ESTIMATED READING TIME – 2:10
Learning goals for this activity
– Know why it is important to compare team capabilities with the work to be done
– List the steps to compare a team’s capabilities with the work to be done
Why it’s important to compare the team’s capabilities to the work it sets out to do
No team operates in a vacuum—the team’s efforts are always expended within the context of the business. The work to be done thus represents an important lens through which to view and interpret the behavior and execution of each team member, and the team as a whole. Doing so can highlight fits and gaps that lead to greater awareness and improved intervention in pursuit of a successful team outcome.
When comparing the team’s capabilities to the work to be done, you must:
- Identify natural fits to the team’s most popular type of priorities.
- Identify balancers who fit less popular priorities.
- Identify gaps that pose a risk to team performance.
Let’s take a look at these steps in greater detail.
1. Identify natural fits to the team’s most popular type of priorities
With the team’s strategic intent now properly visible through a talent lens from the preceding activity, you should now identify the most predominant type of strategic priorities for the given team. Are the priorities mostly related to innovation, or to process creation and improvement? Are they focused on teamwork and employee-facing activities, or do they involve producing results in a highly disciplined manner?
Once you’ve identified the most popular type of priorities, you should identify which team members are naturally suited to do this type of work. Highly dominant and extroverted people, for example, tend to be a natural fit for objectives requiring innovation and dealing with uncertainty. By highlighting fits, you will amplify the voices of those most naturally suited to the team’s primary objectives.
2. Identify balancers who fit less popular priorities
While most teams have a predominant type of priorities—such as teamwork or process objectives—it’s also common for a team to pursue multiple types of objectives at the same time. In our last example, if most of the team’s objectives were of an innovation type, that same team may have stabilizing objectives around improving predictability, efficiency, or quality.
When this is the case, you should make a special effort to highlight the role of any balancers, as described earlier, who are a natural fit for this set of less popular priorities. Highlight the importance of their role on the team. Don’t let their efforts and natural style be drowned out by the demands of the team’s competing priorities, or by the behavioral styles of those naturally suited to those other priorities.
3. Identify gaps that pose a risk to team performance
While most teams have a predominant type of priorities—such as teamwork or process objectives—it’s also common for a team to pursue multiple types of objectives at the same time. In our last example, if most of the team’s objectives were of an innovation type, that same team may have stabilizing objectives around improving predictability, efficiency, or quality.
When this is the case, you should make a special effort to highlight the role of any balancers, as described earlier, who are a natural fit for this set of less popular priorities. Highlight the importance of their role on the team. Don’t let their efforts and natural style be drowned out by the demands of the team’s competing priorities, or by the behavioral styles of those naturally suited to those other priorities.