Assessing the Performance of Cross-Functional Teams




  1. How do we assess the product of a cross-functional team?


    • Product success criteria is determinded at the start, e.g. once the team is clear on deliverables they will need to set standards to define success.
    • Success criteria may have to do with any or all of the following:
      • Will the product be useful to the customers for the purpose they were intending to use it for?
      • Is the quality of the product at or above their expectations?
      • Was the product delivered within the agreed upon time commitments?
      • Were the right people involved in the product development to assure the appropriate levels of input and credibility?
      • Does the product meet any financial or budgetary requirements?
    • Cantalanello & Kirkpatrick offer a useful model to assess four levels of evaluation. Teams will need to be really clear as to what level they want to use to judge the effectiveness of their work product. Many programs are evaluated at below level one, simply by counting the number of participants as a measure of success. For example, in assessing the effectiveness of a training program:
      • Level One: Affective Reactions- did the attendees "like" the training session, this is the happiness index. Were they satisfied that the program met their objectives?
      • Level Two: Learning- did the participants actually learn something in the training? This is often measured by pre/post testing or demonstration of new skills upon retuning to the job.
      • Level Three: Behavior Change- did participant's actual behavior change on the job? Are there observable opportunities to note specific changes?
      • Level Four: Performance Change- did participation in the training program result in the application of new learning back on the job that acutally made a difference in business outcomes (bottom line)? This is the real "so what" objective, often evaluated with "hard" measures such as productivity, quality rates, sales volume, profit, absenteeism, and turnover changes.
    • Teams will be most successful with specific, measurable objectives or clearly defined deliverables. It is also much easier to acknowledge performance with small, task specific teams. Teams with lofty or amorphous objectives will often get lost and fail to achieve their objectives. Designing teams with specific targets and essential membership will enable them to succeed.


  2. Who should assess the product of a cross-functional team?


    • Key stakeholders are defined at the beginning along with success criteria. These are often the customers or recipients of the team's work. Although one might argue that eventually "everyone" would most likely benefit from the team's work, it is best to determine a few key customers at the start.
    • Some teams will generate a 360 feedback process to assess the merit of the final product. Customers, peer team members, and team leaders provide feedback to ascertain the success of the team's work product. Peers will often assess the contributions in developing the outcome, while customers assess the product quality.
    • It is helpful to make sure that the key stakeholders agree with the deliverables and the success criteria developed by the team. They would do best if asked to review and add their suggestions at the start.


  3. How do functional managers assess the contribution of their employees to the cross-functional effort?
    4.

    • The primary and formal method of assessment is the actual product/deliverable. Did it meet the success criteria?
    • In addition, most functional managers will want to solicit feedback on how effective their employee was in contributing to the team success. This is most often done informally by talking with several members of the team. We suggest bringing this process out in the open so that the expectation is set that team members may be asked to provide feedback to functional managers. Managers are not obligated to share who specifically gave each input or suggestion. Generally they will ask questions about the extent of participation, follow-through on commitments, quantity of contribution, and quality of work, etc.


  4. How do functional managers assess the trade-off between their employee's functional contribution vs. cross-functional contribution?
    5.

    • Functional managers will want to clarify performance objectives on a regular basis to adjust for changes in work requirements. They may want to weight different objectives with different percentages and align objectives with time obligations. It doesn't work to simply add cross-functional assignments and expect the employees to work extra time. Some employees will be better able to achieve their work objectives by working in cross-functional teams rather than doing the work alone.
    • Functional managers will have an important role in sponsoring their employee's participation in cross-functional team assignments. They must be able to see benefit for their organization in order to provide support and release time for participation. The employee will not be able to participate effectively if they do not incur some degree of work re-balanceing, are frequently unable to attend meetings because of functional priorities, or receive acknowledgment on their appraisal only for functional contributions.
    • Some teams have incented sponsor participation by developing an outstanding/supportive functional manager recognition award.
    • Managers who are contributing resources to staff a project should do so with the full intention that their employee can/will be able to contribute to the outcomes of the team efforts. Passive participation is costly and offers little gain except for occasional exposure to team discussions. Team participation/achievement should be included in individual performance appraisals. If employees are to spend time working on team objectives, they should not be invisible on the appraisal. This will surely discourage participation and thwart the efforts of dedicated team members.


  5. How do we recognize cross functional teams as a whole?
    6.

    • There are many forms of team reward and recognition ranging from social acknowledgements, parties, gifts and certificates, financial bonus awards, and team weighted/percentage objectives on performance appraisals. In addition, team celebrations build camaraderie and achieving important objectives will be personally fulfilling and helpful to one’s career development.
    • Team financial awards are used most often when the work of the team actually impacts budget through cost savings or revenue generation. Financial awards are in the form of one-time compensation versus additions to base pay. Project teams are best suited for a one-time bonus award.
    • Financial team awards must fall within the "line of sight" of the team. Company-wide team awards have little impact on individual and team motivation since they often do not see a clear path between their contribution and reward.
    • The most effective team designs include core team members who have a dedicated percentage of their time allocated to the work of the cross-functional team. They have definite accountability for products/results associated with team effort and they possess the ability/time to contribute significantly to the team objectives. These are solid, committed contributors who most likely have accountability for the objectives independently.
    • Teams are wise to carefully select core members who can offer vital contributions and limit the number of extended members. Ideal team size is generally 5-7 people.
    • The degree of inclusion of cross-functional teamwork in the performance appraisal/merit process is equivalent to the work objectives of each individual role/job description. In other words, if 10% of my role accountability is the development of an effective officer educational program, and I do this via a cross-functional team approach, then my performance on the team would equate to 10% of my appraisal.
    • Additional team members are classified as extended members. They may participate on an ad hoc or occasional basis. They may attend meetings for learning/development purposes or to gather/provide information.
    • The literature supports an equal share distribution of monetary rewards among core team members. The premise being that if you know your core team members will share in the same reward, it is in each member’s best interest to assure that everyone can/does contribute by sharing information, motivating and including each other. Reward systems that attempt to break down contributions into most/least significant contributors actually encourage people to "starve" certain individuals thus leaving a bigger pot for the achievers.
    • If the team members are defined by core versus extended, this further defines contribution expectations, e.g. extended team members are not held to the same standards and consequently do not participate in the same reward system.
    • Some teams reserve a special reward for an outstanding contributor award. This is usually a member that goes well beyond the expected to contribute to the teams’ success. They would participate in the shared team reward and receive additional acknowledgement, either monetary or recognition.


  6. How do we recognize individuals on cross-functional teams?
    7.

    • Individuals are recognized via the percentages on the formal performance appraisal that includes cross-functional team objectives.
    • Individuals who need to cooperate and help each other should not be put in the position of competing for the same rewards.
    • Individuals are acknowledged when the team has achieved the desired results.
    • Peer feedback is often used among cross-functional team members to give specific feedback and acknowledgement to each member via a framework of team effectiveness type questions.
    • Teams can nominate outstanding contributors for social or monetary reward.


    Additional Questions to Consider:

    1. How are individuals currently compensated and what flexibility might exist to modify the existing system? Are there any existing disincentives that actually get in the way of team participation, e.g. ranking among team members, lack of re-balancing for team participation, or competition among members?
    2. What is the role/expectation of the functional manager in supporting cross-functional teamwork?
    3. What objectives are best suited to cross-functional teamwork?.



Reference List


  • Cantalanello, R. F. & Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1968). Evaluating Training Programs. Training and Development Journal.
  • Crandall, N. Fredric, Ph.D. & Wallace, Marc J., Jr., Ph.D. (1998). Work & Rewards in the Virtual Workplace: A "New Deal" for Organizations and Employees. American Management Association.
  • Gross, Steve (1997). Compensating and Rewarding Teams: How to Design and Implement Team-Based Reward Programs. Conference Proceedings: The Best of Teams ’97. Chicago. Linkage Corporation.
  • Jones, Steve (1997). Measuring Team Performance. Conference Proceedings: The Best of Teams ’97. Chicago. Linkage Corporation.
  • Lawler, E. E., III (1999). Pay System Change: Lag, Lead, or Both? Center for Effective Organizations, USC.
  • Lawler, E. E., III (1996). From the Ground Up: Six Principles for Building the New Logic Corporation. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  • Lawler, E. E., III (1998). Creating Effective Pay Systems for Teams. Center for Effective Organizations, USC.
  • Lipnack, Jessica & Stamps, Jeffrey (1997). Virtual Teams: Reaching Across Space, Time, and Organizations with Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Mohrman, A., Jr., & Mohrman, S. (1997). Managing Performance for Organizational Change and Learning. Center for Effective Organizations, USC.
  • Mohrman, S. & Tenkasi, R. & Mohrman, A., Jr. (1998). Learning and Knowledge Management in Team-Based New Product Development Organizations. Center for Effective Organizations, USC.
  • Parker, Glenn M. (1994). Cross-Functional Teams: Working with Allies, Enemies, and Other Strangers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  • Shonk, James H. (1992). Team-Based Organizations: Developing a Successful Team Environment. Homewood, IL. Business One Irwin.
  • Wellins, Richard S.; Byham, William C. & Dixon, George R. (1994). Inside Teams: How 20 World-Class Organizations are Winning Through Teamwork. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass Publishers.