Tag: Building High Performance Teams

Both Sides of the Staffing Coin: Building a High Performance Team -and- Building a Great IT Career

    Jim D

I find it remarkable that despite the slow recovery the IT job market remains very tight. This poses significant hurdles for IT managers looking to add talent. In the post below, I cover how to build a great team and team into good seams of talent.  I think this will be a significant issue for IT managers for the next three to four years – finding and growing talent to enable them to build high performance teams.

And for IT staffers, I have mapped out seasoned advice on how to build your capabilities and experience to enable you to have a great career in IT. Improving IT staff skills and capabilities is of keen interest not to just the staff, but also to IT management so that their team is much more productive and capable. And on a final note, I would suggest that anyone who is in the IT field should consider reaching out to high schoolers and college students and encourage them to consider a career in IT. Currently, in the US, there are fewer IT graduates each year than IT jobs that open. And this gap is expected to widen in the coming years. So IT will continue to be a good field for employees, and IT leaders will need to encourage others to join in so we can meet the expected staffing needs.

Please do check out both sides of the coin, and I look forward to your perspectives. Note that I did publish variants on these posts in InformationWeek over the past few months.

Best, Jim Ditmore

Building a High Performance Team Despite 4% IT Unemployment

Despite a national unemployment rate of more than 8%,  the overall IT unemployment rate is at a much lower 4% or less. Further, the unemployment rates for IT specialties such as networking, IT security or data base are even lower — at 1% or less. This makes finding capable IT staff difficult and is compounded because IT professionals are less likely to take new opportunities (turnover rates are much less than average over the past 10 years).  Unfortunately these tough IT staffing conditions are likely to continue and perhaps be exacerbated if the recovery actually picks up pace. With such a tight IT job market, how do you build or sustain your high performance IT team?

I recommend several tactics to incorporate into your current staffing approach that should allow you to improve your current team and acquire the additional talent needed for your business to compete. Let’s focus first on acquiring talent. In a tight market you must always be present to enable you to acquire the talent when they first consider looking for a position. You must move to a ‘persistent’ recruiting mode. If your group is still only opening positions after someone leaves or after a clear funding approval is granted, you are late to the game. Given the extended recruiting times, you will likely not acquire the staff in time to meet your needs. Nor will you consistently be on the market when candidates are seeking employment. Look instead to do ‘pipeline recruiting’. That is, for those common positions that you know you will need over the next 12 months, set up an enduring position, and have your HR team persistently recruit for these ‘pipeline positions’. Good examples would be Java or mobile developers, project managers, network engineers, etc. Constantly recruit, interview and when you find an ‘A’ caliber candidate, hire them — whether you have the exact position open or not. You can be certain that you will need the talent, so hire them and put them on the next appropriate project to be worked on from your demand list. Not only will you now have talent sourced and available when you need it because you are always out in the market, you will develop a reputation as a place where talent is sought and you will have an edge when those ‘A’ players who seldom look for work in the market, decide to seek a new opportunity.

Another key tactic is to extend the pipeline recruiting to interns and graduates. Too many firms only look for experienced candidates and neglect this source. In many companies, graduates can be a key long term source of their best senior engineers.  Moreover, they can often contribute much more than most managers give them credit, especially if you have good onboarding programs and robust training and education offerings for your staff. I have seen uplifting results for legacy teams when they have brought on bright, enthusiastic talent and combined it with their experienced engineers — everyone’s performance often lifts. They will bring energy to your shop and we will have the added dividend of increasing the pool of available,  experienced talent. And while it will take 7 to 15 years for them to become the senior engineers and leaders of tomorrow, they will be at your company, not at someone else’s (if you don’t start, you will never have them).

The investment in robust training and education for graduates should pay off also for your current staff and potential hires. Your current staff, by leveraging training, can improve their skills and productivity. And for potential hires, an attractive attribute of a new company is a strong training program and focus on staff development. These are wise investments as they will pay back in higher productivity and engagement, and greater retention and attraction of staff. You should couple the training program with clearly defined job positions and career paths. These should spell out for your team what the competencies and capabilities of both their current position as well as what is needed to move to the next step in their career. Their ability to progress with clarity will be a key advantage in your staff’s growth and retention as well as attracting new team members. And in a tight job market, this will let your company stand out in the crowd.

Another tactic to apply is to leverage additional locations to acquire talent. If you limit yourself to one or a few metropolitan areas, you are limiting the potential IT population you are drawing from. Often, you can use additional locations to tap entirely new sources of talent at potentially lower costs than your traditional locations. Given the lower mobility of today’s candidates, it may effective to open a location in the midwest, in rustbelt cities with good universities or cities such as Charlotte or Richmond. Such 2nd tier cities can harbor surprisingly strong IT populations that have lower costs and better retention than 1st tier locations like California or Boston or New York. The same is true of Europe and India. Your costs are likely to be 20 to 40% less than headline locations, with attrition rates perhaps 1/3 less.

And you can go farther afield as well. Nearshore and offshore locations from Ireland to Eastern Europe to India should be considered. Though again, it is worth avoiding the headline locations and going to places like Lithuania or Romania, or 2nd tier cities in India or Poland. You should look to tap the global IT workforce and gain advantage through diverse talent, ability to work longer through a ‘follow the sun’ approach, and optimized costs and capacity. Wherever you go though, you will need to enable an effective distributed workforce. This requires a minimum critical mass in each site, proper allocation of activities in a holistic manner, robust audio and video conferencing capabilities, and effective collaboration and configuration management tools. If done well, a global workforce can deliver more at lower costs and with better skills and time to market. For large companies, such a workforce is really a mandatory requirement to achieve competitive IT capabilities. And to some degree, you could say IT resources are like oil, you go wherever in the world you can to find and acquire them.

Don’t forget to review your recruiting approach as well. Maintain high standards and ensure you select the right candidates through using effective interviewing and evaluation techniques.  Apply a metrics-based improvement approach to your recruiting process. What is the candidate yield on each recruiting method? Where are your best candidates coming from? Invest more in recruiting approaches that yield good numbers of strong candidates. One set of observations from many years of analyzing recruiting results: your best source of strong candidates is usually referrals and weak returns typically come from search firms and broad sweep advertising. Building a good reputation in the marketplace to attract strong candidates takes time, persistence, and most important, an engaging and rewarding work environment.

With those investments, you will be able to recruit, build and sustain a high performance team even in the tightest of markets. While I know this is a bit like revealing your favorite fishing spot, what other techniques have you been able to apply successfully?

Best, Jim Ditmore

 

 

Key Steps to Building a High Performance Team: Prune and Improve

    Jim D

Today I revisit a core topic of Recipes for IT: High Performance IT Teams. Before I provide background on this series of posts, I thought it was about time for a quick blog update. Recipes for IT continues to attract new readers and has a substantial ongoing readership. It is quite heartening to see the level of interest and I really appreciate your visits and comment. I will strive to regularly add thoughtful and relevant material for IT leaders and hope that you continue to find the site useful. I do recommend for new readers that you check out the introduction page and the various topic areas as you should find useful material of strong depth and actionability that can help you be more successful. This site also continues to do well in Google page rankings on a number of topic areas, particularly service desk queries and IT metrics and reporting. If there are topics you would like me to tackle, please do not hesitate to send me a comment.

Now back to some background on Building High Performance Teams. This post is now the fifth on this topic and there will be one further post to complete the steps of building a high performance team. I hope you find the material to be both enlightening and actionable. One key for IT leaders is that you consider the tasks required to build a HP team as some of your most important activities. At nearly every poor performing organization that I have been responsible for turning around, I have found that many times, the primary reason for inadequate talent and poor performing teams is inadequate manager attention and focus on these activities. So, work hard to make the time, even though you would much rather be doing other activities. And now for the post. Best, Jim

Building High Performance Teams: As I have mentioned previously, I have a positive outlook on the competence of today’s managers and leaders. I see more material and approaches available for managers than ever before and more effort and study applied by the managers as well. Much of the material though is either a very narrow spectrum or a single technique which does not address the full spectrum of practices and knowledge that must be brought to bear to build and sustain a high performance IT team. So,  I have assembled a set of practices that I have leveraged or I have seen peers or other senior IT leaders use to build high performance IT teams in this series of posts to enable managers to have a broad source of practice at their disposal.

Senior IT leaders, with his or her senior management team, can use these practices to build a high performing team, in the following steps:

Today’s post covers how to prune and improve as required. The previous steps are prior posts and I have further constructed reference pages with links above on the first four steps.  Subsequent posts will cover the last steps as well as a summary.

I think the aspiration of building a high performing team is a lofty, worthwhile, and achievable vision. If you have ever participated in a high performance team at the top of their game, in other words: a championship team, then you know the level of professional reward and sense of accomplishment that accompanies such membership. And for most companies that rely significantly on IT, if their IT team is a high performing team, it can make a very large difference in their products, their customer experience, and their bottom line. Building such a championship team is not only about attracting or retaining top talent, it is also necessarily about identifying those team members who do not have the capabilities, behaviors, or performance to remain part of the team and addressing their future role constructively but firmly.

Let’s first revisit some key truths that underly how to build a high performance team:

– top performing engineers, typically paid similar to their mediocre peers are not 10% better but 2x to 10x better

– having primarily senior engineers and not a good mix of interns, graduates, junior and mid and senior level engineers will result in stagnation and overpaid senior engineers doing low level work

– having a dozen small sites with little interaction is far less synergistic and productive than having a few strategic sites with critical mass

– relying on contractors to do most of the critical or transformational work is a huge penalty to retain or grow top engineers

– line and mid-level managers must be very good people managers, not great engineers, otherwise you are likely have difficulty retaining good talent and you will not develop your talent

– engineers do not want to work in an expensive in-city location like the financial district of London (that is for investment bankers)

– enabling an environment where mistakes can be made, lessons learned, and quality and innovation and initiative are prized means you will get a staff that behaves and performs like that.

With these truths in mind, (and these are the same ones you used to set about building the team), having executed the first four steps, you should have adequate capacity to begin thoughtful pruning and improvement of your organization. While there are circumstances when a poor performing manager or senior engineer causes so many issues that it is a benefit to remove them, in many cases you must have adequate resource capacity to meet demands so that once you begin pruning your team is not overtaxed and penalized as a result.

Pruning should begin at the top and work down from there. Start with your directs and the next level below. Consider the span of control of your organization and the number of levels. High performing organizations are generally flatter with greater spans of control. In considering your team, I recommend leveraging a talent calibration approach of either the typical 9 box or a top-grading variant. The key to calibration is to essentially formulate three sets of results: those on your staff that are top performers that you will need to further develop and challenge; the ‘well-placed experts’ and solid performers that will need support and attention but will execute reliably; and those whose performance and potential is lacking and who must step up to continue in their role. With these three groupings of your management team identified, ensure you lay out crisp plans for all three groups and execute against them. (Remember, it will be very difficult for you to subsequently demand of your line managers that they address their staff issues if you have not shown a capability to execute such accountability with your team.)

One area to particularly focus on is time-boxing the development plans for poor performers. As these are senior managers the time to address performance issues should be shorter not longer. I recommend you start the development plan with a succinct, clear conversation on high expectations and shortcoming of their performance with examples where possible. You should provide a writeup covering this discussion at the end of the discussion. Jointly layout key deliverables, milestones, expected behavior changes and results with the affected leader. Be open to the possibility that the employee may know they are in over their head and may be looking for an alternative. While not advocating moving problem performers around, there may be a role within the company or elsewhere outside the company that is a much better fit. Look to assist with such a transition if beneficial for the company and the employee. If the employee insists this is the role they want and they are willing to step up and adjust, then you should provide support under a tight timeline for them to achieve it. Monitor the plan regularly with HR. If you follow up diligently it will become evident quite quickly that the employee can muster to the new level or not. Generally, in my experience, a surprisingly large percentage of poor performing employees will drop out of their own accord once you have provided clear expectations and no escape routes other than the hard work to get there — assuming of course that there is a modest but respectable exit plan for them. It is also key to treat the employee with respect and fairness throughout the process and focus on the results and outcomes.

Equally though, I have more than a handful of senior leaders and managers who have expressed surprise when confronted with poor performance as no one had communicated clearly and firmly their performance issues previously. Once understood and once the higher goals and expectations were known, many of these individuals (and others as well), definitively stepped up and improved significantly. Thus, until you communicate the higher goals and expectations clearly AND communicate where they must improve (constructively, with specifics) the likelihood of improvement is minimal. So, allocate the time to hold the tough but fair conversations and provide this information. Once the conversations are held, over the next 2 to 3 months you should take action based on the results. Either poor performing managers will be exited (or moved to a role much more befitting) or poor performers will become good performers.  One of the interesting results from such actions is that the remaining team, upon seeing poor performers exited, will view the results positively. In fact, I have experienced some very strong reactions from other team members who now felt a dead weight was off of their shoulders as they no longer had to make up for the defects and negative performance of the just exited team member. Further, I have received multiple (back-handed) compliments along the lines of ‘Wow, we are glad management finally figured out what to do and took action!’ . So do not be persuaded that the team will view performance actions solely in a negative light.

Once you have initiated the performance management process and you are well in the process of pruning your team, you can work with your managers and HR department to address areas lower in the organization. Remember it is key to first set expectations and goals that cascade and match your overall goals. Then ensure you hold managers and senior engineers to a higher bar than the mid and junior staff. For senior staff, you are not looking just for technical competence but also they must meet the standard for such behaviors as problem solving/solution orientation, teamwork, initiative and drive, and quality and focus on doing things right. And they should exhibit the right leadership and communication skills.

Driving such pruning and development work through your organization is important but also a delicate task. Generally, with little exception, management in a IT organization can improve how they handle performance management. Because most of the managers are engineers, their ability to interact firmly with another person in a highly constructive manner is typically under-developed. Thus, some managers may not be up to this pruning task or their calibration of talent could be well off the mark. So, leverage your HR resources to guide management and personally check in to ensure proper calibration of talent by your lower level managers. Provide classes and interactive session on how to do coaching and provide feedback to employees. Even better, insist that performance reviews and development plans must be read and signed off by the manager’s manager before being given to improve their quality. This a key element to focus on because a poorly executed resource improvement plan could backfire. Remember that the line manager’s interaction with an employee is the largest factor in undesired attrition and employee engagement. Of course, these is all the more reason to replace poor performing managers with good leaders, but do so effectively and firmly. Use the workforce plans that you developed in the Build step to ensure your pruning and development also helps you move toward your strategic site goals, contractor/staff mix targets, and junior/mid/senior profiles.

Pruning and improvement is the tough but necessary step in building a high performance team. If done well, pruning and improvement will provide additional substantial lift to the team and more importantly, enable ongoing sustainment. It requires discipline and focus to execute the steps we would all prefer to avoid, but are necessary for reaching the final high performance stages.

What has been your experience either as a leader or participant in such efforts? What have you seen go very well? or terribly wrong? I look forward to your perspective.

Best, Jim Ditmore

Evaluating and Selecting Talent – perhaps the Google Way?

    Jim D

There was an interesting article today on the interview approach that Google has used as part of their talent selection in the Wall Street Journal by William Poundstone. According the the WSJ article, currently Google gets over a million applications per year, and from this only about 1 in 130 applicants are hired. Getting a flood of applicants and having ratios of candidates to hires close to 1 to 100 is not unusual. At the last two large companies I have held senior positions in, we received hundreds of thousands of applications per year, and the end ratio to the hire was close to 1 to 100. Since the advent of the internet job boards and social networking, most large companies are now dealing with a flood of applicants. In fact, enabling your HR department to handle effectively these ever-growing volumes is an important service you should provide, especially if you are a retail company. In other words, every potential applicant who has a poor experience on your web job site and process is a potential customer who is now turned off on your company.

So how do you effectively sort through the flood of applicants effectively, select only the best and leave the rest with a positive experience?

The Google approach, and apparently a growing approach elsewhere is to include brain teasers in the interview process such as:

‘You are shrunk to the height of a nickel and thrown into a blender. Your mass is reduced so that your density is the same as usual. The blades start moving in 60 seconds. What do you do?’

Hopefully, these brain teasers will enlighten the interviewer about the intellect and creativity of the candidate, and also provide how they might respond in a tough situation. While I think just about any off-the-wall puzzle question could do that, I think there are a number of better techniques to sort out the best candidates from those who are just adequate. And I think you must start much earlier in the process than the interview.

First, you should have two processes: one for senior candidates and one for everyone else (entry, junior, and mid-level). Let’s take the more junior roles first in today’s post. You should note that the source of the candidate has very different yields in terms of strong hires. Thus, you should treat candidates differently based on the recruiting method. And you should greatly prime those recruiting methods that are proven. For the more junior roles, your best sources for ‘A’ caliber staff are graduate and intern programs and referrals from current ‘A’ staff. In fact, I would venture these are 2 to 3 times more effective at getting top staff than all your other methods. So, assuming you have invested as much as possible in these two methods (you have referral awards in place, you have an extensive and well-supported intern and graduate program with appropriate universities), how best to handle and sort the flood of applicants from your other sources and fill the remaining shortfalls?

Consider the process from applicant to new hire as a giant funnel. And one where your internet interface must be top-notch to be appealing to your top candidates and thoughtful yet efficient at filtering and still providing a considerate experience for those you will not hire but could be your customers. To ensure you are getting the right candidates at the end of the process, and yet prevent your costs from soaring given the number of applicants, you must have efficient and effective early steps in the selection process. I recommend having a subject area test that an applicant takes via the internet for the vast majority of the junior positions. Your technical team can compile the test (say 200  questions) for the HR recruiting team and keep it up to date. Rotate a different 40 or 50 questions to each applicant that they can take the test over the internet in a set period of time. This will then filter out 80% of the applicants that are often not qualified and just applying. Your company can then send a thoughtful letter explaining they did not score high enough to be considered further but you appreciate that they applied.

Next, make it very clear throughout the process, that you will check references. This will cause the poor performers to think twice about applying to your company. As you move to the next step of identifying the candidates to interview from those who passed the test, I recommend setting a high bar where the candidates must be qualified but then have one additional outstanding experience or quality (e.g., won an award at their previous company or school, showed initiative in gaining additional certifications or knowledge of your company, etc). Now you have optimized the pool that you will interview — not too big to make it too time-consuming and expensive, and not too small to gain diversity and ensure you don’t miss great candidates. Again, I recommend two additional methods for the junior candidate process to achieve a better screen: a problem or work simulation; and a team interview.

The problem or work simulation (not a brain teaser), would be a 1 or 2 hour session where you give the candidate an exercise similar to the work that they will be doing. If a Unix administrator, give them Unix scripts to write. If a developer, ask them to design or or outline how they code an interface, etc.  This will give you real insight into their capabilities.

The team interview is critical. Often, organizations make the mistake of having only management interview a candidate when in reality, those who are more familiar with the work, and who often will hold a higher bar on the selection, are the teammates and peer staff that this person would work with. In fact, they don’t want someone who is incompetent or would be a poor fit because then they have to carry the load. So include in them in the process. Have one of the more outgoing and senior individuals lead the interview with one or two others participating. And ask the HR person or someone skilled at nonverbal communication to join. Then, when the lead person is asking the questions, the others can observe the body language and other signals that this candidate is giving off that most interviewers miss because they are so focused on the next question. They can ask questions as well of course but should focus on what is not said. Given the importance of team in IT, this is a critical filter to ensure you get people who not only know what must be done, but can do it in the team and culture setting that you have at your company. I have employed the team interview process to ensure you set a consistently high bar, eliminate those who would be detrimental to the team, and importantly, avoid the manager picking only their favorites. And don’t neglect checking the references. And the more senior a person is, the more important it is for you to check the references.

Have established the key selection steps above, the tougher part can be getting the candidates in the first place. Often, the best candidates, the ‘A’ players are not in the applicant pool but are busy working somewhere else. This is where your referrals from your ‘A’ players come in. Your top engineers often know the other good engineers at other companies or elsewhere in the industry. Ensure you have recruiters willing to follow up on the referrals and if necessary, cold call. And make sure, once the candidate is past the initial filters, you move them quickly through the process — otherwise you will lose out on the best candidates to other companies who moved quicker.

Every now and then you will come across other approaches that allow you to identify the top performers. I recall when working for a company in the Midwest that we had a critical need for MUMPS (or Cache) developers (we had a major financial services legacy system developed on a tool primarily used in hospital applications).  We had enormous difficulty finding anyone who had the experience much less developers who were top-notch until, in talking to one of the senior engineers, I found out he had just received a certification and he had not scored as as high as some others nationally. When he showed me the website with the scores listed of those who had taken the test nationally, there was the gold mine of all the top developers in that field. By the next day, we had our best recruiters calling those developers to see if they were interested in a new job at a new company. In fact, I think we ended up hiring 7 of engineers who scored in the top ten on that list.

So you may not have a list of the best fall into your lap like I did at that time, but you can get the best by always having your door open. In other words, for most shops of any size, you will always need project managers, network engineers, server engineers and developers and designers. By taking a ‘pipeline’ approach, where you always have a ‘proxy’ opening for these positions, you can be choosier (you are not under a deadline to fill a position) and when the ‘A’ player who is working at another company gets frustrated one day and decides to post his resume or look, you will come in contact. And with a tuned process using the steps above, you will likely land the best candidates.

Doing a robust intern and graduate program is another form of a pipeline. If you do not have these in place, establish strong intern and graduate programs with the universities near your key sites. It will be a good source for as much as 20% of the new and replacement staff you need. View the intern assignment as one long interview and be sure to have a job placement offer ready at the end of the internship to assure the best interns of a place at your shop when they graduate the following year.

If you deploy these techniques, and ensure your managers place recruiting tasks as important and urgent, and review regularly the operational metrics around recruiting (not just time to hire but more importantly quality of hire by vintage and by source) you will build a strong pipeline of talent that enables you to build sustainably a high performing team. In my next post, I will talk about the different approaches to use for more senior positions as well as top-grading, a very good technique to filter at senior levels.

And by the way, WSJ and Mr. Poundstone also provided the answers to those Google interview questions. Enjoy!

What techniques or best practices have you used to recruit? Any particular pitfalls or issues to avoid? What companies do you admire for their recruiting processes?

Best, Jim

 

 

 

 

Too busy to be productive? Traps of our modern world

    Jim D

There was a very good article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday on ‘How to Save an Unproductive Day in 25 Minutes’.  I found it useful that the article points out a few techniques to keep that day from being a complete loss. But while the authors pointed out a portion of the cause of unproductivity (fragmentation and interruption), they failed to really pin down why so many of us struggle to be productive at work. Or perhaps to put it another way, why so many of us spend nearly all of our time killing alligators and spend so little time draining the swamp. This tendency of being ‘too busy to be productive’ finds particularly fertile ground in IT organizations.

The reason this is more prevalent in IT teams is because in IT there are are the usual ‘urgent’ distractions of email and phone calls and business meetings AND there are additional and very real urgent distractions of production issues and high priority projects that are running late but must be completed on a specific date. Thus, the opportunity and time to do important foundational tasks is even smaller. As a result, I come across many IT teams that are running at 100 miles an hour, not doing a good job of delivery of production or projects and their teams are at or close to burnout. And yet the solution to this very real and overwhelming issue is close at hand for IT leadership to leverage.

To solve this ‘too busy to be productive’ issue, you must address it on two levels: for your self and for your team. If you are running around with your hair on fire, then no amount of coaching by you will change how your team approaches their work. Let’s start with the knowledge that we will be able to change both your productivity and your team’s dramatically in two to three months. Understand that going forward, things that are important (and may or may not have a critical time deadline) will take precedence over everything that tends to interrupt but is not important. And you must demonstrate this improved choice everyday for the next 3 months. Here are the steps to get you and your team out of burnout and delivering with much greater quality and capability:

For you:

a) First, get your calendar balanced. Take your calendar for the next two months and let’s implement some radical changes. First go through your calendar and categorize your activities as either important or not important, reactive (dealing with a crisis demand or the fallout of an issue) or proactive (e.g. planning or addressing root causes). After categorizing, it would be interesting to see how much time you are spending on important and proactive work. My bet is it is less than 25%. And it is even less than that because the first part of the meeting focuses on today’s production failure rather than the planning work you were going to do. Next, either delegate or eliminate all the not important meetings from your calendar. Then, at least 3 times a week allocate 2 hours for important proactive work. Ensure you cover the areas you know need the most attention. If production is a problem, then spend two hours on root cause and how to improve change quality. If project delivery is a problem, spend an hour with your key team reviewing your project metrics and constraints affecting delivery and how to solve them. Spend at least 1 hour per week ensuring your key goals for the next 3 months and the next year are clear, and craft the messages to ensure they are well-communicated. Spend another hour figuring out how you can improve or coach your team to better performance. And stop doing every email and phone call that comes in. You do not need to meet with vendors for new products and solutions when you are having issues with your current delivery. At least half of your emails never need to be read or responded to – ignore them. Stop interrupting your meetings due to phone calls unless it is your boss or a very important customer.   Throughout your day, continually evaluate if you are spending good, solid time on important proactive work.

b) Make clear decisions and ensure you empower the team to execute with quality. Sometimes the cause of the productivity issue is a team caught up in over-analysis. If you are not making clear decisions or if you are making micro-decisions then you can cause your team to do 200% of the work necessary as they try to buttress their recommendation and collect every data point possible. Or the team may abdicate doing work they should do because in the end, they know that you will overrule them and make a micro-decision. Be self aware enough that you are causing these effects. If, in the past three months you have either recalled previous decisions more than once or sent multiple decisions back for more research than either the team is inadequate or you are not decisioning effectively. Sound out with a trusted colleague or coach if you need to improve your decisioning process. The bottom line is that you must stop requiring or doing unimportant analysis work or decision work. Let your team make the decisions for the areas they are accountable for and stop requiring perfect facts to make a decision in this imperfect world.

For your team:

a) First, set goals and expectations that i) you want them to deliver with quality and ii) you will support them to fix things so their work can be done in an improved manner. You must let them know that not only is it ‘safe’ to do things with quality, it is expected. Your team and organization may have fallen into the trap of thinking the only thing that is important is that work must get done based on the timeline, even if it means slamming something in that is riddled with defects. By insisting on quality first, you put your team on notice that this is foundational. Now, it should also be noted that this is not a pass to then have endless delays and no accountability to deliver. Instead, you must work hard to deliver in as timely a manner possible, but with the quality.

b) Use the proactive important time or your calendar to work with your team on the things that will improve how the work is getting done. Are your processes convoluted and time-consuming? Then spend time with the team to straighten them out and lighten the load. Are the tools inadequate? Then figure out what is best practice and pilot an improved set. Are things going in with lousy quality and causing production issues and lots of rework? Then stop letting poor quality change in and fix it before production. Do this even if it means a train wreck on a promised implementation date with the customer. Go and personally talk to the customer that quality is too important to you and to him or her. (I have never met a customer who remembered they insisted something go into production when it was known poor quality and instead blamed IT. Conversely, if you delayed something by a few weeks or even months yet it went in with quality, 6 months later, they invariably remember the successful launch versus the delay.) Spend your time with your team draining the swamp.

c) Set their goals and their schedule leveraging the fact the people do urgent things first. In other words, it is a natural tendency to focus on the urgent things like email instead of getting a backout plan done for a change or mapping out how we improve our development process. So, as the leader, set clear deliverables and clear dates and accountability for the important things (thus making the important and proactive work important AND urgent) for your team. It is a very effective management technique. Then, you will find that much more of the proactive work will get done.

Watch what happens then as a virtuous cycle takes hold. Because implementations start to get done with more quality, there is less fallout and production incidents. With reduced demand to work production issues, your team should have more time and focus on doing more proactive work (you must do (c) above to get this effect, otherwise they will just do more email or other urgent and unimportant work). And as they do more proactive work, they eliminate bottlenecks and rework and become even more productive. This cycle will take a few months to gain traction. And if your organization is really in a rut it may take as long as 6 months to show measurable difference. But usually, the effect is much quicker, and the first lift can be outpaced by the second and third and subsequent lifts as the cycle repeats. I recall one infrastructure component team that had a terrible production track record, the rest of IT viewed them as a bottleneck in the project process and the team, being close to burnout, saw no solution except to double or triple the number of staff. By implementing this approach, within a few months their change success rate went from the mid eighties to better then 99% and they trimmed their implementation processes significantly in terms of effort to deliver a unit of work. Everyone understood what their goals were and what was important to get done to be successful. And when I asked one of the managers to compare his team’s work to the state three months prior, he said ‘It is night and day. I can get all the important work done and our implementations go smoothly. I no longer spend every evening on a bridge call trying to figure out why something is not working. And I come in the next morning refreshed and productive. My week is in a box.’ This was the result in just a few months.

It can be tough in IT with the press of production incidents and the pressure of critical project deadlines. Add to that our everyday distractions of email and mobile devices and trying to keep up with the pace of technology and we soon lose the forest for the trees. Perhaps the best treatise on this effect is in ‘The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People’ by Stephen R. Covey and his time management matrix.  By leveraging this knowledge of techniques to ensure we work on the important things versus the unimportant but urgent, you can be a better manager and your teams can be more successful and have their week in a box. You might even buy copies of this book for your managers so they understand what is happening themselves and learn personal techniques to address it.

All of us undoubtably, have had some experience where we felt trapped in an overwhelming level of work and no real way out. How did you solve this? Do these approaches resonate with you? Have you employed them to change your team in a sustaining way? I look forward to hearing from you.

Best, Jim