Alignment in Distributed Team Environment

This write-up is my take on the definition of ‘Alignment’ in the context of a distributed team working together to execute a project and a proposed mechanism to assess the health of the ‘Alignment’ within the distributed team environment.

‘Alignment’ My Definition

Common sense of purpose and shared commitment to action, which enables the distributed teams to work collaboratively, to succeed in accomplishing project objectives and goals

‘Assessment’ My Proposal

Below listed six parameters would help in assessing the state of the ‘Alignment’ that has been established within the distributed project teams.

These parameters at best can be seen as symptoms of better/improper ‘Alignment’ within distributed teams. These however do not provide definitive solutions on how an improper ‘Alignment’ can be rectified or on how a perfect ‘Alignment’ can be instituted.
The real factors that determine the ‘Alignment’ are much above & broader than the indicated symptom parameters. On a cursory note, without exploring into the details, factors such as organization norms, corporate governance, capability & credibility perceptions, communication and leadership styles , to a large extend determine the ‘Alignment’

This write up has been formulated with the assumption that units constituting the distributed teams will be fully allowed to leverage their fundamental strengths. The distribution teams governance & operational structure, will allow for more enablers rather than disablers in consolidating and channelizing the strengths spread across distributed teams for better achieving the project objectives.

Clarity on Responsibilities

Higher Maturity Indicators
Authority and responsibilities are clearly defined: who does what, what is delivered to whom, and what standards are to be met. "RACI" matrix enforced to clearly communicating who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, or Informed for each deliverable or process step.

Lower Maturity Indicator
· No clarity on responsibilities and authority.
· Operational structure & governance model evolves, influenced more by team individuals’ personality, by whims & fancies of team members controlling the flow of project critical information/resources.
· Lower sense of belonging within the team

Decision Making

Higher Maturity Indicators
· Decisions/issues on all major project execution aspects, are build through consensus.
· Decision making decentralized to the maximum extent possible, with the individual teams enabled to make decision on the resources that are at their disposal & within the scope of their operations.

Lower Maturity Indicators
· Decision making is centralized. The decisions are communicated as instructions, without dwelling on the rationale or elaborating the data points/facts that influenced the decision.
· Very low appreciation / understanding of the decisions within the team

Planning

Higher Maturity Indicators
· Involvement of all the teams in the planning of the project execution, detailing the activities, the sequencing, timelines & the responsibilities, that can best achieve the project objectives.
· Periodic group review of the project plan, allowing for emergent & deliberate changes, to accommodate the unknown risk & issues that affect the project progress.
· Team members have visibility to both long term & the short term project execution plans. Team members are periodically updated on the changes to the execution plan & the rational for the same.

Lower Maturity Indicators
· Team members have very low visibility about their work plan. Their visibility is limited to a day or two. The work priority changes on a daily basis, without adequate thought given neither on the preparation nor on the opportunities available through work consolidation.
· Team members focus only on day to day task execution, with lack of clarity of broader purpose of the project or how their contribution matter to the project success.

Status Tracking

Higher Maturity Indicators
· Metrics/data point to be used for tracking progress and status, are identified & decided upon upfront, before commencing the project execution.
· Fact & Data based progress indicators like, milestone accomplishment, Schedule adherence, Variation of actual \ estimated effort, Quality metrics, Issue resolution effectiveness, Periodic assessment of project risk, are predominantly used for tracking the status of the project.

Lower Maturity Indicators
· Non-fact & non-data based progress reporting, based on individual team members’ opinion or feeling of ‘project status’.
· Daily status call, with the involvement of almost all the team members. The progress is assessed, by taking in information about the progress that individual team members are making on their assigned task. This information is collated by taking directly with each individual team members, through long distance phone calls.

Knowledge Sharing

Higher Maturity Indicators
· Knowledge sharing is predominantly document driven. Identification & the developing documents to share the technical/domain knowledge across team members are planned work items, with project effort & time allocated for the same

Lower Maturity Indicators
· No formal mechanism for knowledge sharing. Generally allow for team dynamics to determine the level of knowledge sharing that takes place within the team. Information sharing is more reactionary, only done on escalations or when things go wrong.

Clarity on the Rules of the Game

Higher Maturity Indicators
· Established, well-defined and consistent workflows: How work should be done, defined, documented & the team educated on the consistent processes that will be followed across all the teams.
· Parameters that all work processes must meet well defined, consistent touch points and deliverables across and between teams well established. Artifacts to be produced, the metrics to be tracked, the measures of success, and the mechanisms for providing oversight and governance, well defined & understood by the different teams
· Clear understanding within the team on non-negotiable work behavior or interpersonal conduct

Lower Maturity Indicators
· Unclear rules of the game