of teams.
  • toolz 12y ago
    I work remotely and I would say that communication is much better and easier when working remotely for many people such as myself. Tapping someone on the shoulder is a LOT more intimidating than highlighting someone in chat. I don't want to bother people, I just want to be effective. Highlighting allows me to hit someone up with questions and they'll be able to respond depending on how urgent the task is in relation to their other tasks. I will say I get more solo work done when I'm around people. It's hard to stay on task if you don't have the ambiance of people with expectations. I go to coffee shops, because even though they aren't my co-workers, if they see me working, they still have expectations. If they look over my shoulder and see me on social media, I've failed their expectations, and just that subconscious feeling does wonders to motivate me. I want to be a people pleaser and remotely that can be tough.
    • p0nce 12y ago
      Thanks, I was wondering how to solve this very problem. I over-perform only when people are expecting something of me, to please them. Else I do simply nothing.
  • 12y ago
• ThomPete 12y ago
  Just as understanding the science to music does not make you a good musician or allow you to build a great band, understanding the science to teams does not make you a good team builder. I look at these things as performance art. Theory goes in the background when you perform all that is left is execution.
  • nnain 12y ago
    Neither does studying computer or electrical theory alone make you a better programmer. It does help though. It's nice that there's a 'Human Dynamics Laboratory' out there that does so much research and puts out the findings.
    • ThomPete 12y ago
      As I said another place. It's different they are not "performing arts" so to speak. More akin to composing.
  • amirmc 12y ago
    > "Just as understanding the science to music does not make you a good musician or allow you to build a great band..." I'm not a musician, but I disagree with the first part of this statement. My impression has been that understanding the theory can make the difference between a good musician and a great one. One could apply the same to programming -- understanding the fundamentals of computing is not necessary but it can mark the difference between good and great.
    • ThomPete 12y ago
      That impression is simply wrong. You can become a great musician knowing theory or not. Programming is not a performance art it's more akin to composing which is a little different.
    • analog31 12y ago
      I'm a musician and a programmer, with minimal theory knowledge but extensive work experience in both areas. I can do productive work, but at the same time, can see my own limitations. For instance, I would have a hard time organizing a large scale effort in either area: In music, that would be something like creating a long composition or arrangement involving multiple musicians. In programming, it would be coming up with the architecture for a big project. Still, in a vein similar to a comment that I made about education yesterday, I wonder if there is such a thing as a "theory" of the formation and administration of work teams, i.e., of a level of reliability similar to music or programming theory.
• Fede_V 12y ago
  Reading articles in that format drives me crazy. For example: "For example, we now know that 35% of the variation in a team’s performance can be accounted for simply by the number of face-to-face exchanges among team members" Can I get a reference to a scientific paper that measures this or where this result is discussed? Off the top of my head - this depends hugely on the task at hand. Certain tasks require constant nonstop communication and updates - other tasks are more modular and the communication sweet spot is different. Even within the same task, different phases of the task require different amounts of communication - when you are whiteboarding the design of a particular library, constant feedback is exceptionally useful. When it's time to sit down and write difficult code involving pointer math, constantly discussing things will just throw you off. I am sure there was some proper science done behind that number - but that number refers to teams of a certain size, working on a specific task, in a given context (I would also be curious to know the C.I. on that 35% too). Trying to draw a nice narrative with a simple message from a narrow experiment is basically everything that I dislike about this Gladwellesque style pop science. Reading narratives like this gives a completely unwarranted sense of confidence into something which we still understand very, very little about.
  • loceng 12y ago
    Time constraints are also an important factor as to how a team can potentially function under different conditions.
• trhway 12y ago
  it isn't surprising that the identified communication patterns correlate well with team being successful. Yet it is somewhat doubtful that such good communication can be enforced, ie. good communication seems to be a manifestation of a good team not what makes it.
  • s0uthPaw88 12y ago
    The article discusses some different interventions that were used to improve communication on teams: 1) "Every day for a week, we provided team members a visualization of that day’s work, with some light interpretation of what we saw. (Keep in mind that we didn’t know the substance of their work, just how they were interacting.) We also told them that the ideal visualization would show members contributing equally and more overall contributions. By day seven, the maps showed, the team’s energy and engagement had improved vastly, especially for the two Japanese members, one of whom had become a driving force." 2. "The manager wanted to raise energy and engagement in lockstep. We suggested instituting a common coffee break for each team at the call center. This increased the number of interactions, especially informal ones, and raised the teams’ energy levels. And because all team members took a break at once, interactions were evenly distributed, increasing engagement. When we mapped energy and engagement against AHT afterward, the results were clear: Efficiency in the center increased by 8%, on average, and by as much as 20% for the worst-performing teams."
  • russelluresti 12y ago
    They did mention about using tactics to encourage better communication (with the visual feedback and such), which showed that those efforts led to better team performance; so, for me, that shows good communication creates a good team environment instead of vice versa (since the communication was the variable that was changed during the experiment). People often forget that communication is a skill that can be honed. Certain behaviors - body language, active/passive, talking versus listening, etc. - can be adjusted to make you a better communicator.
• read 12y ago
  the best predictors of productivity were a team’s energy and engagement outside formal meetings We’ve been able to foretell, for example, which teams will win a business plan contest, solely on the basis of data collected from team members wearing badges at a cocktail reception. Individual reasoning and talent contribute far less to team success than one might expect. * Social time turns out to be deeply critical to team performance, often accounting for more than 50% of positive changes in communication patterns, even in a setting as efficiency-focused as a call center.* Our data also show that exploration and engagement, while both good, don’t easily coexist, because they require that the energy of team members be put to two different uses. in a typical high-performance team, members are listening or speaking to the whole group only about half the time, and when addressing the whole group, each team member speaks for only his or her fair share of time, using brief, to-the-point statements. making the tables in the company’s lunchroom longer, so that strangers sat together, had a huge impact. The best-performing and most creative teams in our study, however, sought fresh perspectives constantly we found that the more of these charismatic connectors a team had, the more successful it was. Observation: I wish I had a tool for writing short notes on things I read. It seems I end up doing this in the form of HackerNews comments. I think I want conclusions.
  • gregclermont 12y ago
    You might like https://www.diigo.com/ https://www.diigo.com/
    • teamonkey 12y ago
      Or OneNote