Improve team performance by studying problems and spotting coping behaviours

by Tracy Reader, Management Consultant & Leadership Coach

The modern world of work is a fast-changing environment – making it hard to keep on top of how individual employees and teams are performing. Generally, the foundations for individuals to achieve peak performance come from a combination of how well-suited someone is to their specific job role; how well they interact with their colleagues and how they feel about the challenges facing them at any given time.

Whatever the situation, team performance can often suffer if colleagues aren’t getting along well; if there is confusion over whose responsibility it is to perform or make decisions about key tasks; or if there is duplication of effort in some areas and a lack of attention in others. It is therefore important for team leaders to spend time identifying whether problems are being solved quickly or if the team is spending more time deliberating over solutions than moving quickly from one task to the next.

Due to the increase in globalisation there is also greater diversity in the workplace (which is generally a good thing) but means that people often find themselves working with others – be it colleagues, clients or suppliers – whose backgrounds, approach and personality styles differ greatly from their own. This, together with rapid technological developments and changes in working practices as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, means that many more people are either finding the pressure of their jobs overwhelming or find their work mundane, unstimulating, boring or frustrating. This inevitably has a negative impact on their individual performance and sometimes the performance of the team around them. So, what can team leaders and managers do to overcome these issues?

A great tool in enabling leaders to identify these areas of difficulty and thus improve performance is the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory, or the KAI. Like other psychometric measures it helps employers and managers identify differences in the way that team members approach certain aspects of their jobs; but unlike other psychometric measures it focuses specifically on problem solving. This is particularly useful in the majority of workplaces that exist today, where much of our working lives are spent trying to find solutions to problems that inevitably arise as a result of the rapid changes taking place in our complex global society.

The KAI doesn’t measure one’s capacity or ability to solve problems, rather it measures the way in which an individual prefers to solve problems. For example, developing fail-safe ideas within the comfortable environment of familiar rules and policies score nearer to the adaptive end of the continuum. At the other end of the continuum are the more innovative, who prefer to solve problems with more unconventional ideas, thinks more broadly, and may bend or break rules and policies in solving the problem. It’s important to note that one preference is not better than the other, as it has no relationship with one’s intelligence, learned skills, motivation, culture, or ethnicity.

What matters for employers and managers is how well the team engaged in solving the problems work together. If the team is not cohesive, performance suffers. Individuals who are expected to work a long way outside of their preferred problem-solving style will become disillusioned with the task and are likely to either cause more problems for the rest of the team, or decide to leave the organisation altogether.

Team B – stressed, not able to work well together and so not achieving their potential. Individuals will be stressed and finding it a difficult workplace to be in.

Once managers understand which style of problem solving their team members each prefer and how far apart on the scale different employees may be, this can be very useful in identifying when colleagues are operating outside of their comfort zone or struggling to see eye-to-eye on a particular problem.

Furthermore, to optimize team success, it is useful to recognise what problem-solving style may be needed, given the nature of the problem. Does the problem-at-hand require a more adaptive approach, or a more innovative approach? More complex problems need a mixed team to sort them out, so ensuring the team working on the problem has a good range of problem-solving styles and recognising which ideas are most appropriate as you go through the problem-solving process can help teams to move forward with greater success for the benefit of the organization.

This knowledge, coupled with an understanding of the kinds of coping behaviours that might be displayed by employees who are struggling at work, can be invaluable in for managers in resolving problems in teams before they become a major issue. So, what are the warning signs that team leaders should look out for?

In 2018, Dimoff & Kelloway carried out research on the visible signs of mental ill health at work. Their findings suggest that four categories of behaviour can generally be detected in traditional workplaces: emotional outbursts, social withdrawal, attendance and performance changes. The first is obviously one of the easiest to spot – for example if someone were to start yelling at others or crying over the coffee machine. Withdrawal may be harder to recognise but this could be noticed through lack of communication with colleagues or unusual quietness in meetings. Attendance may also be a tricky one to spot with more people now working from home, but perhaps this highlights the importance of managers checking in with their teams regularly at different times of the day – though of course one needs to be mindful not to go too far with this. Finally changes in the speed at which employees respond to requests or get work completed would be a useful clue that they may be overwhelmed with their work or disillusioned with what they are being asked to do.

Research has yet to be completed if one’s problem-solving style is connected to a particular category of behaviour, but recognizing these behaviours among teammates is the first step in recognizing an issue. The next step is to determine if the source of the issue is a gap in expectations, motivation, ability, or problem-solving style. The first three are commonly considered, the latter is not as well known. A significant gap of problem-solving style between two people can lead to conflict in how best to solve the problem. A gap of problem-solving style between an individual and the group may lead to lack of organizational fit and stress. A gap of problem style of the individual and the problem attempted to be solved may lead to stress and avoidance of the problem. Coping behaviour is fuelled by motivation, and when one runs out of motivation there is a lack of ability to cope to work with others and solve problems outside of one’s preferred style.

Why is it vitally important to recognize how individuals are coping and managing problems at work? When people work in a role and for an organisation that complements their problem-solving preferences, it is more likely they will find that work rewarding and more likely that they will perform better and, thus, be happier and fulfilled in both their career and life in general. This not only benefits the individual, but in turn, benefits the organisation they work for in many ways – from avoiding complications caused by disagreements within teams, to maximising the output of each individual, that naturally occurs when everyone understands the value each team member brings and can thereby take the lead on tasks they feel to be best suited in a particular situation.

So, rather than push your employees to perform better by setting ever more challenging targets, instead consider using the KAI and enable your team to better understand one another’s problem-solving style. Equip them with the language they need to solve problems more smoothly and collaboratively in the future – with newly agreed upon objectives which are based on the nature of the problem, rather than just a matter of opinion.

Team A – focused on solving problem required, low levels of stress, working to their thinking and problem-solving style.