All posts by cdv

Head of Organisational Development at University of Kent. Change Academy 2011 member.
Updates

The Buck Stops – Where?

Leave a comment

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

In my last blog, I discussed the importance of understanding different roles within a project. This blog takes that thinking to the next level of detail. Those who use formal project methodologies such as PRINCE 2 undoubtedly understand the value of responsibility charting. It should be stated that this blog will not provide that level of formality or detail. Rather, it simply serves as a broad introduction for getting further clarity on how roles and responsibilities fit together to accomplish tasks.

In the RACI process, generally four responsibilities are defined for each task and incorporated into a matrix framework. Common terms used in this process are: Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed, although many variations of this model exist and many more initials can be added to the acronym depending what Guide to… you choose to read. We will keep it simple.

Responsible
Those who do the work to achieve the task. At least one role must be responsible for each task.

Accountable
This is the role that is ultimately answerable for the appropriate completion of the task, and is the one who delegates the work to those responsible. There must be only one accountable role specified for each task or deliverable.

Consulted
Those whose opinions are sought, typically subject matter experts; and with whom there must be two-way communication.

Informed
Those who are kept up-to-date on progress, often only on completion of the task or deliverable; and with whom there is generally one-way communication.

Often the role that is accountable for a task or deliverable may also be responsible for completing it. Outside of this exception, it is generally recommended that each role take on, at most, just one of the participation types for each task. Where more than one participation type is shown, this may mean that further clarification is needed.

There is also a distinction between roles and people: a role is a descriptor for a set of tasks and may be performed by many people; similarly, one person can also perform many roles.

As mentioned previously, all too often we gather together and simply begin the work at hand. While not getting caught up in formalisation and documentation for their own sake, using some techniques for clarifying roles can provide a useful framework for any type of group working.

The benefits are many in using the role clarifying techniques discussed in this and last week’s blog, including:

Helping group members understand their roles and responsibilities

Clarifying interdependencies between roles

Raising awareness of the significance of contributions

Helping to balance workloads

Promoting acceptance of the structure and systems needed for the project’s success

Serving as a way in to engage in constructive conflict management if this should occur.

Clarification of roles and responsibilities will benefit the entire project and its group members since everyone will be clear on where they fit within the whole and can work together towards the vision, purpose and objectives that have been established.

Change Principles

‘Design team work carefully’ – but how?

1 Comment

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

Simon Black’s latest blog highlighted key principles for how groups might work better. His first principle – ‘design team work carefully’ will provide a strong foundation for success in maintaining and improving team effectiveness. But how? There are a range of techniques that can be used to assist in designing team work.

A useful starting point is role analysis. Role analysis? Isn’t this the job of Human Resources? Yes, often job descriptions are created as part of a central HR function. But work, and especially work with others, is never as simple as following a printed job description that more often than not is created at a single point of time and then simply filed away.

It is all too often the case that mutual demands, expectations and obligations of interdependent team members are never openly discussed. Each individual may wonder why others do not seem to be doing what they are ‘supposed’ to be doing even though all individuals are performing as they think they should.

The technique of role analysis can be effectively used to help teams and groups work together. How does it work? Individuals first each analyse their own role in the group. A few questions to ask:

What is the rationale for the role – why does it exist?
What is the role there to achieve?
What are the specific duties of the role?
What are the expected behaviours of the role?
How does the role contribute to the achievement of the group’s goals?
How is the role related to other roles in the group?

The next step is for individuals to explain their understanding of their role within the group. Other group members can then share their expectations of the role. Expectations and obligations can be modified and agreed through discussion so that all reach a common understanding.

At the conclusion of this process, the individual holding the role assumes responsibility for preparing a brief written summary (a role profile) consisting of the activities of the role, the obligations of the role to the other roles and the expectations of the role from the other roles. Sharing this summary back with the group is the final step.

Each individual then ends up with a better understanding of what their own role is, what the perceptions and expectations of others are, and how all roles fit together. Role profiles are not static but can be modified as needs change over time.

Effective use of the technique of role analysis can reduce role ambiguity (am I supposed to be doing that or is it your job?), role conflicts and misunderstandings. The technique can also help ensure commitment to the individual roles that have been collectively and collaboratively defined.

Next time, another technique for group working…

Change Principles, Updates

Categorising Group Roles

Leave a comment

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

I have previously written about principles that can benefit groups when they want to think together. I have also written a series of blogs with practical tips for the chair and for participants in working to ensure that meetings are successful.

But what I haven’t yet done is share thoughts on the roles of group members. Role differentiation and clarity is important to any group. There are many many ways to categorise group roles and I do not profess any particular theoretical expertise on group dynamics. Do take a look at the work of The Centre for the Study of Group Processes at the University of Kent (also Twitter @Group_Lab) that researches social psychological processes affecting group & intergroup relations.

To keep things simple, as a starting point I will reference a single model used by one of my own University professors (Professor A.R. “Elango” Elangovan), which is a distillation of Kenneth Benne and Paul Sheats’ work on group behaviour that originated as far back as the 1940s. Benne and Sheats defined three categories of group roles: task-oriented roles, relations-oriented roles, and self-oriented roles.

Task-oriented roles include initiators, information seekers, information givers,  coordinators and evaluators. These roles are important in actually getting the work done.

Relationship-oriented roles serve a different purpose. These roles help the group function in a positive way. They include encouragers, harmonisers, gatekeepers, standard setters, and group observers.

Finally, Self-oriented individualistic roles generally weaken and disrupt the group. These roles include blockers, recognition seekers, dominators and avoiders.

If you have freedom of choice in forming your group, be careful in choosing your members. A diverse range of people who balance task and relationship-oriented roles will take the group forward in a positive way.

But what do you do about the dysfunctional self-oriented roles? Perhaps you don’t have complete control over group membership. If this is the case, then the goal should be to minimise or eliminate these behaviours through increased awareness and full group acknowledgment that all of these roles exist within groups. This is of course easier said than done but a start can be made by simply naming these roles and agreeing from the outset of the group creation that disruptive behaviour will not be tolerated. Coaching and feedback can also help to greatly reduce or eliminate these behaviours.

You have an idea of the range of roles you want. What is next?

Change Principles, Updates

When are many heads better than one?

1 Comment

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

As a follow on to my last blog, why do we bother with groups at all?

Firstly, it is important to note that sometimes groups are formed as a conscious structural choice of an organisation. At the University of Kent, for example, staff members who were previously dispersed throughout colleges were collected into subject-based academic schools in the mid 1990’s. Professional services are similarly identified as functional units and sometimes co-located to provide support to the core business of the University’s Faculties / Schools. For example, Information Services, Human Resources, Finance and Research Services (among many others) each serve a functional purpose. While much could also be written about these groups, what follows is not focused on groups that are created as part of an organisational structure.

Rather, what about those groups or teams that are created for a reason beyond the formal structure? Research groups, project teams, working parties – these are groups that come together – usually over a finite amount of time – to accomplish a specific goal.

Why do we create these groups? What is the potential value that we gain? While in reality we do not always accrue significant benefits for a host of reasons we will consider, group decision making can be superior to individual decision-making in a number of different situations. Many heads can be better than one, for instance, when:6

  • Tasks require judgments about uncertain events and information available is either incomplete or uncertain
  • Concern for quality outcomes are high and potential benefits are substantial
  • Costs of errors is also high and it may be difficult to reverse or salvage a poor decision
  • Many feasible alternative solutions exist
  • Identifying the optimal alternative is difficult
  • Feedback about results will not be immediately available

This is not meant to be an exhaustive list and there are undoubtedly many more reasons that could be added. Perhaps two key factors that are common, however, are uncertainty and complexity.

So, if groups can sometimes be effective but aren’t in all cases; where do we go wrong? What are the characteristics of successful groups? More on this next time.

Change Principles, Updates

Building and Maintaining Resilience

Leave a comment

imageBy @cdvallance

The past few weeks since my last blog have been a struggle. Like many others around the University I have been battling what a colleague referred to as ‘the ubiquitous Kent bug.’ While I very much doubt that Kent is alone as an organisation that has had many of its members fall victim to a range of winter colds and flus, it has certainly been difficult for me to identify anyone absolutely brimming with energy and enthusiasm of late. Add to this a bout of cold, wet, grey weather, short days, dark nights and many work challenges. So what can be done?

For me, the only way to regain and then maintain my personal and professional resilience in relation to work is to reflect on the question ‘why do I bother?’ What do I believe about why I get up every morning and go to work? Of course I need and want a pay cheque. That is a given. But this isn’t enough for me and I believe it isn’t enough for others either. I believe we all (or at least the great majority of us) want to feel that we are making a positive difference in what we do and that we also want to share these feelings of pursuing a common purpose with others.

How do we do this? In my last blog, I shared six keys to successful change coined by leading thinker Rosabeth Moss Kanter. To recap, these were:

Show up, speak up, team up, look up, don’t give up, lift others up.

In my next few blogs I will discuss why I believe groups and teams are key to organisational success. This is partly selfish. My hope is that sharing my thinking about something I care about – team work and collaboration – will also help me rebuild my own resilience and restore my own energy in trying to make a positive difference at the University of Kent.

Change Principles, Updates

Leadership in Action

Leave a comment

By Cindy Vallance

@cdvallance

I was very pleased to be asked to present our University of Kent leadership and management programme participation certificates at the annual Learning and Development Awards Ceremony in late January.

However, before I presented the certificates I was given the opportunity to share a few thoughts with the 120 staff members in attendance. A few people asked me afterwards for my references so I thought it might be useful to repeat the words I shared with that group again here:

 

Everyone in this room today that is receiving an award has demonstrated leadership. This type of leadership is self-leadership and is the foundation for all other types of leadership. An American professor by the name of Charles Manz provides an explanation of the concept of self-leadership in relation to self-management. He stated that while self-management is largely concerned with a set of behavioural and cognitive strategies that reflect a rational view of what people ought to be doing…self-leadership goes beyond this to place significant emphasis on the intrinsic value of tasks.” (Manz, Charles C. “Self-Leadership: Toward an Expanded Theory of Self-Influence Processes in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review, Volume 11, No. 3, 1986, 585-600.)

The individual who exercises self-leadership does not simply respond to a leader’s vision; the individual helps to create the vision. Your achievements reflect your individual part in helping to embody a wider organisational vision for the University of Kent.

I have also noticed a number of common themes recurring increasingly in discussions across our leadership and management programmes – behaviours that appear to resonate to participants, managers, and sponsors alike – qualities that I am happy to see not just being spoken about but also demonstrated.

These themes include: collaboration, community, respect, fostering diversity, transparency, trust, breaking down silos, appreciation, balancing creativity with consistency and focusing on a purpose that is larger than ourselves to inspire and motivate others.

Everyone can help to demonstrate their self-leadership and belief in the themes that are resonating across the University by practicing six keys to leading positive change. These keys were coined by one of my favourite thinkers, Professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter and are really very simple:

“Show up, speak up, look up, team up, don’t give up, and lift others up.”

 

Change Principles, Communication, Effective Meetings, Updates

Tips for Meeting Participants

Leave a comment

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

Even if you’re not ‘in the Chair,’ all participants still have responsibilities when it comes to ensuring that all receive the full benefit from effective meetings.

Prior to the Meeting

Submit agenda items if and when asked to do so

Come to the meeting prepared to discuss the agenda at hand

Read and be familiar with any information that is distributed in advance

At the Meeting

Attend all meetings and if for any reason you can’t, send apologies in advance along with your legitimate reason for being absent

Arrive at meetings on time

Stay until the end of the meeting

Actively participate – that is why you are attending in the first place isn’t it?

Understand that within the meeting everyone has an equal right to participate

Exert peer pressure on other group members by fully supporting the Chair in managing inappropriate behaviour

Share ideas in an honest and open manner

If conflict exists, air these items in the meeting in a professional manner, not after the meeting

Retain confidentiality for any meeting items when agreed to

Once actions have been decided, support the group’s decision

Refrain from complaining about other participants or the group itself when outside the meeting

Raise concerns with the Chair directly

After the Meeting

Complete any tasks that you have responsibility for within the timeframe discussed

Share with the Chair any observations that might provide helpful learning for the future

In conclusion, the ‘how’ of the meeting is just as important as the ‘what’ since it is the collective energies, commitment and actions of the group that will help us to accomplish so much more than any of us can individually. Note that further consideration was given to the ‘how’ of creating a thinking environment for meetings in this earlier blog series.

Since this is my final blog for 2012, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has been reading these pieces.  While formal comments within the blogs have been minimal, I have appreciated the references that colleagues have made about the blogs along with the retweets when these have been posted to twitter. I hope that you have found these blogs to be of interest. Do check back in the New Year and in the meantime, I wish you the very best for the holiday season and for 2013.

Effective Meetings, Updates

Meetings – Chair / Group Dynamics

Leave a comment

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

In my last blog, I discussed some of the practical considerations facing the Chair. However, even if the meeting goes like clock work on the surface operationally, it is important for the Chair to pay attention to the group dynamics that are just as important and that underpin every discussion, every meeting.

Again, it is once again the responsibility of the Chair to set the tone and take the lead with the group. If, for instance, the Chair behaves in a way that is open, honest, enthusiastic, and committed to positive outcomes, meeting participants are more likely to respond in kind.

The  Chair should be open about what kinds of dissent are acceptable. Let people know that it is okay to disagree (recall the old adage “if two people agree all the time on everything, one of them is unnecessary”) but that respectful and professional behaviour is expected.

Disagreement should focus on topics and should not be personal attacks against people. While people need to be able to express themselves openly, unhealthy aggression should not be tolerated.

It is important for the Chair to try to not take sides when disagreement occurs, but rather, remain impartial, stick to the facts and ask open questions for clarification. The Chair should work to keep their temper even when provoked. It may be necessary and useful to agree to meet with the dissenter(s) at another time outside the meeting. If a decision cannot be made within the meeting due to disagreement, the Chair should advise next steps and move on.

The Chair should also watch participation levels during the meeting and work to draw out comments from those who are less vocal; those who are quiet will often have a great deal to contribute but may not be as quick to speak, allowing others who speak freely to dominate the discussion.

The Chair should manage the tendency for discussion to go off course inadvertently and should work to steer the group back to the agenda if the discussion begins to wander. Asking questions and paraphrasing conclusions to seek common understanding and bringing participants back to the topic at hand can be helpful.

Wide ranging discussion (eg for gathering information or problem solving) can be helpful and genuine consultation is critical in these types of sessions but this should be an explicit part of the meeting (back to purpose and objectives again) rather than something that happens by accident as a meeting with a different purpose goes off track.

In a consultative discussion, it is important not to jump to instant solutions, but rather to consider the pros and cons of alternatives. It can be helpful to record suggestions as they are stated and to build upon these ideas as a group.It may be that this type of discussion will not end in a decision and this is fine. Time may be needed to reflect on the discussion. The Chair should, however, indicate what will be done with the information from the session and what the plans will be to either make a decision in the future and the timeframe for doing so.

Finally, Chairs (or those who hope to be Chairs) can learn much by watching for and emulating good examples. Good Chairs will have done their homework before the meeting, solicited input in advance where appropriate, gained the confidence of others outside the meeting, work to have a variety of participants lead on topics, strike a balance between direction and consultation, involve everyone, maintain a good pace, order, and humour even in difficult circumstances, and will get the job at hand done by moving beyond differences of opinion to agreed action plans.

This blog, along with the previous one on the Challenge of the Chair and the blog on Team Briefings have primarily focused on the Chair’s responsibilities. However, meeting success is not down to only one individual. What if you are not in the Chair? What are your responsibilities as a participant?

More on this next time.

Change Principles, Effective Meetings, Updates

The Challenge of the Chair

2 Comments

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

The challenge of establishing the conditions for a productive meeting falls to the CHAIR and much of the success of a meeting comes down to ADVANCE PREPARATION.

While the hints and ideas that follow should not be seen as prescriptive rules, they can provide ways to think through each meeting element.

As mentioned previously, once again, it comes back to first considering the explicit PURPOSE and precise OBJECTIVES of the meeting, or each part of the meeting.

Once the purpose and objectives are set, it is then useful to consider the meeting SIZE. Seven to ten is generally ideal for discussion. A meeting with over fifteen in attendance starts to become unwieldy and it will become increasingly difficult to ensure everyone’s voice is heard. In these cases, if discussion is desired, it can be helpful to first provide the context, then break into smaller groups for discussion and save time for a report back from each group at the end so thoughts can be collected and summarised.

Estimate the LENGTH of the meeting; two hours is generally a good maximum but many meetings can be effectively conducted within an hour.

The LOCATION of the meeting is also important. Ideally, everyone should have a clear view of everyone else; a round or oval table can be beneficial if the Chair does not wish to convey a hierarchical structure.

Do people need to ATTEND all or only part of the meeting? While having people come and go can be disruptive, it is worth considering on a case by case basis.

The Chair should draw up the AGENDA and circulate with applicable papers a minimum of two days in advance of the meeting (or longer depending how large that pack of pre-reading is, of course). Agenda items should be allocated in priority order so that the most important items are scheduled while people are fresh. Do students attend the meeting? Is their section always last? Why not try reversing the order? It is helpful to save a positive item for the end (see the point about praise in my last blog). However, if the meeting is a difficult one, it is important not to include something positive for its own sake. Simply thank participants for their honesty and engagement within the meeting.

It can be useful to request a brief SUMMARY DOCUMENT in advance from people who want to add agenda items to the meeting. This provides them with the opportunity to outline the purpose and objectives of their item(s), so the same rigour begins to be practiced by everyone.

DURING THE MEETING itself it is the responsibility of the Chair to maintain control by guiding the participants in a clear, transparent and respectful way through the agenda. It can be helpful to think of the Chair role as a facilitator who remains objective and impartial within the meeting even while having a direct and personal stake in the matters at hand. Getting engrossed deeply in the subject matter while simultaneously getting others involved are not activities that easily mix.

Once AT THE MEETING, the Chair should

Start the meeting on time

Clarify the objectives of the meeting so everyone has a shared understanding

Introduce each topic by putting it into context and explaining the purpose and objective of the item

Control the pace and time of the meeting

Keep discussions to the point by asking clarifying questions

Conclude each item by summarising what has been agreed or decided

Finish off by recapping all actions and time scales by individuals and confirm shared understanding

And what about AFTERWARDS? The Chair should:

Reflect on whether the meeting was successful in meeting its objectives by considering: what went well; what could have gone better? It can be helpful for the Chair to test their own perceptions with a few others who attended and who will be honest with us since we can either be our own worst critic or we can let ourselves get off too lightly

Confirm the minutes or action log and circulate to participants as soon as possible (ideally within a few days following the meeting)

Check that those responsible for actions have received the notes and taken action according to agreed timescales

Does all this feel just slightly overwhelming? Even as I write, I am cringing as I think how often I don’t manage to get all this right. However, since we spend so much time in meetings, isn’t it worth our concentrated and conscious efforts to make the best use possible of this ‘supertax‘ of work?

This blog has discussed the ‘what’ of meetings; my next blog will discuss some principles to keep in mind in relation to the ‘how’ of working with groups.

Change Principles, Communication, Dialogue, Effective Meetings

Team briefings – a particular kind of meeting…

3 Comments

By Cindy Vallance @cdvallance

In my last blog, I discussed the importance of identifying the purpose and goals of meetings so that the Chair and participants can be clear on what should be accomplished. Regular team briefings are one common type of meeting. How can these be constructed?

Relatively short, regularly scheduled team briefings are most often for:

passing on information…I have news to share with you about …

decision-making…What are we going to do about…?

Depending on the length and regularity of the meeting, there may be time to include:

gathering information…What do you think of …?

problem solving…How should we resolve…?

However, often these last two items may involve additional people beyond those in the immediate team since there may be considerations that would benefit from input beyond the team itself.

A handy discipline to think through the team  meetings process is to apply the five P’s mentioned by Peter McCaffery in his book, The Higher Education Manager’s Handbook: Effective Leadership & Management in Universities & Colleges.

PROGRESS – how is the team doing in relation to specific objectives that have previously been set? It is important for the team to know that while the team’s ‘to do’ list will never stop growing, taking a moment to reflect on progress and accomplishments keeps us motivated to keep pushing ahead.

POLICIES – a shorthand word for what might be any range of initiatives. Are there new activities or changes in policies, systems or processes underway that team members should be aware of? When we are personally deeply involved in something we can forget that others are just as busy with completely different things and won’t have a clue what we are doing unless we regularly find a way to share this information so the team can gain a sense of the whole.

Note: There may be opportunities with the top two items to share information prior to the meeting to make discussion more effective. Depending how large the team is, maintaining an action log (to track ‘progress’) and circulating updates in advance (to share ‘policies’) can be practical ways to keep on track.

PEOPLE – are people joining, leaving, or changing roles? Have team members been involved in activities or attended events where information has been gained that could be usefully shared? Open and transparent sharing leads to a stronger and more cohesive team.

POINTS FOR ACTION – what do we need to do before we meet again? Who will do what? Identifying action points is critical so that discussion at meetings can lead to successful implementation and progress.

PRAISE – do we show appreciation for individuals and for the team as a whole? This important element is often missed in the rush to focus on the ‘what’ but can do much to keep the team feeling positive about the work to be done and the support we have in doing it.

If you aren’t a hundred percent happy with your team meetings, why not try applying the five ‘P’s within your next few meetings to see if the approach works for you and your team? Let them openly know what you are trying. They may have even better ideas.

My next blog: what are some of the challenges and possible pitfalls to avoid when chairing meetings?