Introduction

One of the most important developments in management during the

1970's has been the widespread application of project teams to a
variety of complex tasks. Project managers quickly learn the critical
significance of the effective project team and the role of team building
activities in facilitating project management performance. In fact, the
difference between successful and unsuccessful performance can
often be linked to the effectiveness of the project team. We expect
that the 1980's will surely witness an increased emphasis on team
building.

Varney2 notes that the importance of developing effective teams

comes from three major forces. First, there are more
specialists/experts within organizations whose talents need to be
focused and integrated into a larger task. Second, more organizational
members want to become increasingly involved in their total work
environment. Third, the benefits of people working together can result
in important synergy and creativity. Increasing task complexity and
complicated environmental interfaces also encourage the
development of effective teams. Effective team building also leads to
higher levels of job satisfaction.

Team Building Defined

Team building is the process of taking a collection of individuals with
different needs, backgrounds and expertise and transforming them by
various methods into an integrated, effective work unit. In this
transformation process, the goals and energies of individual
contributors merge and support the objectives of the team.

The concept of team building becomes critically important as

bureaucratic hierarchies decline and horizontally-oriented teams and
work units become increasingly important. In most cases, team
building involves relationships among peers with a wide diversity of
expertise.

Major Barriers To Project Team Development

In a recent exploratory field probe with over 90 project leaders, we
attempted to identify some of the major barriers project leaders
experience in building effective teams. The project leaders
represented several types of organizations and technologies. Most of
the respondents to our probe, however, were in research and
development, construction, and engineering projects and computer
information system implementors. A more comprehensive study is
planned to develop detailed data on team-building barriers. Our
purpose here is to illustrate some of the most common major barriers
to team-building efforts and suggest alternative approaches for
handling these problems.

Differing Outlooks, Priorities, Interests and Judgments of Team

Members
A major barrier is that team members often have different professional
objectives and interests. Yet project accomplishment often requires
team members to place “what's good for the project” above their own
interest areas. When team members are reluctant to do so, severe
problems develop in building an effective team. This problem is
compounded when the team relies on support groups which have
different interests and priorities.

Role Conflicts
Team development efforts also can be thwarted when role conflicts
exist among the team members. Role conflicts are most likely to occur
when there is ambiguity about who does what within the project team
and between the team and external team support groups. Overlapping
and ambiguous role responsibilities are also major contributors to role
conflicts.

Project Objectives/Outcomes Not Clear

One of the most frequently cited team-building barriers is unclear
project objectives. As one project leader remarked:

How can you implement a team building program if you're not clear on
what the objectives for the project really are? Let's face it, many
teams are muddling along on fifty percent of their potential because no
one is really clear on where the project should be headed.
In R&D and computer systems projects, objectives may be formulated
by managers or clients external to the team. Moreover, if objectives
are not explicit, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to clearly define
roles and responsibilities.

Dynamic Project Environments

A characteristic of many projects is that the environments in which
they operate are in a continual state of change. For example, senior
management may keep changing the project scope, objectives, and
resource base. In other situations, regulatory changes or client
demands for new and different specifications can drastically affect the
internal operations of a project team. Disruptive environments are
frequently a characteristic of project teams. Finally, the rate by which
a team “builds up” to its full manpower base may present team-
building barriers.

Competition Over Team Leadership

Initially we were somewhat surprised at the number of project leaders
who mentioned competition for a leadership position. They indicated
that this barrier was most likely to occur in the early phases of a
project of if the project ran into severe problems and the quality of
team leadership came into question. Obviously, both cases of
leadership challenge can result in barriers (if only temporary) to team
building. Frequently, these challenges were covert challenges to the
project leader's ability.

Lack of Team Definition and Structure

One of the most frequently mentioned barriers of all was the lack of a
clearly delineated team to undertake a project. We found this barrier
to be most likely to occur among computer system managers and R&D
project leaders. A common pattern was that a work unit (not a project
team) would be charged with a task but no one leader or team member
was clearly delegated the responsibility. As a consequence, some
work-unit members would be working on the project but not be entirely
clear on the extent of their responsibilities.

In other cases, a poorly defined team will result when a project is

supported by several departments but no one person in these
departments is designated as a team member and departmental
coordinator. Such an approach results in the project leader being
unclear on whom to count for support. This often occurs, for example,
when a computer systems project leader must rely on a “programming
pool.”

Team Personnel Selection

Another barrier was centered on how team members were selected. In
some cases, project personnel are assigned to the teams by functional
managers, and the project manager has little or no input into the
selection process. This, of course, can impede team development
efforts, especially when the project leader is given available personnel
versus the best, hand-picked team members. The assignment of
“available personnel” can result in several problems, e.g., low
motivation levels, discontentment and uncommitted team members.
We have found, as a rule, that the more power the project leader has
over the selection of his/her team members, the more likely team-
building efforts will be fruitful.

Credibility of the Project Leader

Team-building efforts were hampered when the project leader suffered
from poor credibility within the team or from important managers
external to the team. In such cases, team members are often reluctant
to make a commitment to the project or the leader. Credibility
problems may come from poor managerial skills, poor technical
judgments or lack of experience relevant to the project.

Lack of Team Member Commitment

Lack of commitment to the project was cited as one of the most
common barriers. Lack of commitment can come from several
sources, such as; the team members’ professional interests lie
elsewhere; the feeling of insecurity being associated with projects; the
unclear nature of the rewards which may be forthcoming upon
successful project completion; and from intense interpersonal
conflicts within the team. One project leader made this comment to
us:

Let's face it—some personnel are not suited for project work. Some
can't stand the ambiguous, fluid nature of projects while others simply
rather work alone or with a small group of colleagues they've
developed close working relationships with over a period of years.

As we suggested earlier, the nature of many projects requires the

disruption of valued, existing routine work relationships of team
members. As a consequence, they may not feel committed to the
project.

Other issues which can result in uncommitted team members are

suspicious attitudes which may exist between the project leader and a
functional support manager or between two team members from two
warring functional departments. Finally, we found that low
commitment levels were likely to occur when a “star” on a team
“demanded” too much deference from other team members or too
much pampering from the team leader. One team leader put it this
way:

A lot of teams have their prima donnas and you learn to live and
function with them. They can be critical to overall project success. But
some stars can be so demanding on everyone that they'll kill the
team's motivation.

Communication Problems
Not surprisingly, we found that poor communication was a major
enemy to effective team development efforts. Poor communication
existed on three major levels. First, several mentioned the problems of
communication among team members and between the project leader
and the team members. Often the problem was caused by team
members simply not keeping others informed on key project
developments. Yet the “whys” of poor communication patterns were
far more difficult to determine. It can result from low motivation levels,
poor morale, or carelessness. We also discovered that poor
communication patterns between the team and support groups could
result in severe team-building problems, as did poor communication
with the client. Poor communication practices often led to unclear
objectives and poor project control, coordination, and work flow.

Lack of Senior Management Support

Many of the project leaders indicated that senior management support
and commitment often were unclear and subject to waxing and waning
over the project life cycle. This behavior can result in an uneasy
feeling among team members and lead to low levels of enthusiasm and
project commitment. Two other common problems frequently noted
were that senior management would not help set the right
environment for the project team at the outset, nor would they give the
team timely feedback on their performance and activities during the
life of the project.

Overcoming Team Building Barriers

For each of the major team-building barriers identified, several
suggestions can be advanced for either minimizing or eliminating
them. Table 1 lists the barriers and the suggested handling
approaches.

Table 1
Barriers To Effective Team Building And Suggested Handling
Approaches

Barrier Suggestions for Effectively Managing Barriers (How

to Minimize or Eliminate Barriers)
Differing Outlooks, Make effort early in the project life cycle to discover
Priorities, Interests, these conflicting differences. Fully explain the scope
and Judgments of of the project and the rewards which may be
Team Members forthcoming upon successful project completion. Sell
“team” concept and explain responsibilities. Try to
blend individual interests with the overall project
objectives.
Role Conflicts As early in a project as feasible, ask team members
where they see themselves fitting into the project.
Determine how the overall project can best be
divided into subsystems and subtasks (e.g., the work
breakdown structure). Assign/ negotiate roles.
Conduct regular status review meetings to keep
team informed on progress and watch for
unanticipated role conflicts over the project's life.
Project Objectives/ Assure that all parties understand the overall and
Outcomes Not Clear interdisciplinary project objectives. Clear and
frequent communication with senior management
and the client becomes critically important. Status
 review meetings can be used for feedback. Finally, a
proper team name can help to reinforce the project
objectives.
Dynamic Project The major challenge is to stabilize external
Environments influences. First, key project personnel must work
out an agreement on the principal project direction
and “sell” this direction to the total team. Also
educate senior management and the customer on
the detrimental consequences of unwarranted
change. It is critically important to forecast the
“environment” within which the project will be
developed. Develop contingency plans.
Competition Over Senior management must help establish the project
Team Leadership manager's leadership role. On the other hand, the
project manager needs to fulfill the leadership
expectations of team members. Clear role and
responsibility definition often minimizes competition
over leadership.
Lack of Team Project leaders need to sell the team concept to
Definition and senior management as well as to their team
Structure members. Regular meetings with the team will
reinforce the team notion as will clearly defined
tasks, roles and responsibilities. Also, visibility in
memos and other forms of written media as well as
senior management and client participation can
unify the team.
Project Personnel Attempt to negotiate the project assignments with
Selection potential team members. Clearly discuss with
potential team members the importance of the
project, their role in it, what rewards might result
upon completion, and the general “rules-of-the-road”
of project management. Finally, if team members
remain uninterested in the project, then replacement
should be considered.
Credibility of Project Credibility of the project leader among team
Leader members is crucial. It grows with the image of a
sound decision maker in both general management
and relevant technical expertise. Credibility can be
enhanced by the project leaders' relationship to
 other key managers who support the team's efforts.
Lack of Team Try to determine lack of team member commitment
Member early in the life of his project and attempt to change
Commitment possible negative views toward the project. Often,
insecurity is a major reason for the Jack of
commitment; try to determine why insecurity exists,
then work on reducing the team members' fears.
Conflicts with other team members may be another
reason for lack of commitment. It is important for the
project leader to intervene and mediate the conflict
quickly. Finally, if a team member's professional
interests lie elsewhere, the project leader should
examine ways to satisfy part of the team member's
interests or consider replacement.
Communication The project leader should devote considerable time
Problems communicating with individual team members about
their needs and concerns. In addition, the leader
should provide a vehicle for timely sessions to
encourage communications among the individual
team contributors. Tools for enhancing
communications are status meetings, reviews,
schedules, reporting system, and colocation.
Similarly, the project leader should establish regular
and thorough communications with the client and
senior management. Emphasis is placed on written
and oral communications with key issues and
agreements in writing.
Lack of Senior Senior management support is an absolute necessity
Management for dealing effectively with interface groups and
Support proper resource commitment. Therefore, a major
goal for project leaders is to maintain the continued
interest and commitment of senior management in
their projects. We suggest that senior management
become an integral part of project reviews. Equally
important, it is critical for senior management to
provide the proper environment for the project to
function effectively. Here the project leader needs to
tell management at the onset of the program what
resources are needed. The project manager's
relationship with senior management and ability to
 develop senior management support is critically
affected by his own credibility and the visibility and
priority of his project.

Suggestions For Handling The Newly Formed

Team
A major problem faced by many project leaders is managing the
anxiety which usually develops when a new team is first formed. This
anxiety experienced by team members is normal and predictable. It is
a barrier, however, to getting the team quickly focused on the task. In
other words, if team members are suffering from anxiety, their
attention consciously or subconsciously will be focused on the
resolution of their own anxieties rather than on the needs of the
project.

This anxiety may come from several sources. For example, if the team
members have never worked with the project leader, the team
members may be concerned about his leadership style and its effect
on them. In a different vein, some team members may be concerned
about the nature of the project and whether it will match their
professional interests and capabilities. Other team members may be
concerned whether the project will be helpful or a hindrance to their
career aspirations. Our experience indicates that team members can
also be highly anxious about lifestyle/work-style disruptions which the
project may bring. As one project manager recently remarked to one of
the authors:

Moving a team member's desk from one side of the room to the other
can sometimes be just about as traumatic as moving someone from
Chicago to Manila to build a power plant.

As the quote suggests, seemingly minor changes can result in

unanticipated anxiety among team members.

Another common concern among newly formed teams is whether or

not there will be an equitable distribution of the work load among team
members and whether each member is capable of pulling his/her
weight. In some newly formed teams, team members not only might
have to do their own work but they also must train other team
members. Within reason this is bearable, necessary and often
expected. However, when it becomes excessive, anxiety increases
and morale can fall.

We've found that certain steps taken early in the life of a team can pay
handsome dividends in terms of handling the above problems. First, we
recommend that the project leader at the start of the project talk with
each team member on a one-to-one basis about the following:

1. What the objectives are for the project.

2. Who will be involved and why.

3. Importance of the project to the overall organization or work unit.

4. Why the team member was selected and assigned to the project.
What role will he/she perform.

5. What rewards might be forthcoming if the project is successfully

completed.

6. A candid appraisal of the problems and constraints which are likely

to be encountered.

7. What are the rules-of-the-road which will be followed in managing

the project, e.g., regular status review meetings.

8. What suggestions does the team member have for achieving

success.

9. What are the professional interests of the team member.

10. The challenge the project is likely to provide to individual members

and the entire team.

11. Why the team concept is so important to project management

success and how it should work.

A frank, open discussion with each team member on the above is likely
to reduce his/her initial anxiety. As a consequence, the team member
is likely to be more attentive to the needs of the project. Of course, the
opposite reaction is possible, too. A frank discussion, for example,
may actually increase a team member's anxiety level. Often, however,
the source of the anxiety can be identified and dealt with in a timely
manner.

The importance of dealing with these anxieties and helping team

members feel that they are an integral part of the team can result in
rich dividends. First, as noted in Figure 1, the more effective the
project leader is in developing a feeling of team membership, the
higher the quality of information which is likely to be contributed by
team members. Team members will not be reluctant to openly share
their ideas and approaches. By contrast, when a team member does
not feel like part of the team and does not believe he/she can trust
others in team deliberations, information will not be shared willingly or
openly. One project leader emphasized this point as follows:

There's nothing worse than being on a team when no one trusts

anyone else.. .Such situations lead to gamesmanship and a lot of
watching what you say because you don't want your own words to
bounce back in your face...

Second, the greater the feeling of team membership and the better the
information exchange (flow) among team members, the more likely the
team will be able to develop effective decision-making processes. The
reason is that the team members feel committed to the project and
they feel free to share their information and develop effective problem-
solving approaches. Third, the team is likely to develop more effective
project control procedures. Project control procedures can be divided
into two basic areas. The first is the quantitative control procedures
traditionally used to monitor project performance, e.g., PERT/CPM,
networking, workbreakdown structures, etc. The second “control
procedure” (and perhaps the most important) is the willingness and
ability of project team members to give feedback to each other
regarding performance. Again, trust among the project team members
makes the feedback process easier and more effective. Without a high
level of trust, project personnel are often reluctant to give negative or
constructive feedback to fellow team members.

Figure 1
Team Building Outcomes
Team Building As An On-Going Process
While we have directed considerable attention toward the role of team
building in the critical early phases of a project, it is a never-ending
process. The project manager is continually monitoring team
functioning and performance to see what corrective action may be
needed to prevent or correct various team problems. We've found
several barometers to be good clues of potential team dysfunctioning.
First, noticeable changes in performance levels for the team and/or for
individual team members should always be followed up. Such changes
can be symptomatic of more serious problems, e.g., conflict, lack of
work integration, communication problems and unclear objectives.
Second, the project leader amd team members want to be aware of
the changing energy levels of team members. This, too, may signal
more serious problems or that the team is tired and stressed.
Sometimes changing the work pace, taking time off, or selling near-
term, more easily reached targets can serve as a means to reenergize
team members. More serious cases, however, can call for more drasric
action, e.g., reappraising project objectives and/or the means to
achieve them. Third, verbal and nonverbal clues from team members
may be a source of information on team functioning. It is important to
hear the needs and concerns of team members (verbal clues) and to
observe how they act in carrying out their responsibilities (nonverbal
clues). Finally, detrimental behavior of one team member toward
another can be a signal that a problem within the team warrants
attention.

We highly recommend that project leaders hold regular team building

meetings to evaluate overall team performance and deal with team
functioning problems.

The focus of these meetings can be directed toward “what are we

doing well as a team” and “what areas need our team's attention?”
This approach often brings positive surprises in that the total team will
be informed on progress in diverse project areas, e.g., a breakthrough
in technology development, a subsystem schedule met ahead of the
original target, or a positive change in the client's behavior toward the
project. After the positive issues have been discussed, attention
should be devoted toward “areas needing team attention.” The
purpose of this part of the review session is to focus on actual or
potential problem areas. The meeting leader should ask each team
member for his observations on these issues. Then, an open
discussion should be held to ascertain how significant the problems
really are. Assumptions should, of course, be separated from the facts
of each situation. Next, assignments should be agreed upon on how
best to handle these problems. Finally, a plan for problem follow-up
should be developed. The process should result in better overall
performance and promote a feeling of team participation and high
morale.

Over the life of a project, the problems encountered by the project

team are likely to change and as old problems are identified and
solved, new ones will emerge. We recommend that a high degree of
effort be focused on problem avoidance in the entire process.

Team Building With Other Departments A Case

Study
A variation of the team-building approach occurs when two separate
departments or work units are dependent upon each other for support
but have intense conflicts which slow or even stop intradepartmental
coordination attempts. Consider the following situation which recently
occurred in a division of a large, high technology company. One of the
authors served as a consultant to the firm.

The case involved an R&D group and a marketing-directed project

team. R&D's role was to develop new technology and support the
project team in its new product developments efforts. Over a period of
several months, relationships between the two groups deteriorated to
such a level that the division manager decided that an intervention
into the situation was critical. One of the authors entered the picture
at this point. After reviewing several problems with the division
manager, a recommendation was made to take both groups to a
“neutral” site for a two-day meeting. The R&D manager and the project
leader fully concurred with this decision. The meeting opened with a
talk by the division manager on the overall status of the division, the
role and importance of R&D, and the new product project team in
effectively integrating their efforts. The division manager left the
meeting after the first short coffee break.

After reconvening the R&D and the project team members, the
consultant asked each group to go to nearby conference rooms and
clearly establish how they perceived the other group. These
perceptions were to be limited to short statements and a general
agreement reached on their validity. The consultant noted that if 50
pecent or more of the members of a group believed that a statement
was an accurate reflection of the other group's behavior, then it would
constitute a general agreement. Complaints or perceptions about
personalities were not allowed. The intent here was to keep the two
teams focused on detrimental behaviors rather than specific
individuals.

After several hours the two groups were reassembled and each group
was asked to give their perceptions of the other. An abbreviated
version of the results is presented in Table 2. This process did produce
an occasional emotional outburst but was handled by the consultant
stressing that these were perceptions and part of an overall problem-
solving process.

Table 2 Team Perceptions Regarding Each Other's Behaviors: R&D vs

New Product Project Team

Upon completion of the “mirroring” process, each group had a chance

to respond to the perceptions of the other group. This proved helpful in
cooling down emotions.

The next morning, the two groups were reassembled and given this
assignment: “What Can We Do Together to Solve the Problems We've
Identified.” The two teams were again asked to retire to their separate
conference rooms to work on the assignment. After a couple of hours,
the groups were brought together again to see what kind of
suggestions had been developed and if an agreement could be
reached. The results of this phase are presented in Table 3. Overall,
the session was a success and it set the tone for regular meetings
between the R&D group and the New Product Project Team. In this
situation, the “team” was the two interdependent groups working
together.

Conclusions
Effective team building can be a critical determinant of project
success. While the process of team building can entail frustrations and
energy on the part of all concerned, the rewards can be great.

Social scientists generally agree that there are several indicators of

effective and ineffective teams. At any point in the life of a team, the
project manager should be aware of certain
effectiveness/ineffectiveness indicators. Several such indicators
appear in Table 4.

As we progress through the 1980's, we anticipate important

developments in team building. These developments should not only
lead to higher performance levels but also to increased morale. We
have noted on many occasions that the well developed, highly
committed team can withstand almost any kind of adversity. It is the
poorly developed team which is likely to run aground when storms
appear.

Table 3
Resolution Plan: Outcome From Interdisciplinary Problem-Solving
Session

• Conduct Status Review Meetings to

Monitor Progress for All On-going
Projects
• Hold Regular Product Concept Sessions
to Screen New Product Ideas
• Establish Priority System for New
Product Development Projects
• Project Team Members Will be
Responsible for Facilitating
R&D/Customer Contact
• Develop Team Concept to Facilitate
R&D/Project Group Interaction (Matrix
Approach)
• Continue These Sessions!
Table 4
Project Team Characteristics: Effective vs Ineffective

The Effective Team Likely The Ineffective Team Likely

Characteristics Characteristics
• High Performance • Low Performance
• Professional Objectives of • Low Commitment to Project
Team Members Coincides Objectives
with Project Requirements
• Clearly Defined Project • Unclear Project Objectives and
Objectives Which Are Fluid Commitment Levels from
Accepted by Team Key Participants
Members
• Team Members Highly • Team Members Operate
Interdependent Independently/ Lack of
Coordination
• Conflict Encouraged When• Conflict Avoided at All Costs
It Can Lead to Beneficial
Results
• High Trust Levels • Subtle Sabotage, Fear,
Disinterest or Footdragging
• High Interest in the Team • Unproductive Gamesmanship,
and Team Processes Manipulation of Others, Hidden
Feelings
• High Energy Levels and • Lethargic/Unresponsive
Enthusiasm