What Makes a Good Team Dr Aaron Mc

  • Slides: 11
Download presentation
What Makes a Good Team? Dr Aaron Mc. Manus ST 2 GP Ai. T

What Makes a Good Team? Dr Aaron Mc. Manus ST 2 GP Ai. T

Who Are The Teams? Admin staff Doctors • • • Diagnose Treatment plans Prescribe

Who Are The Teams? Admin staff Doctors • • • Diagnose Treatment plans Prescribe Operate Discharge • Running ward • Hygiene • Staff management • Bed manager Nurses • • • Patient comfort Administer drugs Co-ordinate ward All have different jobs and potentially different individual objectives

How Do Teams Interact? Doctors Diagnose Treatment plans Prescribe Operate Discharge Nurses Patient comfort

How Do Teams Interact? Doctors Diagnose Treatment plans Prescribe Operate Discharge Nurses Patient comfort Administer drugs Co-ordinate ward Admin staff Common Purpose Running ward Hygiene Staff management Bed manager Achieve best possible patient care as efficiently as possible

A Typical Team • Six members • How many relationships? • 30 relationships •

A Typical Team • Six members • How many relationships? • 30 relationships • Add one new member • How many relationships? • 42 relationships • One new member results in 12 additional relationships

Team Member Traits • Team dynamics – – – Personality Chemistry Experience Social group

Team Member Traits • Team dynamics – – – Personality Chemistry Experience Social group Prejudice • Recognising – Different jobs – Different individual objectives – Different learning styles Hopefully all striving towards a COMMON PURPOSE!!!

Individual Learning Styles Activist Pragmatist Reflector Theorist

Individual Learning Styles Activist Pragmatist Reflector Theorist

Individual Learning Styles Activist Pragmatist Reflector Theorist

Individual Learning Styles Activist Pragmatist Reflector Theorist

Teams In Action Forming Storming • High dependency on leader for direction • Decisions

Teams In Action Forming Storming • High dependency on leader for direction • Decisions don’t come easily within the group • Little agreement on team aims • Team members vie for position • Roles and responsibilities unclear • Clarity of purpose increases • Many questions about team purpose • Lots of uncertainties persist • Processes often ignored • Cliques and factions form • Members test the tolerance of the system • Leader coaching demand increases Performing Norming • Team more strategically aware of common purpose • Less dependency on leader for direction • High focus on over-achieving goals • More agreement and consensus • Teams makes decisions on goals agreed with leader • Big decisions made by team • High degree of autonomy • Smaller decisions delegated to individuals • Disagreements resolved quickly and positively • Commitment and unity strong • Leader delegates and oversees • Engagement in fun and sociable activities • Motivation is high • Leader facilitates rather than leads

High Performance Teams • Motivated • Focus on over-achievement • Good collaboration on major

High Performance Teams • Motivated • Focus on over-achievement • Good collaboration on major decisions • Continuously improving processes • Able to bond and overcome differences • Leader able to take more of a back role • Successional planning should be the norm

Low Performing Teams • Do not address the underlying problems • Leader may not

Low Performing Teams • Do not address the underlying problems • Leader may not be strong enough in the forming / storming stage • Politics take over • Continuous lack of clarity and purpose • Motivation will be low • Performance suffers

Thank You Any questions?

Thank You Any questions?