UNLEASHING POTENTIAL TO CREATE HIGH PERFORMING TEAMS Shifting the focus from individual to collective intelligence
If you give a good idea to a mediocre team, they’ll screw it up. But, if you give a mediocre idea to a great team, they’ll make it work Ed Catmull, 2008
2
CONTENTS
Overview In the article entitled “How Pixar Fosters Collective Creativity”, Ed Catmull outlines the journey Pixar undertook to achieve excellence in their field. The underlying theme of this bold journey was Pixar’s willingness to create a culture that allowed individuals to collaborate, communicate across boundaries and to feel psychologically safe to express their views and opinions. While the intelligence of the individual team members at Pixar no doubt contributed, interestingly Catmull attributed the incredible success of the organisation to be Pixar’s ability to harness its people’s collective potential. Given this formula for success clearly worked at Pixar, could other organisations also benefit from focussing less on individual talent, and more on the collective potential of the people within the business?
3
CONTENTS
What is it that makes one team of highly intelligent individuals outperform a team of equal talent? This article sets out to explore the concept of collective intelligence and how a well-constructed team can deliver beyond the outputs of the individuals alone. In presenting the concept of collective intelligence we are able to explore the foundations for high performance: social sensitivity, collaboration and cognitive diversity. Research today indicates that when all three are present, teams can deliver exceptional results. Our aim is to provide you with a checklist of ideas and concepts to help you pull together and support team performance in your business.
4
CONTENTS
CON
TEN TS
Overview 3 Building collective intelligence 6 General intelligence of individuals 7 Collective intelligence 9 - Social sensitivity 11 - Equality and quality of communication
14
- Cognitive diversity 16 Building CI in your team 17 - Look to your leaders 18 - Consider your team composition
20
- Enable a culture of collaboration
21
How can we help? 24 References 26
5
CONTENTS
SECTION 1
Building collective intelligence Are two heads better than one? Can we work more intelligently as a team than as individuals? Group performance remains an increasingly valuable human activity, even as computers learn to read facial nuance and detect feelings. The simple reason is that we, not computers, decide what our problems are and ultimately choose the best solutions. Groups can be far better at choosing solutions than a single individual can. “Can” is the operative word. As the world becomes more complex, more tasks are being handled by groups, but groups aren’t always better. Our own Experience (and plenty of research) shows that some groups are utterly dysfunctional and achieve nothing. Yet, when groups ‘work’, they are superior.
6
CONTENTS
While technology and machines take over more of our tasks, choosing our problems and how to solve them will still be among the jobs reserved for us. Understanding how to do these jobs best, often in groups, is therefore vital to our success.
General intelligence of individuals
Teamwork is playing an increasingly important role in the classroom, the workplace, and other areas of daily life. It has become more and more of a necessity to understand the factors that contribute to strong performance and successful dynamics within groups. The first step in this process is to understand how the individual functions. At an individual level general intelligence, or ‘g’ factor, has consistently been found to be the best indicator of future job performance, especially in ‘knowledge work’ environments. General intelligence includes more than just knowledge and skills. It also encompasses the ability to reason, solve problems, and to learn from experience. So general intelligence is less about being book smart and is more about how much intellectual horsepower you have at your disposal to process information and problem solve across a range of tasks, environments and situations. 7
CONTENTS
General intelligence can be compared to athleticism. A person might be a very skilled runner, but this does not necessarily mean that they will also be an excellent figure skater. However, because this person is athletic and fit, they will probably perform much better on other physical tasks than an individual who is less coordinated and more sedentary. IQ has long been controversial, and it certainly doesn’t measure everything we want to know about a person, but its predictive power is solidly established. Researchers have consistently observed its reliability to predict a wide range of important life outcomes over a long span of time, including grades in school, success in many occupations, and even life expectancy. What if something similar existed for groups—a factor that measures the general effectiveness of a board of directors or a sales team or a project group, and that also predicts performance beyond the tested domains?
8
CONTENTS
SECTION 2
Collective intelligence
Traditionally, many Psychologists have assumed that the intelligence of a group was no more than the average intelligence of the individual members. In other words, two heads may be able to do more work than one head, but two heads can’t work any smarter than either could alone. Alternatively, some Psychologists have suggested that the intelligence of the group is merely that of its most intelligent member, who dominates the group and coordinates its activity. New research conducted last year by Carnegie Mellon University Professor Anita Williams Woolley and her colleagues, suggests that intelligence of a group can exceed that of its members if the right conditions are met. In their lab, they had groups complete a set of cognitive tasks, much like the tests used to measure individual intelligence. They also measured the general intelligence of each individual group member. What they discovered was that the intelligence of the individual members didn’t predict how well the group would perform. Instead, they found that any particular group tended to perform similarly across tasks. And, of course, some groups tended to outperform other groups regardless of the test. In other words, the group as a whole exhibited a kind of general intelligence termed “collective intelligence”, a synergy where the team as a whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. 9
CONTENTS
The researchers then asked the most important question: If individual intelligence doesn’t explain a group’s effectiveness, what does? What they found was remarkable! There were, in fact, differences that explained a large proportion of the variation in performance, and the individual intelligence of the members played only a small role. How about such fine-sounding concepts as team satisfaction, motivation or cohesion?
The key factors that affect how collectively intelligent a team is, and therefore how likely they are to perform, are: SOCIAL SENSITIVITY
COMMUNICATION
COGNITIVE DIVERSITY
They were of little importance.
10
CONTENTS
Social sensitivity Social sensitivity, sometimes called social perceptiveness, refers to the empathy an individual provides to the perspectives of others – for example, their ability to perceive another’s emotional wellbeing based on their body language or conversation. Woolley describes this “social perceptiveness” as how well the individual members can read the emotions of the other group members. While the average intelligence of the group members does contribute to the group’s collective intelligence, social perceptiveness is more important. Thus, a group composed of members who have moderate intelligence but are very good at reading each other’s emotions can outperform a group with high average intelligence but low social perceptiveness.
11
CONTENTS
A highly socially sensitive person is more likely to identify: • when another person is interested in what they are saying • the social context of the environment and using this knowledge to guide the content and delivery of their message • when it is their turn to speak • how much of the conversation they are absorbing • how to read verbal and nonverbal cues • cultural influences in context • their personal mindfulness of the situation. Perceiving others’ emotions and states can help to alleviate many of the issues associated with relational conflict between groups by showing a degree of regard for the perspectives and circumstance of others.
12
CONTENTS
Research has shown that the inclusion of women leads to teams with higher ‘collective intelligence’. It is thought that this is because women typically possess higher levels of social sensitivity than men. Woolley et al (2010) 13
CONTENTS
Equality and quality of communication Equality and quality of communication are two vital ingredients in collectively intelligent teams, as both influence the way in which teams collaborate. The argument for increasing the diversity of work groups suggests that greater diversity within groups can lead to performance benefits. However, if there is not enough or an equal distribution of communication, the benefits of a range of opinions cannot be fully harnessed. For this reason, greater equality of communication is fundamental and can result in a more thorough utilisation of a group’s resources.
14
CONTENTS
High quality communication is likely to foster a positive type of conflict, which facilitates the critical examination of the objectives, processes, and information in the work group. Individuals are more likely to discuss their specific roles in the team to more effectively decide how their skills align with these factors. It is important to note that adding individual intelligence in the form of “experts� to a group can result in enhanced performance. However, such an addition will show very little benefit if the group does not collaborate sufficiently or if that expert dominates the discussion in a negative manner.
15
CONTENTS
Cognitive diversity Another important factor for a group’s collective intelligence is the degree of cognitive diversity, particularly in terms of cognitive style or personality. People who approach tasks differently and have different skills and experiences can enhance the collective intelligence of the group. Too much similarity among members limits the range of approaches the group can apply to a task. Likewise, too much difference among members can lead to communication breakdowns and a lack of empathy for others in the group. Striking the balance of not too much and not too little diversity leads to the best performance. With this new found knowledge of collective intelligence and how it can improve team performance, what can be done to harness the individual and collective intelligence of your organisational teams? 16
CONTENTS 16
SECTION 3
Building collective intelligence in your teams The contributing factors of collective intelligence can be easily understood, however using this information in an applied way can sometimes prove challenging. Our experience in working with both high performing and dysfunctional teams has lead us to identify a simple and straight forward process for building collective intelligence in teams. For a team’s potential to be achieved all three areas of this process need to be given consideration: 1) Leadership: look to your leaders 2) Team: consider your team composition 3) Environment: enable a culture of collaboration When the right interaction between your people and the environment is achieved, collective intelligence will ensue.
17
CONTENTS
1) Look to your leaders How socially aware are your leaders? Do they have the right skills to enable effective team collaboration, idea generation and problem solving? Leadership styles can vary considerably, with some managers relying on a more directive or technical approach. Look for leaders with strong social skills or consider coaching to help leaders engage and manage their people in a way that fosters and promotes a team culture of collaboration. One of the key factors underpinning effective leadership is self-awareness. Ensure that you select leaders that are committed to increasing their self-awareness by seeking feedback on their performance, encouraging honest conversations within their teams and are focused on continually learning new skills/knowledge.
18
CONTENTS
Tips on leadership Engage in your own experiential learning to develop your leadership skills through seeking feedback and active self-reflection. Working with a coach or mentor to facilitate the reflection process is highly recommended. Utilising psychometric assessment and 360 degree feedback can also help to fast track this process. Lead by example and become a role model for effective communication in your team. Aim to equally distribute your communications across team members wherever possible and encourage those around you to do the same. Have the confidence to be vulnerable. Admitting your mistakes and owning your actions as a leader can set a powerful example and assists to create psychological safety in a team.
19
CONTENTS
2) Consider your team composition
Tips on team composition
Do you have the right mix of talent in your team? How safe do your team members feel to contribute their views and opinions? Understand the unique attributes of each team member and how they contribute to the group. Plan the team composition to ensure a strong level of social sensitivity amongst members and look to bring in outsiders who will add value through their diversity of experiences and approaches. Develop and articulate a collective team purpose. Doing so will provide group members with a shared understanding of the ‘why’ behind the team formation and function. Create a team charter of expectations, responsibilities, goals and boundaries of authority. This can help to clarify and establish behaviours that team members are accountable for. Harness the cognitive diversity of your team by mapping the skills, learning styles and personality attributes of your team members. Identify goals that require a number of collective tasks that draw upon the individual strengths of each team member. Spend time as a team doing both the mundane, difficult and fun tasks. Like raising a family, in order to have ‘quality time’ you need to set aside adequate ‘quantity time’. You can’t expect that the team will magically collaborate with one another once you’ve decided it’s a priority. Allow the team to develop trust and respect through face-to face meetings and catch-ups that explore group outcomes. The more familiar each team member becomes with the other, collaboration and creativity are more likely to happen. 20
CONTENTS
3) Enable a culture of collaboration Does your culture enable collaboration, open communication and the sharing of ideas? Are your systems and structures designed to enable equality of communication? What does ‘the way you do things’ at your organisation look like? A number of important cultural levers must be considered and aligned (e.g. organisational systems, structures and symbols; leadership behaviours and mindsets) in order to create an environment that will facilitate and develop collective intelligence in a team. In addition to having clarity on the strategy and purpose of the organisation, it is critical that the team is also able to clearly articulate what a culture of collaboration looks like. This is more than being able to wax lyrical about the ‘ideal’ environment or ‘desired’ behaviours, it’s about being really honest with one another about the type of team they want to be a part of and holding each other to account.
21
CONTENTS
Tips on culture Revisit your organisation’s purpose and strategy to ensure the whole team is clear about their role in the organisation’s success. If this exercise reveals that the team is very unclear about the strategic direction of the organisation, take this as a first step to identifying opportunities to carve out your team’s contribution. Too many teams fear asking the big questions or addressing the ‘elephant in the room’ because they don’t want to create problems. The truth is, not addressing the core issue only makes it harder to build a collaborative culture….and the longer you leave it….the harder it gets. Too often we spend all of our time on defining what success looks like, implementing our agreed actions and following up on each other that we forget to revisit the start of our journey and reflect on our successes. One great way of doing this is by measuring the team’s level of collaboration through the use of robust assessments at regular intervals. This ensures that we can measure progress, see where improvements can be made and understand what challenges are in the way.
22
CONTENTS
Where you have objective data to discuss, the dialogue will quickly move to the core issues. What’s better is when you can demonstrate the positive shift in the culture with regard to collaborative efforts and link it back to an objective measurement. Analyse how freely communication flows within your organisation and look for blockages. Poor communication can occur within teams for a number of reasons. Perhaps an idea wasn’t well received and people feel it’s not worth contributing, or a small number of extroverts take over and dominate the agenda. There are many reasons why team members may quickly decide it’s safer to keep their thoughts to themselves. Create spaces in your environment to allow team members to collaborate and engage each other at multiple touch points. Ensure your organisational systems and technology allow all group members to participate and ‘speak from the same page’.
23
CONTENTS
How can we help? Chandler Macleod People Insights can partner with you to assess and develop collectively intelligent and high performing teams. Our understanding of behaviour and ‘what makes people tick’ allows us to work with individuals, teams and organisations to: • Identify high potential employees who are aligned, with your culture and invested in your organisations success. • Assess, coach and develop high performing, collaborative and socially aware leaders. • Understand interpersonal dynamics to build team effectiveness. • Create and develop psychologically safe environments for high performing teams to flourish. • Analyse and understand your culture to leverage strengths and identify blockages that may be hindering your organisation’s potential.
24
CONTENTS
Looking to achieve success through insight?
Phone - 1300 664 305 Email - CMPIenquiries@chandlermacleod.com focusyourview.com.au Chandler Macleod People Insights has been helping organisations and employees find their BestFitTM for almost 60 years. With a high performing team of Psychologists, we can assist your organisation to understand, nurture and develop your talent and realise the true potential of your workforce.
Powered by
Gateway
Powered by our unique Gateway platform, we can help you hire more effectively, build stronger and more resilient teams, develop leaders with insight, and ultimately accelerate the performance of your business. 25
CONTENTS
References
26
CONTENTS
TECHNICAL PAPERS
ONLINE
Aggarwal, I., & Woolley, A. W. (2014). The effects of cognitive diversity on collective intelligence and team learning. Symposium present at the 50th Meeting of the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, Columbus O.H.
Are two heads better than one? David Ludden. Feb 2016 https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ talking-apes/201602/ are-two-heads-better-one
Brody, N. (2000). History of theories and measurements of intelligence. In R. J. Stenberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp.16-33). New York: Cambridge University Press. De Wilt, F., & Greer, L. L. (2011). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 360-390. Engel, D., Woolley, A. W., Jing, L. X., Chabris, C. F., Malone, T. W. (2014). Reading the mind in the eyes of reading between the lines? Theory of mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and faceto-face. PLoS One, 12(9), 1-16. Gottfredson, L. S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24(1), 79-132. Herring, C. (2009). Does diversity pay? Race, gender, and the business case for diversity. American Sociological Review, 74, 208-224. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274. Spearman, C. (1904). General intelligence: Objectively determined and measured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 201-292. Tse, H. H. M., Dasborough, M. T., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2008). A multi-level analysis of team climate and interpersonal exchange relationships at work. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 195-211. Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. G., Pentland, A. Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330, 686-688. Woolley, A. W., Aggarwal, I., & Malone, T. W. (2015). Collective intelligence and group performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 420-424. Woolley, A. W., Gerbasi, M. E., Chabris, C. F., Kosslyn, S. M., & Hackman, J. R. (2008). Bringing in the experts: How team composition and collaborative planning jointly shape analytical effectiveness. Small Group Research, 39, 352-37
The science behind team intelligence. Geoff Colvin. Jul 2015 http://www.fastcompany.com/3049524/ know-it-all/the- science-behind-team-intelligence Exercising our freedom and intelligence. Michael Hogan. May 2016. https://www.psychologytoday.com/ blog/in-one- lifespan/201605/exercising-our-freedom-and-intelligence-part-5 Facilitating collective intelligence. Michael Hogan. Jan 2016. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ in-one- lifespan/201601/facilitating-collective-intelligence Why is a culture of candour so important. Emily Kutchinsky. May 2016. https://channels. theinnovationenterprise.com/ articles/why-is-a-culture-of-candour-so-important Why your workforce acts stupid and how to release their intelligence. Sarah Lewis. Nov 2015. http:// www.recruiter. co.uk/personal-dev/2015/11/why-your-workforce-acts-stupid-and-how-to-release-theirintelligence/ Why some teams are smarter than others. Anita Woolley, Thomas W. Malone and Christopher F. Chabris. Jan 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/18/opinion/sunday/why-some-teams-are-smarterthan-others.html?_r=0 Strong team intelligence equates to high profitability. Cheryl Conner. Oct 2014. http://www.forbes. com/sites/ cherylsnappconner/2014/10/31/new-research-strong-tq-team-intelligence-equates-to-highprofitability/#6ddb6f0a40f1 What is general intelligence. Kendra Cherry. May 2016. https://www.verywell.com/what-is-generalintelligence-2795210 Group intelligence correlates more with social aptitude than IQ. Steven Rice. Oct 2015. https://hbr. org/2012/10/collective-intelligence-and-th Defend your research: What makes a team smarter? More women. Anita Woolley and Thomas W. Malone. June 2011. https://hbr.org/2011/06/defend-your-research-what-makes-a-team-smarter-more-women/ar/1 How Pixar fosters collective intelligence. Ed Catmull. Sep 2008. https://hbr.org/2008/09/how-pixarfosters-collective-creativity
27
CONTENTS