MENTORING A GLOBAL TEAM

7/30/2019 MENTORING A GLOBAL TEAM

1/67

MENTORING A GLOBAL TEAM

Prepared for

Professor Saumyendu Ghosh

International Project Management

DNSC 6290

The George Washington University

Prepared by

Ceyda Alaca Santanu Bhattacharya

Mark Vincent, Ph.D.

July 3, 2012

Executive Summary

This paper builds on the model pioneered by Tuckman (1965) that sets the foundation for manyinvestigations of groups and teams. Tuckmans four phases of team development - forming,storming, norming, and performing are introduced and examined in the additionally complex


2/67

context of international projects. Best practices analyzed from relevant literature are then usedto develop and suggest recommendations and solutions for mentoring a team for aninternational project.

1. Introduction

1.1 The Global economy - what has changed?

It is easy to understand how the global economy has changed by just looking around us. At thesame time we might be wearing shoes from Italy, a dress designed in Turkey, drinking Frenchwine, searching for a German car with a Japanese laptop and talking on the phone that is madein China and put together in the US. One of the reasons driving globalization is that all partiesinvolved gain from the process. Another reason is that nations are increasingly interdependent.No nation can be truly self-sufficient without great expense or sacrifice. The United States, forexample, is one of the most self-sufficient countries in the world, yet it depends on imports forvirtually all of its bauxite, diamonds, coffee, nickel, rubber, bananas, gold, platinum, and more.

The global economy emerged in the post-World War II period, from 1944 to the mid-1970s, butit has undergone a fundamental transformation with the technological developments sincethen. The pace of technological change and innovation has brought the world closer and closer.The world has become smaller and has affected trade, finance, production andcommunications. Clearly international projects and international project teams will become astandard mechanism.

1.2 The Value of Coaching and Mentoring Teams for Global Projects

As globalization brought people together and required them to work together across timezones and cultures, coaching teams became a challenge and a must. Achieving such goalsbecomes even more challenging when team members do not share the same culture, and havedifferent values, or expectations. Low cohesiveness and poor talent management may lead todemotivation, conflicts, frustration, and even power struggles that can seriously undermine theteams effectiveness. One of the values of mentoring a team is the increased team spirit andcohesiveness, by learning the dynamics of team development, and how to access and managethe resources and the individual talents available within their team. Also the communicationamong the team members enhances by learning to listen actively and try to understand everyparties perspectives with respect. It also teaches members not to re -act issues withuncomfortable statements and be open to explore new solutions. It also helps with buildingtrust and increase cooperation. At the end the team performance increases.


3/67

In 1965 Tuckman (1965) pioneered a model for group development that sets the foundation formany investigations. His landmark work defines the four key phases of group development as:

forming storming norming, and performing

The remainder of this paper will introduce these phases with a focus on additional challengesencountered by teams in a international project management context such as our project. Fromthese additional challenges a set of recommendations for improvements for mentoringinternational teams will be proposed.

1.3 Assumptions

To frame this discussion we assume that our company is based in the U.S. and we are in theInformation Technology (IT) industry. The team members are located in the the U.S.(Washington D.C.) , China (Beijing) , and Luxembourg.

2.0 Descriptions and International Challenges of the Phases

2.1 Forming

Description

The first phase of team development identified by Tuckman (1965) is forming, and ischaracterized by initial orientation, testing, and exploring relationships with leaders, othergroup members, and preexisting standards.

International Issues

Complexities that may arise in an international project setting stem could arise from failure toconduct a clear project launch, lack of a formal project team with a Terms of Reference (TOR),and vague or conflicting chain of command structures.

2.2 Storming

Description


4/67

The second phase of team development is storming, which is often the most emotional phaseand can be characterized by conflict, polarization, resistance to group influence and taskrequirements Tuckman (1965). During this phase team members often feel overwhelmed bythe tasks ahead but also stressed or impatient with the lack of early progress. Distrust is often

typical and is evidenced by lack of team cohesion.


In an international project team setting, this already difficult phase is even more of a problem.For example, (Daft, Kendrick, and Vershinina, 2008), noted the significant cultural differencesthat could clearly complicate the dynamics of the storming phase. These include aspects of Hofstedes Value Dimensions or the expanded Global Leadership and Organizational BehaviorEffectiveness (GLOBE). Additional international barriers in this phase include differences inhumanistic attitude and ethocentrism.

Professor Geert Hofstede conducted one of the most comprehensive studies of how values inthe workplace are influenced by culture. (Hofstede, 2012) Table 1 below shows the culturaldifferences among United States, Luxembourg and China. By looking at the scores we clearlysee the U.S. is the most individualistic country and scored relatively low on the power distanceand uncertainty. Almost opposite of the U.S., the Chinese are collectivist, hierarchy is importantand do not like to take risk much. Luxembourgers are somewhat individualistic but not as muchas the U.S. and they are Masculine at work where the best will win, but Feminine in socialaffairs, like caring for others and great sense of community.

Table 1. Selected Hofstede Dimensions for United States, Luxembourg and China

Hof sted

eDimen

UnitedSt

ates

Luxembo

urg

China


5/67

sions

PDI:PowerDistance

40

40

80

IN

V:Individ

ualism

91

60

20


6/67

MAS:

Masculinity

/Femininit

y

62

50

66

UAI:Uncertainty

46

70

30


7/67

Avoi

dance

LTO:Longterm orientation

29

Notavailableatthistime

118

2.3 Norming

Description


8/67

In the third phase of Tuckmans (1965) model, a true sense and identity of team cohesionbegins. During the norming phase, team members typically begin to agree upon the teamobjectives and goals. In addition, the previous competitive, territorial, or even hostile behaviorof the storming phase is reduced.


However, potential advancements of this phase are met with other barriers in internationalprojects. For example, differing linguistic standards can reduce team cohesion andcommunication.

2.4 Performing

Description

In the performing phase of Tuckmans model, the teams sense of identity continues toincrease and the roles, responsibilities, strengths, and weakness of each member is realized.The team ground rules and procedures become fully established and accepted.The focus of thegroup becomes aligned with the project goals and tasks. The roles of the team become flexibleand functional (Tuckman, 1965).


Even established rules and procedures will have challenges in an international projectmanagement setting. For example, the project setting we have identified spans significant timezone differences from Washington D.C. (Luxembourg, +6 hours; China, +12 hours with DST or+13 hours non DST)

3.0 Solutions and Recommendations

From an understanding of the team development phases and the additional complexities posedin an international project management environment, best practices for mentoringinternational teams can be developed. In order to achieve optimal performance andcommunication standards across teams located in different geographic regions it is importantto understand cognitive styles, value systems, and negotiation strategies in different cultures(Morrison and Conaway, 2006). Management must recognize the importance of mutual trust


9/67

building between various contributors in the global team. Several key recommended bestpractices include:

1) A recommended best practice would be to bring the whole team together at the start, end,and other pivotal points during various projects (if budget permits). Use these periods of working in the same place to not only build shared understanding of the problem domain butalso working relationships within the team. Expect to have people travel a couple of weeksevery other month in order to maintain the teams cohesion and become a performing unitfaster.

2) This distributed team in the long run must be self-managed. So, when these spatiallydistributed pieces of specialist work cant be completely black -boxed and they must beintegrated. One approach involves building formal channels for coordination. These includeassigning integration roles (such as that of a Global Program Manager, GPM) or by locatingsome employees physically close to others, and opening direct channels of communication tohelp bridge distances(a.k.a. cross boundary spanning).

3) Incorporating uniform process and quality standards across global teams is critical to thesuccess of distributed teams. This ensures that that people speak the same language (andthat doesnt mean English) to augment the efficacy of the communication channels. There hasto be some overarching standard that guide every phase of activities. At GE, design engineersfrom R&D centers around the world collaborate effectively because, as a senior GE Bangaloremanager puts it, We all speak the language of Six Sigma. (Kumar and Puranam, 2011).

4) A time zone analysis between proposed locations with this paper (Appendix 1) demonstratesthat participants in global team environment must be open to and have appetite for non-standard working hours for real time communication that may be necessary for the project. So,teams in global environment must also embrace various newer communication mechanismsand new generation of tools for their day to day work such as instant messaging, onlinecollaboration tools in addition to regular channels such as telephone and email.

With the understanding of four linear stages (forming, storming, norming, and performing) that

this group will go through in its unitary sequence leading to a high performing unit, mentoringwill provide awareness of the above best practices in various phases required to understand theteam development progression and processes for the team to determine appropriate actions -depending on the theme and the needs of the team have at that stage (Storch and Soholm,2005).


10/67

Brief descriptions for the various stages of development and recommended leadershipguidance and mentoring in those stages are identified in Table 2.

Table 2. Recommended Mentoring Practices for the International Project Teams

Phase

ExpectedP

haseChara

cteristics

Mentoringa

ndGuidanc

etotheInt

ernatio


11/67

nalP

ro jectTea

m

Forming

Theteam is

justf ormedatth

Introductionof participants


12/67

issta

ge.Thef oll

owingques

tionsmustb

eanswe

andt

heclarificati

onof basict

erms,ob

jec

tives,vis


13/67

red:

Whoarethe

participant

s?

Whatare

theygo

iona

ndvalues.R

ecommenda

tionsaref o

rthete


14/67

ingt

odo?

How s

halltheydo

it?

am (

oratleast

thelocatio

nleads)to

haveat


15/67

eam

kick-off and

aproductiv

eice-break

ingses


16/67

sionp

ref erably

underagoo

df acilitato

r whoh


17/67

aspr

eviousexp

erienceof b

uildingint

ernatio


18/67

nalt

eam.

Goals

andTarget

sduringFor

mingst


19/67

age:

Organizeat

eam kick-o

ff andaprod

uctiveic


20/67

e-br

eakingses

sion,

Estab

lishshared

team g


21/67

oals,

buildteam

ob

jectives

tatementa

ndiden


22/67

tif yk

eyperf orm

anceindica

tors(KPI),

Establi


23/67

shcle

arescalati

onpathtoa

voidbusine

ssdisru


24/67

ption

sduringearl

ystage.

Storming

Coordinating,TimeZ

Conflictresolution,d


25/67


26/67

sreg

ardingest

ablishingc

ommonunde

rstand

ccom

monunders

tandingso

f roles,rou

tineset


27/67

ing,

roles

andp

rocedures.

c.

GoalsandTa

rgetsduringStormingstage:

D


28/67

efine

rolesandr

esponsibilit

ies

leade

rshipa


29/67

mbig

uitiesmust

bef ullyres

olvedatth

isstage


30/67

,Con

ductaCoac

hdrivenMey

er

sBriggss

essiona


31/67

ndun

derstandp

ersonalitie

sof team m

embers.


32/67

Iden

tif y/define

andadoptm

ethodolog

y,

Esta


33/67

blish

operatingr

hythm,

Con

ductdryru

n

sele


34/67

ctan

oncriticalt

askandone

f ullshort-c

ycleof d


35/67

elive

rywiththen

ew team

Im

partcross

-cultur


36/67

altr

ainingtot

heteam at

eachlocati

on,

Use


37/67

appr

opriatemed

iarichness

f orcommun

ication,


38/67

vide

oconf eren

cingf ortea

m meetings

should


39/67

been

couraged;

puttingaf a

cetoaname

makesg


40/67

reat

dif f erence

.

Norming

Theteam establishesacomm

Encouragedevelopmentof t


41/67

onun

derstandi

ng,rolesa

ndprocedu

resthr

hete

am specific

commonund

erstandin

gs,role


42/67

ough

self assess

mentandag

reements.T

hecomm

s,wor

king,etc.

GoalsandT

argetsduri

ngNorm


43/67

unity

mustbeest

ablishedan

dtheindiv

idualw

ings

tage:

Runr

etrospecti

vesatthee

ndof fir


44/67

illac

commodate

themselve

s.

stsh

ortoperati

ngcycle,

Co

nductteam

r

etro


45/67

spec

tive

under

adesignate

dcoach,

Mo

nitorda


46/67

y-to

-daycross

-boundary

hand-off pr

ocesscl


47/67

osel

y,

Makenec

essarypro

cessad

jus

tments


48/67

toin

corporate

f eedbackf

rom there

trospe


49/67

ctive

session,

Ag

reeonperf

ormancest

andard


50/67

sf or

thestage,

Makeneces

saryperso

nnelch


51/67

ange

sbasedonfi

tmentandn

ecessity,

T

akethe


52/67

first

largeassig

nment,

Esta

blishKPIda

shboar


53/67

d,Ba

selineKPIs,

Acknowled

geteams

su

ccess-


54/67

small

orbig.

Perf orming

TheTeam canprimarilyconcentra

Encourageworkperf ormancethr


55/67

teon

gettingthe

jobdonein

steadof pr

ocedur

ough

af ocusone

xcellence,

potentials,

new ta


56/67

es,co

operationa

ndorganizi

ng.Thecoo

peratio

rget

s,etc.

GoalsandTargetsduringNorming


57/67

nwor

ksandther

earelesst

alkaboutp

rocess

stag

e:

Deploy

steady-st

atecross-

bounda


58/67

ands

elf assessm

ent.

rysp

anners,

Refi

nerichness

of mediaf o

rdayto


59/67

dayt

eam inter

action,ena

bletechno

logysu


60/67

chas

instantme

ssagingat

thisstagei

nadditi


61/67

onto

asynchron

ouscommun

icationmeth

ods,

Ope


62/67

ratio

nalizeself -

managed

R

un-Retros

pect-Ad


63/67

just

cycles,

Tea

m hasexec

utedfirstl

argeas


64/67

signm

ent,

Team is

abletoself

-monitorth

eTeam


65/67

KPI,

R

e-baseline

steadysta

teperf orm

anceth


66/67

resh

olds.

4.0 Conclusion

Motivated, cohesive, self -managed team = High performance

This is derived from the Principle of synergy which says that the whole is greater than the sumof its parts. A well trained Formula One team - capable of changing tires and filling a gas tank inseconds - achieves more than its members if they were working individually. It is particularlyimportant due to the increasing complexity of running business that requires variety of skillsthat individuals in U.S. do not possess by themselves in abundance. To achieve success in thehighly crowded marketplace, teams need to be well organized, motivated, cohesive, self-managed and most importantly globally distributed.

Distributed teams in this case is a business necessity; the risk/reward tradeoff is clearlyunderstood by companys management. Companys management is supportive and committedto this move to form a global team. In general, teams working in the physical location take along time to form, storm, norm before beginning to perform; when distributed in this case, thiswill take even longer.

Distributed teaming is hard and requires more resolve to build and stay on track in the long run.Qualified Global Project Managers will be key enabler in the process and must make sure thatthe team has well trained and has a clear mandate to coach the team along the way.Establishing a baseline as outlined in this paper for how the teams should function duringvarious group development stages will help, however the team should be encouraged to treat it just a as guidance and adapt it to suit their needs.

5.0 References


67/67

Daft, R, Kendrick, M., and Vershinina, N. 2008. Management, International Edition. CengageLearning EMEA

Hofstede, G. 2012. National Culture Dimensions . http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html web site accessed July 2, 2012

Kumar, Nirmalya, and Puranam, Phanish, 2011. Have You Restructured for Global Success?Harvard Business Review.

Morrison, K. and Conaway, W., 2006, Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands. Adams Media Company

Tuckman, B., 1965. Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 32 (6): 384-99

Storch, and Sholm, 2005. Practical team based organization. ISBN: 87-7706-460-7
http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.htmlhttp://geert-hofstede.com/countries.htmlhttp://geert-hofstede.com/countries.htmlhttp://geert-hofstede.com/countries.htmlhttp://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html

MENTORING A GLOBAL TEAM

Documents

Transcript of MENTORING A GLOBAL TEAM