The Team Communication Cycle is an effective way to facilitate communication within the team. Teams are a resource of tremendous potential, and tapping the genius, insight and potential in any team is the challenge of team communication. Individuals who make up the team can bring a vast knowledge, understanding, ability, expertise, insight, intuition, access and energy to the team, yet these assets are not immediately obvious or easily accessible. We have an unmined deposit.

While the team contains the untapped resources of great knowledge and energy, it also harbors misperceptions, partial understanding, blind spots, invalid assumptions, irrational responses, prejudice and bias. The key to successful teamwork is to separate the two,utilizing the former and discarding the latter. Just as the prospector panned for gold and carefully sorted the gold from the mud, a team must select the genius of insight from the mud of misinformation.

The Team Communication Cycle, which is a specifically designed communication method, facilitates the team’s gathering of information and the sorting of the valuable from the worthless. It is a very specific method used to facilitate teamwork by managing communication. It utilizes the same probing questions that drive the team process to stimulate each team member to draw on the pool of resources he/she brings to the task in order to utilize the collective resources to work as a team.

The challenge of an effective team facilitator, like a prospector of old, is to separate what is valuable from what is not. While teams generate a great deal of information, not everything is useful to the team. To collect and sort information, effective teams follow a five-step process, the Team Communication Cycle.

The five sequential steps are:

1. Ask a probing question.

2. Provide time to find potential answers.

3. Report all potential answers.

4. Discuss and analyze all potential answers.

5. Agree as a team on the answer.

What are the six elements  of a Probing Question?

1. It cannot be answered with a  ”yes” or “no.”

2. It requires a thoughtful explanation.

3. It draws on the knowledge, experience, insight, expertise and intuition of the person answering the question.

4. It has no bias or predetermined answer.

5. It facilitates synergy through honest inquiry.

6. It causes others to search for an answer.

The “Advanced Team System” includes highly effective tools and processes for Teamwork, Problem Solving and Strategic Planning. These are products and training of the Center for Creative Teamwork (all featured in the left side bar of this blog). These processes are built around the use of Probing Questions and the Team Communication Cycle.

These two elements are unique and distinguishing features because most processes teach the use of yes/no and controlling questions that actually reduce effectiveness.

Why are Probing Questions so effective? It is because they engage others by facilitating inquiry and curiosity. When people become curious, they begin to wonder. When they wonder, they start thinking about the questions and their subconscious minds begin to filter through thoughts, ideas and experiences in an attempt to address the inquiry and wonder. Soon they are fully engaged and cannot help but offer their insights. As each team member answers the Probing Question, based upon their own unique insight, experience and expertise, the team collects the information needed for a rational outcome and focused discussion using the Team Communication Cycle.

Next Post: The Team Communication Cycle

In the previous post (The Three Phases of Problem Solving) I discussed the three common and universal phases of effective problem solving. Though the phases are common, the steps used to process these phases are as varied as the number of problem solving processes available. I have seen methods with as many as 24 steps. It is my opinion that the process should be “user friendly.” Using a method should not be problematic in itself. Therefore, I have identified six simple steps to effective problem solving. These steps guide an individual and team effectively through the three phases.

Phase I: Identify the Problem – ( Steps 1-3)

There are three distinct activities in this phase. Each is treated as an action step. The first action step is the “reaction” to the initial indicator that a problem exists. My approach calls this initial indicator an “Alarm.” It is a signal or “red flag” that warns or alerts observers of potential difficulties. Key to understanding the alarm is the step that an alarm is an “indicator of a possible problem.” Since problem solving is reactive, it is important to safeguard against “under” reaction and “over” reaction. The alarm signals the team to pay attention. The alarm is information. The sole purpose of the alarm step is to recognize an indicator of a potential problem and to accurately describe the indicator in terms of what has been observed.

The second action step of identifying the problem is to find a way to measure the alarm in order to determine if it is or is not a problem. My process calls this standard of measurement an “Expectation.” The expectation is the assumed or explicit measurement that triggered the alarm. It is the standard of measurement that will be used to measure and define the problem. The existence of a problem implies that there is an “expected result” that is being hindered. The reactive nature of problem solving is based on something not being as it is expected. The expectation is a description of the acceptable situation, at minimum, or the ideal state, at best. It may be a policy statement, a recurring procedure or precedent, a standard of measurement, a benchmark, a goal, an objective, a desired result or a best case scenario. It is impossible to define a problem accurately without a standard of measurement.

The third action step of identifying the problem is to accurately define the problem by measuring what has occurred (the alarm) against what was expected to occur (the expectation). My process calls this comparison and resulting measurement of the difference the “Surface Problem.” A surface problem is an obstacle that blocks the expectation. It is the gap or difference between the alarm and the expectation. This condition, difference or gap is unacceptable. Surface implies that the problem is immediate and observable. However, what is visible is not the entire problem. In some terminology, the surface problem might also be called the symptom. A surface problem is caused by single or multiple, less visible sources.

The Identify The Problem phase is complete when the indicator of a potential problem (the alarm) has been described and measured against the expectation, resulting in an accurate definition of the surface problem.

Phase II: Expose the Root Causes – (Step 4)

There is one single purpose in both this phase and the one action step, to completely expose the root system that feeds and fuels the surface problem. My process calls this search the “Root Causes.” These are the factors that fuel the surface problem. They are the source of the problem condition and the tributary events that bring about the problem. While exposing the root causes is simply stated, the work of exposing causes is challenging. The nature of root causes is that they are hidden and not immediately obvious. Therefore, problem-solvers must “dig” and “search” for all source causes. My process describes a way to conduct this search and incorporates a way to conduct the search and guide the problem solvers to the root causes.

The Expose the Root Causes phase is complete when the root causes to the surface problem have been identified and exposed to analysis.

Phase III: Create the Solution(s) – (Steps 5 & 6)

There are two steps in this phase with each separate activity treated as an action step. My process calls this fifth step “Solutions” to the problem. This is the course of action chosen to address the root causes and solve the problem. This is the point where creativity is required. My process describes a way to generate creativity and guide the problem solvers to creative, viable solutions.

The sixth step of my process, “Tactical Plan,“ details the implementation of solution(s). To complete the task, problem solvers must develop and implement a tactical plan. My process describes a way to guide the problem solvers to viable solutions.

The Create the Solutions phase is complete when the viable and effective solution(s) to the problem has been selected and effectively implemented.

My complete process is called, Creative Root Cause Analysis, a highly effective and easy to use problem solving tool.

Products are available to the left of this post.

Next post: The Power of Probing Questions.

Problem solving is by its very definition a reactive activity, meaning it is focused on events that have already happened. Unlike planning, which is a proactive activity that is forward looking, problem solving is investigating something that happened in the past. The existence of a problem implies that an expected outcome has been foiled. Problem solving is focused and directed on correcting an unacceptable situation that already exists and threatens the desired outcome. Problem solvers are “reacting” to actual factors that block the expected results.

Any and all effective problem solving processes are similar in that they include three general phases. These three phases are:

Phase I:  Identify the Problem

Phase II:  Expose the Root Causes

Phase III: Create the Solution(s)

Phase I: Identify the Problem

The phase discipline of effective problem-solving is to accurately Identify the Problem, to understand, describe or definine the problem. Poorly defined problems lead to poor solutions. Or to say it another way, the initial phase of Identify the Problem is critical to successfully solving a problem. Many problem solving attempts have been doomed from the very start because the problem itself was never accurately defined. Impatience at the point of problem identification is a self-defeating impulse. Of course, it is important to find a solution, but a viable solution is predicated on the initial phase of problem identification.

Phase II: Expose the Root Causes

The second phase of effective problem solving is to completely expose the root system.

This phase proceeds from the accurately identified and defined problem. The terminology of “expose” has been chosen as part of the root cause metaphor. The factors that fuel or feed the problem already exist. It is not the problem solver’s job to create these causes. It is the problem solver’s task to find these pre-existing causes and make them visible so they can be analyzed and cured.

Imagine, if you will, uncovering the root system of a weed. The root system already exists. It is an active and healthy system that feeds the weed visible above the ground. To find the roots, you must remove the soil and clear everything away from the root system. This is precisely what happens in the phase of Exposing the Root Causes. It is as if the problem solver has dug down and removed the entire weed and its complete root system. The weed and barren root system are laid out in the sunlight, no longer hidden but “exposed” and visible, to be studied and analyzed.

Phase III: Create the Solution(s):

The third phase of effective problem solving is to create innovative solutions. The Create the Solution(s) phase depends on both preceding phases. If the problem is not accurately defined and the root system is not completely exposed, the likelihood of an effective solution has been compromised. All too often problem solvers jump ahead to solutions without fully understanding the problem and its causes.

Effective solutions are a creative and innovative response to an accurately defined problem and a completely exposed root system. Einstein has been quoted as saying, “It is impossible to solve a problem with the same kind of thinking that caused the problem.” Problem solvers must think differently. That is why we call this the “create” phase. Effective problem solvers actually generate new, innovative and creative ways to eliminate the root causes and, as a result, solve the problem.

In my next post, I will break down these three phases into six simple steps that effectively guide you to solving problems.

1.  Effective Facilitators are experienced in team participation and team facilitation.

2.  Effective Facilitators believe that the team can and will generate a synergistic result.

3.  Effective Facilitators lead teams with an optimistic expectancy and attitude that gives the team a
performance edge.

4.  Effective Facilitators find the balance in the team dynamics.

As the facilitator, your role is to guide the team members in a team process. You need to create an environment that encourages open communication and participation by all. If you are facilitating a brand new team, you may need to run team-building exercises before you start the process to familiarize them with each other and the concepts of teamwork. If the team is cohesive and versed in process, your role will be more of process guide and coach.

There are two assumptions that are key to team success. They are a belief/faith in two intangible facts:

Insight/intuition: Everyone has knowledge, experience, expertise, insight, intuition and energy that are essential resources for team success. All members must make their unique contributions for the team to be successful.

Team synergy: Two or more people working together collaboratively and cooperatively can produce better results than the same people working independently.

These are fulfilled by a facilitator who believes that the team can and will generate a synergistic result. These beliefs lead to choices and actions that ultimately provide the atmosphere and environment where the synergistic dynamic can occur. Additionally, any preconceived attitudes or perceptions with which the facilitator approaches the team is a self-fulfilling prophecy that either propels or limits the team results.

The facilitator must lead the team with an optimistic expectancy and attitude in order to give the team a performance edge. Pressure and time constraints are nearly always the enemies and saboteurs of effective teamwork. Team process requires time. The actual amount of time is dependent upon the complexity of the problem and the size of the team. The facilitator must be able to find the balance in the team dynamics, encouraging the team members to take more time when needed and pulling them off tangents when time is being wasted.

The art and science of effective team facilitating and process are part of the Advanced Team System, Master Facilitator Guides. Use the tools listed on the left to develop your skills as a facilitator.

Our work and research have identified nine rational, emotive categories regarding the thinking of effective leaders. These categories represent 100 specific, uniquely powerful ideas that drive the thinking of effective people. We have summarized these into nine clusters/categories in the acrostic, PRO-ACTIVE:

Passion: Effective leaders lead with “heart.”
The “To Do” list of MBOs goals and objectives is a critical key to effectiveness, but there is a bottom line difference between MBOs accomplished by utility and those accomplished with “heart.” The most effective people are driven by a constructive passion for results. They have realistic goals and laser-sharp priorities, i.e., MBOs; but the best of the best have more. They are driven by a heartfelt, rational, emotive vision and understanding that energizes their thoughts and actions. They are passionate about all they do.

Relational: Effective leaders value and foster positive relationships.

The leader’s work is leading people who produce results. Leaders cultivate and grow the networks of relationships among themselves, both intra and interpersonally. These positive relationships with people are essential for success. All organizations work in relational structures. At the lowest and least productive level of networks are the relationships of bureaucratic, autocratic and driver organizations. At the highest and most productive levels are the synergistic teams. Effectiveness at any level is built on “the power of positive relationships.”

Optimistic: Effective leaders embody optimism.

Contrary to popular myth, optimism is not “looking at the world through rose colored glasses.” Optimism is looking at the world with realistic hope. Optimism is the opposite of pessimism. Pessimism sees and offers no hope: “It is useless, it will never work, it will never be….” Those who approach tasks and people with pessimism are seldom surprised. They get exactly what the limits of their expectancy prescribe—NOTHING.

Likewise, leaders who approach tasks and people with optimism, expecting outstanding results, are seldom surprised. They get exactly what their positive expectations prescribe—POSITIVE RESULTS.” The attitudes and expectations with which one approaches others is a self-fulfilling prophecy that limits or propels the outcome. Effective leaders have hope.

Affirm-Assert: Effective leaders listen carefully.

Leaders must be eager to receive input. Maturity understands that the best decision is not a matter of “who owns the idea” but of “useful ideas.” People limited to selling their ideas are blocking “different ideas.” No one has the best insight or idea on everything. Effectiveness is about getting useful ideas on the table. Therefore, the best practice is to listen and learn from the input of others. At the same time, effective leaders clearly articulate their agenda without controlling or dominating. It is important for a leader to be assertive but the best take care to assert without stifling others. Therefore, “affirming” precedes “asserting.” The order is deliberate. Effective leaders encourage others’ opinions, thoughts and insights for the good of the whole while making their own contributions.

Confident: The most effective leaders believe they are not egocentric but are confident.

They have a certain faith and trust in themselves, their people and the organization that projects a “can do” attitude in the face of the most difficult challenges. This confidence is a kind of intuitive insight that makes the vision and goals of the future appear objective and actualized long before they are reality. Such confidence inspires and motivates others to believe in and work to actualize the future.

Tactical: Effective Leaders have the ability to see things from both the 50 and 50,000 foot levels.

Tactical thinking is the ability to zoom in from the big picture to the closer picture that reveals the detail of the manageable, component parts that make up the whole. People who lack tactical perspective are easily overwhelmed, frustrated and give up because things seem insurmountable. Tactical thinking enables leaders to identify individual components that make up the whole. It is the ability to “pan out and zoom in” on a problem, project or situation and provide the components of high achievement.

Innovative: Effective leaders are creative.

Creativity is about innovation, new and different approaches through insight and intuition. Innovation is often a slight variation, a new combination or application of putting familiar components together in new ways. It is not so much about a total new idea as it is about a slight variation and subtle difference that impacts different results. Effective people are constantly looking for new combinations, variations and subtle differences that can have a significant impact.

Venturesome: Effective Leaders are willing to risk.

Leadership, on a time line, is about moving from the present to the future. Whenever we project actions into the future, we are dealing with an element of the unknown/uncertainty, which is about risk. It is the leader’s job to lead people with confidence into uncharted waters of the future. Risk aversion is a roadblock. Effective leaders are willing to take reasonable risk and try a different approach.

Enthusiastic: Effective Leaders Show Excitement.

“It’s hard to start a fire with a wet match.” It really is that simple. As the leader, if I am not enthused and motivated about what I are doing, how can I expect my people to be enthused? Effective leaders are caring, engaging and interesting. The best have vibrant, dynamic interactions with others that include differences, strong beliefs, convictions, and spirit that drive and inspire positive outcomes. They are effective, enthusiastic energizers.

Re-Active

While “In-active” people are frustrating and “Neg-active” people are exhausting, “Re-active” people are useful. Leaders need  constructively “Re-active” people on their teams. They are problem-solvers and fire fighters; they perform triage. These are the people who jump into action, are at their best under pressure and excel when faced with a challenge. These folks are useful because they get things done and work out the glitches.

Many business and organizational leaders who have been internally promoted within their organization are “Re-active.” You see, if you are a problem solver and a fire fighter who “fixes things” for the organization, you get noticed. This notice typically comes in the form of more responsibility and promotion. While such people are useful, we also know that most individuals internally promoted within their organization tend to be reactive, and it is their reactive ability that gets them noticed and promoted. Sound good? Enter the “Peter Principle.”

The Peter Principle says that in business/organizations, people tend to be promoted to a level of incompetence (Laurence Peter and Raymond Hull, 1968).  The Peter Principle holds that members of business/organizations are promoted so long as they work competently. Sooner or later, they are promoted to a position at which they are no longer competent. I would suggest that they do not suddenly become incompetent, but that their “thinking” becomes counter-productive as they move along the responsibility line of supervisor, manager, leader and executive.

How do “Re-active” people think? Some examples of “Re-active” thoughts are:

Responsive: Ready to respond
Emergency focused: Waiting for a problem to solve    
Affected: Stimulated by problems        
Compelled: Driven to resolve problems
Tied-up: Kept occupied and engaged in circumstances
Inflame: Excited by actions and feelings
Victimized: Controlled by external means
Enslaved: Burdened and controlled

The problem with “Re-active” thinking is that it operates in the past and under the control and influence of past circumstances. The very nature of reaction is response to a stimulus. That means the stimulus is in control. Problem solving, crisis management and conflict resolution are reactive activities. They cause one to respond to a stimulus, but effective people quickly move from a reactive stage to the initial stage of problem solving.

Effective, constructive leaders are “Pro-Active.” It is rooted in a way of thinking that promotes choices that drive constructive, effective decision-making and moves individuals, teams, departments in a positive, rational and optimistic direction. “Pro-Active” leaders facilitate the circumstances and environment that leads to constructive results.

What was I Thinking: “Neg-Active”

What about negative people? While inactive people are frustrating, negative people are exhausting.

As leaders, we work hard to inspire and motivate our staff and move the team forward, and with a sigh or a smirk (let alone a disparaging comment) a negative person can cripple our best efforts. Negative people are so frustrating that an entire business has developed around countering the negative person. The industry is motivational posters and sayings. Companies spend lots of dollars annually to line their halls and meeting rooms with inspirational business posters. You can almost tell what the naysayers in a company are saying by the countering themes of the posters that are on display. But again the tactic is at the surface problem of negative behavior and fails to address the root causes of negative thinking. The irony of the motivational market has been captured by the de-motivational market. There is a negative poster to counter every positive poster in the market and, I suspect given the cynical twist, the naysayers are winning. (After all, I am a positive person but just jaded enough that I enjoy the despair products as well.)

The problem is not the negative behavior. The problem is negative thinking and choices. How do negative people think? Some examples of “Neg-active” thoughts are:

No, Not, Never: Do not waste your time. It will never work.
Expect Negative/Exclude Positive:   A good outcome is a fluke.
Gloom and Doom:  The Sky is Falling.
Apprehensive: Everything that can go wrong will go wrong.
Condemning: That’s dumb.
Troubled: Not worth the risk.
Ill-fated: It is bound to fail.
Vindictive: I hope it fails.
Entrenched: Why change?

People who  think in negative terms will make negative choices which result in negative expressions. If we want to change outcomes, we must challenge a person to change their thinking.

In-Active

I am sure you have people under your sphere of responsibility who can perceive a project, problem, conflict or task, obviously think about it and make choices but the outcome is to be inactive, do nothing at all, or do the bare minimum. These folks consume 80% of our management time. It is interesting. Only about 3% of people are like this. We think the group is larger because it is too time consuming.

I ask others: “What do you do to get inactive people going?”

Common answers are:

“I assign specific tasks with regular and repeated reporting requirements.”

“I give them critical reviews and hold their feet to the fire.”

“We have a ‘Come to Jesus’ meeting.”

“I keep the pressure on them.”

These tactics are effective, they do work. Fact is, if you apply enough pressure and discomfort to a person you can get them to do pretty much whatever you want.

But then I ask another question: “What do you suppose these folks are doing this week while you are not there applying pressure?”

Laughter breaks out. Everyone knows their tactics do not get to the root cause to cure the problem, but are simply gimmicks to temper the problem.

The problem is not the behavior or, in this case, the lack of behavior. The problem is in thinking and choices. How do inactive people think?

Some examples of inactive thoughts:

Impotent: Nothing I can do about it.
No Hope: Nothing I do will make any difference.
Aimless: It is not worth the effort.
Cynical: Why should I bust my — for —
Trivial: I’m not going to waste my time on/for…..
Ineffective:  Will never work
Vain:  That will be futile
Enervate:  That’s lame

People who think in impotent, no hope terms will make impotent, no hope choices, resulting in doing nothing or very little. If we want to change outcomes, we must challenge the person to change their thinking. (link to opossum pic.)

Leaders repeatedly ask me: “Why do people act/behave as they do?” (The question is typically asked in the context of problematic and counter-productive actions.) But I would expand the question to, “Why do I act/behave as I do, for good or ill? What drives effective, productive actions? What drives ineffective, counter-productive actions?”

Let us begin our discussion at the point of observation. As leaders we observe, over a period of time, individual actions and performance and form general characterizations about each individual. We label these as their personality or reputation which, in turn, becomes an expected behavior. This personality or reputation is a pattern of unique behaviors and characteristics that is consistently displayed. This reputation takes on a “persona” as the “external visible self” which we title, “personality.” There is no discernable difference between one’s reputation and personality. People are outgoing or aloof,  controlling or cool, calm and collected, high strung, confident, mean spirited, negative, workaholics, considerate, unproductive….etc.

If we drill down below the surface of the immediate behavior, we observe that people make choices that produce behaviors. People choose to be engaging, which appears to be outgoing. People chose to take charge, which appears to be controlling. People chose to worry, which appears as anxiety.

At this point, I sense objections. Some say, “I do not choose these behaviors. They occur without a thought. I just do it.”

I agree. Many of our actions are routine habits that seem natural and automatic. But, there was a time and place where the pattern was established based on conscious or subconscious thoughts and choices.

If we drill down even further the next questions is, “What drives my choices?”

The answer: My thinking drives my choices that drives my behavior that builds my reputation/personality. I think in terms of meeting and being with people. I make a choice of engagement and demonstrate a pattern of being warm and outgoing. The reputation I establish is one of being an extravert. Or, conversely, I think that meeting people is stressful and awkward and I choose to be private and stay to myself. The behavior demonstrates aloofness and I build a reputation of being introverted – all based on my thoughts that work themselves out into actions. “The ancestor of every action is a thought.”

Thinking

I use the word “thinking“ as an umbrella term to describe all the cognitive processing in my conscious and subconscious thoughts. My thinking includes my assumptions, attitudes, values, beliefs, convictions, prejudices, biases; basically my conclusion about myself, my work, others and all of life. Then I use these thoughts/conclusions to filter all I take in though my perceptive senses. I use them for recognition, interpretation and expectation; meaning, my thinking not only sets in motion my behaviors but also becomes the key to understanding.

Perceive-Think-Choose-Act

I use a simple process diagram to illustrate the concept: Perceive >Think> Choose>Act.

We perceive the world around us through our “six” senses (sensory skills include intuition/emotional intelligence) that constantly pick up stimulus hardwired directly to our brain where we “think” about what we have perceived. That perception is evaluated using our filters of recognition, interpretation and expectation, leading us to our thoughts about what we perceived. We then make choices based on that thinking, and act.

Over the next series of posts I will explore example of thinking using this model.