Team Composition & Development

As suggested in article #3T1, teams have to consciously work at becoming teamly (an interactive, integrated social dimension) and effective in terms of performance (a task-oriented measure). Most teams are not likely effective upon formation. A theoretical model that describes this process is Tuckman’s forming > norming > storming > performing development sequence and the article describes how this occurs in the two dimensions: social and task. Ideally, a team will be assembled based on conscious design. Typically this is based on functional capabilities required to achieve the team’s intended goals, objectives and supporting tasks/activities. However, I advocate that conscious team design should also give due consideration to interpersonal social compatibility.

Initial assembly places the group in the ‘forming’ stage where members will define tasks, initiate getting to know one another, explore & test the boundaries of acceptable task & interpersonal behaviour within the group. Newness is wrestled with, including members’ desires to be members, assume roles & responsibilities, expected contributions, and explore dependencies.

In the ‘storming’ stage, members experience emotional reaction to task demands and inter-member conflict. Conflict can be hostile at times and often manifests as a reaction to group structure and loss of individuality of expression. There can be polarizing issues: in a growth-oriented entrepreneurial venture (‘GOEV’), this may derive from different views about how to strategically progress into the unknown as well as establishing ‘rules’ regarding autonomy & control over decision-making. When analyzing this, I was able to relate the challenges to my preferred philosophical perspective of Pragmatic Constructivism (article #5R2) which describes four pillars of socially-constructed reality that must be integrated for effective action. One of these is ‘values’. Since group members likely come from a variety of different paths, it is quite possible that there can be differences in their value sets. ‘Getting to know each other really well’ (article #3T1) includes expressing & discussing these difference values so they can be identified and reconciled. This does not mean they must be harmonized, but each member has to understand the others and how they think.

Cohesion should be developing by the ‘norming’ stage as members acknowledge & accept individual members’ idiosyncrasies, become more sensitive & understanding to one another, and even develop some mutual affinities. As roles are adopted & accepted and sense of ‘pulling together’ develops, the group becomes an entity and teamliness may also begin to emerge. During task activities, there is an open exchange of relevant interpretations/alternatives followed by evaluation before decision-making and action.

Having become an entity with norms, the team explores their interdependencies and starts ‘performing’ pragmatically as their focus shifts from social development & maintenance to efficient task achievement.

Team sponsors and leaders/developer should realize that time & effort will either be invested building the social structure up front or early, or it will be spent resolving conflict and/or reworking tasks. The duration of this process is team-dependent, indeterminate, and involves periodic retracements whenever there are member changes. This is one reason why I recommend ‘doing it right the first time’, meaning consciously manage design and member selection as well as the social integration processes.

Unfortunately, my research and that of others indicate that VCs generally have not demonstrated any reliably capability to develop the management teams in their investees. I am not suggesting this is their responsibility. It is most likely the responsibility of the entrepreneur-leader. But I do recommend VCs sponsor the notion of developing team effectiveness (article #3T1) and, as they do with tasks and milestones, monitor progress. This is in their best interests as the potential rewards are enhanced enterprise performance/valuation and a compressed timeline. If the VC and/or entrepreneur-leader need assistance they can always retain a coach (especially one experienced in coaching teams).