People have been working in teams since before the word 'team' was invented, but modern industrial organizations have adopted the team structure in just the past generation. Because the transition from functional structures is still underway, our understanding of teams is incomplete, and in some ways, incorrect.
To advance our knowledge, and to become more comfortable with this relatively new way of organizing work, we adopt and propagate beliefs that seem plausible. They might apply often, but they aren't necessarily universal. I call them myths because their universal truth certainly is questionable, even though they do sometimes yield desirable results.
One popular example is the idea of the "Mythical Man-Month" conceived and popularized by Fred Brooks. This myth holds that we can speed up all work by applying more people to the task. The reverse usually occurs: applying more people usually slows the work.
Brooks's myth is just one of many teamwork myths. Here is the first in a series about teamwork myths, exploring two myths about team formation.
- There is an optimal size for all teams
- Various investigations have reported optimal sizes for teams, ranging from five to fifteen and more. In team-oriented organizations, wide variation in team size can create management problems, which lead some to search for an optimal team size.
- Problems arise, for example, in task reporting, management development, performance management, and compensation equity for team leads. For instance, meeting reporting requirements can be easy for a large team, but an undue burden for a small team.
- An optimal team size range probably does exist, but it depends on the culture of the organization in which the team is embedded; the degree of dispersion in geography, language, or profession; the need for specialized knowledge; the complexity of the task; the prevalence of split assignments; and the skill of the team's leadership. Most important is how well the teammates know each other.
- When sizing a new team, be guided not by purportedly universal rules of thumb, but by the nature of the task, the character of the organization and the particular people who lead and belong to the team.
- Team building is worthwhile only at the beginning
- We use team building to achieve team cohesion and effective collaboration. Some believe that after the first application, further investment in team cohesion provides only minimal returns.
- Although we do use team building in the beginning of the team's life, we must attend toWe must attend to team
not just at the outset team cohesion continuously. The need increases with the frequency of changes in team composition; with increases in geographic dispersion; and with increases in stress. Stresses can result from new challenges, or from changes in resources, requirements, or constraints imposed from external sources.
Following erroneous guidelines is always problematic. It can be especially damaging during team formation, because damage occurs so early and repair can be so, so costly. Next in this series Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering is a classic of the literature of software engineering, but it has a place on the bookshelf of any project manager or project sponsor. Order from Amazon.com
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenYQqVsDrTsHBniYUxner@ChachFEjNwjTLcWJbOEzoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- The Shape of the Table
- Not only was the meeting running over, but it now seemed that the entire far end of the table was having
its own meeting. Why are some meetings like this?
- Virtual Communications: III
- Participating in or managing a virtual team presents special communications challenges. Here's Part
III of some guidelines for communicating with members of virtual teams.
- Most of us follow paths through our careers, or through life. We get nervous when we're off the path.
We feel better when we're doing what everyone else is doing. But is that sensible?
- Annoyance to Asset
- Unsolicited contributions to the work of one element of a large organization, by people from another,
are often annoying to the recipients. Sometimes the contributors then feel rebuffed, insulted, or frustrated.
Toxic conflict can follow. We probably can't halt the flow of contributions, but we can convert it from
a liability to a valuable asset.
- How to Ruin Meetings
- Much has been written about how to conduct meetings effectively. Here are some reliable techniques for
doing something else altogether.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 29: Newtonian Blind Alleys: II
- Some of our decisions don't turn out well. The nature of our errors does vary, but a common class of errors is due to applying concepts from physics originated by Isaac Newton. One of these is the concept of spectrum. Available here and by RSS on May 29.
- And on June 5: I Could Be Wrong About That
- Before we make joint decisions at work, we usually debate the options. We come together to share views, and then a debate ensues. Some of these debates turn out well, but too many do not. Allowing for the fact that "I could be wrong" improves outcomes. Available here and by RSS on June 5.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenpdRXaEgkFGDTaAtSner@ChaccaDgxWhkRQLHyZQKoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.