11/19/13%
Linda Peters, Ph.D.
!
!
!
BBA – Finance
MBA
!
Ph.D. – Management (Statistics minor)
!
!
!
Married with 3 kids --- triplets
Born and raised on Minnesota farm
1%

!
!
Professor in online MBA program at
UMass Amherst (2003-present)
!
Editorial Board Member – Small Group
Research Journal
!
Board of Directors – Colony Hills Capital
!
!
Board of Advisors – HGCF
‘Angel’ Investor
!
Partner – Real Estate Investment firm
!
What does influence involve?
!
Matching values/politics/power
!
How does one successfully influence others within a team environment?
!
What role do team dynamics play in one’s ability to be influential within the team?
11/19/13%
2%

(adapted from Peters, L. & Manz, C.C. 2007).
11/19/13%
1. The Person of the
Meta-Leader
3%

1
2
3
4
5
Hold a mirror to yourself as a leader
“BASEMENT”
Your picture of the problem must constantly adjust
“PERCEIVE”
Commit- ment
Support your staff & they will support you
“LOYALTY”
Priorities
Conn ect ivi ty
Know your boss’s priorities
Create leverage by and deliver building links
“POLITICS” “LEVERAGE”
© 2013, Health Care Negotiation Associates
!
Reaching challenging goals in a team environment requires ‘influence’ to change behaviors (some long-standing and deeply rooted)
!
Steps:
1.
Plan
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Persuade
Motivate
Teach new skills/behavior
Provide social support
Provide social capital
11/19/13%
4%

!
Identify goals and how they can be measured
… what exactly do you want from others and how will you know when you have it?
!
Identify those with the necessary expert power to be on your team
!
Determine what behaviors will be needed from team members to be successful … to what extent are these behaviors already present vs. needing to develop or change?
!
If on wrong track, make strategic adjustments as needed (don’t just give up)
!
Utilize conversation, presentations, and talking points
!
Go beyond verbal arguments – use powerful stories that engage hearts and minds
!
Create experiences and simulations (action vs. talk)
!
Find experiences that build confidence that changing behavior will have results they care about (ie. Maslow’s hierarchy)
11/19/13%
5%

!
Offer arguments to help them see the moral imperatives of the changes needed
- Help them see the ‘human’ and
‘personal reasons behind the changes
(i.e. ethical perspectives)
!
Help them understand how their goals fit with the required changes
!
Add elements of fun, competition, or excitement to activities that result in change
!
Design intense and focused coaching sessions
!
!
!
Teach skills to deal with emotions that arise when things get ‘tough’
Provide guidance and immediate feedback until behaviors become
‘natural’
Repeat above if they fall back into old habits (don’t give up!)
11/19/13%
6%

!
Identify those most resistant to change and involve them early in process
!
Identify opinion leaders on team and get them involved in helping to encourage others on team to make changes (never rely on a coalition of just one or two --- get everyone on-board)
!
Make sure there is buy-in from above
(superiors and leaders) and that they will model, teach, praise and coach others towards new behaviors needed
!
Provide immediate help when roadblocks arise - Identify most difficult obstacles to change and make sure team members have someone to call on to help or assist
!
Create ‘safe’ environment to ask for help
(without embarrassment)
!
Make sure all team members willingly share information needed to support the change
11/19/13%
7%

!
Small group discussion: Exercise 1
(handout)
!
Large group discussion: share key examples/outcomes of small group discussion
!
‘Into Thin Air’ (optional pre-work)
!
Course link: https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/ access/20285903
!
Login (need to register if never used HBSP before) --- student will now be enrolled in the coursepack
!
Role and team assignment (by instructor)
11/19/13%
8%

!
!
This is NOT a video game;
Working together as a team is critical
!
Designed to teach concepts of group dynamics, decision-making, and leadership
!
!
Do not rush through decisions --- examine data carefully (calculator needed)
Have paper for notes and computer plugin if insufficient battery life
!
Prepare screen (provides necessary background info)
!
Analyze screen (frequently updated info that is referenced to make good decisions)
!
Decide screen (place decisions are entered)
11/19/13%
9%

!
!
!
Introduction sub-screen introduces the simulation and includes a video of James
Clarke talking about the challenges of climbing Mt. Everest
How To Play sub-screen gives on-screen instructions plus includes a ‘how to play’ video
Your Profile sub-screen gives you role-specific information, listing goals and associated points
!
Visible on every screen --- includes:
!
Role icon
!
!
!
Chat – enables communication privately to individual or the whole team
Dashboard overview – quick reference guide to current Weather, Health, Supplies, and the team’s Hiking Speeds (detailed info on all of these found on the Analyze screen)
Round
11/19/13%
10%

!
Mountain View sub-screen – displays location of each player (on team) using role icon
!
Weather sub-screen – use drop-down menu to see information for specific camp:
!
!
Weather forecast – gives today and tomorrow information on temp., wind speed, and wind direction
Oxygen level
!
Current status – indicates weather and wind status at current location and other camps
!
Health sub-screen (info on one’s self)
!
Health status (overall strong, weak, critical)
!
Mental acuity (normal or below normal)
!
Frost bite (not severe or severe)
!
Altitude sickness (none or severe)
!
Current status (on all above)
11/19/13%
11%

!
Supplies sub-screen
!
Team medical supplies, which includes blood pressure monitor, inhalers, and a
Gamow bag (all distributed by physician only)
!
Personal food supply
!
Current status (lists supplies available in the current round plus inventory history)
!
Hiking speed sub-screen
!
Gives hiking speed in vertical feet per minute
!
Health and backpack weight
!
Current status (current round plus history of previous rounds)
11/19/13%
12%

!
Round Info sub-screen
!
Provides general and role-specific information each round
!
Each team member will receive info about prior round events such as notice of those who have been rescued
!
Camp decision (move to lower camp; stay at current camp; go to next camp)
!
Oxygen Canisters decision (Round 4 only – asks for each hiker to request a certain number of oxygen canisters
!
Role-specific decisions
!
Note: hikers can revise decisions until simulation is advanced (those who haven’t submitted decisions at all will automatically hike to the next camp)
11/19/13%
13%

!
Survey to assess team dynamics
!
Round 3 and Round 6
!
Individual responses will not be released … aggregated at the team level
11/19/13%
!
Ready … Set … Go
!
Complete rounds 0-6
14%

!
Small group discussion – reflect on your experiences and examine your team processes and interactions
11/19/13%
!
Large group discussion
!
Compare and contrast ways in which various teams approached the simulation
!
Discover the dual nature of the challenge each faced (due to asymmetric information and asymmetric interests)
!
Examine the extent different leaders were able to influence the team’s results and why
15%

!
!
Information held by more members before team discussion has more influence on team judgments than information held by fewer members, independent of the validity of the information.
B,E
Groups tend to spend too little time discussing unshared (unique, uncommon) information.
Three Possible Initial-Distribution Conditions
A,C,B,D A,D
A,B,C,D,E,F
A,C,B,E
C,F A,C,D,F
A,B,C,D,E,F
A,B,C,D,E,F
No overlap of information between three people
A,C: Common to all three people
B,D: Shared by two people
E,F: Unique to one person
All information fully-shared by all three people.
11/19/13%
16%

!
Why do groups find it so difficult to deal with asymmetric information?
1.
2.
Members are judged as more task competent
& credible after discussing shared instead of unshared information.
Shared information is judged as more important, accurate, and decision-relevant than unshared info.
!
!
!
Caused by:
1.
Groupthink
2.
3.
Unproductive conflict
Inability to deal with info/interest asymmetries
Use of only shared information supports a less optimal decision alternative whereas tapping into unshared information supports the best option.
Failure to discuss unshared info thus harms group decision quality
11/19/13%
17%

"
"
More discussion #
Separate review and decision #
"
Bigger team #
"   More information (but same distribution) #
"   Pre-discussion polling #
"
Team leader is information manager #
!
Increase focus on unique information #
"   Suspend initial judgment #
"   Frame as an information-sharing problem, rather than a judgment to be made #
"   Minimize status differences #
11/19/13%
18%

!
How did your leader help or hinder the ability to uncover and analyze all relevant information?
!
Psychological safety concept
!
!
!
Rate your team’s level of psychological safety
What are the barriers of psychological safety in organizations?
What behaviors promote and enhance psychological safety?
!
Dealing with conflict (task vs relationship)
!
Leaders can increase psychological safety by:
1.
2.
Acknowledging their own fallibility in order to encourage others to be open;
Reduce the salience of status differences in order to promote equality among the members;
3.
4.
5.
6.
Set an appropriate tone for discussion to ensure that individuals do not become alienated;
Encourage multiple channels of communication
(one-on-one vs. groups);
Balance the power of dominating experts;
Remove himself or herself from group discussions so that members can speak more openly without worry;
11/19/13%
19%

!
Additional things a leader can do:
1.
Engage in active listening;
2.
3.
Ask members to argue a position opposite what they believe (play Devil’s advocate);
When conflict turns personal, take control of the situation and make a decision that will advance the team’s goals and objectives (but pay attention to procedural justice);
!
Point system measured goal achievement
!
Individual points shows the extent to which each individual achieved his/her goals
!
Simulation does not reward a team for getting everyone to the top of the mountain as that wasn’t everyone’s primary goal.
11/19/13%
20%

!
Surveys measured various group processes:
!
Team effectiveness
!
Cognitive vs. affective conflict
!
Psychological safety
!
Fair process
!
Leader behavior dimensions
!
Compare points scored for goal achievement with survey results on various constructs
!
How can we explain the differences between what was perceived by the team members and what the point system shows?
11/19/13%
21%

!
Themes:
1.
Information and interest asymmetries
2.
!
Can some conflict be good?
!
Value-creating vs. value-claiming actions
Leading teams to reduce process losses
!
Psychological safety
!
Ensuring disclosure of privately held information
3.
Information processing challenges
!
Incomplete or ambiguous information
!
Information overload
4.
Short-term vs. long-term effectiveness
!
Procedural and distributive justice
11/19/13%
22%

11/19/13%
23%