“A Tale of Two Matrices”: 2 ways of knowing who is being a good team member
It’s often hard for us to know who is being a good team member and who is not. This is easier said than done, and it can help to have a framework to think about these things.
Matrix 1
Jack Welch, the legendary CEO of General Electric made the following matrix:
Given that Tunapanda Institute is a learning organization (not purely focused on productivity), our team members need to be in “Second chance” (which I prefer to call “Growing”) or “Star.” Our culture can survive as long as we are working hard for the organization, learning, showing respect, taking responsibility, innovating, and showing a growth mindset. Productivity is important to us, but we can be a bit more forgiving than GE.
A very interesting blog post (which also describes 5 types of people who destroy a company culture — the jerk, the whiner, the credit taker, the charming do nothing, and the loyalty monger) summarizes our first matrix:
On one axis is culture fit, on the other axis productivity. Welch’s advice was as follows:
High Culture Fit, High Productivity. These are your Stars. Do whatever you can to promote, develop, and find more of these people.
High Culture Fit, Low Productivity. Give these people a second chance due to culture fit. If they can not become productive, you will need to let them go.
Low Culture Fit, Low Productivity. Let them go quickly. The lack of culture fit is the reason they should not be given a second chance.
Low Culture Fit, High Productivity. These people are dangerous to your company long term.
For most managers, the hardest people to decide what to do with are the people who are very productive, but a bad culture fit. As a manager you will be tempted to keep them around or even reward them, even though they make the lives of the people around them miserable. However, you should do the exact opposite and let them go quickly. These are the people pose the largest threat to your culture by providing bad behavior for others to copy. Additionally, they will hurt your culture by driving out their most productive and well intentioned peers.
With culture fit, you should never compromise. This bar should be the highest for the most visible and most productive of your team.
We need to be careful that “culture fit” doesn’t become coded language for “the same as us.” Forbes has recently pointed out that the term “culture fit” is falling out of favor in Silicon Valley. The underlying point still stands, though, as long as our culture is based on shared values and productive teamwork, rather than more superficial attributes.
Matrix 2
Another matrix comes from Lex Sisney, author of the great book, “Organizational Physics” (there are some short introductory videos to his ideas on systems thinking in organizations):
Here, you want to be a Team Player or a Team Leader. Specialists can be brought in for specific projects, but shouldn’t be given much say in the overall direction of the team. Waivers can cause cultural disaster.
This matrix comes from his blog post comparing a company to an NFL (American National Football League, not soccer) team:
Like most great things in life, this draft board is both simple and powerful. It groups all of an organization’s current staff and/or potential job candidates into one of four quadrants:
The Team Leaders in quadrant 1 demonstrate high skills and fit for this position or role, they have shared vision and values, and they demand fair compensation (defined as at or below market rates for your industry and corporate lifecycle stage) for this position. That is, they could get more money elsewhere but they choose to take less because they intrinsically value being part of the team and opportunity in a role that is well suited to their strengths and interests.
The Team Players in quadrant 2 don’t have the same technical skills, fit, or experience as a Team Leader but they share the same desired vision and values and don’t cost an arm and a leg relative to market price.
The Specialists in quadrant 3 have high technical skills and are a strong style fit for the job, but they don’t share the same vision and values and/or may be very expensive compared to market rates.
The Waivers in quadrant 4 do not have the skills and fit and do not buy into the desired vision and values. Or, they simply demand way too much compensation beyond market rates for a company of your size and industry.
That’s the four main quadrants of the draft board: #1 Team Leaders, #2 Team Players, #3 Specialists, and #4 Waivers. You should notice immediately that this framework provides a strong foundation for how to think about who’s on your team now and who you want on your team in the future. It tells you that:
You need a strong core of #1 Team Leaders who are extremely talented at what they do, are a great fit for your system, share the desired vision and values, and will work at a fair price relative to market rates.
You need a deep bench of #2 Team Players who aren’t yet as talented as the starters (or there’s not the same level of job fit) but buy into the desired organizational culture at also do so at fair market price.
For the most part, you want to avoid using #3 Specialists who, if placed in a leadership position, can quickly turn the organizational culture toxic or tip the payroll balance by demanding exorbitant fees to be part of the core team.
You must avoid hiring and retaining #4 Waivers who don’t have the skills, aren’t a fit, don’t buy into the vision and values, or make it too expensive in time, energy, and/or money to keep them around.
As you can see, the draft board framework provides a very strong foundation for how to think about the type of players you want on your team. It’s pretty straightforward to master the basic concept and it’s simple for everyone involved in the hiring process to understand.
Our team has historically operated a lot like a “marketplace” in the sense that people can come and go as they wish, and we haven’t had strong accountability mechanisms in place. That will need to change going forward, and, ideally, we will put our Team Leaders into Lead Link positions and find a way to pay them enough that they can balance their focus more between gig work and Tunapanda work.
This is important
The next stage of Tunapanda’s growth is going to require extraordinary vision/perspective from Team Leaders to point us in the right direction, and extraordinary effort from Team Leaders and Team Players to get there. Our very survival is at stake over the coming weeks and months. We don’t have time for people who will damage our company culture, who will only focus on their own short-term needs, and who won’t put in the necessary effort.
What we need is leaders who share the deepest values of the organization, who still have enough energy for a bit more sacrifice, who have the vision to see how much opportunity lies ahead of us (hint: it’s huge), and who will do what it takes to get there.
Thanks to Mick Larson for reading a draft of this article.
