How can you develop a project team - with multi-disciplinary members?

Why is this a problem?
First of all let's say that there are clear advantages to placing experts from many disciplines together in project teams. Key people, all familiar with project issues can sit together and solve problems, progress decisions, much faster. Some idustries have years of experience of this, but for others it's a new development.

Team members can suffer from confusion about their accountability - which is both to the Project (and therefore to the project manager), and to their line/functional boss.

What can be done?
For new teams, a start-up event, or for existing teams a teambuilding review canhelp enormously. during this:

• The team can ensure that the business objectives and deliverables of the project are fuly clarified, and that all members fully understand and subscribe to them.
• Dialogue can take place to clarify the roles and responsibilities of each member.
• Existing teams can undertake a review of past problems (which not only enhances resolution of the problems, but also helps the team to learn new skills)
• A stakeholder review can identify key individuals who have influence on the team and the project. Clarification can be acheived on what needs to be communicated to them, and when.

Case Studies: Developing a project team (1)

We were asked to assist a product development team in a large corporation had around 20 members, which had members from the US and the UK. Prior incarnations of the group had been attempting to resolve a particular development issue for several months, and the new group inherited this problem.

Team startup
At a face-to-face event, the individual team members spent valuable time introducing themselves to the group, with some of their background, interests, then some of their work history, specialties and perspectives on current issues. After this exercise, they were able to build consensus on the team's operating principles - what should be communicated and when, listening behaviours, and so on.

Developing communication and decision-making processes
They then focused on the work issue they'd been trying to resolve. The team had a tendency to debate everything to death! Discussions would continue for ages even around issues that had been agreed! One that hadn't, however, kept bouncing back and forth, with ideas and counter-ideas. The leadership members were encouraged to make more solid proposals: summarising the essence of the disagreements and pushing for consensus - the best compromise. It turned out that the real sticking point for the team were their behaviours and approaches, rather than completely polarised beliefs. They continued to press for closure, and they managed to complete the decision.

The whole exercise above was completed in around 2 days.