"Because We've Always Done It That Way!"
Do you ever wonder why some things are done the way they are in your organization. Perhaps the following story may help explain why.
 
The US Standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number. Why was that gauge used? Because that's the way they built them in England, and English expatriates built the U.S. railroads.
 
Why did the English people build them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, that's the gauge they used. Why did "they" use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.
 
Okay! Why did the wagons use that odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing the wagons would break on some of the old, long distance roads, because that's the spacing of the old wheel ruts.
 
So who built these old rutted roads? The first long distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for the benefit of their legions. The roads have been used ever since. Roman war chariots first made the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagons. Since the chariots were made for or by Imperial Rome they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing.
 
Thus, we have the answer to the original question. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches derives from the original specification for an Imperial Roman army war chariot.
 
Specifications, bureaucracies, policies, procedures and decisions can sometimes live forever, regardless if they are relevant today. So, the next time you are handed a specification and wonder what horse's rear came up with it, you may be exactly right. Because the Imperial Roman chariots were made to be just wide enough to accommodate the back ends of two war horses.
 
But wait, there's more!
 
When we see a Space Shuttle sitting on the launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are the solid rocket boosters, made by Thiokol at a factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the boosters might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but they had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line to the factory runs through a tunnel in the mountains. The boosters had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than a railroad track. You've got it. A major design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined by the width of a horse's derrière!

Does Your Team Need A Health Check-up?
Remember the last time you visited the doctor for your annual check up? In the waiting room you completed a form answering lots of questions about your lifestyle, medical and physical history. Then the nurse took your weight and blood pressure and asks a few more questions. Finally the doctor arrives and proceeds to ask even more questions, all in an effort to determine your overall health. Determining the overall health of a team can work much the same way. The following Team Health Check* is a list of questions that can help your team 1) understand the critical elements required to be a healthy team 2) determine to what extent you have the necessary elements in place and 3) identify key steps to take to improve your team's health.
 
Commitment to a Common Purpose & Performance Goals
A team's purpose and specific performance goals have a symbiotic relationship. The performance goals help a team track progress and hold itself accountable; and the broader, even nobler aspirations in a team's purpose supply both meaning and emotional energy. Do we have a broader, meaningful purpose that all of us aspire to?

• Does it constitute a broader, deeper aspiration than just near-term goals?
• Is it a team purpose as opposed to the leader's or a broader organizational purpose?
• Do all understand and articulate it the same way?
• Do we all define it enthusiastically in discussions with outsiders?
• Do we frequently refer to it and explore its implications?
• Does it contain themes that are particularly meaningful and memorable?
• Do we feel it is important, if not exciting?

Do we have a specific set of performance goals that we all agree on?

• Are they team goals versus the leader's or broader organizational goals?
• Are they clear, simple and measurable? If not measurable, can we determine if we've achieved them?
• Are they realistic as well as ambitious? Do they allow for small wins along the way?
• Do they call for team members to do "real" work (things other than discussing, deciding, delegating)?
• Are we all clear on their relative importance and priority?
• Do we all agree with the goals, their relative importance and the way we will measure our achievement?
• Do we all articulate the goals in the same way?

Mutual Accountability
No group ever becomes a team until it can hold itself accountable as a team. Specific performance goals provide clear yardsticks for accountability. Do we hold ourselves individually and mutually accountable for our results?

• Are we individually and jointly accountable for our purpose, goals, approach & work products?
• Can we and do we measure progress against specific goals?
• Do all of us feel responsible for all measures?
• Are we all clear on what we are individually responsible for and what we are jointly responsible for?
• Is there a sense that "only the team can fail"?

A Common Work Approach
Teams need to have a common work approach – an agreed upon way they will work together to accomplish their purpose. Teams need to agree on such things as who will do what jobs, how schedules will be set and adhered to, what skills need to be developed, and how the group will make and modify decisions. Is our working approach clearly understood and commonly agreed upon?

• Will it result in achievement of our objectives?
• Will it capitalize on and enhance the skills of all of our members.  Is it consistent with other demands on our time?
• Does it require all of us to contribute equivalent amounts of real work?
• Does it provide for open interaction, fact-based problem solving and results-based evaluation?
• Does it provide for modification & improvement over time?
• Are fresh input, approaches and perspectives systematically sought and added?

Complementary Skills
Teams must develop the right mix of skills necessary to do its job. These skills fall into three categories: technical or functional expertise, problem solving and decision-making, and interpersonal skills. Do we have adequate levels of complimentary skills and skill potential in all three categories?

• Are all three categories of skills either actually or potentially represented in our membership?
• Does each member have the potential in all three categories to advance his or her skills to the level required for our purpose?
• Are any skill areas that are critical to our success missing or underrepresented?
• Does each member understand the others' roles and skills?

Small Number
Generally speaking, smaller teams tend to be more effective than larger ones. A smaller number facilitates interaction, communications, decision-making, meeting scheduling, and sharing of viewpoints. Are we small enough in number?

• Can we convene easily and frequently?
• Can we communicate with all members easily and frequently?
• Are our discussions open and interactive for all members?
• Do we need more people to achieve our ends?
• Are sub-teams (of this group) possible or necessary?

The answers to these questions provide valuable insights into your team's health.  With this knowledge your team can write its own prescription for improved performance.
 
* Adapted from The Wisdom of Teams – Jon Katzenbach

The Center for Peak Performance Expands Challenge Course
The Center for Peak Performance™ at Rock Springs is expanding its high challenge course with three new teambuilding challenges. The elements will add a new dimension to a course that is already unique in the industry of outdoor experiential teambuilding.  The Team Climb challenge requires a team of three people, harnessed together, to summit a 40-foot climbing wall. The High Y calls for two people to lean on each other to negotiate their way across a Y shaped cable suspended high above the ground. The Pamper Pole challenges an individual to climb up and leap off a tall telephone pole while being belayed by team members from below. These challenges are used as learning tools in workshops designed to help individuals and organizations achieve their full potential.
 
The Center for Peak Performance™ at Rock Springs is managed in partnership with Rock Springs Conference Center and The Leadership Challenge, Inc. The Center is the perfect venue for business retreats designed to focus on important business issues. It is located on 1,200 acres in the sunny, high desert near Bend, Oregon and grants exclusive use of the property to each group.

Your Mentor Subscription
Mentor is a free quarterly publication for our customers, suppliers and associates. We respect your online time and Internet privacy. If you would like to continue receiving Mentor you need do nothing. Mentor will arrive automatically in your e-mail mailbox each quarter. If you prefer not to receive this publication simply hit reply and type "Remove" in the subject line. We will promptly cancel your subscription. If you know someone who would benefit from receiving this newsletter please forward this edition on to him or her so they may evaluate and subscribe if desired. To subscribe to Mentor simply reply to this newsletter and type "Subscribe" in the subject line.

Copyright ©The Leadership Challenge, Inc. All Rights Reserved 2002