IT's critical success factors - the series finale
IT's critical success factors end as they began - with relationships. This time it's the relationships within each team, the relationship between teams, and the importance of everyone inside IT owning the relationship with everyone outside IT.
This week's KJRSpeak: All business is personal.
By way of "Tony Barrett's dad," or so Tony tells us.
And, of course, it is.
(I'm told, the Godfather also said this, not that there's any connection).
Okay, I admit it. I was a big fan of Eureka, not least because the show's heroes (and villains, and, for that matter, extras) were smart people. Very smart people.
And while I'd have enjoyed another season or two, the show's creators were wise enough to know it had run its course. And, having run its course, they showed they knew how they were going to finish the show when they filmed the first episode. (Anything more would be a plot spoiler. Watch it on Netflix and you'll understand.)
Speaking of series finales, this marks the end of KJR's series on IT critical success factors. And like any good series finale, it ends as it began -- in this case, with relationships.
The series (about IT CSFs, not Eureka) began with how the relationship between IT and the rest of the business is defined and how it's managed.
It ends with team dynamics, inter-team dynamics, and whether every
employee in IT feels a sense of ownership when it comes to the
High on the list of what the best leaders take pride in is their ability to build strong teams.
It turns out that managing team dynamics is a lot like Michelangelo's technique for crafting his most famous statue ... his legendary explanation was that he merely chipped away everything that didn't look like David.
Sometimes, the best a leader can do is chip away everything that doesn't look like a strong team -- in particular, two team members who can't seem to get along with each other.
It's easy when one or both are marginal performers. The best leaders know they're better off without marginal performers anyway; this is one more justification for replacing them with others who are stronger.
But sometimes two otherwise good employees, often for reasons they can't even articulate, just rub each other the wrong way. Requiring them to like each other is a non-starter. Hollywood solutions, where they (for example) get lost in the woods and discover each other's virtues are just that ... pretty fictions that rarely happen in non-fiction settings.
The best leaders can do is inform both employees that if they can't figure out how to work together effectively, one or both will find themselves working somewhere else.
See, teams aren't comprised of individuals. They're a collection of relationships, so a seven-person team consists of 21 interpersonal connections (the formula is n(n-1)/2). You might think this means that if two people can't get along that's just 1/21 of the team.
But it isn't, because it doesn't work that way: If two employees can't get along they'll both ask everyone else on the team to choose sides. And as no business process or practice can work without trust among all participants (see "Uncomfortable conversations," KJR, 9/13/2010 or Chapter 4 of the KJR Manifesto), the more side-choosing that happens, the more team effectiveness will break down.
Good team dynamics energize everyone. Bad team dynamics? They poison the organization.
In software, objects have a property called "inheritance." It means that if an object has a property and you use that object to create a new, specialized "child" object, the child inherits the properties of its parent unless and until the programmer overrides them.
Sometimes, teams don't get along. Not the members of the team, or at least, not yet -- the teams themselves. This is unsurprising. Teams define who we are, so anyone on another team starts out with the onus of being they.
And you know what they're like. Them-ness is never good.
When it comes to us-vs-them relationships, team members inherit the properties of the team.
The tendency to divide the world into us and them seems to be hard-wired. About the only thing leaders can do is to point it in more productive directions, like, for example, emphasizing that a competitor's IT department is the true them, not another development team, or even the bean-counters in Accounting.
Owning the relationship
There's one more, complementary tactic leaders can pursue to overcome inter-team distrust, and that's to establish a competing dynamic ... a cultural one in which everyone in IT owns IT's relationship with everyone else in the company.
The extent to which IT staff adopt this responsibility is the extent to which they'll consciously try to understand what's going on out there, how IT fits into the overall picture, and, by establishing rapport and trust, to turn they into we.
Along the way they'll discover, you can't get them to think of you as we until you start thinking of them as us.
Okay, we've just finished wading through eighteen critical success factors for IT. Based on your experience, out of these eighteen, which are at the absolute top of the list?
Do you know anyone or any discussion groups that should be talking about this?
Bob Lewis is a senior management consultant with Dell Global Business Consulting. Contact him at email@example.com.
Disclaimer: All opinions, statements, representations, allegations, images (if published) and anything else that appears here is the sole responsibility of the author. Dell has and had nothing to do with it, other than saying it's okay to continue publishing KJR.
Don't leave me sitting here in a vacuum! If you think I'm full of beans, let me know. Leave a Comment (just click on the Comments button at the bottom of either the homepage or any archived column) to share your thoughts with the whole KJR community.
Or, drop me a line -- the address is Letters@ISSurvivor.com.I sometimes use Comments or reader letters in my columns. The rules:
Comments are public, because they're ... well, they're right at the bottom of every column in the archives.
If you send me a letter, let me know if and how I can use it (as is, sanitized, or don't be ridiculous - you'll be found out and run out of town). Once you give me permission to use it, the permission is eternal.
Also let me know if you'd prefer to remain completely anonymous, or whether I may give you credit by name.
If you like this article, why not let a friend enjoy it, too? It's fine with me, and in fact I'd be flattered. All I ask is that you send the whole thing, including this notice. But don't be shy ... if you think they'd like it, don't you think they should see it? But only those people - you wouldn't want me to get a reputation as a spammer, would you?