Level the Playing Field for Global Teams
Our recent case study with a US-led global medical research team revealed just how easily distance turns relatively small misunderstandings into significant misalignment for globally distributed teams.
As we continued to analyze the results from our assessment, we learned that the quality of the communications between the US-based leadership and the non-US team members was causing a significant rift within the team. This was uncovered when we compared specific data sets gathered from each of the non-US teams with the US-based team.
Leadership was surprised:
“But we have weekly status meetings!” “We send emails all the time!”
However, it became clear that the non-US based team members were disconnected from the daily communication of the larger team. The fact that the US team met face-to-face while the non-US teams utilized video updates gave an impression of inequality relating to the roles and importance of individual team members. Among the global teams, there was an overwhelming perception of favoritism by leadership toward the US-based research team members. This perception of favoritism tainted leadership’s ability to effectively communicate with the global teams.
Together with organizational leadership, we created an action plan to reduce the perception of favoritism and foster the desired sense of equality among all research teams, regardless of location.
Team Leadership began conducting all team meetings through video conferencing, even when members shared an office location. Treating all members the same levelled the playing field of communications and sent a subtle, but powerful, message that leadership held all research groups in equal standing.
Additionally, the Team Leader made it a point to visit every global team that quarter to solidify the importance of everyone’s contribution to their team effort. After this initial visit, a schedule of regular in-person meetings was developed to maintain the feelings of equality.
Six months later, the team had measurably improved its productivity and was on-track with its research goals. Each team re-took our assessment and this subsequent analysis confirmed a vastly improved global team.