From the inspiration of group competitive sports, to achieve a high standard of corporate teamwork

The ideal high level of collaboration can be likened to group Athletic sports, such as football. A good team can always achieve four "no difference" in collaboration. No difference in timing, ability, responsibility, and goal is no bad. The time is not bad: as the bottom of the two wings and the position of the front line, collaboration between the members of the key points of time and location of the active observation and judgment. Ability: When a big long ball is in the front, you want the striker to be able to stop it accurately, and to break through the opposing defenses and pass the ball. You are sure that each teammate is trained in the same rigorous way that they will not live up to their expectations. The responsibility is not bad: In addition to the goalkeeper, the running of each player is clear about their formation responsibility, the striker is a striker, defender is a defender, but you in the high level of the football game will find the player is still actively running, absolutely not egotistical, otherwise become a passing game. The goal is no bad: on the pitch, the player's goal is to win, but still may be offensive or defensive for the first choice of strategy, if the players do not reach a consensus, as easy to lose. In business organizations, it is not as easy to imagine that all staff have a consistent understanding of long-term and short-term goals. How to do these four "no difference"? To achieve a high standard of teamwork, I have six suggestions: the basic process of open communication and collaboration is communication, communication skills improved, the level of collaboration naturally rising. For a long time, managers have been committed to the pursuit of precise and seamless communication, trying to ensure the effective flow of information among team members through process and control methods, which are often filled with the logic "when ... When it happens, A needs to send .... To B&c. " However, in today's communication environment, to achieve full communication is already very difficult, not to mention accurate. Business people are now faced with the choice of a number of communication tools, and within the team may not be unified, to be precise and seamless, unless the machine and machine dialogue. In fact, in the high standard of collaboration, the core point of communication is not "precision and control", but "open". The need for confidentiality of information is relative, and information ensures that knowledge is absolute. In football, players and coaches are not free to communicate, not they do not want to, just because not allowed, so once the coach caught the opportunity to suspend, always try to get all the players together, around in a circle, in the rapid verbal communication, not only the captain got the coach, the team members are fully informed, but on the back of the court time, The team wanted everyone to continue with a wireless headset. In the aerospace industry with the highest precision in collaboration, the communication paradigm used between pilots and controls is open, and is not a one-to-one connection between the guiding tower and the aircraft on the ground, but is publicly shared throughout the communication frequency. The airline industry does not care whether pilots will accept too much information (they have their own division of Labor), but the first thing to ensure is that there is a possibility of sharing information between any of the two possible collaborations and conflicts. In the cockpit, if it involves multiple crew members, it is also transparentIn the form of communication, each procedure requires not only accurate operation, but also repeat to other members and be inspected. The means of communication for the safety of aviation is not accurate, but it is the most transparent and well-known. Back to the general enterprise, communication has often become the most common pain points, communication accuracy can be improved through individual training, but the adequacy of communication is no longer through the individual to solve the problem. The most common communication problem in enterprises is "poor communication" and too many communication boundaries. Not only geographical boundaries, but also ubiquitous departmental boundaries, and hierarchical boundaries, have led to a lot of effort in teamwork to "plan" communication pathways. Some people say that if you ignore the boundaries of communication directly, we can not communicate with each other directly? Things are not as simple as you think, upper and lower genera if the leapfrog communication between the two departments of grass-roots staff direct dialogue, or under the matrix management structure, the different lines of direct communication between members will lead to two obvious problems, 1 Some members of the uninformed, may spoil, 2 members of the misunderstanding, triggering office politics. To solve the internal communication problems of enterprises, we must change the way of thinking, do not persist in the design of the best communication path, but use a simple communication rules: open and transparent. Managers, while encouraging members to initiate Cross-border direct communication, require openness and transparency in certain areas, so that they do not delay or misunderstand. We stop asking, "Does he know if it's necessary to know?" When we initiate communication. By establishing open and transparent communication guidelines, managers can boldly allow and encourage free dialogue among any member. Even with this open value, members should be allowed to broadcast power to groups. If we do not give this power, our old social learning, spontaneous communication is missing the Platform Foundation. In most companies, multiple communication is not "rampant", but "undercurrent", the public and formal platform from the grassroots staff to share, feedback and advice is very little. Therefore, even if the supporting communication tools, it is not helpful to establish an open and transparent culture of communication. Once the open and transparent culture prevailed, a high standard of collaboration had a basis for communication. The Focus task task is the second basic collaboration element in addition to communication, which is the other side of full communication across borders, emphasizing a single responsibility. The team's executive power is only two guarantees, one is the ability to manage the task list, and the other is the ability to complete the task according to quality. The latter is more a matter of team competence, which is mainly about the former: Creating a list of tasks that cover all members of the team. Tasks should include these elements as the most basic collaboration Unit: task titles (headings and summaries), expiration dates, task owners, delegates, and members who work together to complete the task. When each member is clear about the list, the collaboration system can begin to function properly. Focus on the task process to pay attention to two key issues: to develop a task from the scattered communication, and tracking habits, to prevent the flow of communication in general, say more, do less, not even knowing what to do. Do not report to the leader only if you are aware of the progress of the task. Each task should have a single person in charge, if the need for different people responsible for different results goals, should be timely decomposition of tasks. Review and review the task list regularly, avoid heavy task procrastination and weaken the rigidity of task completion time. If you trust the GTD concept, but do not persist, then change the angle, let the cooperation to achieve personal self-discipline, so that the entire team focus on the task. Ignoring forms in traditional sophisticated collaborative thinking, many so-called business process management (BPM) systems are born, but most of them are not real BPM (typically, BPM is used only as a key business process control in a business to achieve lean quality and risk control), It's just general application and approval. OA software company to the government's set of official Document System moved to the enterprise, not only complicated operation, but also a lot of time wasted in order to complete the task of the task. Many application forms, the core information value of the 1-2 fields, but employees must endure lengthy filling process, managers are tired of coping with various approvals. A practical way to improve the level of collaboration is to remove all the necessary formal means to be effective as the king, to achieve communication purposes, leaving records, do not dwell on the form. So the approval can be a "OK", not a waste of time in the official documents, seal system. Just like on the court, when the opportunity comes, even the defender, without any application can be a foot. The rationale for data centralization is simple, and if data and information are distributed in a decentralized way, it is necessary to spend too much time on location information in collaboration. Imagine a simple example, if you want about three team members to have a brainstorming session this week, the best scenario is that four people's schedule information is already shared on one platform (even if the privacy schedule reflects the free and busy state). And if you manage your schedule, you can imagine how frustrating it is. If these members are dispersed in different cities, the process will be even more painful if they are to have a conference call. If a lot of time in collaboration is spent on transactions that can be automatically coordinated by centralizing information, the efficiency will be greatly improved. It's no wonder that almost all groupware platforms (Groupware) Use schedule sharing as one of the basic applications. In addition to simple schedule sharing, the team also has shared data content such as tasks, projects, and files. The same principle, the data is best stored in a unified platform, so that people will not remember what is stored in what location, reduce the cost of access to information. With the spread of cloud computing and the development of SaaS applications, we encourage all teams to use SaaS solutions to share information, rather than keep them in the office's local area network unless you don't want to play with the power of your portable smart devices. It is an abstract management problem to go to the center, but at the collaborative level, you need to aim at specific goals, because really high levels of collaboration and control based scheduling are incompatible. On the football field, the playerNot as a coach or captain, but at any time to form the core of the attack and defensive positions. The core challenge of decentralization lies in the ability of enterprises to establish decentralized decision-making, allowing the business frontier to make most tactical decisions based on the situation. To do this, managers have to build some simple basic rules, thus boldly "out of control." Make sure that the goals are measurable and that members have a way to gauge whether the outcome of the decision can be achieved. Each task has a single responsible person. All communication can be recorded. Why? We illustrate this through the last "close-loop optimization" of the collaboration treasure. Closed-Loop optimization understanding "out of control", can understand "self-correcting", the process of correction comes from quick and simple gap analysis, just like the people wave effect of the stadium audience, there is no need for training and command, it only takes a short time, so many complex intelligence bodies can achieve a high level of coordination. Because each participant has a simple ability to observe and correct. In the enterprise collaboration, to achieve a step by step, the same can leave the command system, but inseparable from a replenishment process. In other words, in a specific collaborative link, it is possible to produce failure, but managers need to do is to observe the gap and cause. This is the four features we're going to go back to high level of collaboration, time, capacity, responsibility and goals are not bad, and when the collaboration to deviate from the ideal level, we need to analyze the nature of this deviation, if it is from the point of the time gap between members, we want to further enhance the synchronization of communication (open communication); We need to consider training and dismissal, and if it is because of the ambiguity of member responsibilities, we need to re-examine structural design, and if it is because the members ' perceptions of the goals are inconsistent or unclear, managers should strive to communicate from top to bottom to ensure the clarity of strategic objectives. In short, this closed-loop optimization is the management to achieve collaborative results and continuous efforts. Back to our 5th talk about the three prerequisites of bold runaway, you will understand that the 1th is used to ensure that gap analysis can be implemented, and the second and 3rd will be used to duplicate the collaborative process, locating the gap nature and making targeted improvements. Having said these six points, you may not think these are easy to do. Indeed, open communication and other preconditions have been a huge psychological challenge to managers, and continuous closed-loop improvement is to test whether managers can persevere in team building. But once these collaborations develop, you will have a team that is invincible, so we believe that every team can succeed as long as there is real synergy.