1 ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Spring 2002 OSU-Tulsa ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Nicholas C

11ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Spring 2002 OSU-TulsaETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Spring 2002 OSU-Tulsa

ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and ExecutionApplication and Execution

Nicholas C. Romano, Jr.Nicholas C. Romano, [email protected]

Paul RosslerPaul Rossler

[email protected]


ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and ExecutionApplication and Execution

Week 1 April 2, 2001Week 1 April 2, 2001

Challenges of TeamingChallenges of Teaming


Meeting Analysis: Meeting Analysis: Findings from Research and PracticeFindings from Research and Practice

Nicholas C. Romano, Jr.Nicholas C. Romano, [email protected]@mstm.okstate.edu


Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline

Why Consider Meeting in GSS Research?Why Consider Meeting in GSS Research?Defining MeetingsDefining MeetingsMeeting Productivity MetricsMeeting Productivity Metrics


Why Consider Meetings Why Consider Meetings in terms of GSS Research?in terms of GSS Research?


Research and Practice Illustrate that Meetings:Research and Practice Illustrate that Meetings:Are essential for accomplishing workAre essential for accomplishing workDDominate workers’ and managers’ timeominate workers’ and managers’ timeAre considered costly, unproductive, dissatisfyingAre considered costly, unproductive, dissatisfying

Are steadily increasing in number and lengthAre steadily increasing in number and length



""Almost every time there is a genuinely Almost every time there is a genuinely important decision to be made in an important decision to be made in an organization, a organization, a groupgroup is assigned to is assigned to make it -- or at least to counsel and make it -- or at least to counsel and

advise the individual who must make itadvise the individual who must make it ." ." HackmanHackman



Why People MeetWhy People Meet

Surface PerspectivesSurface Perspectives Review

Share WorkShare Work

Share the VisionShare the Vision

SocializeSocializeBuild Consensus Solve ProblemsSolve Problems

Avoid DecisionsAvoid Decisions

Make Decisions

SynergySynergy Share Information

Build TrustBuild Trust

Allocate ResourcesAllocate Resources

Develop Project PlansDevelop Project Plans

Monitor Project ProgressMonitor Project Progress

Prioritize TasksPrioritize Tasks


"We meet because people holding different jobs "We meet because people holding different jobs have to cooperate to get a specific task done. have to cooperate to get a specific task done.

We meet because the knowledge and experience We meet because the knowledge and experience needed in a specific situation needed in a specific situation are not available in one head, are not available in one head,

but have to be pieced together out of the but have to be pieced together out of the knowledge and experience of several people.”knowledge and experience of several people.”

Peter Drucker 1967Peter Drucker 1967


Today We Collaborate through MeetingsToday We Collaborate through Meetings

We need to Understand Todays We need to Understand Todays Meetings as thoroughly as PossibleMeetings as thoroughly as Possible

in order to move to towardin order to move to towardCollaborating in a Collaborating in a Virtual WorldVirtual World

One way to do this is through One way to do this is through Meeting Productivity MetricsMeeting Productivity Metrics


• Downsizing/RightsizingDownsizing/Rightsizing• FlatteningFlattening• TelecommutingTelecommuting• Increased CompetitionIncreased Competition• Globalization Globalization • Etc....Etc....

Why is This Happening?Why is This Happening?

A Big Change is occurring A Big Change is occurring


Revolutionary Critical Revolutionary Critical Ages ResourceAges Resource

Agricultural Agricultural Physical Capital Physical Capital (Manpower/Horsepower)(Manpower/Horsepower)

Industrial Industrial Financial Capital Financial Capital (Purchasing Power)(Purchasing Power)

InformationInformation Intellectual Capital Intellectual Capital (Attention)(Attention)


The Information AgeThe Information Age

Manage routine transactions (50s-60s)Manage routine transactions (50s-60s)

Integrated business operations (70s)Integrated business operations (70s)

Enterprise-wide communication (80s)Enterprise-wide communication (80s)

Collaborative technology (90s)Collaborative technology (90s)

Ubiquitous computing 2000-???Ubiquitous computing 2000-???

Manage and Leverage Intellectual CapitalManage and Leverage Intellectual Capital (Attention to relevant information)(Attention to relevant information)


Intellectual CapitalIntellectual Capital

• Companies typically value tangible assets, such as Companies typically value tangible assets, such as

buildings, machinery, cash etc., but such measures buildings, machinery, cash etc., but such measures

do not include the value of the work force, their do not include the value of the work force, their

knowledge, and the way they use information knowledge, and the way they use information

technology to increase productivitytechnology to increase productivity..

• In the information society In the information society intangible assets may intangible assets may

represent significant competitive advantagerepresent significant competitive advantage..


Intellectual CapitalIntellectual Capital

Categories of intangible assets: Categories of intangible assets:

• Human Centered AssetsHuman Centered Assets

• Intellectual Property AssetsIntellectual Property Assets

• Infrastructure AssetsInfrastructure Assets

• Market AssetsMarket Assets


The Gottlieb Duttweiler FoundationThe Gottlieb Duttweiler Foundation

has estimated that organizations use has estimated that organizations use

only only 20%20% of available intellectual of available intellectual

capacity on a day to day basis.capacity on a day to day basis.

This is most likely a high estimate. This is most likely a high estimate.

Meeting Intellectual CapitalMeeting Intellectual Capital


•TypesTypes• PurposesPurposes• TimeTime• NumberNumber• CostCost• EfficiencyEfficiency• ProblemsProblems

Existing Meeting Productivity MetricsExisting Meeting Productivity Metrics


(Monge, P. R., McSween, C., & Wyer, J. 1989)(Monge, P. R., McSween, C., & Wyer, J. 1989)

Types of Meetings in Corporate AmericaTypes of Meetings in Corporate America

Based on 903 meetingsBased on 903 meetings

45% Staff 45% Staff 22% Task 22% Task 21% Information Sharing 21% Information Sharing 5% Brainstorming5% Brainstorming 2% Ceremonial2% Ceremonial 5% Other5% Other


Meeting Purposes Meeting Purposes 66% Involve Complex Group Processes66% Involve Complex Group Processes

2%

2%

4%

4%

5%

11%

11%

26%

29%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Demonstrate a project or system

Accept Reports

Explore new ideas and concepts

Gain support for a program

Facilitate staff communicaiton

Ensure that everyone understands

Solve a Problem

Reach group decision or judgement

Reconcile conflict

(Monge, P. R., McSween, C., & Wyer, J. 1989) (Monge, P. R., McSween, C., & Wyer, J. 1989)


Time Spent in MeetingsTime Spent in MeetingsUpward TrendUpward Trend

1960’s:1960’s: AAverage Exec. verage Exec. 3 1/2 hrs/wk3 1/2 hrs/wk ((~3-4 Meetings~3-4 Meetings) ) additional time in informal meetings additional time in informal meetings (Tillman, 1960)(Tillman, 1960)

1970’s1970’s Average Exec. Average Exec. 6-7/wk6-7/wk ((~Twice # 1960’s Study~Twice # 1960’s Study - - Rice, 1973Rice, 1973))Managers Managers up toup to 60% of their time 60% of their time. . (Mintzberg, 1973)(Mintzberg, 1973)

Program managers Program managers up toup to 80% of their time 80% of their time. . Middle managers Middle managers 3 or 4 full days a week3 or 4 full days a week. . Some Some 8 straight hours in one meeting8 straight hours in one meeting. . (Van de Ven, 1973)(Van de Ven, 1973)



1980’s1980’sTypical middle managers Typical middle managers ~35% of their work week~35% of their work week. . top mangers top mangers 50% of their time50% of their time. (Doyle, 1982) . (Doyle, 1982)

TTypical managers ypical managers up toup to 80 % 80 % of theirof their time. (Monge, 1989)time. (Monge, 1989)

Average technical professional/manager Average technical professional/manager 1/4 work week1/4 work week..

Top and middle managers Top and middle managers 2 days/week2 days/week..Executive managers Executive managers 4 days/week4 days/week. . (Mosvick, 1987)(Mosvick, 1987)


Mosvick Mosvick (Mosvick, 1982, 1986)(Mosvick, 1982, 1986) 2 studies over a five year period 2 studies over a five year period

950 junior-senior managers & technical profs. 950 junior-senior managers & technical profs. large-scale technology-intensive industries large-scale technology-intensive industries U.S. and abroad U.S. and abroad

Major finding: Major finding: ""a notable shift toward an increase in the number a notable shift toward an increase in the number and length of meetings with an increasingly high and length of meetings with an increasingly high level of dissatisfaction with meetings.level of dissatisfaction with meetings." "



Reported Length of Actual Meetings in Corporate AmericaReported Length of Actual Meetings in Corporate America51% between 30 and 90 minutes51% between 30 and 90 minutes

10%

13%

16%

25%26%

0.9%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0-30min.

31-60min.

1-1.5hrs.

1.5-2hrs.

2-4hrs.

>4hrs.

%

(Monge, P. R., McSween, C., & Wyer, J. 1989) (Monge, P. R., McSween, C., & Wyer, J. 1989)



Up to Up to 20% of a manager’s work day20% of a manager’s work day is is spent in conference room meetings. spent in conference room meetings. (Panko, 1992) (Panko, 1992)

Managers spend ~ Managers spend ~ 20% of their work 20% of their work day in 5 person or larger formal day in 5 person or larger formal meetingsmeetings and as much as and as much as 85% of their 85% of their time communicating.time communicating. (Panko, 1994) (Panko, 1994)



Number of MeetingsNumber of Meetings

Meeting Frequency is IncreasingMeeting Frequency is Increasing

Fortune 500 Fortune 500 companies hold between companies hold between 11 to 15 million formal meetings/day11 to 15 million formal meetings/day and and 3 to 4 billion meetings/year3 to 4 billion meetings/year (Doyle, 1982; Monge, 1989)(Doyle, 1982; Monge, 1989)


Number of MeetingsNumber of Meetings

Meeting Frequency is IncreasingMeeting Frequency is Increasing

A 1997 Survey found that in 1998: A 1997 Survey found that in 1998:

• 24% of respondents expect to hold more meetings 24% of respondents expect to hold more meetings • 85% predict the same length or longer meetings85% predict the same length or longer meetings


Meeting CostsMeeting Costs

3M Meeting Productivity Study3M Meeting Productivity StudyHarrison Hofstra StudyHarrison Hofstra Study

• 11-15 Million11-15 Million formal meetings / day formal meetings / day• ? Million? Million informal meetings / day informal meetings / day• 3-4 Billion3-4 Billion meetings / year meetings / year• 30-80%30-80% Manager’s time in Teamwork Manager’s time in Teamwork• 7-15%7-15% of personnel budgets on Teamwork of personnel budgets on Teamwork• $ Billions$ Billions of Dollars Spent each year of Dollars Spent each year


Meeting EfficiencyMeeting Efficiency

On average, by managerial function, On average, by managerial function, 33% of meeting time is unproductive 33% of meeting time is unproductive

(Sheridan, 1989 )


Reported Meeting ProblemsReported Meeting Problems (N= 1305)

Rank Type of Problem Number ofReferences

1 Getting off the subject 204 2 No goals or agenda 190 3 Too lengthy 187 4 Poor or inadequate preparation 94 5 Inconclusive 88 6 Disorganized 86 7 Ineffective leadership/lack of control 38 8 Irrelevance of information discussed 37 9 Time wasted during meetings 37 10 Starting late 36 11 Not effective for making decisions 31 12 Interruptions from within and without 30 13 Individuals dominate/aggrandize discussion 29 14 Rambling, redundant, or digressive discussion 27 15 No published results or follow up actions 25 16 No pre-meeting orientation/cancelled or postponed meetings 20 17 Meetings too large/too many people 13 18 Ineffective speakers/communication problems 13 19 Too much information presented 12 20 Poor attitudes or effort by participants 10 21 Lack of participation 8 22 Participants have no decision authority 8

Source: Data combined from [Mosvick, 1982 #876; Mosvick, 1986 #877]


Meeting ProblemsMeeting ProblemsAgendaAgenda

Lack of an AgendaLack of an AgendaNo goals or agendaNo goals or agenda – – 2nd most commonly reported problem2nd most commonly reported problem (Mosvick, 1987) (Mosvick, 1987)

~ ~ 50% had no written agenda50% had no written agenda; ; however however 73%73% of of respondents felt an agenda is "respondents felt an agenda is "essentialessential" for a productive " for a productive meeting.meeting. (Burleson, 1990; Sheridan, 1989 - Harrison-Hofstra survey) (Burleson, 1990; Sheridan, 1989 - Harrison-Hofstra survey)

32%32% No stated agendaNo stated agenda 17%17% Prior Verbal agendas Prior Verbal agendas 9% 9% Written agendas distributed at startWritten agendas distributed at start 29%29% Prior written agendasPrior written agendas (Monge, 1989) (Monge, 1989)


Workers Express the Desire to Work in Groups.Workers Express the Desire to Work in Groups.

3 year survey of 3 year survey of 10,27710,277 U.S. workers from U.S. workers from all levels of employment that all levels of employment that 97%97% reported reported

they needed conditions that encourage they needed conditions that encourage collaborationcollaboration to do their best work. to do their best work.

(Hall, 1994)(Hall, 1994)


A recent survey of executives found that A recent survey of executives found that 43% of them admitted dozing off at least 43% of them admitted dozing off at least once during a meetingonce during a meeting. .

The majority concluded that The majority concluded that 20-30% of meetings were unnecessary20-30% of meetings were unnecessary..

(Erickson, 1998) (Erickson, 1998)


FindingsFindings


Decades of study show that meetings Decades of study show that meetings dominatedominate workers’ and managers’ time workers’ and managers’ time

and yet are considered to be and yet are considered to be costlycostly, , unproductiveunproductive and and dissatisfyingdissatisfying..

Yet Meetings are Yet Meetings are EssentialEssential,,because because no one personno one person has the has the

knowledge, insight, skills knowledge, insight, skills andand experience experience to do the job alone. to do the job alone.


Steps to Move Toward UnderstandingSteps to Move Toward Understanding


• Develop Develop betterbetter Collaboration Collaboration Productivity Metrics Productivity Metrics • Develop a Develop a Collaboration Productivity Collaboration Productivity Maturity Model Maturity Model • Develop and Test Develop and Test Guidelines and Guidelines and InterventionsInterventions to improve Collaboration to improve Collaboration Productivity via Productivity via ProceduresProcedures, , FacilitationFacilitation, and , and TechnologyTechnology

Documents

1 ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Spring 2002 OSU-Tulsa ETM 5221 - Engineering Teaming: Application and Execution Nicholas C