9 hours 3 minutes
Hi, guys. Welcome to lean Six Sigma within the organization team member selection on Katherine MacGyver. And today we're gonna understand the considerations in selecting team members and be able to identify a balanced team. So if you remember in our last module, we talked about the different roles that members play within that
this module is going to be focused on how do we build that team and adding another layer of consideration
for building our ideal team?
All right, so what is a balanced team so noticed? This is a little bit different than what is ah,
high performing team. And what are the rules that we need? So a balanced team is a team that has representation from appropriate people. You remember We talked ad nauseum about our stakeholder analysis. This is one of the areas that we use it and perspectives. So this is going to be a new layer to what we already know about
So when we're talking about perspectives,
I need to put the caviar in there that there are a lot of different ways to identify personalities and perspectives and thought patterns and work styles for the sake of the next little chunk of discussion. We're going to be using the quality council of Indiana's team personalities.
And the reason why is the quality Council of Indiana is considered the
foremost for the body of knowledge for Lena and Six Sigma. So if you were to get the quality council of Indiana's lean six Sigma Black Belt book, it would be considered the most comprehensive and leading information. I wouldn't recommend it. It's a really dry reed,
So using that definition, we need to have perspectives which will talk a little bit more about in a second. And we also need to have diversity and orientation. So when we talk about orientation, we're talking about people's personalities. So you have
three fundamental types of people. According to the Quality Council of Indiana, you have action oriented people, these air people who focus on completing tasks. These are the people that you are going to be delegating your delivery bols to These are the people who you want to do your data collections. These are the people who you want to do your research. These are people who are highly motivated
by getting stuff done.
You then have your people oriented people these air, the your collaborators thes air, the people who are focused on coordination and communication. If you had a people oriented person, this would be the person that I would delegate our communication plan, Thio and the person that I would ask to go out and generate some enthusiasm and excitement around the company
regarding this project because they're really motivated
by relationships and people interaction.
Then you have your problem solving people. These air your knowledge owners so they're focuses on subject matter expertise where you really need to leverage them in your project teams is root cause analysis because these are the people who know everything there is to know and in ideation and improvement these air,
these are your thought partners.
You need to have representation from all three personality types to have a successful balanced team. You also a couple of other facets. As far as a well balanced team.
These are more details for you. His team construction.
The 1st 1 is your ideal team sizes 7 to 10 members. So I, the smallest project team I've ever lead, was six members on dhe. We did bump into scenarios where we didn't have the right people at the table. So we didn't fully rely on our stakeholder analysis,
which meant that we had to go back and do some rework and do some additional investigation because we didn't hear all of the different perspectives
Larger than 10 members is very difficult to manage. So the largest project team I run had 17 members. When we get to be that large, it's very difficult to complete tools to complete delivery. Bols, get consensus in advance your project forward
so the sweet spot really is 7 to 10 members.
If you need more than 10 members,
start thinking about using your sneezes internal consultants. So bring them up to speed on what's happening on the project. Let them know that you're going to need them as a resource, but they don't necessarily need to be part of that core team.
You will rely on them as you need them. It is a much better way to manage, rather than having even more people around the table, unless for some reason they need to be there. So they have a very deep level of insight or they are a stakeholder.
When you're choosing your team, members remember we're talking about diversity and perspectives in addition to those rules that need to be filled, make sure to include a wide variety of tenure and experience.
So one of the traps that project teams tend to fall into is one we draw from the same people over and over again because they're really great project team members or they're really great knowledge or something, and then the other one is is We tend to choose the people who we think are the most experienced
or the most insightful. So
with that, if you use the same four people who have worked for the company for the last 20 years, over and over again, you're going to get the same types of ideas. Balance your team out by adding somebody who is new to the department or new to the organization, or has less organised or has less industry experience
so that you can get different ideas in different perspectives.
The strength is in that bouncing around in those brainstorming because sometimes established employees can be myopic and only see things through their viewpoint. So you're going to want new people and very tenured people.
The last roll that you're going to want isn't Naser. You're gonna want somebody who doesn't want to be either and either because they don't believe that the process needs to be improved. They don't believe in process improvement methodology. They don't think that there's going to be any benefit for this. Whatever their chip on the shoulder is, that's fine.
You need them to be there because they're not supportive.
The reason why is because this nay Sayer will strengthen the results of your project team. They will point out gaps or holes in your logic or assumptions. This we're going to be the people who tell you it's not gonna work. And then when they say that you have to ask why why isn't it gonna work? And that's where you're gonna tease out
those those things that weren't necessarily fully considered
thes person will also interact or counter act group think so. Groupthink is a very dangerous thing from a team perspective because what it is is one person has a great idea and everybody else
nods along. So what's dangerous about this is remember, we want to have multiple perspectives when we start thinking back to our team's success factors, we want everybody to be weighing and in providing their knowledge and insight. So if we have a bunch of bobbleheads, we're not getting that.
And then the other thing is, is it's a really easy way to cop out of the results. So you finish the project and it didn't do as well as Maybe that team member thought that it was going to,
and then their answer is, Well, I wasn't ever fully on board with it anyway. I was just going along with it cause the group was These are the reasons that you don't want grip. Think as a good facilitator. Nip that in the bud if you are participating in it as a project participant,
try to be mindful and acknowledged that maybe you don't necessarily need to go with the flow.
All right, so when we're talking about team member selection, take your time
adding and removing and switching up team members in mid project causes. Chu hiccups one. It resets your team development cycle, which is our next module, and to a potentially redirects your mo mentum of your team. So if you've had one person who's been on board and you've come up with an action plan and you're moving towards
a specific solution. You add somebody else in.
They don't see it that way. Now you may go back to the drawing board. You may lose the momentum that your project had. You may need to request more. Resource is so more time, more team members. You may need to redo work that you've done previously. It's not very healthy. We do go back to the drawing board when we need Thio, but
not necessarily because we're changing up team members
rather as results of observations from our pilots.
Keep this in mind. Go slow to go fast investor time and selecting your team's way it out. Debate it. Go back and forth because once you get a good team together, you're going to want to get that momentum and keep your project going.
All right. So in summary, your balance team is going to have diversity. We have experience in orientation. Remember, these were going to be people, um, who are action oriented people oriented or, ah, subject matter expert oriented. Um, you're going to want this person, this team to be more or less established,
so you're not gonna wanna have a lot of trade outs.
So in that case, make sure to take your time and be confident that you have the right people at the table.