etm5221 engineering teaming spring 20021 etm5221 engineering teaming: application and execution...

ETM5221 Engineering Teaming Spring 2002 1

ETM5221 Engineering Teaming: Application and

Execution

Nicholas C. Romano, Jr.

[email protected]

Paul E. Rossler

[email protected]


Week 2 April 9, 2002Structure, Process, Facilitation


Agenda

NetMeeting Experience Discussion

Modes of Collaboration

Team Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities

Process Gains and Losses

Lessons Learned

Facilitation


NetMeeting Discussion


Meetings are difficult

Poor Meetings

Waiting to speakDomination

Fear of speakingMisunderstanding

InattentionLack of focus

Inadequate criteriaPremature decisionsMissing information

DistractionsDigressions

Wrong peopleGroupthinkPoor grasp of problemIgnored alternativesLack of consensusPoor planningHidden agendasConflictInadequate resourcesPoorly defined goals

Source: Nunamaker, J.F., R.O. Briggs, and D.D. Mittleman, Electronic meeting systems: Ten years of lessons learned, in Groupware: Technology and applications, D. Coleman and R. Khanna, Editors. 1995, Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ. p. 149-193.


An input-process-output model of teamwork

GroupGroup

TaskTask

ContextContext

TechnologyTechnology

ProcessProcess OutcomeOutcome

(Source: Doug Vogel)


Source of facilitation lies on a continuum

One or more people

Embeddedin software



A facilitation model

Skills &Techniques

Group Systems

Assumptions and FrameworksRapport/Resourcefulness

Outcomes

ToolboxTask Issues

Group IssuesCognitive Issues



Number problem


Revised number problem

ETM5221 Engineering Teaming Spring 2002

Collaboration is…

• Difficult

• Expensive

• Essential

12

Modes of Collaboration

SameSame

DifferentDifferent

SameSame DifferentDifferent

TimeTime

PlacePlace

(Source: Romano)

13

Systems to support different types of collaborative modes

SameSame

DifferentDifferent

SameSame DifferentDifferent

TimeTime

PlacePlace

SessionsGroup

Support

Audio/VideoGroup

Support

TeamRoomsProjectRooms

TeamDatabase

VirtualSessions

(Source: Romano)


A team by its vary nature often differs in terms of…

• Its members’ technical knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs)

• And their teamwork KSAs

Team members probably exhibit wider variability in Teamwork KSAs

than they do in Technical KSAs


Knowledge, skill, and ability (KSA) requirements for teamwork

I. InterpersonalA. Conflict resolution

B. Collaborative problem solving

C. Communication

II. Self-managementA. Goal Setting and performance management

B. Planning and task coordination

Source: Stevens, J. and M.A. Campion, The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Management, 1994. 20 (Summer): p. 503 ff.


I. Interpersonal KSAsA. Conflict resolution

1. Recognize and encourage desirable, but discourage undesirable team conflict

2. Recognize the type and source of conflict confronting the team and to implement an appropriate conflict resolution strategy

3. Employ integrative (win-win) negotiation strategy rather than traditional win-lose strategy


I. Interpersonal KSAsB. Collaborative Problem-Solving

4. Identify situations requiring participative group problem-solving and to utilize the proper degree and type of participation

5. Recognize the obstacles to collaborative group problem solving and implement appropriate corrective actions


I. Interpersonal KSAsC. Communication

6. Understand communication networks and to utilize decentralized networks to enhance communication where possible

7. Communicate openly and supportively, that is, to send messages that are behavior- or event-oriented, congruent, validating, conjunctive, and owned


I. Interpersonal KSAsC. Communication (cont’d.)

8. Listen in a non-evaluative manner and to appropriately use active listening techniques

9. Maximize consonance between nonverbal and verbal messages

10.Engage in ritual greetings and small talk, and a recognition of their importance


I. Self-Management KSAsD. Goal Setting and Perf. Mgmt.11.Help establish specific, challenging,

and accepted team goals

12.Monitor, evaluate, and provide feedback on both overall team performance and individual team member performance


I. Self-Management KSAsE. Planning & Task Coordination

13.Coordinate and synchronize activities, information, and task interdependencies between team members

14.Help establish task and role expectations of individual team members, and to ensure proper balancing of workload in the team


Difficulties with groups

• Some tasks are simply not well suited for group methods or processes

• Often develop preferred ways of looking at problems that can inhibit innovation

• Synergistic effect can be absent– For example, brainstorming doesn’t exceed

performance of individually produced and combined results


Difficulties (continued)

• Politics, power, and position can dominate methods or results – Or can suppress contributions of others

• A group fulfills social needs, but group seldom has ways of regulating amount

• Fairly reliable characteristic of groups to get off track and get stuck there



• Groups tend to have relatively low aspiration levels with respect to quality of solutions accepted– Once some level of acceptance is inferred,

little further search happens

• Often lack concern and method for dealing with way to best utilize and communicate members’ knowledge



• Strongly influenced by cultural norms– In natural groups, members tend to be

conservative, circumspect

• If the group’s efforts do not appear reinforced, effort is reduced

• As group size increases, effort contributed by each individual member tends to decrease



• Reliably exhibit norms against devoting time to planning their methods– Move immediately to attacking problem,

relying on implicitly shared methods– Considerable likelihood that method is

poorly adapted to task and only modestly effective

– Seldom have ability to change the method when things not going well


A group’s Stage 2 problem

TeamMeets

Teamwork

Process Gains

Process Losses

Teamwork’sStage 2Problem


Process gains

• More information

• Synergy

• More objective evaluation

• Stimulation (encouragement)

• LearningSource: Nunamaker, J.F., R.O. Briggs, and D.D. Mittleman, Electronic meeting systems: Ten years of lessons learned, in Groupware: Technology and applications, D. Coleman and R. Khanna, Editors. 1995, Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ. p. 149-193.


Sources of slippage:process losses

• Air time fragmentation• Attenuation blocking• Concentration blocking• Attention blocking• Failure to remember• Conformance pressure• Evaluation

apprehension• Free riding

• Cognitive inertia• Socializing• Domination• Information overload• Coordination problems• Incomplete use of

information• Incomplete task

analysis

Source: Nunamaker, J.F., R.O. Briggs, and D.D. Mittleman


Common process losses

Air time fragmentation

Attenuation blocking

Members who are prevented from contributing comments as they occur to them, forget or suppress them later in the meeting

Concentration blocking

Fewer comments are made because members concentrate on remembering comments until they can contribute them


Process losses (cont’d.)

Attention blocking

New comments are not generated because members must constantly listen to others speak and cannot pause to think

Failure to remember

Members lack focus on communication, missing or forgetting the contributions of others

Conformance pressure

Reluctance to criticize others’ comments due to politeness or fear of reprisals



Evaluation apprehension

Withholding ideas due to fear of negative evaluation

Free riding Relying on others to accomplish goals due to mental loafing, competing for air time, or perceiving input not needed



Cognitive inertia Discussion moves along one train-of-thought because others refrain from contributing comments

Socializing

Domination

Information overload



Coordination problems

Difficulty integrating members’ contributions because the group does not have an appropriate strategy for doing so

Incomplete use of information

Incomplete task analysis

Incomplete analysis and understanding of task resulting in superficial discussions


Key lessons for outstanding participation

• Anonymity increases the amount of key comments contributed

• Parallel nature of interaction increases participation

• Adding participants almost always improves the outcomes– Good ideas are a function of the quantity of

ideas generated(Source: Nunamaker, J.F., R.O. Briggs, and D.D. Mittleman)


Key lessons for outstanding participation (cont’d.)

• When participants anonymously criticize ideas, performance improves– It keeps the group searching for better

answers

• Any idea may inspire a completely new idea which would not have otherwise occurred– Develop activities that encourage frequent

generation of new ideas


Key lessons for outstanding participation (cont’d.)

• Provide feedback to groups to let them know how each activity they take maps to the entire agenda– Groups stay better focused if they

understand how what they are doing ties into the big picture

• In face-to-face groups, peer pressure keeps people moving. – Distributed groups tend to lose momentum


Lessons about (electronic) voting

• Voting clarifies communication, focuses discussion, reveals patterns of consensus, and stimulates thinking

• Anonymous polling can surface issues that remain buried during direct conversation

• Voting can demonstrate areas of agreement, allowing the group to close off discussion in those areas and focus only on areas of disagreement

(Source: Nunamaker, J.F., R.O. Briggs, and D.D. Mittleman)


Lessons about (electronic) voting (cont’d.)

• Electronic polling can facilitate decisions that are too painful to face using traditional methods

• Care must be taken to ensure that voting criteria are clearly established and defined


Key lessons about leadership in “virtual” teaming

• Technology does not replace leadership

• Technology can support any leadership style

• Some people resist electronic meeting systems– The game has changed, oral/verbal skills

and ramming an agenda through are not as important


Key lessons about leadership (cont’d.)

• Loss of engagement for distributed teams– Lack of visual and nonverbal cues and low

accountability appears to reduce involvement

• Change of emotional engagement for face-to-face teams– More exciting for some, mundane for

others


Key lessons about leadership (cont’d.)

• Need to develop group incentives

• Willingness to accept criticism of you and organization

• Make sure there is an individual incentive to contribute to the group effort


Key lessons from facilitators and session leaders

• Preplanning is critical

• Find a fast, clean way to do idea organization – people hate it, and you lose them if you take to long

• The group must always see where they are headed and how each activity advances them toward the goal

(Source: Nunamaker, J.F., R.O. Briggs, and D.D. Mittleman)


Key lessons from facilitators and session leaders

• Be cognizant of nonverbal interactions; Even small nonverbal cues can tell a facilitator a lot

• Expect that ideas generated will change the plan and the agenda

• Group dynamics can be affected by the selection of switches (interfaces)


Facilitator behaviors

• Recognizing stages of group process

• Providing motivation

• Establishing a model of behavior

• Managing group creativity, anxiety, and conflict

Source: Hayne, S.C., The facilitators perspective on meetings and implications for group support systems design. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 1999. 30(3, 4): p. 72-90


Facilitator behaviors (cont’d)

• Maintaining awareness of own feelings as an indicator

• Demonstrating flexibility


Facilitator interventions

• Planning the meeting• Observing communication patterns• Determining levels of consensus• Creating situations conducive to

learning• Synthesizing information and building

cognitive maps

(Source: Hayne)


Facilitator interventions (cont’d.)

• Recognizing implicit vs. explicit decisions• Detecting variance from structures• Confronting the group regarding its process• Providing structure to focus group limits and

boundaries• Intervening when appropriate at level of

group instead of individual• Providing closure


Facilitator roles

• Ensuring members identify and maintain discussion focus and a procedure for that focus

• Ensuring everyone has an opportunity to contribute to the discussion and decisions regarding focus, procedures and decision issues

• Understanding group values and providing new values in the process

• Sensitivity to time management(Source: Hayne)


Optimal (face-to-face)meeting sizes

Meeting TypeMaximum # Participants Comments

Problem solving 5

Decision making 5

Problem identification 10 More may bog down process

Training seminar 15 Especially hands on

Informational 30 To promote interaction

Review or presentation 30

Motivational No limit

Source: 3M Meeting Management Team and J. Drew, Mastering meetings: Discovering the hidden potential of effective business meetings. 1994, New York: McGraw-Hill.


Guidelines for who to invite to meetings

• Relevant experience• Must be in on decision• Are crucial to

implementation• Most affected by the

problem addressed• Responsible to resolve

or implement decision

• Direct responsibility and authority over topic of discussion

• Enough knowledge to contribute meaningfully

• Information unavailable elsewhere

Summarized in Romano, N.C. and J.F. Nunamaker. Meeting analysis: Findings from research and practice. In Proceedings of 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 2001: IEEE.


Developing an agenda

List potential

topics

Define goal

for each

Handle before

meeting

Handle after

meeting

Prioritizetopics and

specify success for

eachHandle during

meeting

Based on Kaner, S., Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. 1996, Gabriola Island, British Columbia: New Society Publishers.

etm5221 engineering teaming spring 20021 etm5221 engineering teaming: application and execution...

Documents

collaborative group

ability requirements

teamwork ksasteam members

source of conflict

traditional win

conflict resolutionrecognize

interpersonal ksasa

interpersonal ksasb