A Coaching Power Tool created by Arvind Agrawal
(Team Coach, INDIA)
Distinct from individual and group coaching, focus of team coaching is the entire working team. Team coaching is aimed toward helping the team achieve better cohesion and commitment to the team goals, improve quality of interaction, improve ability to surface differences and deal with them, (Hackman & Wageman, 2005). Since the client is the entire team and not individuals, there is need to develop a new coaching tool for use in team coaching situation. This may be particularly useful for the five step team coaching model ACCED which has been developed by this author toward fulfillment of ICA graduation requirement.
The five step Team Coaching model ACCED is briefly described below –
- A Aims and objectives of the team
- C Current work culture in the team
- C Culture desired in the team
- E Explore enablers for transiting into ‘ desired culture ‘
- D Develop action plan for institutionalizing the ‘new way of working’in the team
This paper gives a new tool for identifying current work culture in the team. Tool for identifying current work culture in the team. To identify the current culture in the team one needs to reflect upon the following three aspects of the team functioning.
1.1 Clarity of team goal
1.2 Quality of interaction
1.3 Engagement of members of the team
1.1 Clarity of Team goal
Teams are established to meet certain objectives. Team will be able to accomplish these objectives only if all members are clear and coherent about these objectives. Simple as this may sound, quite often team members coming from various parts of the organization may be carrying different understanding about the team objectives. Only when team provides for time to discuss and test understanding about these objectives, every member will have same understanding. Annexure 1 attached to this paper gives 2 items scale to test level of this understanding and coherence.
1.2. Quality of interaction
This refers to how free flowing is the communication within the team. In the team where there is high quality of interaction, members will feel free to bring their ideas without apprehension of being ridiculed. They will not feel need to be guarded. Lots of diverse ideas will be available to the team. There will be positive energy in the team. This also depends upon the mutual affection among the team members (Zaccaro, Rittman & Marks, 2001). Such a team is cohesive and members enjoy working together. Such a team will reach consensus much more easily. Further, the teams witness conflicts of ideas as well as relationships. Both are natural. In the team that has open culture, there will be healthy discussions on varying ideas. On the other hand, conflicts based on relationships are personality conflicts and these are likely to be dysfunctional to the team functioning (Zaccaro et al, 2001). Annexure 1 gives 7 items scale to establish current status of quality of interaction in the team. This has been arrived by simplifying the scale developed by Li and Hambrick (2005), Jehn (1994) and Bollen and Hoyle (1990).
1.3 Engagement of all members of the team
Team is constituted with an assumption that all members will contribute toward the achievement of objectives. In reality it is often seen that some members tend to be more active than others. There are team members who do not voice their opinions while there are some others who tend to dominate the entire discussion. In the team which is functioning with high level of effectiveness, one will expect to find all team members equally active in various discussions. To measure this, there is 2 items scale shown in Annexure 1 .
Questionnaire given in Annexure 1 can be used by the team coach to record own observations as well. It can also be given to members for them to respond and give their views on functioning of the team. This questionnaire can be used at any stage in the life of the team.
It will provide ready health check for the team at that stage in its life.
References
Bollen, K. A., & Hoyle R. H. (1990). Perceived Cohesion: A conceptual empirical examination; Social Forces, Vol. 69, No.2, 479-504.
Hackman, J.R. & Wageman, R. (2005). Theory of Team Coaching. Academy of Management Review, vol. 30, No2, 269-287.
Jehn, K.A. (1994). Enhancing effectiveness: An investigation of advantages disadvantages of value based intra-group conflict; International Journal of Conflict Management, 5; 222-238.
Li, J. & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Factional groups: A new vantage on demographic faultiness, conflict, and disintegration in work teams; Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48, No. 5, 794-813
Zaccaro, S. J., Rittman, L.A & Marks, M. A. (2001). Team Leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 12, 451 – 483.
Annexure 1
Tool for identifying current work culture in the team.
1.1. Clarity of goals:
