The Century of Teams

2. Impact on Organizations 

​

No matter if it’s the evolution of megatrends, technology disruption or exponential change it is clear that businesses cannot be successful with an organizational model of hierarchy, command and control designed 100 years ago.

Other models such as the Matrix organizations of the 70s and 80s failed as they conceived organizations as a set of pyramidal boxes filled with individuals that performed tasks, rather than focusing on dynamic  uindividual-basedse of individuals and teams to serve customer needs.

It’s no surprise that in Deloitte’s last Business Leaders’ survey, they placed organization redesign as their number one priority to respond to disruptions in the marketplace.

The study identified that some Companies are decentralizing authority, moving toward product- and customer-centric organizations, and forming dynamic networks of highly empowered teams that communicate and coordinate activities in unique and powerful ways.

This is giving rise to a new model of organization based on a “network of teams” with a high degree of empowerment, strong communication, and rapid information flow.

These organizations, which utilize principles based on Stanley McChrystal's book, Team of Teams, have several fundamental components:

​

• Move people into customer-, product-, or market- and mission-focused teams, led by team leaders who are experts in their domain (not “professional managers”).

• Empower teams to set their own goals and make their own decisions within the context of an overarching strategy or business plan, reversing the traditional structure of goal and performance management.

• Replace silos with information and operations centres to share integrated information and identify connections between team activities and desired results.

• Organize these teams around mission, product, market, or integrated customer needs rather than a business function.

• Teach and encourage people to work across teams, using techniques like “liaison officers” like the US military, “hackathons,” open office spaces that promote collaboration as Apple Inc. and Cleveland Clinic, and job rotation to give teams a common understanding of each other.

• Enable people to move from team to team as needed—similar to the way experts come together on Hollywood movie sets or in global consulting firms—and then ensure that people have a home to return to once a team-based project is done. This changes the concept of a “job description” to that of a “mission specialist” or “technical specialist.”

• Shift senior leaders into roles focused on planning, strategy, vision, culture, and cross-team communication.

​​

Academic research supports this strategy, Sociologist Robert Dunbar proved that the optimum number of people any individual can know well and communicate with is around 150, a phenomenon known as the Dunbar Effect. Smaller organizational units tap into the human strengths of communication.

​

3. Impact on Talent Management practices

​

The new organization based on a network of teams will require a dramatic redesign or elimination of Talent Management practices and processes as well as a redefinition of how to lead in the new environment.

Most of the work in the talent Management space is based on work done during the post-world war Industrial area analyzing big corporations that operated in stable environments. Both the science behind the tools as well as the tools themselves have a focus on the organization or individuals, but lack focuses on teams, team composition, performance and dynamics.

The new model of work will force us to change job roles and job descriptions; rethink careers and internal mobility; emphasize skills and learning as keys to performance; redesign how we set goals and reward people, and change the role of leaders.

Structure

One may ask, does this New Organization model even need an org chart? Of course, people need to know how the company is organized, who oversees what, and where to go for information and decisions.

But as the research shows more and more, the days of the "org chart" are starting to disappear, because the organization itself operates more like a sports team or consulting firm, and less like a top-down bureaucracy than ever before. What we need today is a "network analysis" of the company (the discipline is called ONA) that tells us whom to call for what, regardless of where they work. 

Careers

In today's digital workplace the value of an individual can be enormous if they have the skills, passion, and network connections to do what is needed. Why would we penalize or hold back someone's ability to grow by telling them that only by moving "up" do you progress in the company?

A consulting, firm, for example, decided that the whole idea of a "HIPO (high potential)" is now obsolete, and it must empower everyone to grow through lateral projects and roles, continuous development, and challenging assignments.

Leadership

What should high performing leaders do, who should be promoted to top leadership, and how to design reward and alignment systems to help leaders contribute. 

Leaders of teams and networks must promote practices that bring people together, help people develop, and focus on topics like onboarding (people change teams regularly), engagement, career transition management, and continuous learning. These practices are of even more important today because companies are realizing that if they can't help people operate in the team, the transition from team to team, and stay current with new trends- they can't perform as a business.

Dilemma

All these changes will require addressing the issues of individual based individual-based and team-based practices, and the key to this is the dilemma of collective creation and individual recognition.

Whilst the value and strength of individuals in the new setting come from their connection with the collective intelligence of others, the need for individual recognition remains.

The challenge for Leaders now is to navigate the boundaries of what is collective and what is individual, mastering the continuous tension between the two.