Enabling Cultural Transformation: An Example
I wrote yesterday about using the results of your Silverside Collaborative Culture Assessment heatmap to strategically plan to improve collaboration within a given unit of focus.
Here’s an example. The following Core Quadrant Compass is one of the tools within our Collaborative Culture Assessment. It is created based on the input provided by the team members taking the assessment. This Core Quadrant profiles a team with the following style or characteristics of collaboration: persistent, competitive, focus on goals, decisiveness, and serious. That would make for a great team who could produce, work together, and drive results.
But as the core quadrant shows, there are pitfalls to this style of collaboration if pushed too far:
- Tenacious – keeping a firm hold of something; not relinquishing a position easily.
- Antagonistic – becoming hostile within and beyond the team.
- Neglect team – too much focus on producing, and not enough on caring for the producers.
- Limiting options – e.g., prematurely settling on “the answer” without looking more broadly.
- Workaholic – working excessively hard. The work isn’t the problem – it’s the excess.
It also shows a list of supplementary or complementary collaboration styles that would add strength to the current team:
- Flexibility – a willingness to see things from a different perspective
- Laid-back – not so hard-charging, willing to smell the roses
- Foster the team – cultivate the relationships within the team, to give space for learning together and having fun
- Patience – it doesn’t all have to happen yesterday, today, or even tomorrow. A longer-term perspective.
- Relaxed – embracing a different kind of power.
Therefore the strategic question becomes: do we leave the team with its current composition, or do we seek to add strength through coaching or new team members with a different and complementary style? The first re-factors what is already there, providing a vocabulary and set of behaviours for complementary styles. The second would be more dramatic, forcing the current team to adjust its performance and collaboration style to accomodate one or more people with complementary – but different – styles. And clearly the second is going to be the opposite of “cultural fit” as it will require adjustment, extension, and a transformation of how the team collaborates.
What does the Core Quadrant analysis from your Collaborative Culture Assessment indicate?