We hear similar frustrations expressed in today's organizations relative to this "stab in the dark" approach to work solutions. As a consequence, many of us PSGers are real sticklers about starting every one of our work efforts with a definition of success up front.
My partner, Rick Heydinger, has taken this one step further. He has encouraged many a client to put in writing the expectations for EVERY task force, EVERY work team, EVERY committee they establish. Rick believes all teams that are assigned tasks within an organization should have a Charter that specifies the following:
Authorizer: The person or team who has established and delegated responsibility and authority to the team. The Charter names this sponsor and what responsibility they have to the team.
Purpose: Why the team exists; its assigned task.
Goals or Deliverables: The expectations of the team, articulated as the results to be produced and the time frame for completion.
Approach: Specific steps or processes that the authorizer wishes the team to complete or use, if any, and any preferred solutions that must be considered.
Team Makeup: The members of the team, and the skills and discipline needed for completing the task. The team leader may be named.
Boundaries: The team's authority to act and the scope/scale of the endeavor. This section needs to specify whether the team is to take action, make recommendations for action, deliver alternatives without recommendation, and/or solicit opinion. It sets the boundaries for the work, including what is 'out' of bounds and any givens.
Support: The resources available to support the team's work, including training, meeting support, budget, facilitation or consultation. This section of the Charter also addresses the time team members will be afforded away from their daily work to participate.
Communication: Any expected progress updates with the authorizer and with the organization as a whole. Also, states any key messages or tone the authorizer wants to set for the effort.
Whew! But, hard as it is for an authorizer to write a succinct, clear Charter, chartering doesn't stop here. A Charter needs to be a mutual agreement, not a unilateral edict. How does that play out? Following is a team discussion Rick designed that serves as THE agenda for the chartered team's first meeting.
Practice Field: Refining Your Team's Charter
The authorizer of your team has drafted a Charter for your team's work. As a group, review the Charter that has been drafted for your team and work through the following questions:
- Do team members have a shared understanding of what is expected?
- What questions do you need to raise with your authorizer for clarification?
- On what points, if any, is there disagreement?
- What suggestions do you have for improving the draft Charter?
- What do you need in order to succeed with these expectations?
This meeting is called a Practice Field because it helps the team prepare for a conversation with their authorizers to resolve any issues identified. The Charter conversation affords both the authorizers and the team members a face-to-face chance to clarify or adjust what's expected BEFORE work effort is expended. Agreed-upon changes are made to the Charter - and work commences. Only this time, rework - and frustration - are not the unintended by-products!
|
