When Team Development Must Change Workplace Behaviour

Team development usually occurs only when a certain problem appears, such as an imbalance in communication within the team or a manager who cannot motivate employees to participate. The biggest mistake is to take this problem as the only task. A team might appear unengaged, while the underlying reason for this is the way meetings are conducted or how managers motivate employees to participate in decision-making. Therefore, providers must be assessed based on how well they conduct analysis of the work environment before planning the training program. A good approach goes beyond the sponsor's perspective and examines the daily experiences of employees. Also, it should outline what kind of performance improvement should be achieved before choosing the development activity.

The diagnosis made should be reflected in behavioural change, not in a one-off workshop. The buyers need to know how the provider translates the ideas into actions that could be used by managers and teams. The best results occur when development activities are linked to specific daily routines and when participants are provided with practical tools to use these routines. Practicality is important since many managers are promoted based on their technical skills rather than their people management. The development should allow them to receive and use feedback and hold employees accountable without making this process formal.

The delivery method is important as well. Structured sessions can bring about some consistency but might overlook any divergence that exists between organisational needs and individual participants’ needs. Ideally, the delivery model should integrate organisational needs with individual participants’ input. The self-assessment can reveal gaps in either competence or confidence that may go unnoticed in a group setting. The coaching sessions will then be used to solve problems that may be too individual to be solved in a shared session. Buyers should seek a provider that is able to do both without letting the individual development needs take over from the initial business need.

"McManus HRD uses personalised group training along with self-evaluation, coaching in pairs, review and implementation instead of out-of-the-box training."

Finally, follow-through should be considered. Team development will be limited if the provider is unable to demonstrate how the new behaviour will be sustained once the formal sessions come to an end. Evaluation should not be limited to attendance or satisfaction scores. The buyers require a solid plan of follow-up and manager involvement backed by measures that can be put in place even after the provider’s exit. The goal should be building internal capacity rather than creating dependency on external consultants. Providers who provide checkpoints and assist managers in assessing whether the agreed behaviour has been incorporated into daily activities make it easier for executives to assess the impact of the investment made.

The development intervention at McManus HRD first consults with the stakeholders of the organisation, as well as the staff members who are involved, and then it tailors its process using the feedback. The process involves customised group development, self-assessment, coaching one-on-one, review and application rather than buying ready-made courses. The associates at McManus HRD have had experience in either management or development of people, thus making the process very practical. McManus HRD has also incorporated the process of evaluation into their process so that even after formal delivery is complete, the client will be able to assess the process.