Assembling the Team

In the early stages of the planning team’s effort, Commanders and team leaders face the task of assembling the individuals who will comprise the group. Although in some cases Commanders and team leaders may have the opportunity to screen and select the team, interview participants described many instances in which this was not the case. Whatever senior leader’s level of involvement in forming the team, leaders must figure out how to organize and begin to mesh a disparate collection of individuals into a well-functioning team.

To assemble a group of individuals into a high-functioning conceptual planning team, leaders must manage a number of challenges including:

Identifying how team members will be recruited and/or selected.
Understanding the personality attributes, skills, knowledge, and problem solving styles that can help or hinder the team problem solving process.
Identifying/assessing the attributes and styles of candidate team members.
Determining the optimal balance of skills, characteristics, and attributes that are needed for the team to function well.
Determining the characteristics for which diversity among team members is best, versus where consistency among team members is preferable.
Identifying an optimal size for the team, given the scope of the problem and available resources.

In the sections that follow we discuss these challenges, and the strategies and approaches team leaders have found useful in the initial phases of forming a team.

Key Issues and Challenges

Determining the Expertise and Skills Needed

A key aspect of assembling the team is considering what knowledge, skills, abilities (KSAs), work styles, and personality characteristics are needed for the team’s task. One of the challenges for Commanders and team leaders is the nature of the problems they confront. Because the problems being addressed are complex and unfamiliar, identifying the expertise and skillsets that are optimal for the team can be difficult. Despite this challenge, experienced team leaders and team members described definite preferences regarding team composition. Some of the characteristics and styles that individuals bring to the team are truly essential for complex problem solving teamwork. Other characteristics and styles are considered “nice to have” but not crucial, while other personality attributes and work styles can make it more difficult for the team to do its work. Figuring out the skills, talents, experiences, working styles, and personality attributes the team has available to draw on is an important initial phase of working together. It is also important for the team leader to identify personality styles that may not mesh well, or might hinder collaboration, so that the leader can begin managing those potential issues (see Managing the Team).

Considering Diversity vs. Uniformity of Team Members

Many of the experienced team leaders we interviewed identified diversity as a critical attribute of military planning teams. Teams comprised of people with widely varying backgrounds, experiences, and work styles are seen as having a greater variety of perspectives to draw on for their work. Teams that are more diverse are also believed to be more creative, to see a wider range of possibilities in the problem-solving and planning process, and to develop more innovative solutions.

"The greater the diversity, the increased chances that members do not subscribe to the organizational paradigm, or at least question some aspects of it. This is key to critical reflection."

(U.S. Army MAJ)

However, team leaders noted it can be difficult to find individuals with a significant degree of diversity. Military planning teams are primarily comprised of career military personnel whose values, language, and perspectives are largely shared, and whose backgrounds, education, and deployment histories may be remarkably similar. It can be difficult to find individuals who have considerably different paradigms or ways of thinking and viewing the world.

In addition, diversity within a team can be somewhat of a “double-edge sword.” While diversity can offer several benefits, teams with a considerable amount of diversity may suffer from a lack of team cohesion, may experience coordination challenges, and may take longer to develop products.

While experienced team leaders seek diversity within their teams, diversity was not sought after on every dimension. Interviewees also described a set of attributes that they prefer every team member to possess. These dimensions are described in the "Tips" section.

Recruiting or Selecting Team Members

Interview participants indicated that although the team leader may have a significant say in who ends up on the team, in many cases the team leader may have very little input. Moreover, having decision authority over who serves on the team is not the only means to putting together a high functioning team. Team leaders described planning teams whose members had come to the planning effort in a variety of ways. Members may be recruited by the team leader or Commander; team members may apply to be part of the team through some formal selection process; members may hear about a problem solving effort informally (e.g., group “FYI” emails or word of mouth) and volunteer to be part of the team; or, members may be selected by someone else in the command structure who nominates or assigns them to the team. (See three examples of different recruitment and selection processes).

In all three examples, the teams provided important and valued products to their Commanders, and their team efforts were considered successful. As demonstrated by the three examples, rather than there being a particular best practice for creating a planning or problem solving team, what seems to matter is how the team leader works with the people who come to the team, however that happens. Whatever the process is that brings individuals onto the team, it is the team leader’s job to figure out how to begin to mesh the group of individuals into a functional work team. Doing so requires figuring out who the prospective team members are and what strengths and weaknesses each member brings to the effort, so the team leader can provide effective support as the individual members begin to develop into a team. Experienced team leaders described a number of formal and informal assessment strategies for gaining an initial view of individual members, and of the overall team configuration. In some cases these assessment strategies are used as part of the recruitment and selection process; in other cases the assessment strategies are used once the team is already established. The assessment strategies are described in the Tips section (see Managing the Team); (see Building Trust and a Team Identity).

Team Size

Team size is an additional consideration when assembling the team. The individuals we interviewed suggested that there is no “right size” for a conceptual planning team, and the team size can be fluid over the course of the team’s lifecycle. We learned about teams that varied in size from 3 to 25 people. Teams of 5-9 persons were typical, and larger teams often managed their work by dividing into smaller sub-teams to complete certain tasks (e.g., independent research) and then reconvening for discourse. Larger teams may offer a larger pool of intellectual assets upon which to draw, but they also require more resources, including larger workspaces. Larger teams also incur significant coordination costs, including the time and resources involved in sharing information and insights across a large team, and keeping sub-teams in synch (See Managing Team Workflow and Productivity).

Tips and Things to Consider

Consider the following tips and reflections when assembling a planning team.

(Expand All)

Recognize both the advantages and disadvantages associated with team member diversity (Expand)

For example, more diverse teams have a wider range of perspectives on which to draw, but may experience more conflict (both task and interpersonal conflict) and higher coordination needs, and may take longer to arrive at a final product.

Strive for variety on certain dimensions (Expand)

Teams comprised of people with widely varying backgrounds and experiences will have a greater range of perspectives to draw on for their work. Teams that are more diverse will likely also be more creative, engage in higher-quality discourse, and develop more innovative solutions. Strive to assemble a team with a rich mix of:

"You want a group to have a broad base so you will miss as few things as possible at first."

(USMC LtCol)

- Backgrounds: education, training, credentials/qualifications, rank (Note), work experience
- Assignments, deployments, career history
- Functional area of expertise (e.g., planner, intelligence, logistics, special ops)
- Gender
- Personality characteristics (e.g., Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® [MBTI®] types) (Note)
- Approaches to solving problems
- Thinking styles and preferences (e.g., big picture thinkers, detailed thinkers, abstract thinkers, historical thinkers, those who can think forward in time, and those who are metacognitive thinkers, and can reflect and comment on how the team is thinking about a particular topic.)

Strive for consistency on other dimensions (Expand)

Although there are some ways in which variety among team members is best, there are certain aspects of personality and work style that are desirable for all members of the team to have, if possible. Seek team members who are:

"Are they willing to sit down and plough through the hours upon hours of work?"

(USMC LtCol)

- Eager to learn, naturally curious, and enjoy learning for learning’s sake
- Task-oriented, with a strong work ethic
- Avid readers, able to digest and synthesize large amounts of information
- Efficient, effective writers; able to communicate ideas verbally and in text
- Able to think deeply and in a sustained way about a topic
- Open-minded and adaptable; willing to consider points of view that differ from their own
- Disciplined, critical thinkers, adept at following a line of reasoning and evaluating it for its value, efficacy, and relevance
- Ability to work well with others, to listen, communicate, and influence others
- Able to break complex ideas into simple words and phrases
- Willing to speak up, to share their thinking and point of view with the team, and to work collaboratively
- Unafraid of having their ideas critiqued by others on the team
- Able to accept a less-than-perfect solution
- Comfortable with ambiguity
- Able to think visually; to communicate ideas visually; and to create effective graphics
- Aware of how the sponsoring organization thinks, and its typical approach to problems

Consider using selection tools and approaches (Expand)

When the opportunity exists to select who is on the planning team, consider using tools and approaches for assessing an individual’s relevant skills and characteristics. When selecting team members is not a possibility, consider using tools and inventories for assessing characteristics of the team members you have once the team is in place.

There are many assessment tools and procedures available to help understand the strengths and weaknesses of the team members. Some of the practices that planning teams have used include:

- Inventories for identifying talents, work style and interaction preferences, and aspects of personality. Some examples of inventories that teams have found useful include the Myers Briggs Type Indicator®, Strengths Finders, and the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory, the Strategic Thinking Questionaire, and the Cognitive Styles Inventory [PDF].
- Writing samples and other examples of work products. These products can provide an initial look at individual communication styles and proficiencies.
- Interviews, which can be structured or informal. By the mid-career level that is typical for people entering these teams, people usually know their strengths and workstyles and can describe them fairly accurately through use of specific examples.

Recognize that there is no right size for a conceptual planning team (Expand)

There are advantages and disadvantages related to team size. For example, larger teams may mean more perspectives on which to draw, but larger coordination costs. Smaller teams may yield fewer perspectives, but may experience more efficient coordination and increased cohesiveness.

Tools and Resources

This section provides additional material that planning team leaders and members may find useful to augment the topics covered in the "Assembling the Team" module. It is organized around two topics: 1) assessment tools, and 2) suggested reading.

Assessment Tools

(Note: We are not making any claims about the scientific validity or reliability of these tools. They are tools that planning teams have found helpful for practical use.)

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®)
Description: Questionnaire to measure psychological "types" – i.e., how individuals perceive the world and makes decisions.

MBTI® Complete
Description: Online tool that does not require a certified individual to conduct the assessment.

Clifton StrengthsFinder
Description: Assessment test to uncover one’s personal strengths.

The Cognitive-Style Inventory
Description: Assessment to identify cognitive styles and help to anticipate benefits and drawbacks for each.

Team Architect® Sort Cards
Description: Diagnostic tool to determine the gap between team success factors and current team skill levels and assess team effectiveness.

MAKING SENSE OF COMPLEX PROBLEMS