The Business of Thinking®
ThinkAbout
Teams
better results through better thinking
Purpose
To use the power of Whole Brain®
Technology to make the most of
the thinking preferences and
potential of all team members.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Measurable Success
Four levels of Application of Whole Brain Technology®
Transformation
Adoption
Application
Foundation
Time
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Why Spend Time on This?
Discuss why it makes sense
for you personally
to learn about the thinking
preferences of your team.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Agenda
 Warm-up Activity
 What the Experts Say About Teams
 Your Team Profile
 Is Your Team Ready for Action?
 Applying Whole Brain Thinking to
Your Own Team’s Work
 Next Steps
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
What the Experts Say…
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
According to Jon Katzenbach
in The Wisdom of Teams, high performing teams:
 Are committed to a common goal.
 Outperform all reasonable expectations.
 Have team members that are deeply
committed to one another.
 Share leadership within the team.
 Have team members that are able to
develop interchangeable skills giving them
greater flexibility.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Key Learnings from 20 Years
of Whole Brain® Team Application
 Stereotyping of others is a major impediment to team development
(he's a "this" or she's a "that").
 The more heterogeneous a group is, the more they need a multidominant leader/facilitator.
 Heterogeneous groups can be extremely creative and successful OR
they can "crash," unless they take the time necessary to find synergy.
 Strive to encourage "heterogeneous thinking" even in a homogeneous
group.
 Cultural differences can make working as a team even more
challenging--more process time and consistent communication are
especially important.
 Size does matter: 7-8 members is the "ideal" team size.
Source: Herrmann International, 2004
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Close Collaboration
When people are more than 50 feet apart, the
likelihood of them collaborating more than once a
week is less than 10%. These are the findings from an
MIT research study that focused on the distances
between engineers' offices and how much regular
technical communication they engaged in.
From research conducted on workplace architecture by Thomas J. Allen,
former Director of MIT's International Center for Research on the Management of
Technology
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Team Power:
A Six-Year Study
A six-year study focused on factors that increase the productivity and
efficiency of teams found that:
 Teams that are balanced in terms of thinking preferences
(e.g., whole brained teams) are more effective; they consider
more options and make better decisions.

Whole Brained Teams were 66% more efficient (e.g., did
things right).

70% or more of the teams were "successful" when whole
brained (versus 30% or less when not whole-brained).
From "How to Improve Group Productivity: Whole-brain® Teams Set New Benchmarks” by
Charles G. DeRidder and Mark A. Wilcox.
For the entire article, click here.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Two Key Questions
1. How is this data representative of what
happens on this team in terms of
interactions and performance?
2. How can we use this data going
forward?
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Two Dimensions Of Team Effectiveness
How the team interacts
How the team performs
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Ready-for Action Team Assessment
A
Small
Extent
A clear common purpose,
goals and performance
objectives?
1
An understanding of our
budget and financial
resources?
1
2
2
Great
Extent
D To what extent do we have?
3
A vision of our successful
future?
1
2
3
An idea of how our work fits
into the larger organizational
strategy?
1
2
3
A willingness to take risk?
1
2
3
New ideas and solutions that
challenge the status quo?
1
2
3
1
2
3
3
An idea of how we fit into
the big picture and global
perspective?
Great
Extent
C To what extent do we have?
3
All the data and research we
need?
1
2
3
Technology that can enable
us?
1
2
3
Clear measurements?
1
B
©2010 Herrmann International
To what extent do we have?
To what extent do we have?
2
Small
Extent
Guidelines, agendas, and
ground rules to help us use
our time together
effectively?
1
The resources we need?
1
2
3
Agreed-upon processes?
1
2
3
2
3
Clear priorities, a plan and a
timeline?
1
2
3
Clear responsibilities and
accountabilities?
1
2
3
Small
Extent
Great
Extent
Small
Extent
Great
Extent
An understanding of each other? 1
2
3
Facilitation skills available to
us?
1
2
3
An understanding of our
"Customers?”
1
2
3
Clear understanding of each
other's roles and how we
interact?
1
2
3
Agreements on how we'll
communicate with each other
and with our customers?
1
2
3
02-10
Ready-for Action Team Plan Overview
You’ll be discussing the assessment items—one
quadrant at a time.
Each person will share his or her
ratings for that quadrant.
The Team will select one item from
that quadrant to discuss and take
action on.
The process will be repeated for
each quadrant.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Ready-for Action Team Assessment
Step-by-Step
Step 1: Select a Facilitator and Scribe for the first quadrant.
Step 2: Each person shares his or her ratings.
Step 3: Team selects one item to discuss based on low or
varied ratings.
Step 4: Team discusses reasons for the ratings. (4 min.)
Step 5: Team identifies and assigns action item(s) to raise
the rating. (2 min.)
Step 6: Repeat for other quadrants.
8 minutes per quadrant.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Team Planning Walk-Around
©2010 Herrmann International
A
Actions
Who/By When
D
Actions
Who/By When
B
Actions
Who/By When
C
Actions
Who/By When
02-10
ACTION CHECKLIST : WHAT DOES THE TEAM NEED TO DO?
Instructions:
Use this checklist to
identify action items
related to the project
or task.
©2010 Herrmann International
A Does the project/task require
actions related to:
Does the project/task require
actions related to:
 Goal and objectives?
 Efficiency?
 Financials?
 Technology?
 Past Trends?
 Research?
 Performance?
 Measurement?
 Competition?
 Environment?
 Future Trends?
 New Concepts?
 Nation and World?
 Vision and Purpose?
 Long-term strategy?
Does the project/task require
actions related to:
Does the project/task require
actions related to:
 Methods and Regulations?
 Quality?
 Risk Reduction?
 Resources?
 Control?
 Timing?
 Policy?
B  Procedures?
 Training & Development?
 Teams & Relationships?
 Community Relations?
 Customer Relations?
 Recognition?
 Communications?
 Culture and Values?
D
C
02-10
FROM INSIGHT TO ACTION
What's one insight or thought you had as a result of today's session?
What actions will you take as a result of today's session?
Research shows that learning sticks and grows when it is applied within 24
hours.
Think about what you've learned today and identify one or more
opportunities to use it.
Is this d o n e ?
Action
Start Date /
Completion Date
The next 24 hours
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
In Closing…
Questions?
Comments?
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Optional Slides
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Keep your eye on the ball
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
Case Study: Thinking Styles in Exile
 Review the case study on page
14 to learn about the team.
 Answer questions on page 14
 Select a spokesperson to share 2
or 3 recommendations.
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10
It’s Tough Being Different!
©2010 Herrmann International
02-10