Utilising the Belbin® Methodology in understanding and guiding the implementation of teaming as a working model in a South African Government Department

(Copyright© 2003. 7i™ Management Consultants. All Rights Reserved)

The Government Department under discussion is currently undergoing a business process re-engineering (BPR) exercise which began in 1999. The goal of this is to transform from a government entity, characterised by a "public service mindset", into a learning organisation capable of innovation and self sustainability, with the ability to deliver services of the highest quality, at the lowest possible cost and as speedily as possible. With this comes a change in the workforce profile required to support the process and embody the five disciplines of a learning organisation, namely systematic thinking, building a shared vision, team learning, mental models and personal mastery. In order to achieve this change, the Department had to implement the 'teaming model' of working, thus challenging the validity of the previous hierarchical departmental structures.

The apparent challenge was twofold: firstly, the 'new' and 'transformed' workforce profile had not been clearly articulated; and secondly, it was unclear how the Department would determine when transformation had been achieved if the current workforce profile was not known in its entirety. For example, how is the strategy of 'teaming' implemented as a business imperative rather than simply as a means of addressing demographics and how does team leader and team member training integrate into the human resource’s (HR) Employment Equity (EE) Plan and the department’s Workplace Skills Plan? What this means is that in the 'new' democratic South Africa, organisations find themselves characterised by extreme cases of diversity in the makeup of their staff complement in terms of competency and suitability. The Department under discussion, effected this challenge by assigning team leader roles and team member roles, each requiring a unique intervention (such as training) based on their functional roles.

In July 2001, 7i™ was subcontracted to design a team leader training preassessment tool to determine the content, depth, level and range of training to be delivered. 7i™ used the Belbin® Team Role Inventory as complement to the required roles already identified by the department. The results of the team role profiles were then checked against a list of management leadership competencies identified by the managers within the Department as essential for the re-engineering process to be successful and for the future business of the Department. They were also compared with the competencies identified in the Department’s job profiling system according to which the team leaders were selected. Based on the check and comparison, the behaviour clusters that required the focus of the team leader training were then identified and a training preassessment tool was designed around these identified clusters of behaviours.

The overall conclusion from this process was that the very question of the team leadership role would have had to be redefined given that the focus on the vision, self awareness and adaptability, and doing things in a new way, were lacking. As a result, it also meant that the definition of team member roles and the teaming concept needed to be revisited.

7i™ then had the opportunity to examine the team member role. In May 2002, 7i™ was awarded a government tender to conduct a comprehensive skills audit, demographic profile overview and competency profiling exercise within one of the divisions of the department. Team member assessments, using the Belbin® Team Role Inventory, were conducted with over 1 600 team members, the purpose of which was to determine the content and type of training required for team members to ensure that the teaming concept worked.  It was motivated that team members undergo the assessment for the following reasons:

• An over selection of the same people (team leaders) for training, piloting new tools, assessments, exposure and involvement in new projects as a result of the re-engineering exercise;
• As a result, team members were feeling overlooked and therefore demotivated;
• Enthusiasm and eagerness to learn, despite being overlooked (a climate survey was included in the Belbin® process);
• Not developing team members clearly flies in the face of the teaming concept, exacerbating the feeling of demoralisation; and widens the skills and competency gap between team leaders and team members.

The team member assessments proved to not only be a morale boosting and team building exercise in terms of the recognition and attention it gave to each team member, but also provided very useful information on the team member team role profile; the nature and type of interventions for the development of the team members and the team as a whole; and a more accurate and comprehensive overview of the entire staff (and not just team leaders). The results of this process complemented the findings of the team leader research (mentioned above), in the sense that the team members mostly saw themselves as team workers, meaning that the remainder of the team roles as identified in the Belbin teaming model were not covered, leaving a huge gap for team development to turn the teaming concept into a success.

A very appealing feature of the Belbin® Team Role Inventory (in terms of South Africa’s National Qualifications Framework [NQF] criteria) is that the inventory is based on experimental observations, not psychological constructs. Thus, to design a training programme that works in terms of seeing observable improvement in behaviour, the Belbin® Inventory was an excellent start.

To summarise then, what makes Belbin® preferable in a South African context in the sense that it complies with the legislative requirements is the following:

• It assesses behaviour not personality;
• The gap between self scoring and the observer scoring provides valid guidelines as to strengths and weakness in individual team roles;
• It takes into account the context, prevailing value systems, external demands and constraints and is therefore fair and reliable;
• All scoring and reporting is electronic, making the presentation and interpretation of results more reliable and making the generation of reports more efficient and comprehensive;
• It has over 21 years of research, application and improvement and enjoys wide spread acceptance all over the world;
• The reports have proved to be invaluable in identifying team strengths and weaknesses and suggesting, through training and development, how best to perform specific tasks and functions within a team;
• Providing a common team role language team members can use to discuss team effectiveness;
• Identifying and understanding the organisational culture as a result the team members’ role overview and knowing the gap between current scenario and future preferred way of working, as well as how to get there using individual strengths and addressing weaknesses.

It is therefore evident that the training modules required by the department to support its re-engineering process, namely understanding team roles and decision making; planning and goal setting; understanding the business case for change; understanding the teaming process and effective collaboration; conducting effective team meetings; measuring success; valuing diversity and interpersonal conflict; and self-management, coaching and empowerment; are very specifically and clearly aligned with the purpose and use of the Belbin® Teaming Model.

In addition, all nine Belbin® behaviour clusters relate to innovation, adapting to change and improving ways that are no longer of business and interpersonal benefit, evaluation and critical appraisal, coordination, influencing, implementation, completion/finishing, team working and collaboration, and quality. These all refer to day to day operational requirements of the division and the Department as a whole.

In conclusion, not only does using the Belbin® model as the basis for training allow for the integration of training content with actual day to day job activities, but because of the alignment and immediate application to the work environment which facilitates continuous evaluation, on the job training, and visible improvement, it is in line with an outcomes based training methodology and NQF quality and competency assurance standards so important to the South African situation.