New
York Times best-selling author Patrick Lencioni (2005) said, “Teamwork doesn’t
require great intellectual insight or masterful tactics. More than anything else, it comes down to
courage and persistence.” Furthermore, he continued by stating, “I honestly believe
that in this day and age of informational ubiquity and nanosecond change,
teamwork remains the one sustainable competitive advantage that has been
largely untapped” (p. 3).
When
most people think of teams their minds race to football championships and World
Series wins. Corporate gurus use Google,
Southwest Airlines, and GE as standards of great teams. Teams operate every day all over the
world. From the Girl Scouts to the
Marines, teams permeate every facet of our lives. Since, as John Maxwell said, “One is too
small a number for greatness,” then true success lies in the ability to
synergize efforts and create great teams.
The
F-22 Raptor is known as the greatest advanced fighter aircraft ever
created. Yet every pilot will tell you,
they accomplish their missions because of the teamwork on the ground. Nowhere is this more important than during a deployment. The combined efforts of the maintenance and
supply team are instrumental in facilitating successful flying scenarios.
Denning
(2011) identified six elements of high performance teams in his book The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling. By demonstrating the following principles of
high performance teams, the deployed coordinated efforts of maintenance and
supply create meaning beyond operational success:
1. Actively shape the
expectations of those who use their output and then exceed the resulting
expectations.
a.
When fixing aircraft in a deployed location, it is essential that maintenance
personnel receive their parts when they need them. Backorders cause delays and missed
opportunities. Supply personnel help
shape the expectations of maintenance by ensuring the right part is available
when needed.
2. Rapidly adjust their
performance to the shifting needs of the situation. They innovate on the fly,
seizing opportunities and turning setbacks into good fortune.
a.
Maintenance personnel understand the challenges of meeting mission
requirements with reduced budgets. It is not economically feasible to deploy
with every part just in case it may
be needed. As a result, when parts are
unavailable, maintenance personnel must act fact and take subsequent steps to
avoid delay. Cannibalization (removing parts from one jet and install it on
another) is one way maintenance maintains available aircraft.
3. Grow steadily stronger.
a.
In a deployed environment, maintenance and supply personnel
increase the knowledge of each other’s strength and weaknesses.
b.
When deployed, personnel work in close quarters. The austere
situations, while difficult, facilitate a greater understanding of each other. As a result, by finding the strengths and
weaknesses of a maintenance crew, supply personnel can anticipate potential
system failures and plan accordingly.
4. Grow individually. Mutual
concern for each other’s personal growth helps develop interchangeable skills
and create greater flexibility.
a.
Raising the bar, minimizing failures, and providing the necessary
training when necessary result in a stronger deployed team and ultimately, a
stronger Air Force as well.
5. Purposes become nobler; team
performance more urgent and team approach more powerful.
a.
Supporting the world’s best fighter aircraft is a daunting task.
Maintenance and supply personnel do not take it lightly. Combining skills to support the freedom of
American citizens generate pride and enthusiasm in the Air Force support units.
6. Carry out work with a shared
passion.
a.
Working side by side in a deployed environment, both maintenance
and supply have a great desire to see the Raptor where it should be—in the
air. When an F-22 is parked on the flight
line unable to fly, both maintenance and supply personnel take whatever actions
necessary to fix it and get it flying again.
Though
the effectiveness of deployed maintenance and supply personnel are measured with
different metrics, the end result is the same: mission capable aircraft. Supply
measures stock levels, fill rates, and issue effectiveness. Maintenance keeps a close eye on
cannibalization rates and aircraft turn-times.
However, both units understand the overarching metric and shared value
of the equipping the Air Force to fly, fight, and win.
Denning
(2011) said values are often diminished when there are “Sayings without
substance” (p. 158). Moreover, he continued,
“Shared values in an organization create trust.
People have confidence that others will do what they say” (p. 149). Deploying tons of support equipment, nearly
one hundred people, and twelve aircraft to a potentially dangerous environment
requires trust on many levels.
The
patriotic motivation undergirding the Air Force core values of Integrity First,
Service Before Self, and Excellence in All We Do act as catalyst for creating
teamwork and maintaining focus.
There
are many relational interactions among military members. Denning (2011) identified four patterns of
working together (pp. 161-162).
1. Work group – defined
responsibilities and report to the same person. Little need for collaboration.
2. Team – Each member has
defined responsibilities and the work itself depended on the ebb and flow of
the organization; required gathering intelligence, identifying threats, and
accomplishing objective.
3. Community –
self-organizing. The leadership
responsibilities were shared by those who volunteer to facilitate meetings,
organize events, and contribute expertise and information to the group.
4. Network – rarely meet
face-to-face. No mutual engagement to do anything in particular except stay in
touch by way of a list.
One
of the Raptor success stories with teams occurred in a value stream mapping
(VSM) event to curb the high failure rate of canopies. The team brought together expertise from many
areas to improve the identification, repair, and investment toward canopy
support. Improving canopy management
required a high degree interaction among the team members. Each expert contributed potential process
improvement ideas and sought to make changes where necessary. At the conclusion of the 5-day process,
transportation times were decreased, turn-around times improved, and failure
rates dropped by 12 percent in the first six months.
Conversely,
as part of a senior manager directed work team, we were assembled to improve
support of the Raptor’s Air Recharge System.
While supply brought the necessary historical data to the equation in a
timely manner, the engineers were caught dragging their feet and causing
significant delays in improving the process. By the time they arrived with the data, some
of the historical data collected by supply was outdated. Since work teams often have their own
timeframe to accomplish objectives, it required a great degree of flexibility
from the supply team. When supply complained
about the engineer delays, the group supervisor was often reluctant to apply
pressure to the engineers.
Looking
back, it may have reduced frustration if the supply managers waited on the
engineer data rather than conducting a tremendous amount of research and leg
work up front. By communicating a new
schedule to the group supervisor, some of the deliverables could have been reworked
to facilitate a better investment of people’s time.
To
quote Lencioni (2005) again, “The true measure of a team is that it
accomplishes the results it sets out to achieve” (p. 7). In short, a team is only as successful as its
end goal. Keeping shared values in mind,
coordinating with respect toward the team member’s expertise, and maintaining
focus are key factors motivating high performance teams.
Steve
Reference
Denning,
S. (2011). The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lencioni,
P. (2005). Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-
Bass.
No comments:
Post a Comment