You have reached a collection of archived material.
The content available is no longer being updated and as a result you may encounter hyperlinks which no longer function. You should also bear in mind that this content may contain text and references which are no longer applicable as a result of changes in law, regulation and/or administration.
Measuring Team Performance
Jack Zigon, writing in Training (June 1994), recommends five keys to designing a measurement system that supports and improves the performance of teams and their individual members:
- Tie the team's results to the organization's goals.
- Begin with the team's customers and the work process the team follows to satisfy their needs.
- Measure both team and individual performance.
- Shoot for verifiability. Don't try to measure everything using numbers.
- Train the team to create its own measures.
Christopher Meyer agrees that teams should develop their own measures based on commonly understood team goals. He states in the May/June 1994 Harvard Business Review: "When a group of people builds a measurement system, it also builds a team. One benefit of having a team create its own measurement system is that members who hail from different functions end up creating a common language, which they need in order to work as an effective team."
The way measures are used to appraise team performance will depend on the team's location in the organizational structure. For example, a high-level management team might use measures that determine program effectiveness or the success of the organization's strategic plan, whereas teams at lower levels in the organization would be more concerned with measuring quality, cycle time, waste, or delivery.
Another factor to consider when setting up team measures is the type of team to be measured. A temporary, problem-solving team would probably want to measure results, such as the effectiveness of the solution they developed. On the other hand, a permanent work team will want to measure work processes as well as results. If work teams only measure results and they don't reach their goal, they won't know why. Measuring the work process will show the team where improvement can be made.
Helping teams establish effective measurements will provide them with the information they need to improve their performance. As Jack Zigon states, "Measuring team performance is difficult but not impossible. And it can pay off in better quality, shorter cycle times, and improved customer satisfaction."
As someone deeply involved in performance management and team dynamics, I can verify that the ideas presented in that article still hold significant relevance today. The concept of tying team performance to organizational goals is a fundamental principle. This approach ensures that teams are aligned with the broader mission, creating a clear pathway for success.
The emphasis on starting with customers and their needs reflects a customer-centric approach, a cornerstone in modern business strategies. Understanding and meeting these needs through the team's work processes are crucial for sustained success.
The suggestion to measure both team and individual performance strikes at the heart of effective performance evaluation. It acknowledges the collective effort while recognizing individual contributions, fostering a balanced assessment.
Verifiability in measurement resonates deeply with my experience. Relying solely on numerical data may not capture the full spectrum of team performance. Incorporating qualitative assessments and feedback mechanisms is often necessary for a comprehensive understanding.
The insight by Christopher Meyer about teams developing their own measurement systems echoes the importance of ownership and collaboration in fostering a shared understanding within diverse team structures. This shared language is pivotal for effective teamwork.
The article's distinction between high-level management teams and lower-level teams in the organization aligns with the varying focuses at different hierarchical levels. This tailored approach ensures relevance and applicability in performance measurement.
Furthermore, recognizing the difference between temporary problem-solving teams and permanent work teams when setting up measurements is key. Understanding what to measure—be it results or work processes—empowers teams to make targeted improvements.
Finally, the overarching theme of using measurement as a tool for improvement is paramount. It aligns perfectly with the continuous improvement paradigm, where insights derived from performance metrics guide teams toward enhanced quality, efficiency, and customer satisfaction.
This article encapsulates the essence of effective team performance measurement, emphasizing alignment, ownership, relevance, and improvement—a framework that transcends time and remains invaluable in today's organizational landscape.
