DMEM

1. DMEM DMEM DMEM DMEM Measuring and Managing Team Performance: A Balanced Approach Researcher: Kepa Mendibil Telleria Supervisor: Dr Jillian MacBryde DMEM Research Presentation Day 24 January 2003

2. Contents • Research area & background • Research questions • Methodology • Results & findings • Contribution of the research

3. Research area & Background ‘A team concept is central to the development of process-based management and it is one of the few means by which large business processes can be integrated ‘ (Teare et al) Over half of the Fortune 1000 are implementing self-directed teams Implications: • Increase empowerment • Increased accountability • Increased emphasise on measuring and managing team performance

4. FUNCTIONS Manage processes • Conflicts between departmental and • processes managers PROCESSES Operate processes Support processes • Employees have a lack of the • company’s vision worsening of • employee participation Common Problem • PROBLEMS: • Business Process objectives are • not aligned with company’s strategy • Employee performance measurement • is not aligned with process performance • and organisational objectives • Lack of understanding on how to • measure team performance

5. Need to develop a better understanding on how to manage and measure team performance Why do teamwork attempts fail? • ‘Traditional ways of measuring performance, determine compensation, provide training, and even organize facilities are tailored to vertical units, not processes, and to individuals, not teams’ (Hammer & Stanton, 1999)

6. Research questions RQ1. How do current organisations tackle the issue of team performance? RQ1.1. Why is TPM difficult? RQ2. Is there a need for a tool that facilitates TPMS design? RQ2.1. What are the requirements of a TPMS development process? RQ2.2. Do current methods fulfil those requirements? RQ2.3. What are the drawbacks? RQ3. If yes, how should such a tool look like? RQ4. How does such a tool impact on organisations?

7. Methodology: Research Phases VALIDATING AND EVALUATING Jan02 – Jan03 PRE-UNDERSTANDING Jan00 –Sep00 THEORY BUILDING Aug00-Jun02 THEORY TESTING Jun01 – Sep02 Phase Activities Outcomes Novelty of research Discussion groups Broad literature review Specific literature review Practical relevance Exploratory research (Phase 1): 4 case studies Industrial workshops Seminars Applicability of The tool in Different environments Exploratory research (Phase 2): 6 ‘best practice’ case studies Case studies Expert opinion Action Research Focus group discussions Reliability of Research process • Research problems • RQ1, RQ2 -Research gap -RQ3, RQ4 -Typology for TPMS design -Theoretical framework -TPM workbook -Theoretical framework and workbook verified and improved -Findings -Reliable answers to research questions -Proved novelty of the research

8. Pre-understanding 4 case studies: EPSRC project collaborators • 6 ‘best practice’ case studies • Litton (electronics) • NCR • Rank Xerox (Sales and Service) • Irizar (Coach manufacturer, Basque Country) • Maier (Plastic moulding, Basque Country) • ITP (aerospace, Basque Country)

9. Pre-understanding • All organisation deemed team performance measurement (TPM) as an important aspect • Organisations are measuring team performance in an ad hoc manner • Teams using performance measures systematically: • were further advanced in the team development scale • combined process measures with other variables affecting team performance (e.g. EFQM self-assessment) • had a better understanding about customer requirements • had a more systematic and transparent ways of communicating and deploying company strategy • Managers and team leaders suggested that it would be beneficial for industrial organisations to develop a practical tool to facilitate and assist in developing TPM systems • 3 main areas impacting team performance • Process management • Team management • Organisational support management

10. Theory Building (TB) if yes if no Development of TPM typology Do current framework meet TPM requirements? Re-think research questions Develop TPM framework Construct practical tool Apply model/tool and extract learning Contribution to Knowledge

11. TB: Typology of TPM development process • Built upon previous typology for PMS development process (Hudson et al, 2001) • Input from a variety of research disciplines (e.g. HR, organisational psychology, operations management) • Classified into 3 areas: • Development process • Characteristics of measures • Dimensions of team performance • Criteria for team performance: • Team effectiveness: How well does the team achieve its process/task objectives? • Team efficiency: How do team processes affect the capability of team members to work together in the future? • How satisfied are the team members? (Combination of personal growth and satisfaction • Provide a balanced view of team performance – i.e. relate measures to those drivers for team performance

12. TB: Factors affecting team performance (1) Team task/process • Interdependence • Technology • Significance • Skills variety • Autonomy (2) Team characteristics and processes • Structure and composition: e.g. Team type, size, heterogeneity, roles, norms, goal clarity, Skills Knowledge and Attitudes, Commitment, Accountability, Autonomy • Internal processes: e.g. Communication, Coordination, Leadership, Learning, Collaboration, Monitoring, Feedback, Decision making, Conflict resolution, Innovation • External processes: e.g. Integration, Coordination, Communication, Cooperation (3) Organisational support • Technology • Training • Rewards • Information systems • Physical environment • Strategic alignment

13. TB: PM models vs TPM typology There is a need for a tool to facilitate TPMS design • Most available PM frameworks/models do not analyse performance from a team perspective • Those that do, only focus on measures related to the team process/task • Current frameworks do not consider those key factors that drive team performance • There is a lack of integration between theory on team effectiveness and theory on performance measurement

14. Theoretical framework Customer requirements Company strategy TPMS Deployment path Deployment path Deployment path • Team Performance Measures • Acceptability of task/process output • Capability of team members to • work together in the future • Team member satisfaction

15. Theoretical framework • Defines a deployment path including five considerations: • Expectations (company, process and team) • Requirements (process, team, organisation) • As-is analysis (current performance vs. desired) • Improvement Action Plan • Performance Measurement

16. Theoretical framework Deployment path (1) What do we want the process to do? (2) What does the team need to do? -Team Competencies (Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes) -Team processes (3) What is currently the team doing? How does this affect process performance? (4) Improvement Action plan (5) Team Performance Measures

17. Theory Testing • Theory and workbook was tested through: • 4 industrial workshops with Australian organisations (around 15 organisations) • 2 further case studies: Honeywell, Polaroid • 4 industrial seminars • Focus groups • Expert opinion • Action Research in Highland-Spring

18. Action Research (AR) in Water Bottling Co Objective - ‘To enhance the cross-functional integration of the manufacturing process team through the development and implementation of a team based performance measurement system.

19. Product Manufacturing Team Quality Assurance Good Inwards Filling & Packaging Warehouse Blowmoulding Laboratory Engineering Material flow Service flow AR in Water Bottling Co. CUSTOMER SUPPLIER • Look at company and departmental strategy • Define objectives and measures for the process • Align training to competency requirements • Define other organisational issues required to maximise team performance

20. AR in Water Bottling Co. Process performance Employee satisfaction Team competitiveness RESULTS Team Performance Measures • OEM • Cost per case • Employee Satisfaction • Job satisfaction • Growth needs satisfaction • Organisational commitment • Skills required vs available (training matrixes) • Employee involvement • Number of implemented suggestions ENABLERS Organisational Support Measures • Planned vs delivered training • HS vs ‘best practice’ benchmark • Employee survey • % of teams/individuals with goals aligned to company strategy and process objectives Process Measures • Downtime Analysis • Estimated vs real changeover time • First hour efficiency • Delivery reliability • Estimated vs Real manning level • Non-budgeted overtime analysis Teaming Measures • Employee productivity • Employee surveys (interdepartmental) • Performance appraisal analysis • Communication • Boundary management

21. Results & findings • General • The application of the TPM framework enables to highlight those key areas that were not previously addressed • Teams at different developmental stages require the use of different performance measures • TPM framework was applied in a wide range of industries and thus, we argue that it could be used by a diverse type of organisations • TPM framework is applicable with teams carrying out a variety of tasks and at different organisational levels • TPM as a local management tool and a bottom-up approach • The TPM framework complements other PM models used by the organisations • The generic nature of the framework does not allow to explicitly identify key factors and measures for different type of teams at different organisational levels and developmental stages

22. Results & findings • Related to Action Research • TPM measurement as a way of increasing management involvement • TPM facilitates the growth in focus and involvement of team members • But, all the above when considering the bigger context • Related to methodology • Usefulness of combining different research strategies

23. Contribution to knowledge was made by…. • Developing a better the understanding of the implications of BPR into team performance management and measurement • Better understanding the limitations of current methodologies for measuring team performance • Further developing the understanding of performance measurement in the context of teams by integrating theory of team effectiveness into research on performance measurement to practice was made by…. • Developing a practical tool (based on a theoretical framework) that facilitates organisations to assess and manage their teams

24. ?