Have you noticed how work is seemingly loaded unevenly in teams? Even for a team where every member is expected to perform the same task, task loading varies. Consider two soccer teams playing against each other. In the winning team, the goal keeper and the defence may seem inadequately loaded, while all the players of the losing team might seem to be adequately loaded.
In an urge for greater efficiency, can we therefore reduce the number of players in the winning team? Let’s for a moment imagine this is done. The strikers of the losing team will know that they only need to shoot into the side of the winning half, and then their chances of making a quick dash into the goal is high. The strikers of the winning team will be conscious of this vulnerability, which will affect how they play. So that seemingly less occupied defence part of the winning team is actually playing a role by their presence!
Challenge of Judging Team Strength Needed
The decisions of team size and team structure are intertwined. There are consequences to structuring the work of a team in different ways. Consider the dilemma of a manager in charge of Mechanical Maintenance of three similar production units. The team can be structured so as to have a team leader for each unit. That way each of the three Production Heads has the comfort of working with one head of Mechanical Maintenance. However, each team member will need to know about all the types of equipment in the unit. If, instead, the team members specialise in subsets of the types of equipment found in each of the three units, then the three supervisors could be assigned to look after specific sets of equipment across the three units. The team sizes could be made slightly smaller. However, there will be greater need to coordinate to address issues. If the overall team experiences high churn at the junior levels, this option might make sense, as there is insufficient time to develop team members who can be entrusted with all the types of equipment of each unit. To minimise skill dependencies, there will then be the need for rotational programs across different types of equipment.
We do believe that there is some truth in the observation of the venerable C Northcote Parkinson, that work expands to occupy the time available for its completion.
It is typical to come across managers who claim that they maintain a lean team. And we do believe that there is some truth in the observation of the venerable C Northcote Parkinson, that work expands to occupy the time available for its completion. So, it is not simple to judge as outsiders whether a team is adequately loaded. We can get some insight by exploring how the team strength or composition was changed the last time.
Given the largely untapped potential today of digitalisation, it might make sense for larger organisations to create a work-study team as in the old industrial era. This, much-despised team, could work with Department Heads to examine continuously, processes and loading, and approve team additions after looking at process streamlining and automation opportunities.
Getting team sizing and structuring right is an important capability, and as we just saw, it is difficult to judge this capability.
References :
FUNKE G, KNOTT B, SALAS E, PAVLAS D, STRANG A. ( 2011 ) Conceptualization And Measurement Of Team Workload: A Critical Need, Human Factors ( Feb, 2012 )
PURANAM P. Dividing Team Tasks: Is There A Better Way, INSEAD ( May, 2015)
