Details and the Big Picture: How to build better teams and be a better team member
4/26/2011 Details and the Big Picture: How to build better teams and be a better team member Jeanne Galvin‐Clarke, Manager, Sponsored Programs Administration, University of Maryland, Baltimore [email protected] Doris H. Schultz, Director of Business Operations, Systems Engineering Research Center, Stevens Institute of Technology [email protected] NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Today’s Topic • Team building and how to better understand the capabilities that lead to good staffing choices, from the perspective of two team building models Meyers‐Briggs® Type Indicator Belbin Team Role Model • The blend of skills needed in a successful Research Administration office NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 1 4/26/2011 Objectives 1. For managers, learn how to build better teams to improve both office productivity and employee satisfaction 2. For individuals, understand how to discover your “sweet spot” – the area in which you are most likely to succeed – and how you can use that understanding to better contribute as part of a team. 3. For the team, learn how to work together better and achieve more together NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Introduction • NCURA has identified a future skill gap in the area of research administration where • Future retirees > replacement talent • This serious gap can be mitigated if we start identifying and grooming individuals to better fit these roles. NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 2 4/26/2011 Methodology • The best decisions are made by combining data and intuition • Statistically, 80% of all staffing decisions are weak and made purely by intuition • Better staffing decisions require a change in perspective and use better data sets which will help – consider more than technical job skills when evaluating prospective staff members – identify strengths and weaknesses of your staff – use that insight to build stronger teams NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Group vs. Team • Group 2 or more entities Common objective Individual goal/objective Sharing of information without sacrificing individual goal. – Individual budget and schedule – – – – • Team 2 or more entities Individual objective Common goal/objective Willing to sacrifice individual objective for common goal – Common budget and schedule – – – – NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 3 4/26/2011 Group vs. Team Goal/Objective Objective Individual Objective Goal/Objective Common Group Team NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Myers Briggs® Presentation by Jeanne Galvin‐Clarke NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 4 4/26/2011 Meyers‐Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI) • Psychological Type concept developed by Carl Jung • MBTI® “instrument” developed by Isabel Briggs Myers and her mother Katherine Briggs, first available in 1975 • Framework for enhancing self‐awareness and improving self‐management • Supports effective communication, leadership, team and relationship development NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 MBTI® Preferences Extraversion E Energy Flow I Sensing S Perceiving N Thinking T Judging Judging J Orientation F P Introversion iNtuition Feeling Perceiving 5 4/26/2011 MBTI® Preferences Extraversion E Energy Flow Action Expressive Talk it out Often speak up at meetings • Energized by interacting with others • • • • • • • • • I Introversion Reflection Contained Think it through Speak after preparing Need time alone to “recharge” MBTI® Preferences How your mind gathers data & information Sensing • • • • • S Perceiving Present Focus Details Actual Specifics Seeing is believing • • • • • N iNtuition Future Focus Patterns Theoretical Big Picture What does it mean? 6 4/26/2011 MBTI® Preferences How you make decisions Thinking T Judging Objective Cause and effect Clarity Would rather be right than liked • Remember numbers more easily than faces • • • • F Feeling Subjective Person‐centered values Harmony “Good” decision must consider impact on people • Enjoy helping others • • • • MBTI® Preferences Your Public Persona T or F • • • • • Judging J Orientation Decisive Orderly Scheduled A deadline is a Deadline Like to work things through to conclusion • • • • • P Perceiving S or P Explore possibilities Flexible Spontaneous A deadline is a Target Like to keep your options open 7 4/26/2011 The 16 MBTI® Types ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ ISTP ISFP INFP INTP ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ The 4 MBTI® Groups Group Name Shared Preference Types Strengths Highest Values Rationals NT INTJ ENTJ INTP ENTP Logic and Strategy Truth, Knowledge, Competence, Autonomy Idealists NF INFJ ENFJ INFP ENFP Diplomacy and creating harmony Principles, Meaning, Relationship Guardians SJ ISTJ ESTJ ISFJ ESFJ Logistics and materials Security and Being Respected Artisans SP ISTP ESTP ISFP ESFP Tactical actions & adaptability Experiences that excite the senses http://www.systemsthinker.com/interests/mind/ptypes.shtml 8 4/26/2011 MBTI® in action you get out of life exactly what you put into it – nothing more, nothing less Somehow, I’d like a little more room for error NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 MBTI® ‐ value to individuals • Understand what energizes you, frustrates you, challenges you, satisfies you • Use awareness of your tendencies to guide your career choices • Approach your work in the way that uses your strengths and reduces stress • Identify non‐preferences and develop strategies to accomplish those types of tasks • Understand and work better within the culture of your office/institution • Maximize your contribution and satisfaction in life NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 9 4/26/2011 Why apply MBTI® to Teams? • Teams with only one member of a certain type, are likely to view that member as “different” and are less likely to appreciate and accept the contributions of that member; potential for team conflict • Teams that include several different types, experience less conflict • Teams with high similarity reach decisions more quickly, but are more likely to make errors due to missing some input, overlooking other viewpoints, and inability to see some consequences • Teams with diverse types will reach decisions more slowly, but are likely to make better decisions due to having more input, considering more viewpoints and evaluating a variety of potential impacts • Teams of many types promote personal development of team members Mary McCaulley, founder CAPT NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Why apply MBTI® to Teams? • Enhances ability to understand and manage others • Contributes to development of leadership skills • Identification of training needs, skill gaps • Provides insight into conflict resolution • Devise recognition and rewards that fit the individual • Guide change management needs of the team NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 10 4/26/2011 MBTI® and Teams Teams dwell in the intersection of Types • Communication (E/I and J/P) • Determining direction and scope (S/N) • Defining (and following) processes and expectations (J/P and S/N) • Decision Making (T/F) • Degree of Conflict (J/P) • Frustration or Patience (J/P and T/F and S/N) • Team cohesiveness (T/F) NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Problem Solving: it takes all kinds Facts & Details What are the facts? Be specific Gather from data observation Be clear Analyze What is the cause & effect of each action? Pros and Cons Objectively consider the consequences Alternatives What alternatives do the facts suggest? Brainstorm, Imagine Consider various solutions Impact Is it something you can live with? How do you feel about the action? How do you think it will affect other people? the community as a whole? © Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. Palo alto, CA NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 11 4/26/2011 Belbin Model Presentation by Doris Schultz NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Belbin Team Roles • Based on Research by Meredith Belbin – PhD Cambridge University – Research began in 1970’s • Various psychometric testing – Cattell 16 Personality Factor test (16PF) – Personal Preference Questionnaire (PPQ) – Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (CTA) • Exercises Played – Executive Management Exercise (EME) / Teamopoly • Established Belbin Team Role Behaviors – Personality, Mental Ability, Current Values and Motivators, Field Constraints, Experience, and Role Learning NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 12 4/26/2011 Cooperation What is cooperation? • Belbin definition of cooperation: to work together or engage in a joint operation • It is the wish to help, adjust, collaborate with and fit in with others who are in direct working contact. Why cooperate? 1. The group will have a common purpose. 2. The group will form a cohesive unit. 3. The group will obtain better results NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Cooperation How do I cooperate and get others to cooperate? 1. Find out the needs of others 2. Offer to help 3. Reach a shared goal 4. Ask for help 5. Give encouragement NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 13 4/26/2011 14 4/26/2011 15 4/26/2011 16 4/26/2011 17 4/26/2011 18 4/26/2011 19 4/26/2011 20 4/26/2011 21 4/26/2011 22 4/26/2011 23 4/26/2011 24 4/26/2011 25 4/26/2011 Thinking Oriented 26 4/26/2011 Thinking Oriented Plant Monitor Evaluator Specialist Thinking Oriented Plant Monitor Evaluator Specialist Action Oriented 27 4/26/2011 Thinking Oriented Plant Monitor Evaluator Specialist Action Oriented Shaper Implementer Completer Finisher Thinking Oriented Plant Monitor Evaluator Specialist Action Oriented Shaper Implementer Completer Finisher People Oriented 28 4/26/2011 Thinking Oriented Plant Monitor Evaluator Specialist Action Oriented Shaper Implementer Completer Finisher People Oriented Coordinator Team worker Resource Investigator Phases Needs Shapers Coordinators 29 4/26/2011 Phases Needs Shapers Coordinators Ideas Plant Resource Investigator Phases Needs Shapers Coordinators Ideas Plant Resource Investigator Plans Monitor Evaluator Specialist 30 4/26/2011 Phases Needs Shapers Coordinators Ideas Plant Resource Investigator Plans Monitor Evaluator Specialist Contacts Resource Investigator Team Worker Phases Needs Shapers Coordinators Ideas Plant Resource Investigator Plans Monitor Evaluator Specialist Contacts Resource Investigator Team Worker Organization Implementer Coordinator 31 4/26/2011 Phases Needs Shapers Coordinators Ideas Plant Resource Investigator Plans Monitor Evaluator Specialist Contacts Resource Investigator Team Worker Organization Implementer Coordinator Follow Through Completer Finisher Implementer 32 4/26/2011 Assessment Feedback Self Assessment Observer’s Assessment Assessment Results in Ranked Order Preferred Team Roles ‐ How You See Yourself ‐ How Your Observers See You ‐ Combined Overall Ranking 1 = Top 9 = Bottom 33 4/26/2011 Team‐Role Circle RI TW PL ME CO SP Now that you have IMP SH completed the team‐ role circle, what would CF you say about the composition of your team? What problems could occur because of the composition? 34 4/26/2011 Psychological Models and Teams Purpose is not to change the group instead it is to understand how its make‐up is likely to influence its functionality and success NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Psychological Models and Teams • Are the types on the team appropriate to the tasks of the team? • Are the individual team members assigned to perform tasks that utilize their strengths? • Is there enough variety in the members’ types to avoid “blind spots”? • Are there enough idea people to inspire the team and enough practical people to bring closure? • What are the potential benefits and liabilities of the team’s collective make‐up? • What might be needed to bridge the gaps/problem areas? NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 35 4/26/2011 NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Your Perfect Team Can you build your perfect team? 1. Think of the best example of each type QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. 2. Discuss and then collectively build your perfect team. 36 4/26/2011 Research Administration MBTI Belbin S and N, T and F, J and P (need a team!) Plant, Coordinator, Resource Investigator Specialist, Team Worker, Completer/Finisher Pre Award Develop ideas, facilitate, communicate, notice details, interpret, meet deadline Post Award Organize, gather S, T, J details, report on details, employ policies to guide decisions, analytical Implementer, Monitor/Evaluator, Completer/Finisher, Specialist Director Create processes, facilitate productivity, develop staff skills, make decisions S and N, T and F, J and P (delegate) Implementer, Resource Investigator Coordinator, Monitor/Evaluator N, T, F, P Plant, Resource Investigator, Coordinator Create vision, develop policy, motivate others NCURA Region II Spring Meeting VP or Provost New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 Belbin Team‐Role Circle TW PL Pre‐Award RI VP Post‐Award ME VP Director Director Post‐Award Director CO Projects VP Projects SH SP Pre‐Award Post‐Award Pre‐Award IMP CF NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 37 4/26/2011 The 16 MBTI® Types ISTJ Post‐Award ISFJ Post‐Award Pre‐Award ISTP Post‐Award Pre‐Award ESTP Director ESTJ Director Post‐Award ISFP Pre‐Award ESFP Director Pre‐Award ESFJ Post‐Award Director Pre‐Award INFJ INTJ Pre‐Award Post‐Award Post‐Award INFP INTP Pre‐Award Post‐Award ENFP ENTP Director VP Pre‐Award ENFJ VP Director Pre‐Award Pre‐Award VP ENTJ Post‐Award VP Director Pre‐Award NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 References • Kroeger, Otton, Thuesen, Janet M. and Rutledge, Hile “Type Talk at Work” Dell Publishing:NY, NY 2002 • Rutledge, Hile and Kroeger, Otto “MBTI Introduction Workbook” OKA, LLC: Fairfax, VA 2005 • Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. Palo Alto, CA (official publisher of the Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator Assessment) o https://www.cpp.com/products/mbti/index.aspx • Meyers‐Briggs Foundation o http://www.myersbriggs.org • The Center for Applications of Psychological Type, CAPT®, Inc o http://www.capt.org/take‐mbti‐assessment/mbti.htm • free short on‐line personality tests that use MBTI –like assessment o http://similarminds.com/jung.html o http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi‐win/JTypes2.asp NCURA Region II Spring Meeting New York, NY, May 1‐3, 2011 38
© Copyright 2024