Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEMDMEMDMEMDMEMDMEM

Measuring and Managing Team Performance:Measuring and Managing Team Performance:

A Balanced ApproachA Balanced Approach

Researcher: Kepa Mendibil TelleriaResearcher: Kepa Mendibil TelleriaSupervisor: Dr Jillian MacBrydeSupervisor: Dr Jillian MacBryde

DMEM Research Presentation DayDMEM Research Presentation Day24 January 200324 January 2003

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

ContentsContents

Research area & backgroundResearch area & background

Research questionsResearch questions

Methodology Methodology

Results & findingsResults & findings

Contribution of the researchContribution of the research

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

‘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

teamsImplications:

Increase empowerment

Increased accountability

Increased emphasise on measuring and

managing team performance

Research area & BackgroundResearch area & Background

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

FUNCTIONS

Manage processes

Support processes

PR

OC

ES

SES

Operate processes

PROBLEMS: Business Process objectives are

not aligned with company’s strategy

Conflicts between departmental and processes managers

Employee performance measurementis not aligned with process performance and organisational objectives

Employees have a lack of the company’s vision worsening of employee participation

Lack of understanding on how to measure team performance

Common ProblemCommon Problem

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

‘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)

Why do teamwork attempts fail?Why do teamwork attempts fail?

Need to develop a better understanding on how to manage and measure team performance

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Research questionsResearch 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?

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Methodology: Research PhasesMethodology: Research Phases

PRE-UNDERSTANDING

Jan00 –Sep00

THEORY BUILDING

Aug00-Jun02

THEORY TESTING

Jun01 – Sep02

VALIDATING AND

EVALUATINGJan02 – Jan03P

hase

Acti

vit

ies

Ou

tcom

es

Broad literature review

-Research problems -RQ1, RQ2

-Theoretical framework and workbook verified and improved-Findings

-Reliable answers to research questions-Proved novelty of the research

Action Research

-Research gap-RQ3, RQ4-Typology for TPMS design-Theoretical framework-TPM workbook

Exploratory research (Phase 1):

4 case studies

Specific literature review

Exploratory research (Phase 2):

6 ‘best practice’case studies

Focus group discussions

Discussiongroups

Industrial workshops

Seminars

Expert opinion

Case studies

Novelty of research

Practical relevance

Applicability ofThe tool in Different

environments

Reliability ofResearchprocess

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Pre-understandingPre-understanding

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)

4 case studies: EPSRC project collaborators

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Pre-understandingPre-understanding

All organisation deemed team performance measurement (TPM) as an important aspectOrganisations 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 systems3 main areas impacting team performance Process management Team management Organisational support management

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Theory Building (TB)Theory Building (TB)Development

of TPM typology

Do current framework meet TPM

requirements?

Apply model/tool and extract learning

Develop TPM framework

if yes

if no

Re-think research questions

Contribution to

Knowledge

Contribution to

Knowledge

Construct practical tool

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

TB: Typology of TPM development processTB: 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:(1) Team effectiveness: How well does the team achieve its process/task

objectives?

(2) Team efficiency: How do team processes affect the capability of team members to work together in the future?

(3) 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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

TB: Factors affecting team performanceTB: 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 supportTechnologyTrainingRewardsInformation systemsPhysical environmentStrategic alignment

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

TB: PM models vs TPM typologyTB: PM models vs TPM typology

Most available PM frameworks/models do not analyse performance from a team perspectiveThose that do, only focus on measures related to the team process/taskCurrent frameworks do not consider those key factors that drive team performanceThere is a lack of integration between theory on team effectiveness and theory on performance measurement

There is a need for a tool to facilitate TPMS design

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Theoretical frameworkTheoretical frameworkCompany strategyCompany strategy Customer requirementsCustomer requirements

Team Performance Measures

• Acceptability of task/process output• Capability of team members to

work together in the future• Team member satisfaction

DeploymeDeploymentnt

pathpath

DeploymeDeploymentnt

pathpath

DeploymeDeploymentnt

pathpath

TPMSTPMS

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Theoretical frameworkTheoretical 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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Theoretical frameworkTheoretical framework

DeploymeDeploymentnt

pathpath

(1) What do we want the process to do?(1) What do we want the process to do?(2) What does the team need to do?(2) What does the team need to do?

-Team Competencies -Team Competencies (Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes)(Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes)-Team processes -Team processes

(3) What is currently the team doing?(3) What is currently the team doing? How does this affect process performance?How does this affect process performance?(4) Improvement Action plan(4) Improvement Action plan(5) Team Performance Measures(5) Team Performance Measures

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Theory TestingTheory 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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Action Research (AR) in Water Bottling CoAction 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.

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Product Manufacturing Team

SU

PPLIE

R

Blowmoulding

Good InwardsFilling &

PackagingWarehouse

CU

STO

ME

R

EngineeringLaboratory

Quality Assurance

Material flowService flow

AR in Water Bottling Co.AR in Water Bottling Co.

• 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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

AR in Water Bottling Co.AR in Water Bottling Co.

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

Teaming Measures

•Employee productivity•Employee surveys (interdepartmental)•Performance appraisal analysis•Communication•Boundary management

Process Measures

•Downtime Analysis•Estimated vs real changeover time•First hour efficiency•Delivery reliability•Estimated vs Real manning level•Non-budgeted overtime analysis

RESULTS

ENABLERS

Process performance

Employee satisfactionTeam competitiveness

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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Results & findingsResults & 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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

Results & findingsResults & 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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

ContributionContribution

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

        

  

Cen

tre f

or

Str

ate

gic

Man

ufa

ctu

rin

g

DMEMDMEM

?