Building teams and creating community parnerships

Kormanski, Chuck

The I-99 Corridor Alliance is a collaborative tri-county effort consisting of key business development, education, research, government and corporate partners in south-central Pennsylvania. The "I-99 Innovation Corridor" connects central Pennsylvania to two major east-west interstate highways, I-76 and I-80. The goal of the Alliance is to establish and promote the I-99 corridor as a cost-effective, progressive location for competitive companies and their employees.

The Alliance achieves its goals through cooperative outreach efforts including targeted marketing campaigns, workshops, demographic analyses, business-to-education partnerships, media/government relations and networking events. The Alliance works to facilitate the enhancement and incorporation of new technology components for all current and future corridor partners. The following is a current list of Corridor Alliance assets:

* A major research university

* Six regional colleges

* A post-secondary technical training system

* Full-service business support network and financing programs

* Business, technology parks, and development centers

* Historic downtown office locations

* Venture capital sources

* Progressive secondary educational systems

* Affordable housing and land availability * Low crime rate

* Advanced personal health-care system

* Diverse economic base * Proximity to major metro areas

* Workforce availability, services, and internships

* Advanced telecommunications infrastructure

* Transportation infrastructure

* Abundant energy/water supply

* Four-season recreational/sporting opportunities

* Proactive political support base

* Cultural centers and retail hubs.

Given the above assets, the essential challenge is economic growth and improvements in quality of life. Building teams and creating partnerships to achieve these outcomes are desired interventions.

BASICS

Business And Schools Investing in Cooperative Solutions (BASICS) is a program created and administered collaboratively by the Blair County Chamber of Commerce and the Altoona-Blair County Development Corporation to encourage dialogue between the business and education communities. Awareness of the causal relationship between economic growth and workforce development within a geographic region by the program's originators provided the motivation to form a committee to explore the possibility of establishing a business-education partnership.

The BASICS mission is to create a workforce development program that will significantly improve the match between the business needs of the region and the priorities of the educational systems for the present and future. The goal is to educate the community so its residents understand what career opportunities exist in the region before making education and training decisions.

In 1998 a group of interested community partners revitalized a steering committee. It included the executive directors of the program initiators plus representation from the school districts, the teachers' union, post-secondary institutions and business corporations. A CEO from one of the business corporations and a superintendent from one of the school districts were selected as co-chairpersons of the committee. I was invited to join as a process facilitator for the group and to provide a format for team development. Thus, both a focus on task and a focus on process were provided early in the life of the committee.

TEAM DEVELOPMENT

A group becomes a team when four conditions are met (Reilly & Jones, 1974):

1. Shared goals

2. Commitment to the goals

3. Interdependent work effort

4. Accountability to a higher authority

Thus, five individuals in a hotel waiting for an elevator are a group, not a team. But if they enter the elevator and it subsequently becomes stuck between the 23rd and 24th floors, the group has the potential to become a team. Its members can agree upon shared goals and commit themselves to working toward those goals. They can decide to work interdependently (being highly independent and highly dependent simultaneously) and rely on each other for cooperative and collaborative solutions. Finally, basic needs dictate that they can remain in the elevator for only a given amount of time and they must act within that timeframe. Thus, an accountability factor is present.

Team development, like group development, is thematic, sequential and developmental. Figure 1 presents a popular group dynamics model (Tuckman, 1965; Tuckman & Jensen, 1977), and Figure 2 depicts a current team-development model (Kormanski & Mozenter, 1987; Kormanski & Bowers, 2001) to demonstrate these characteristics. These five-stage models provide themes and outcomes for both task and relationship dimensions to aid in understanding the nature of the developmental process.

The sequential group development stages are forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. Each stage has a task function and a relationship function. Forming begins with an orientation to the task and resolving dependency issues. Storming requires dealing with resistance and hostility. Norming focuses on opening channels of communication and creating cohesion. Performing involves problem solving and work requiring interdependence. Adjourning brings termination of the task and disengagement of working relationships.

Team outcomes, which are task-oriented, are commitment, clarification, involvement, achievement and recognition. The outcomes, which are relationship-oriented, are acceptance, belonging, support, pride and satisfaction. The five general themes that characterize each stage are awareness, conflict, cooperation, productivity and separation.

Ideally, teams would flow smoothly through the five sequential stages. Realistically, however, periods of crisis often result in regression and movement backward to a previous stage. The crisis might be internal, as a result of the tasks or the relationships or both, or the crisis could be external, as a result of the environment or a team member's personal situation. Developmentally, the progression dictates movement through each stage, thus making conflict (storming) a prerequisite to cooperation (norming) and productivity (performing). The developmental nature of the model results in a dynamic flow, both forward and backward. Even though the theme for each stage provides a focus, behaviors representing all five themes appear to some degree as onestage transitions into the next. Lacoursiere (1980) offers a graphic description of this phenomenon and suggests that the behaviors of each stage spread beyond the formal temporal boundaries of the group experience.

The time it takes to move through all five stages is a function of the team task, team leadership, team member readiness, and external conditions such as availability of resources, amount of organizational support, and accountability requirements (Kormanski & Bowers, 2001). Thus, situations in which the task is simple, leadership is effective, team-member readiness is high, and there are no external constraints usually result in a fairly rapid movement through the five stages. An extended timeframe is required when the task is complex, leadership is weak or absent, team-membership readiness is low, and there are many external constraints. Some teams, unfortunately, never move beyond the conflict stage and eventually self-destruct or atrophy.

TEAM INTERVENTIONS

Planned interventions by team leaders can influence the transitions between the stages and produce a more effective and efficient team performance (Kormanski, 1999). Hersey and Blanchard (1982) describe four leadership styles, which involve low to high amounts of directive and supportive behaviors:

1. High-task, high-relationship

2. Low-task, high-relationship

3. Low-task, low-relationship

4. High-task, low-relationship

The use of a planned intervention focus with an appropriate leadership style provides team leaders with a valuable tool for moving the team forward.

A Balanced Structure

A balanced structure is essential during the forming stage. Too little structure slows team progress and permits wandering from the task. Too much structure can result in a narrow focus and limit exploration and eventual strategy development. A high-task, low-relationship leadership style builds the needed structure by providing opportunities for setting goals, establishing standards, instructing, getting acquainted, and visioning.

Healthy Conflict

Healthy conflict during the storming stage is desirable. It provides a variety of differing perspectives, alternative choices for implementation, and deeper understandings of the challenges the team faces. Conflict is natural and to be expected (and embraced) during the storming stage. Nevertheless, too much conflict creates chaos, whereas too little conflict encourages apathy. Both are unhealthy.

Conflict is not always loud and obvious. Sometimes it is quiet but can be the source of low participation, missed assignments, and limited follow-through on projects. As a challenge, Lewin (1993) has suggested that the point at which organizations (as well as teams and individuals) have the most potential for growth is right at the edge of chaos.

Use of a high-task, high-relationship leadership style focuses attention on both the goals and the team members. This high-energy style encourages active listening, assertiveness, and clarification of the goal. In addition, it requires the leader to be adaptable, flexible, and creative in managing the conflict.

Helpful Support

Helpful support for team members by the team leader is useful during the norming stage. Being unhelpful can cause confusion and uncertainty. Being overly helpful re-creates the dependency of the forming stage and encourages regression. A low-task, high-relationship leadership style increases team members' participating and sharing in the leadership role without eroding the development of self-confidence. This is also an appropriate time to lighten up a little and add playfulness and humor to the team.

Moderate Risk-Taking

Moderate risk-taking during the performing stage is critical. If a leader expects moderate risk-taking from team members, modest failures also must be expected. Team members should be valued and encouraged as they provide a constant flow of information for improving both the productivity and the process. Radical risk-taking can destroy months of productive work and supportive relationships. In contrast, a conservative approach may result in little, if any, accomplishment.

A low-task, low-relationship leadership style increases the opportunity for team ownership of the solution and resulting achievements. Key leader behaviors include keeping communication channels open and rewarding team performance.

Meaningful Closure

Meaningful closure is needed during the adjourning stage. The slight crisis of ending a team task (or a team) results in regressive behavior, which makes this stage similar to the norming stage. Premature closure can result in unfinished business. Efforts to initiate additional work for the team also may be used to avoid bringing closure to a successful experience. The low-task, high-relationship style required is the same as the one used in the norming stage and provides the supportive climate necessary for concluding the teamwork. Formal ceremonies and related rituals offer a framework for celebrating the conclusion of task and disengaging from relationships.

The key to effective interventions is to avoid the extremes at each developmental stage. Thus, team leaders (and facilitators) know how to build a balanced structure during the forming stage, manage healthy conflict during the storming stage, provide helpful support during the norming stage, encourage moderate risk-taking during the performing stage, and bring meaningful closure during the adjourning stage. The most effective leadership style begins with being high-task and low-relationship during the forming stage. As the storming stage evolves, effective leaders increase their relationship behavior from low to high, while maintaining the high task behavior. Effective leaders reduce task behavior during the norming stage while maintaining the high-- relationship behavior. They reduce the relationship behavior during the performing stage and replace it with internal pride to go along with the low-task behavior. They then increase the relationship behavior during the adjourning stage to provide support for closure.

Needs of the Team

Another set of intervention strategies involves understanding the needs of the team. Maslow's (1954) hierarchy of needs arranges needs in ascending order beginning with physiological needs and followed by needs for security, belonging, and esteem. Higher-order and self-actualization needs are at the top of the hierarchy.

Teams move up the Maslow hierarchy as they progress through the 'group development stages. This relationship validates the focus of the intervention at each stage. A balanced structure meets the physiological and security needs at the bottom of the hierarchy by offering certainty and predictability. The need to belong fuels the conflict of the storming stage. Effective interventions create competitive challenges outside the group to build unity and reliance on each other. The helpful support at the norming stage fulfills needs for self-esteem and recognition. The higher need of Maslow that relates most to the performing stage is that of achievement. Teams at that stage require challenging but realistic goals-thus the advocating of moderate risk-taking. Meaningful closure at the adjourning stage necessitates a return to the needs of esteem and recognition.

The task and relationship outcomes (see Figure 2) can provide feedback concerning team development when stated behaviorally and included in a rating scale. An instrument designed to do this is the Team Development Rating Scale (Kormanski & Mozenter, 1987). Ratings and patterns of team development provide application examples from a variety of academic, sports, and work teams (Kormanski, 1999; Kormanski & Bowers, 2001).

A team is completing the forming stage when team members understand group goals and are committed to them and team members are friendly, concerned, and interested in each other. The storming stage is concluding when team members acknowledge and confront conflict openly and team members listen with understanding to others. The norming stage is ending when team members include others in the decision-making process and recognize and respect individual differences. The performing stage is wrapping up when team members contribute ideas and solutions to problems and team members value others' contributions and ideas. The adjourning stage is over when team members recognize and reward team performance and team members encourage and appreciate comments about team efforts.

FORMING THE BASICS TEAM

The BASICS team established an early-morning monthly meeting time to build a balanced structure to carry out the mission. Orientation to the tasks and resolving dependencies were the first challenges. The team of 12 identified the initial tasks of stating a mission, choosing a problem-solving sequence, creating a vision, and exploring the most effective strategies for using a team approach. The mission evolved over a period of time and was created through dialogue among the team members. Initially, the mission focused only on the county, but it was broadened in 2002 to include the region and be included in the 1-99 Corridor Alliance.

Problem-Solving Sequence

A problem-solving sequence was adopted that would define the problem and related issues, collect relevant data, analyze the data, develop a plan of action, implement the plan, and evaluate both task accomplishment and process effectiveness. Although extensive data from a diverse group of stakeholders would be required for a powerful vision, a simple, workable vision was constructed using the dialogue of the team. This dialogue revolved around the issue of our most educated youth leaving the area as a result of a limited number of available jobs in their occupational field while several local industries were importing technical workers for job openings. The later problem became a non-issue when an economic downturn created large layoffs, by local corporations in the technical areas. As a result, overall economic growth and job creation became the major focus of the early vision, and workforce development a significant strategy to realize progress toward those goals.

Dependencies were quickly resolved as team members agreed to limit team meetings to one hour and use these gatherings to plan work, seek input when needed, report on progress, and celebrate successes. The actual work of the team was accomplished between meetings by small taskforces of two to five individuals with expertise related to the given task. When the expertise was unavailable or absent within the team, the taskforce sought out the needed talent from the community for a given task. Careful selection of the original team and the co-chairs brought together a group of individuals who possessed the organizational and problem-solving skills and also the power and influence within the community to attract the needed resources of people, services, and finances.

Defining the Problem and Collecting the Data

To define the problem more clearly and to collect essential data to serve as the foundation for problem solving by the BASICS team, the focus group was selected as a beginning strategy. In the focus group a group interview format is used to gather relevant qualitative data in response to a set of questions concerning the problem or issue. Focus groups solicit all perspectives on a topic. They are not intended to solve problems immediately, gain consensus, or debate issues. Using a synergistic dynamic, they are useful in discovering what people think and feel about something. They provide an opportunity to understand an issue in depth as well as the relationship with other significant issues.

A series of three focus groups consisting of 10 individuals each met in 1998. Participants in each focus group included all of the county's school superintendents, CEOs of the county's major business enterprises, and members of the BASICS steering committee. This unique group of participants was selected for their knowledge and experience and for their power and influence in bringing about change. In addition, they controlled the critical resources needed to carry out the mission. Their support would be needed for advice, funding, meeting space, employee participation, marketing and a variety of related products and services.

Major Questions

Along with selecting participants for the focus groups, a set of questions (and sub-questions) was developed to explore the problem and identify the key issues. The five major questions that guided the focus group dialogue were:

1. What are the regional workforce needs?

2. What are the resources and limitations?

3. What current trends will influence change?

4. What is the common ground for partnering?

5. What steps should we should take next?

The group discussion surrounding these key issues was dynamic and animated, particularly on topics characterized by diversity of perspective and opinion. The conflicts were extremely healthy. Feedback from the participants was highly positive. Most of the participants described the dialogue as insightful and enjoyable. Business and education leaders of the county began to develop mutual respect.

Initiatives

Following an analysis of the data, 10 initiatives were created, and small groups of the BASICS team began to develop action plans to address the related issues. Some initiatives involved supporting ongoing endeavors by becoming an active contributor, and some required addressing neglected issues that needed attention. The four initiatives that required collaborative support were:

1. The School-to-Work Program, bringing students and teachers into the workplace for dialogues, tours, job-- shadowing experiences, and internships.

2. The Attendance Counts Program, encouraging employers to use attendance records from transcripts in the hiring process and providing rewards for high-- percentage attendees in each school district.

3. The Skilled Trades Recognition Program, sponsored by local businesses, which provides awards to outstanding students in technical curriculums.

4. The Eighth Grade Career Fair, bringing presenters from a variety of occupations and occupational levels into all of the county schools for career exploration prior to the students' making critical decisions about their ninth grade curriculum.

The six initiatives that needed new structures and processes were:

1. Occupational profiles of jobs available in local companies, to include openings, salary, educational requirements, and related occupational information.

2. A career exploration website with local occupational information, career exploration strategies, an interest inventory, and links to the state system (Team Pennsylvania CareerLink) that would be attractive to potential users.

3. Career binders containing local occupational information and an introduction to the website for use by school guidance departments, college career centers, and county libraries.

4. Counselor and educator daylong workshops providing a forum for business leaders, counselors, and educators to work together to assist in implementing the other nine initiatives and create additional strategies for encouraging students and their parents to become involved.

5.Augmentation of career education courses and experiences in the schools by making resources available, creating opportunities for dialogue, and advocating for a standard career-education curriculum component for all schools.

6. Creation of a comprehensive advertising campaign to include television, radio, newspapers, bus cards and billboards to market the initiatives throughout the region.

STORMING WITH THE BASICS TEAM

The healthy conflict emerged in 1999 as the team began developing strategies for delivering the initiatives to the stakeholders and acquiring the needed resources to do this most effectively. One of the first strategies was to create a 10-minute video that presented the critical issues and described the mission and vision of the BASICS program. If done professionally, this would cost a few thousand dollars; however, it could be done for a few hundred dollars using students-in-training at the local technology center.

Even though involving students was deemed important, the team decided, after a lively discussion, that a professional-quality product was desired to emphasize the need for all stakeholders to get involved, share their perceptions, provide resources, and support the process. Within a week, a few individuals from the business community provided the funding to cover the cost of the video production.

The initial structures of small work groups and regularly scheduled, time-limited meetings placed the responsibility on coordinated teamwork and reduced topic wandering and turf building. Those who had the interest and the time volunteered for specific jobs. A few of the original team members, who realized they had neither the interest nor the time, left the team quietly and were replaced by individuals who brought needed talents and influence to the work effort. An early addition to the team was a workforce-development specialist whom one of the original partners had recently hired.

As a result, resistance and hostility were kept to a minimum and healthy conflict was promoted as meetings became challenging and enjoyable forums for building strategies and securing resources, delivering them, evaluating their impact, and celebrating successes. The team members developed a strong sense of belonging during the year as each small group's contribution was added to the team's overall impact. The accumulated successes began to be noticeable in the community as some initial marketing strategies were implemented using news releases, pamphlets, and the information video.

Developing Strategies and Acquiring Resources

The individuals working on the advertising initiative augmented their group by adding professionals from the field and enlisting the aid of Chamber of Commerce members involved in the business. Their goal was to have a comprehensive marketing plan completed for implementation during the fall of the year.

Job descriptions were prepared for 215 occupations found in local companies, with accompanying salary and educational requirements. The technical consultant who created the Chamber of Commerce website created a link to a newly developed BASICS website, which was constantly improved and upgraded throughout the year. The first workshop for school guidance counselors was held, with representation from all school districts in the county, along with a number of college career centers. The information binders were prepared and distributed, and the website and advertising initiatives were introduced. A separate mini-workshop was conducted for school administrators. The information video was shown during in-service programs for all of the school districts, followed by a brief question-and-answer session. This also was done for interested business and community groups including a number of service organizations.

Acquiring Resources

The most challenging aspect of the entire development of the BASICS program was funding. Up to this point, key individuals interested in the economic growth and general welfare of the community had contributed their time and expertise. Once the initial vision was created, it became obvious that a substantial amount of money would be needed to deliver the identified initiatives. Significant monies would be required for design, upgrades, and maintenance of a website; a comprehensive advertising campaign, daylong workshops, printed information, awards recognition, and general expenses for smaller projects.

During the spring of 1999, the BASICS program requested $10,000 contributions from the major corporations in the county. Most responded favorably with all or at least part of the suggested amount. Including their CEOs in the initial focus groups was vital in heightening their awareness concerning the issues and the relationship of workforce development to economic growth. The school districts of the county, which included a significant rural area, were asked for a few thousand dollars each based on their total number of students. Even though the school budgets, based on taxpayer monies, were tight, the BASICS team believed strongly that all partners should make some financial commitment to the program. By summer, close to $100,000 had been acquired to fund the program.

The healthy conflict continued as the group working on the advertising initiative described a comprehensive marketing plan that would require significantly more than the program's current financial assets. The BASICS team continued moving forward. A group approached our state and federal legislators and provided a detailed description of the program and its local supporters. Both the U.S. Department of Education and the state Department of Labor provided funding for a 2-year period. The state source came from the governor's budget and included a promise of future funding if the BASICS team would add an initiative to share the process with other counties in the state.

NORMING WITH THE BASICS TEAM

Integrating each initiative with the overall mission and vision became the next critical challenge. The need for supportive helpfulness was evident. The complex nature and size of the advertising campaign and the technical requirements of the website and links required more time. The advertising campaign was delayed until the beginning of 2001. The second daylong workshop for guidance counselors was held in the fall of 2000, and the counselors provided valuable feedback regarding the information video, the advertising campaign, the eighth grade career fair, and the website.

The Southern Alleghenies Workforce Investment Board became a more active partner. This board is responsible for administering federal Workforce Investment Act services provided through the Team Pennsylvania CareerLink System. The board provided valuable assistance in developing the website and the occupational profiles.

Again, a few team members left and were replaced by needed expertise during the year. The new additions included a representative from the Workforce Investment Board, a college president, and a local mayor. Cohesion was high, and communication among team members and partnering organizations was excellent. Reward and recognition programs received communitywide publicity, as did the Eighth Grade Career Fair.

Team members from the two major partners soon discovered that as a number of the initiatives were being implemented, then work with the team increased significantly. The monthly meetings began to include more discussion on process and strategies for dividing the workload more equitably. Grant requests for federal and state funding continued to be a priority. Attendance and participation at meetings and functions remained high throughout the year.

Discussions began with a neighboring county Chamber of Commerce regarding sharing the process, as well as some financial help in initiating a BASICS program. This added initiative was a response to the State, which had asked that this role of mentor be included in the state grant funding proposal. Arrangements were made to select a steering team, establish meeting times, and conduct initial focus groups for this new partner.

PERFORMING WITH THE BASICS TEAM

During the year 2001, two years of hard work began to pay off. The moderate risk-taking by team members who were not satisfied with small gains had a major impact on the county and the region. The advertising campaign was highly successful, and even though there were some criticisms, everyone could recite the catchy jingle that identified the website, which encouraged young people to "hook up with a career in your own back yard." Website hits were in the thousands and beyond expectations. The site could be reached using the Chamber of Commerce's address (blairchamber.com) and clicking on a special BASICS icon.

The interdependence of the BASICS team members and their ability to engage in group problem solving continued to provide new insights and energy for the work effort. The impact of the advertising campaign, success of the website, and effort to create a regional alliance using the interstate highway (I-99) added new risk to the process. The growth and expansion of the program became a serious and real issue.

As the advertising campaign reached its peak in 2001, the region was hit with massive workforce layoffs. As the year went on, the economic climate worsened. This forced the team's brief return to the storming and norming stages. The program focus reverted to one of the original mission statement components: Matching students with careers and aiding students in the career decision-making process became the focal point of the program. The BASICS team also began discussing the need to include the unemployed, the underemployed and other adult groups seeking the best jobs possible.

In the fall the third guidance counselor workshop was expanded to include school administrators, and the State's Lieutenant Governor gave the keynote address on the topic of the business-education partnership. The second phase of the advertising campaign began as students returned to school with updated commercials and free t-shirts with the web address (blairchamber.com) on them. The hits continued.

The Eighth Grade Career Fair remained popular, but recruiting speakers for all eight school systems became challenging. The fair is partnered with the school districts and the Chamber of Commerce's servant leadership program (Leadership Blair County). The latter group graduates a class of 24 yearly and has provided the leadership, and many of the presenters are graduates of the program, which is beginning its ninth year of existence. The Attendance Counts Program had been receiving scant attention and was falling by the wayside. Although committed to requesting attendance records on transcripts, few employers actually were doing this. Little had been done regarding a career education curriculum to be shared by all county schools. Thus, discussion began at the counselor workshop, at which ideas for moving these initiatives forward were solicited.

ADJOURNING THE BASICS TEAM

When tasks are completed or the strategic direction changes, an ongoing team often adjourns. The complexity of the mission (10 initiatives), the extended timeframe needed to establish the program (3 years), and the multiple goals and tasks within each initiative provided the team and each task focused group within the team many opportunities to experience the team-development process. Thus, smaller and simpler examples of the developmental stages occurred frequently and in a variety of different timeframes, all within the overall development of the BASICS team.

Indications that the BASICS program needed some strategic planning included the new focus of the advertising campaign, the expansion to go beyond the county to a regional effort, the mentoring of a neighboring county, and the need to evaluate more systemically the success of each initiative within the program. At the beginning of 2002, the membership changed, as it had in other years, and two new chairpersons joined the team. A strategic planing group was selected to begin this important process. In addition, a part-time project coordinator was hired to administer the program. Two of her early tasks were to begin (a) evaluations of the initial initiatives and (b) the strategic planning process.

EVALUATING OUTCOMES AND ESTABLISHING NEW DIRECTIONS

The most successful initiatives were the website and occupational profiles, the guidance counselor workshops and career binders, the Eighth Grade Career Fair, and the advertising campaign. The student-recognition programs and the School-to-Work program were moderately successful and remain important components of the BASICS program. The two weakest initiatives were the career-education curriculum and the Attendance Counts Program. One group from the team is now working with school counselors to examine a countywide career education curriculum, and another group has already made some improvements to the Attendance Counts program.

The strategic planning group has created a revised mission statement, which provides for a regional focus and an emphasis on educating the community concerning the career decision-making process. New vision initiatives have been developed, including a regular evaluation of program outcomes, more attention to the weaker initiatives, and expansion of the workshop offerings to other interested professions.

In the spring, workshops similar to those offered to guidance counselors were conducted for educational service providers, human resource personnel, and teachers (K-12). All three were highly successful. The fourth guidance-counselor workshop is planned for the fall. The team now is examining the possibility of becoming a post-secondary school clearinghouse for educational providers and creating workforce-entry seminars for high school seniors.

Meaningful closure through evaluation of the original initiatives and celebration of current successes will bring the initial mission and vision to an end. Establishment of a new strategic planning direction will mark a new life for the BASICS team.

LESSONS LEARNED

The most obvious lesson learned is that change is a large part of any organizational development process. Technological change is particularly critical. Our world is undergoing a shift from the gradual and simple change progressions of the past to a change process of the present (and the future), which is more rapid, more complex, and more dynamic. Friedman (2000) offers some interesting insights on adapting to this new world, which he suggests became a reality with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the elimination of an alternative to capitalism. He states that we are now in competition with everyone; we will never feel like we have won; we will never break even; and we can never get out of the game.

The next lesson involves how to manage the game. Keidel (1985) offers an interesting comparison using sports teams. Leadership/management in the past (prior to 1989), he says, was like managing a baseball team. Extensive planning and development were critical. Comprehensive strategies were constructed using a variety of statistics, and players spent years in the minor leagues. Resources were stockpiled. There were pinch hitters, relief pitchers, and defensive substitutes. The team thrived on individual performance and independence. The manager maintained tight control over everything and made all the key decisions. Communication flowed from the manager to specific individuals. Accountability centered on the individual. The game moved slowly and gradually, with time during the innings to change from offense to defense.

This model does not work well in the world of today. Coaching a basketball team is much more applicable. This situation is characterized by group dynamics and spontaneity. The speed of the game and the constant and unpredictable change from offense to defense requires a different type of team member and management style. Interdependence is prized, and coordination is critical. The coach must empower players to make immediate decisions and act on those decisions. Often the decision making and action must occur simultaneously. The few time-out opportunities for conferring are spent in dialogue. The communication pattern flows to the team. Players must bring a variety of skills to the game, not just offense-oriented skills. A number of players at the professional level came directly from high school. Strengths of this type of team are synergy, innovation, and flexibility.

The third lesson uses the previous analogy to suggest a shift from individual efforts to group efforts regarding the nature of influence. Change is a given, not a choice. Thus, the real choice is choosing to influence the change process. Building teams of influential people with a variety of power bases is essential, as is creating viable partnerships to tackle complex, long-term issues.

The fourth lesson involves problem solving. Our past emphasis on individual performance provided communities with exceptional individual problem solvers. But what we need now are group problem solvers. One specific component of this skill is conflict management. We desperately need more education, training, and experience in this area.

The final lesson learned is about strategic planning. As with the baseball team analogy, the process became fixated on the planning effort and involved spending a lot of time on the data. By the time these strategic planning data for the typical organization were collected, organized, analyzed, developed into goals and strategies for implementation, and published, they were out of date and useless. Thus, many strategic plans sat on shelves. Using the basketball team analogy, the new insight is to place the emphasis on creating strategic planners, not strategic plans. The focus is on thinking strategically (considering the present and future together) within a group problem-solving context wherein dialogue is the essential communication process, occurring simultaneously with action.

SUMMARY OF INSIGHTS

A case study of one county community's struggles with the challenge.of economic growth provided the backdrop for understanding the nature of team development and the power of partnerships and teamwork. The insights obtained about change, team leadership, and teamwork are summarized as follows.

Regarding Change

* Change is hard work and requires a commitment of both time and effort.

* Expertise (knowledge, skill, and experience) make the work more efficient and effective.

* Power is essential to obtain needed resources and reduce barriers to change.

* Motivation makes the work easier and a lot more fun.

* More work is accomplished through the use of teams.

* Directive leadership gets the team working quickly, but the shift to shared leadership gets the work accomplished.

* Celebrating team successes, both big and small, is personally satisfying.

Regarding Team Leadership

* When forming the team, a balanced structure is needed.

* When the team is storming, healthy conflict is essential.

* Norming for the team requires supportive helpfulness.

* Performing is enhanced by moderate risk-taking (and accepting modest failures).

* During the team's adjourning of either its work or its life, meaningful closure encourages a desire to create more teams.

Regarding Teamwork

Characteristics of good team members are the following.

* Team members understand group goals and are committed to attaining them.

* Team members are friendly, concerned, and interested in each other.

* Team members acknowledge and confront conflict openly.

* Team members listen with understanding to others.

* Team members include others in the decision-making process.

* Team members recognize and respect individual differences.

* Team members contribute ideas and solutions to problems.

* Team members value others' contributions and ideas.

* Team members recognize and reward team performance.

* Team members encourage and appreciate comments about team efforts.

Note: The author wishes to acknowledge and thank Joseph Hurd, Executive Director of the Blair County Chamber of Commerce, and Stephen McKnight, Workforce Development Specialist of the Altoona Blair County Development Corporation, for their work on this project and their willingness to share their insights and accomplishments.

REFERENCES

Friedman, T. L. (2000). The Lexus and the olive tree: Understanding globalization. New York: Anchor.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1982). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (4th ed.). Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Keidel, R. W. (1985). Game plans: Sports strategies for business. New York: Dutton.

Kormanski, C. L. (1999). The team: Explorations in group process. Denver: Love.

Kormanski, C. L., & Bowers K. L. (2001). Using the team-development rating scale to build task-oriented teams. In E. Biech (Ed.), The 2001 annual: Vol. 2. Consulting (pp. 205-218). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/ Pfeiffer.

Kormanski, C. L., & Mozenter, A. (1987). A new model of team building: A technology for today and tomorrow. In J. W. Pfeiffer (Ed.), The 1987 annual: Developing human resources (pp. 255-268). San Diego: Pfeiffer.

Lacoursiere, R. B. (1980). The life cycle of groups: Group development stage theory. New York: Human Sciences.

Lewin, R. (1993). Complexity: Life at the edge of chaos. London: Orion.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.

Reilly, A. J., & Jones, J. E. (1974). Team-building. In J. W. Pfeiffer & J. E. Jones (Eds.), The 1974 annual handbook for group facilitators (pp. 227-237). San Diego: Pfeiffer.

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399.

Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. (1977). Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies, 2, 419-427.

Dr. Chuck Kormanski of Kormanski Consulting, Hollidaysburg, PA, is a process consultant to business and education and teaches part time at a number of Pennsylvania universities. He can be reached at komanskiconsulting@aol.com

Copyright Love Publishing Company Sep 2002
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved