Sunday, October 25, 2009

Do Super People Help Make Super Teams?

4 Comments

The really big challenges demand a team effort, and the most effective teams are staffed by the best-equipped people.

According to Dr. R. Meredith Belbin, certain key contributors on effective teams possess unique powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men:


Plant

Plants are creative, unorthodox and idea generators. If an innovative solution to a problem is needed, a Plant is a good person to ask. A good plant will be bright and free-thinking. Plants can tend to ignore incidentals and refrain from getting bogged down in detail. The Plant bears a strong resemblance to the popular caricature of the absentminded professor-inventor, and often has a hard time communicating ideas to others.

Resource Investigator

The Resource Investigator gives a team a rush of enthusiasm at the start of the project by vigorously pursuing contacts and opportunities. He or she is focused outside the team, and has a finger firmly on the pulse of the outside world. Where a Plant creates new ideas, a Resource Investigator will quite happily steal them from other companies or people. A good Resource Investigator is a maker of possibilities and an excellent networker, but has a tendency to lose momentum towards the end of a project and to forget small details.

Coordinator

A Coordinator often becomes the default chairperson of a team, stepping back to see the big picture. Coordinators are confident, stable and mature and because they recognise abilities in others, they are very good at delegating tasks to the right person for the job. The Coordinator clarifies decisions, helping everyone else focus on their tasks. Coordinators are sometimes perceived to be manipulative, and will tend to delegate all work, leaving nothing but the delegating for them to do.

Shaper

The shaper is a task-focused leader who abounds in nervous energy, who has a high motivation to achieve and for whom winning is the name of the game. The shaper is committed to achieving ends and will ‘shape’ others into achieving the aims of the team. He or she will challenge, argue or disagree and will display aggression in the pursuit of goal achievement. Two or three shapers in a group, according to Belbin, can lead to conflict, aggravation and in-fighting.

Monitor Evaluator

Monitor Evaluators are fair and logical observers and judges of what is going on. Because they are good at detaching themselves from bias, they are often the ones to see all available options with the greatest clarity. They take everything into account, and by moving slowly and analytically, will almost always come to the right decision. However, they can become excessively cynical, damping enthusiasm for anything without logical grounds, and they have a hard time inspiring themselves or others to be passionate about their work.

Teamworker

A Teamworker is the greasy oil between the cogs that keeps the machine that is the team running. They are good listeners and diplomats, talented at smoothing over conflicts and helping parties understand each other without becoming confrontational. The beneficial effect of a Teamworker is often not noticed until they are absent, when the team begins to argue, and small but important things cease to happen. Because of an unwillingness to take sides, a Teamworker may not be able to take decisive action when it is needed.

Implementer

The Implementer takes what the other roles have suggested or asked, and turns their ideas into positive action. They are efficient and self-disciplined, and can always be relied on to deliver on time. They are motivated by their loyalty to the team or company, which means that they will often take on jobs everyone else avoids or dislikes. However, they may be seen as closed-minded and inflexible since they will often have difficulty deviating from their own well-thought-out plans.

Completer Finisher

The Completer Finisher is a perfectionist and will often go the extra mile to make sure everything is "just right," and the things he or she delivers can be trusted to have been double-checked and then checked again. The Completer Finisher has a strong inward sense of the need for accuracy, rarely needing any encouragement from others because that individual's own high standards are what he or she tries to live up to. They may frustrate their teammates by worrying excessively about minor details and refusing to delegate tasks that they do not trust anyone else to perform.

Specialist

Specialists are passionate about learning in their own particular field. As a result, they will have the greatest depth of knowledge, and enjoy imparting it to others. They are constantly improving their wisdom. If there is anything they do not know the answer to, they will happily go and find it. Specialists bring a high level of concentration, ability, and skill in their discipline to the team, but can only contribute on that narrow front and will tend to be uninterested in anything which lies outside its narrow confines.

Questions for discussion:
  • Which of these roles do you think might be most important to meeting the challenges faced by an Information Technology team?
  • How likely is it that one person will fill more than one of Belbin's roles on an IT Team?
  • Are people born with Belbin's "powers," or can they acquire them?

Monday, October 12, 2009

Ready, Fire, Aim, Paint New Targets

0 Comments

I always seem to find the shopping cart with the misaligned wheel, despite what I'm sure is a whole lot of engineering and management "process" that goes into preventing this little annoyance. Oh, well, maybe I should just learn to accept that shopping cart misalignment is an unavoidable fact of life?
.
Speaking of inevitable misalignment, let's switch gears and talk about the equally pervasive misalignment of Information Technology, and the people who, for all their well-intentioned "process," seem unable to prevent, and perhaps even unintentionally foster, the problem.
.
IT Alignment: everyone wants it, but, if you ask the average CEO, practically nobody seems to have fully realized it. Why?
.
IT alignment demands the simultaneous targeting of four basic organizational goals:
  • Optimizing and applying the individual talent of the IT professionals on staff, consultants and employees alike, to...
  • ...meet the day-to-day business requirements of the individual corporate clients they serve, while...
  • ...shepherding the collective design efforts of all IT professionals on staff: the hardware, software, and networking tools they use; the solutions they buy or build; and the architecture they establish, all to support...
  • ...the achievement of the collective organizational mission of the company as a whole, as embodied in the various operational and customer-focused initiatives of corporate management.
Whether instinctively or consciously, every IT manager understands this. However, because the essential identity of an IT organization is defined more by its reactive response to immediate technical contingencies than by its proactive contribution to long-range business planning, IT leaders typically tackle these four targets separately rather than simultaneously:

In reacting to the myriad things that go wrong in an IT environment, IT leadership understandably establishes isolated processes to manage and measure their performance in hitting each of these targets, and voila! Misalignment.
.
Psychologically speaking, how do IT managers reconcile and accept having to live with this misalignment? All it take is a little cognitive dissonance: "Ready, fire, aim." Then, by clever application of a few cooked-to-order metrics, they paint new targets wherever their arrows land, and pat themselves on the back for hitting the bullseyes. Situation ethics, after all, can make a virtue of any vice, and are a well-known means of rationalizing and taking comfort in situational behavior.
.
How do we fix this situational misalignment of Information Technology?
.
I think I know. But, who cares what I think?
.
What do you think?
.

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Imagine The Enemy Within

0 Comments


"O villain, villain, smiling, damnèd villain!
My tables—meet it is I set it down
That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain—
At least I am sure it may be so in Denmark."

- Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, 105–109



It may seem hard to imagine, but a trusted employee or colleague (and not just those found in Denmark, Mr. Shakespeare) might secretly be acting against you or your organization:


In a 2006 study, the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University notes several psychological factors that may motivate "Insider Spies and Saboteurs:"
  • Extreme sensitivity to criticism
  • Unusual needs for attention
  • Chronic frustration and feeling unappreciated
  • Difficulties controlling anger with bursts of inappropriate temper
  • Chronic sense of victimization or mistreatment
  • Chronic grudges against others
  • Belief, and conduct, reflecting the sense that the insider is above the rules applicable to others due to special characteristics or suffering
  • Chronic interpersonal problems and conflicts (including physical conflicts) such that the insider is avoided by others or they “walk on eggshells” around him or her
  • Compensatory behaviors reflecting underlying self-esteem problems such as bragging, bullying, spending on fantasy-related items
  • Chronic difficulties dealing with life challenges indicating an inability to realistically assess his or her strengths, limitations, resources—overspending, overestimating his abilities and underestimating others, attempting to gain positions for which he or she clearly lacks training or qualifications
  • Use of compartmentalization such that the insider has no problems living with contradictions between his maladaptive behavior and espoused beliefs (an allegedly religious individual who cheats on his wife or expenses)
  • Lack of inhibitory capabilities such as a conscience, impulse control, empathy for others, comprehension of the impact of actions on others, or any regard for the feelings of others such that the insider is chronically offending or exploiting those around him or her 
Their report on the subject offers several telltale behavioral markers that may indicate the presence of the problem in your organization:
  • Bullying
  • Chronic insecurity
  • Intimidation of others
  • Refusal to conform to rules
  • Chronic complaining
  • Chronic disregard for, and manipulation of, the office policies and practices
  • Threatening the life of those opposing him
  • Stealing items from work
  • Admitted theft of computer equipment
  • Access from a new employer’s system without displaying remorse
  • Withholding of information from team members
  • Intimidation of team members to the extent they were fearful for their safety
Followers of this blog might recognize some overlap with the characteristics of the passive-aggressive worker and organization.

Of course, while they may not be very productive, "disgruntled employees" usually aren't maliciously so, and they rarely commit outright bad acts of espionage and sabotage.

Just the same, the Sofware Engineering Institute's report (you'll find it here)  certainly highlights the importance of keeping your privileged passwords secure.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Think You're "All That?" If So, You Aren't

0 Comments
Something to think about before opening your big fat mouth:

People who boast of being "the best" typically score lower than average in objective tests of the superior competence they claim.

On the other hand, people who score well in competence tests tend to underrate their competence relative to others.


In other words, those who brag often do so without basis, while those with authentic professional lights to shine often hide them under a barrel.

IT managers would do well to remember that the illusion of superiority is a well-researched cognitive bias called the Dunning-Kruger Effect. When taking their people at their word, they should take this psychological factor into consideration as well.
IT practitioners: next time you loudly proclaim yourself to be the best and brightest Cisco/Microsoft/Visual Basic/Unix/Whatever genius on your block, keep in mind that you may be revealing more of your true self than you'd like.

Friday, October 2, 2009

What's IT All About, Anyway?

0 Comments


"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."
- Edsger Dijkstra, 1930-2002

I've been in computing for a long time, working on countless projects, large and small, at every level of the OSI Systems Inrterconnection Reference Model. Over a longer span of years than vanity allows me to enumerate here, I've been "'round the block," as they say.


So, I wondered how it was, then, that my kids always managed to stump me by asking the simplest possible question: Dad, what do you do for a living?

For all my experience programming, installing, upgrading, configuring, maintaining, and retiring thousands of "things," could it be that I didn't really know, in any fundamental sense, what I was doing? That I'd never come to terms with the deep basics of Information Technology?


So many things, so many distractions: computers, from laptops to servers to mainframes; data storage systems, from high-end multi-terabyte farms to the tiny iPod; the dizzying array of networking widgets, from firewalls to gateways to hubs...


So many things, each with their own special language to learn and master... But, does their mastery make me an auhentic master, or just some modern-day Nimrod?

Question: Peering past all these distractions, straining to find a way out of Babel, what is all of our "stuff" really for?