BECKY NICKOL

Teams are permeating our organizations, as managers are enthusiastically instructing work forces to "Be a Team!"

Teams are tricky animals. As simple as the concept appears, it becomes intricate and complex in implementation and maintenance. When entering the combat zone of teams, one must be aware of 10 potential land mines—the top 10 reasons teams become dysfunctional.

1. Lack of education about teams. Teams are not only a different way of doing business but they represent an entirely different way of thinking about doing business. For teams to succeed, the executive management team must embrace this change in philosophy.

2. Lack of commitment by upper management. Because teams require a change in the way business is conducted, the restructuring process is painful. Resistance is pervasive. Sabotage runs rampant, and employee morale hits bottom. At times, all are convinced they will perish. Such upheaval requires committed leadership. Employees must know that there is no turning back. When the message comes that "teams are here to stay," people have a decision to make: learn how to be a good team player or resign. Destructive team behaviors can't be allowed.

3. Lack of time. The design, implementation, and maturation of teams takes time as, there is a significant learning curve. Production, morale, quality, efficiency, and timeliness often get worse before they improve. Many managers are unable to withstand these declines. Teams should not be implemented when an organization is on the brink of financial ruin. They do not work well as a quick fix.

4. Lack of money. When team design, implementation, and maintenance is correctly executed, it is costly. Management and select employees must be taken away from their jobs to design and plan the rollout. Team members and coaches require extensive training to adopt basic knowledge and skills. Down time and training time are expensive.

5. Lack of an implementation or restructuring plan. The vision, mission, values, titles, processes, systems, rewards, compensation, performance appraisals, and hiring strategies must all align with the team concept. It is incongruent to ask employees to be team players when the rewards and compensation are based upon independent production. Often barriers must be removed to facilitate open communication. Systems and processes must also change. Lines of communication, reporting structures, and work flow may need to be modified. Performance appraisal and hiring criteria need to align with team philosophies. Anything that does not align with the team concept represents a barrier to team success.

6. Lack of communication. If communication is avoided or handled insensitively or defensively, expect resistance. If the decision to move to teams is communicated "after the fact" or with a downsizing announcement, team members feel "put upon," devalued, and victimized. If benefits are not stressed, it sounds as if there will be more work, longer hours, more responsibility, and no pay increase. When managers are told that decision-making power will be given to the teams, they become demoralized and afraid for their jobs.

7. Lack of empowerment. Often, the management team doesn't relinquish decision-making power to the teams. They give the responsibility without the authority to make decisions and take actions. Managers resist servant leadership because they work years to attain a certain level of control. They often sabotage the team to maintain authority.

8. Lack of purpose. Teams are often implemented because teams are a popular concept. Departments are abolished and employees are grouped and told to "start teaming!" Team members continue to be responsible for the work they do; however, they are now required to waste time attending "team meetings." Team members don't know what is expected of them. They lack a clear, specific purpose.

9. Lack of training. Successful teaming requires a four-stage training pro-cess: 1) Explain the concept of teams, the required changes, the maturation stages, and the benefits to team members, coaches, and the organization; 2) Teach "team player" skills in interpersonal communication, decision making, problem solving, assertion, negotiation, conflict management, and change management; 3) Train in technical and administrative skills, since most teams take on duties previously performed by management; and 4) Train members to perform each other's functions to maintain high performance in the face of changes in the team and work place. All of this training costs dollars and down time.

10. The buck stops in the ivory tower. The problems teams experience are like gossamer threads that often lead to upper management. Teams can be set up to succeed or fail, and often teams are doomed before the first team member is chosen—but teams rarely fail; leadership usually fails teams. I know successful teams can improve communication, productivity, quality, efficiency, timeliness, customer service, employee morale, and innovation. At the same time, they reduce operating costs, turnover, absenteeism, and theft.

Most often, teams succeed or become dysfunctional because of leadership.

Becky Nickol is the CEO of TeamUTurns, specializing in interventions for off-track teams, redirecting them towards high performance; 800-844-4048; www.teamuturns.com.