TEAM
TRIATHLON
TRIATHLON
How can a team assess its strengths and predict the project's outcome at the very beginning?
A vertically integrated oil company is one of the most complex organizational structures in the world. To make it more flexible and adaptive to rapidly changing market conditions, cross-functional project teams are formed. Their task is to implement innovation and drive progress.
Team members often meet each other for the first time and, in addition to project work, are involved in the ongoing tasks of their departments. In this situation, success depends on how quickly strangers can begin to work as a cohesive team.
Team members often meet each other for the first time and, in addition to project work, are involved in the ongoing tasks of their departments. In this situation, success depends on how quickly strangers can begin to work as a cohesive team.
CHALLENGE
To develop cross-functional teams, we offered our client to launch the "Team Triathlon" project, which challenged working groups and their leaders to achieve a selected major management goal within eight months. Leaders and their teams received a variety of expert support, including from the Archipelago
We conducted a team study to help team members not only better assess their resources but also align their vision of the situation, thereby feeling like they were among like-minded individuals:
Synchronization
How does each participant's personal vision of the project differ from the vision of the team and management?
Community
Is there a common information field among employees?
Agreement
Are there any potential sources of conflict?
RESULT
How can we be guaranteed to achieve a common goal together?
OUR GOAL WAS
A new quality of communication
between employees:
hearing and seeing everyone
between employees:
hearing and seeing everyone
It was important to us that the participants before the start
took a realistic look
We assessed the resources they would need and understood what they had and what they lacked. We wanted to not just gather individual opinions, but to assemble them into a unified picture of the future project.
To work with two teams, we used "grasp" — the framework, developed in our bureau. It allows to automate assessment of team potential and facilitate optimal management decision-making.
GR▲SP
A framework developed by Archipelago for management decision-making, successfully used in leading Russian companies. A unique method for collecting, analyzing, and visualizing data allows employees to evaluate company processes in a user-friendly way.
DĚUS
Модульная IT-платформа для разработки, администрирования, проведения и анализа данных онлайн-тестов, опросов и исследований.
Idea generation
- Each member of both teams received a link to an electronic questionnaire on the DĚUS platform, in which they were asked to list everything the team would need to achieve the goal: tools, conditions, resources, and the human factor, dividing resources into:
- critical (without which the goal cannot be achieved) and
- additional (which will help in achieving the goal).
Understanding and critically evaluating ideas
All participants were given access to a shared pool of proposed ideas and were able to sort and evaluate them. This resulted in a large pool of independent expert assessments of the team's resources, which we used to build a dashboard.
Building a team resource map
The team's conceptual network became the dashboard's central component. Analysis of the network's content and structure provided a high-level view of the team's full capabilities. Analysis of its individual parameters provided reference points for team discussions and decision-making.
Facilitation session
- How many total means of achieving the goal were allocated? Into which blocks were they distributed?
- Hierarchy of means: what was central to achieving the goal, and what only affected specific aspects of it?
- Assessment of resource availability: what resources were available at the time of the session, and what was missing?
- How consistent were the team members in their assessments? What was the cause of the inconsistency: was it noise or were there truly possible options?
- What fell into "blind spots"?
- How are the blocks interconnected, and how will resources compensate for each other?
Две карты показали командам каких ресурсов хватает, а каких нет.
Выделились также и области противоречия: кто-то считал,
что ресурса достаточно, а кто-то, что его нет.
Выделились также и области противоречия: кто-то считал,
что ресурса достаточно, а кто-то, что его нет.
Two maps showed the teams which resources
were abundant and which were in short supply.
Areas of disagreement also emerged: some believed
that a resource was sufficient, while others believed
that it was insufficient.
were abundant and which were in short supply.
Areas of disagreement also emerged: some believed
that a resource was sufficient, while others believed
that it was insufficient.
All participants' ideas were uploaded to the dashboard and visualized as a graph, with each node representing one resource and the lines between the nodes representing connections. If multiple people grouped two resources together during sorting, a connection was created. The more people grouped two resources together, the closer they were positioned on the graph.
To facilitate visual analysis, a cluster analysis of the network was conducted. The dashboard algorithm, based on the groupings made by team members, divided all resources into clusters and colored the most similar nodes in the same color.
Participants had the opportunity to give each cluster a meaningful name and, if necessary, adjust the composition of the resources included in it.
Participants had the opportunity to give each cluster a meaningful name and, if necessary, adjust the composition of the resources included in it.
Next, we zoomed in on the map and visualized each cluster as a graph node. The size of the circle indicated the degree of centrality of each cluster.
The more central a cluster, the more profound and systemic its impact on other clusters.
Solving problems (providing resources) within such clusters will have a systemic effect, influencing all other aspects of the project.
The more central a cluster, the more profound and systemic its impact on other clusters.
Solving problems (providing resources) within such clusters will have a systemic effect, influencing all other aspects of the project.
The color indicates the average accessibility of the cluster, and the size indicates its centrality for all activities.
We provided detailed analytical findings for each cluster in a report so the team could further explore specific areas if needed.
In particular, the report included information on the consistency of resource availability estimates. The team had the opportunity to discuss the most contentious clusters.
In particular, the report included information on the consistency of resource availability estimates. The team had the opportunity to discuss the most contentious clusters.
RESULT
We held a team-wide discussion to define all segments using accepted team terms, identify sources of disagreement, and establish a shared vision. The resulting resource map aligned perfectly with the teams' activities and provided structure. Based on the map's analysis, problem areas were identified and recommendations for addressing them were formulated.
Interestingly, although the teams faced substantively different tasks and their maps largely consisted of highly specific resources, several themes emerged in common, and these themes revolved around team interaction in one way or another.
- Both teams identified the following as important resources:
- motivation among team members;
- clear role assignments, convenient procedures, and work practices;
- strong leadership;
- appropriate administrative infrastructure.
TOTAL
Understanding the current level of available resources helped the teams and their leaders develop the right strategy from the start.
The first team won the triathlon, and the second team revised the project timeline and took advantage of the additional time to achieve their goal.
The first team won the triathlon, and the second team revised the project timeline and took advantage of the additional time to achieve their goal.
PARTICIPANTS' REVIEWS
What were the benefits for you personally?
"I was pleasantly surprised by the openness and proactivity of the leader and team members."
"It was important for me to involve all team members in the work of finding and utilizing resources."
"I was able to accurately assess my colleagues' capabilities on this topic and identify new resources."
"I saw myself in dialogue with many like-minded people."
"It was important for me to involve all team members in the work of finding and utilizing resources."
"I was able to accurately assess my colleagues' capabilities on this topic and identify new resources."
"I saw myself in dialogue with many like-minded people."
What did you see as the benefit for the entire team?
"We've become closer and more accessible to each other."
"We were able to see the big picture and gain unexpected insights."
"We finally have a resource classification!"
"We've identified critical resources and bottlenecks based on their availability."
"We've gained a real understanding of the team's unity, everyone's commitment to achieving the goal, and our capabilities as a team."
"We were able to see the big picture and gain unexpected insights."
"We finally have a resource classification!"
"We've identified critical resources and bottlenecks based on their availability."
"We've gained a real understanding of the team's unity, everyone's commitment to achieving the goal, and our capabilities as a team."
What did working with this approach give to your project?
"Positions and behavior when working with external entities and resources have been adjusted. Functions requiring priority attention have been identified."
"The most critical resources, without which the assigned tasks are unlikely to be completed, have been identified."
"Points for more detailed discussion with team members have been identified."
"The most critical resources, without which the assigned tasks are unlikely to be completed, have been identified."
"Points for more detailed discussion with team members have been identified."
