How do you motivate a team that is non-performing?

Lots of good suggestions here. Let's take this one a little further though.

It's too simplistic to assume that poor performance is only related to the individual's psychology. Go back and read First Break All the Rules by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, where they show how GREAT managers do things differently from merely GOOD managers. And the difference shows up in the levels of motivation and performance among their teams.

So first of all, the way the team is directed, measured, advised, coached has everything to do with it. Does the team as a whole understand clearly what's expected? Lack of clarity on job expectations is a key contributor to poor performance.

Does the manager have reasonable ability to delegate? Many managers inadvertently end up handicapping their team's morale, by trying to do it all for them, and not letting them make their own mistakes.

Are there meaningful performance indicators and other metrics in place that are designed to facilitate great performance? If the KPIs and metrics are out of alignment, or if they simply don't exist, contributors don't know whether they're doing well or not. And that can damage morale.

Are the individuals on the team being managed appropriately? This typically relates to the individuals current level on the learning curve for a particular part of his/her job. If the manager's response is out of alignment for the individual's current level, the manager can actually damage morale quite directly.

This questeion of morale is not an easy one to answer. Yes, it might make sense to get the worst performers off the team - but only after you give them a fighting chance.

There are two frequent sources of underperformance: poor leadership and failure to manage performance consistently.

Most teams, and most people, want leadership -- in the best sense -- so that they value and take pride in their contribution. This includes frequent constructive feedback, both monetary and not, so that they know you value them. Often a simple tactic such as high visibility works. For example, managers who spend the majority of time away in meetings are often poor leaders. But managers who delegate meeting participation demonstrate and motivate employees with trust.

Performance management begins with having good measurements and sharing those data frequently with the team. Just as frequently, ask the team to provide and implement recommendations for improvements. Make them part of the solution, not a focus for the problem.

One of the under-appreciated tactics in performance management is to terminate under-performers. Team members know who the slackers are, and they are motivated when slackers are fired.

Sometimes we don't have a choice to choose who works with us. We just get a team which is non-performing.

I would do the following.

1) Clearly define the task and ownership
2) Monitoring the task very closely for the whole team.
3) Give some liberty to the team member who perform and get daily status from the members who don't.
4) Keep everyone in the loop for good and bad task activity.
5) Help non performers get opinion form the team for how to better do a task.

If someone is clearly not interested to be part of the team then we need to let the person go. Check this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE

Lauren, motivation comes from within and is unique for each member of your team. Address and speak to each of their needs. Get to know them, really know them in terms of their needs for collaboration, dialogue and engagement before your need for them to perform is met. Please let me know whether you find this strategy helpful. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you ; )

Ellen hit the nail on the head. Every team has someone who will resist teamwork, or performing. That can make for a team that has one or more under-performers. But if the entire team is under-performing, the onus is on the team leader.
I'll go further: if this team is part of a larger organization, then at least some of the blame goes uphill to the team leader's supervisor. Accountability for under-performing teams is always at the top of the organization.
The only other reason for serious under-performing can be a team that is part of collective bargaining. The entire team could be following their local union organizer's directives.

I would want to know why the employees were assigned to the team. The problem may be the person who assigned the team members. If that person is still involved with the team, perhaps that employee needs to be removed?

Ellen, you make a good case for looking at who designed the team.

"It's too simplistic to assume that poor performance is only related to the individual's psychology."

Given that most all managers ignore employees' psychology I suspect it is a major cause of poor job performance.

"Go back and read First Break All the Rules by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, where they show how GREAT managers do things differently from merely GOOD managers. And the difference shows up in the levels of motivation and performance among their teams."

Read it numerous times--very useful insights. Don't they suggest assigning people to jobs (teams) who have a talent for the job (team)? Isn't talent a function of an individual's psychology?

All of your comments are great but if we assign the wrong people to our teams, i.e., they don't have talent for their job, we will have to expend a great deal of effort to overcome our poor team assignments. Better to fix the team assignments before trying to fix the team.

Good call,Bob. Yes, the folks that are assigned to the team must be the right people for the job. Unfortunately, what we find all too often is that job assignments are not handled with particular care, so we end up with people assigned based on their paper credentials only, with little thought of anything else. And then, team members receive little appropriate management support. Which ends up making poor performance the fault of the team or the fault of the individual, and not the fault of the manager or the 'system.'

So I guess we have to be vigilant in team/assignment design and in matching individuals correctly. And then we have to be vigilant in managing team members so they have a fighting chance to perform well.

Ellen, thanks. We show employers how to identify the effective team players so that dysfunctional teams are not created. It may sound hard to do but it isn't.

I have taken over or inherited the management of seven sales teams in my career and after fixing many of the external influences that diminish performance and providing strong coaching and clear goals, like others here, I also find that there are often 1-3 employees out of the team (5-20 person teams) who MUST leave.
I got to the point that I could identify the suspects within the first month. Regardless of how much I coached them and improved the sales ecosystem they would have to leave.
Why?
- the rest of the team realized that poor performance had no consequences as long as the untrainables stayed employed
- the skepticism/criticisms of the miscreants infected the rest of the team even if they were not respected
- if the untrainables, say regional or segment leaders had sales reps reporting to them, their team was demoralized and not reaching their potential
- these few were contradicting, criticizing and undermining my leadership
- after much attention and attempts to develop them by me, they made no progress

After they were terminated, it became apparent from the rest of the team that they saw the same things that I did but felt it was not their business to critique a peer - and dangerous to critique their regional boss.

My overall point (in support of Glen Marshalls last paragraph), is that sales team members know who the weak links are and shouldn't be expected to 'out' them. The team feels 'safe' from the consequence performance failure as long as they can point to obvious laggards who are worse than them and still employed.

Brian, excellent comments. How do so many "MUST leaves" get their jobs?

"it was not their business to critique a peer - and dangerous to critique their regional boss." An excellent comment and I suspect there are few people who will toss their career for the good of their team. Fixing teams is the employer's responsibility anyway.

Great question Lauren. I would add:

1. Identify why people aren't performing.
2. Practice two-way communication including active listening.
3. Give people work that is meaningful to them.
4. Assign tasks based on people's interests.
5. Don't assume you know why people are performing a certain way.
6. Interview people in depth and listen to them to understand them better.
7. Implement a ongoing team building program that builds trust.
8. Define what performance means.
9. Give people measurable goals and deadlines.
10. Allow people to set their own goals.

http://www.guyfarmer.com/teambuilding

the core problem here it is not about the poor outcome but surely believe that it is the awareness of ability to produce positive result when ever they want too .
that require a psychological induction training about mind power and that surely will build a self esteem .how do you expect someone who does not feel good about himself to feel good about other thing and produce constantly positive result .the root has to be pure and clean then they will be able to reflect the parental authority of the leader and demonstrate the follower ship .
doing so will definitely boost the energy into work environmental .

by Stephane Vri .
www.cornerstonehr.co.za

There are lots of great suggestions here and I think that there's more to bonuses and promotions when it comes to the art of motivation. Every CEO knows that motivation is the key to empowering an employee to perform better and this can be achieved by:

1. Being a role model
2. Focusing on what makes your team happy
3. Sharing your success with your employees

Only when people feel that they're part of a 'greater good' will they be compelled to become great themselves... with or without a raise.

There are lots of great suggestions here and I think that there's more to bonuses and promotions when it comes to the art of motivation. Every CEO knows that motivation is the key to empowering an employee to perform better and this can be achieved by:

1. Being a role model
2. Focusing on what makes your team happy
3. Sharing your success with your employees

Only when people feel that they're part of a 'greater good' will they be compelled to become great themselves.

Look in the mirror! What are you doing or not doing that you should be doing.
Inculcate Trust, recognition, and motivation!