There are many benefits to blended working. We can enjoy time at home to focus on planning and task completion. Time in the workplace creates opportunities to connect with colleagues. Many of us would probably be reluctant to return to being in the office all the time. But…. there are also many challenges to blended working. One of them is how to lead a team when staff no longer have a desk they can call their own and where not all team members are in the office at the same time.
It’s particularly hard for staff who started new jobs during or after the pandemic. Even with a thorough induction and a support buddy, it’s hard to assimilate or penetrate the office culture and a team dynamic that existed pre-COVID.
When I reflected on why this is hard, I was reminded of Patrick Lencioni’s ‘The Five Dysfunctions of a Team.’ I read Lencioni’s book some years’ ago but recently revisited it as a number of the dysfunctions he describes are magnified in a blended work environment. He offers some suggestions on how to tackle them and I offer my reflections.
1. Lack of trust
Teamwork is difficult. Lencioni says teams are inherently dysfunctional. Teams are made up of imperfect individuals who have egos and selfish goals.
In order to function effectively, team members need to trust one another. Trust is established when team members are comfortable engaging with each other in constructive conflict. For this to happen, staff need to be willing to share their vulnerability and mistakes openly. The team leader needs to lead by example to encourage staff to do the same.
The better team members know and understand each other, the greater the degree of trust. This helps to focus shift to team goals rather than individual. The best way to achieve this is through regular contact in person.
My thoughts
Blended working reduces in person opportunities, so leaders need to be intentional in creating more time for staff to meet, connect and share. While this takes staff away from delivery of team objectives, there is more likelihood of agreeing team goals and achieving them by making the necessary time investment.
2. Fear of conflict
The ability to have open discussions within the team, especially about contentious issues leads to better decisions and outcomes. Teams can be reluctant to air concerns. However, where discussion is focused on the topic and not on personal agendas or politics, everyone’s views and concerns can be heard. Keeping the discussion constructive while not not suppressing difficult messages requires trust.
My thoughts
There is less exposure to team dynamics online. Water cooler chats are fewer. Well-established teams have their way of doing things. There will be unspoken ‘rules’ around behaviours. New hires will have had less time to observe the dynamics of ‘how we do things around here.’ These aren’t the kind of thing likely to be covered in a formal induction or written down anywhere. New staff may find themselves feeling excluded if their approach falls outside the established team norms.
3. Lack of commitment
Leaders need to allow all team members to express their views on a specific subject. This isn’t the same as reaching a consensus. There will often be several different opinions about a topic on which a decision is needed. However, the ability to ensure all voices are heard before seeking a commitment to a course of action will help ensure team buy-in. Great teams pride themselves on being able to get behind a decision and commit to a clear course of action.
My thoughts
It’s important as a line manager not to necessarily wait for consensus. It’s better to be decisive than to procrastinate. You’ll never please everyone. You may be able to change course later if need be. Uncertainty and lack of clarity are not helpful to anyone.
4. Avoidance of accountability
For the team to stay focused on its objectives, peers must be willing to call out others on performance or behaviours that might hurt the team. Willingness to do this demonstrates respect and expectations of high performance of colleagues. Putting the needs of the team rather than an individual’s feelings first takes courage. Trust makes it more likely that team members will be willing to do this.
Not calling out behaviours or performance will lead to resentment among team members who have different standards. It encourages mediocrity. Deadlines and outputs may be missed. It relies too heavily on the team leader as the sole source of discipline. A team that holds itself to account will drive up standards, identify problems more quickly and avoids excessive time and bureaucracy around performance management and corrective action.
Making the team’s goals public makes it easier for members to hold each other to account. Clarity of who is delivering what and by when will help to keep the team focused.
Regular communication between team members is key to focusing on progress and avoids some staff not taking responsibility.
By keeping the team focused on the outcomes, the role of the leader moves to one of arbiter of discipline when the team fails- which should be rare. If the team doesn’t hold itself to account, individual team members are likely to look after their own self-interests.
My thoughts
This is an area where many staff can feel uncomfortable. It’s unlikely to happen unless the foundation of trust is in place. This can lead to line managers compensating by ‘over-parenting’ as team members turn to the line manager to sort out conflicts. Small conflicts can then appear to become a big issue once the line manager has become involved. This prohibits the team from developing. It also creates factions and sniping about fellow team members rather than issues being tackled. This can result in ‘playground behaviours’ in meetings and out of them.
5. Inattention to results
A team that’s not focused on results will stagnate and fragment. It will lose achievement-oriented employees. The team fragments and individuals will become disillusioned and focus on their individual careers.
The leader must focus on results and reward only those behaviours and actions that contribute to results- and to the collective contribution to group goals.
My thoughts
Individual egos undermine a team’s trust, damage relationships and ultimately lead to underperformance of the team. There is a risk that the focus shifts away from team goals to personalities, creating unhelpful distraction.
In summary
The investment required in developing your team is significant. Budgetary constraints, lack of space and time to meet means it requires real effort to create the opportunities for your team to meet in person, get to know each other and feel comfortable enough to share their vulnerabilities.
Ask yourself, however, what the cost of not doing so would be.
Peer pressure is more efficient and effective than going to the leader, anonymously complaining, and having them stop what they are doing to intervene. Patrick Lencioni.
