‘Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.’ George Bernard Shaw.
The other day I observed a group of senior executives discussing some key issues in their businesses when one proffered the opinion: ‘Seems to me that what you could well do with is a team building event or two.’
Another quickly commented: ‘Team building: That’s very passé.’
With hardly time for breath another interjected: ‘Indeed. I can’t see why anyone could think that doing some non-work activities would help - just a bit of fun, nothing else.’
Whilst a third added: ‘Expensive too.’
Not dissuaded the original proposer stated; ‘It works’, and then turned and walked off.
Getting people to work together in way that delivers performance is not easy.
World class organisations understand this, which is why for them team building is anything but passé - they see team work as central to achieving their organisational aims and are prepared to invest a great deal of time, effort, and money building world-class teams that are effective (see blog of July 2017 that illustrates the power of effective teamwork in Red Bull F1 race team).
These leading organisations don't go on team events where there are activities such as raft making, bridge construction, or completing an orienteering-style course for the fun of it. They go because they know that effective leadership and team work is central to their success having based their decisions that involve both the financial costs and time away from work upon real supportive evidence.
A team of researchers in 2008 asked the question: ‘Does Team Training Improve Performance?’[1] Using a meta-analysis approach they analysed a database of some of 2,650 teams to find insight into the extent that team training interventions relate to team outcomes. Their findings show that team training interventions are a viable approach for organisations to take to enhance team outcomes being useful for improving:
Cognitive outcomes;
Affective outcomes;
Teamwork processes: and
Performance outcomes.
Their concluding remarks succinctly began with the words: ‘Team training works’.
In 2016 another team of researchers set out to investigate: ‘The Effectiveness of Teamwork Training on Teamwork Behaviours and Team Performance’[2]. To answer this question, they started by reviewing 16,849 studies on this topic, selecting some 51 for detailed analysis.
All of the 51 studies compared teams receiving a team development intervention to teams receiving no intervention – in other words there was a control group. The use of a control group running in parallel to the other groups undergoing team development meant that a trustworthy conclusion could be drawn that would not have been the case if they had only looked at teams undergoing team development. The use of a control group allowed a baseline to be used. The researchers pooled together the data from the 51 studies and conducted a meta-analysis in order to find out how effective team development is and under what conditions it works best.
The research specifically found:
Some 66% of people who went through a team development intervention showed more teamwork behaviours back in the workplace to those who did not go through such an intervention.
The team development intervention benefitted equally all aspects of teamwork. For example: people were as equally engaged in making action plans as they were in resolving conflicts. Team development is likely to improve all aspects of teamwork equally.
Teams were found to perform better on their tasks back in the workplace following a team development intervention.
Experiential based team development interventions led to greater learning and development success.
The more components of teamwork involved in the experiential team development interaction the better were the outcomes.
An experiential learning approach increased participants’ motivation.
Their conclusion was that: ‘Team development is effective on both behaviours and performance.’
Importantly, not only does the latest research add further evidence that shows that team development is effective but it confirms that experiential learning is both a powerful approach and highly effective in the building of team work. Non-work activities that develop leadership, team working, processes, trust, and communication are relevant with learning that is fun being memorable.
Of course team building costs but having clearly defined objectives for each intervention and evaluating post training effectiveness is vital.
Donald Kirkpatrick proposed in 1959[3] that the outcomes of training can be categorised into one of four criteria and each should be evaluated to understand that the training has generated the anticipated results. Kirkpatrick's criteria:
Reactions – what participants thought and felt about the training (satisfaction; ‘happy sheets’)
Learning – the resulting increase in knowledge and/or skills and change in attitudes. This evaluation occurs during the training in the form of either a knowledge demonstration or test.
Behaviour (referred to as Transfer by researchers) - transfer of knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes from classroom to the job (change in job behaviour due to training program). This evaluation should occur some 3-6 months post training while the trainee is performing the job. Evaluation occurs through observation.
Results – the final results that occurred because of attendance and participation in a training program (can be ROI, performance-based, etc.)
Unfortunately few organisations go much further than the ‘happy sheets’ stage but they should, for otherwise in the words of John Lennon from the song, 'Strawberry Fields': 'Living is easy with eyes closed.'
[1] ‘Does Team Training Improve Team Performance? A Meta-Analysis’. Salas, E., Diaz Grandos, D., Klein, C., Shawn Burke, C., Stagl, C., Goodwin, G.F., & Halpin, Halpin, SK. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol 50 (6), 1st December, 2008, pp 903-933.
[2] ‘The Effectiveness of Teamwork Training on Teamwork Behaviours and Team Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Interventions’, McEwan D, Ruissen GR, Eys MA, Zumbo BD, Beuchamp MR, 13th January 2017, https://10.1371/journal.pone.0169604
[3] Kirkpatrick, D. (1959) ‘Techniques for evaluating training programs’. Journal of the American Society for Training and Development, 13, pp 3-9.