Have you noticed how some teams forget they were created to serve a higher organisational purpose; that they are instruments of organisational capability; and that ultimately they are “owned” by a sponsor or sponsors?

Sometimes the sponsors have lost sight of their responsibility to govern their teams. Sometimes team leaders are aware of, and take advantage of this loose coupling.

“Proceed until apprehended!” goes the charismatic and courageous cry.

Or are these team leaders just dodging, for whatever reason, an important relationship? And modelling the sort of behaviours they would rather not see in their space?

What is required where you work for team leaders to get senior engagement and direction?

How about upwards leadership through “red ink correction”? Where no written direction exists, write down what you think it should be and then seek comment. The act of writing can be a great way to get clear on issues. And seeking comment from sponsors invites them into a generative, trust building, and clarifying relationship.

Proceeding until apprehended is certainly one strategy. But thinking and engaging upwards in the service of common purpose and unity of effort might be smarter for everyone.

What is going on for teams and sponsors where you work?

Dave Stewart
The Fresh Air Learning Company

Do you know the possibly apocryphal story about the artillery field gun?

For over 100 years, and through many technological upgrades and Army reorganisations, a crew of four gunners always served this type of gun.

Until one day when someone asked two questions. “What do these four gunners actually do? Why do we need four of them?”

Ummm, good questions. The answer is now three, operation is slicker and manpower costs are less.

As I say, possibly apocryphal. But it does highlight the issue of responsible ownership of organisational capabilities.

So, think here about teams. Who owns them? Who commissions them? How are they resourced? Who gives them their purpose? How are they developed?

When were these questions last considered? What has changed since then? What are the answers now? When is a good time to ask them again?

Sometimes teams are like dogs. Their best service is given to responsible organisational owners.

So, before you even think about individuals, relationships, processes, team building etc.. have a think about how responsible an owner you are, and how clear and relevant your commissioning has been.

Dave Stewart
The Fresh Air Learning Company

How much thinking goes into the selection and use of team development approaches and tools where you work? Who does this thinking, choosing, using, and evaluating?

In various leadership roles over a couple of decades I have been a buyer of external consulting and development support. I now run a company with an expertise around team development. And so I have been on both sides of the thinking, choosing, using, evaluation engagement.

The phrase “both sides” is telling, isn’t it?

As a buyer, how many times have you specified with great confidence that you want a bit of MBTI, some Belbin, and an away day that focuses on subject X? You are the leader-buyer, and you know what the organisation or team needs. Right?

Can you remember how you grew into a different kind of leader-buyer? One that became more comfortable about not knowing the solution? One that became more comfortable with sensing and shaping rather than specifying? One whose role was to create the conditions for success rather than deliver the detail?

Can you remember letting go of being a bricklayer and becoming an architect? Can you remember when the thinking, choosing, using and evaluating engagement became a dialogue with trusted professional partners?

In our work we get to see the many versions of the buyers we used to be.

What kind of leader-buyer are you becoming?

Dave Stewart

The Fresh Air Learning Company