Working SMART Article: Hypothetical Hockey

March 2005

Let's Play Hypothetical Hockey!

As if we have a choice.

With the cancellation of the National Hockey League season, there is little talk about hockey these days. The ice has melted. The nets are stored away. The scoreboards are dark. We're reduced to discussing hypothetical hockey.

Imagine you are the coach of the Chicago Black Hawks and scheduled to play a game against the Montreal Canadians at The Forum arena in Montreal. Upon arriving at the arena, you meet the opposing coach who provides a tour of their remodeled facility. As your tour progresses you inquire about two conspicuous absences. There is no scoreboard above, and there are no nets on the rink. The Canadians' coach explains that they are over budget and short on time and so the game will have to be played sans nets and scoreboard. Would you agree to play anyway? Imagine what such a game might look like. Players skating, checking (yes, perhaps even fighting) in attempting to maintain possession of the puck. For what purpose?

As silly as this sounds, there are an astonishing number of organizations demanding that their so-called teams perform under the these conditions.

In Patrick Lencioni's book, The Five Dysfunctions of A Team, three of his notable dysfunctions relate to this score-free hockey game scenario.

Inattention to Results: If no one knows the score, where do you focus your effort?
Avoidance of Accountability: In the absence of measurable goals, who really knows who's accountable for what?
Lack of Commitment: Is sustained commitment possible where winning or progress is unknown?

Note: Fear of Conflict and Absence of Trust are the other two.

How functional are your teams? Ask yourself...

Are we attempting to run our business in a score-free environment?
Does everyone in our organization know where and when they're winning and where and when they're losing?
Do we hold meaningless performance reviews with arbitrary evaluations, or do our employees know their score and are able to rate themselves based on their measurable contributions to key achievements?
Are we keeping score of the right things or are we defeating our purpose with misaligned goals?

How many workplaces have you seen where this is true?

Applicant:

"Are raises around here automatic?

Or, do you have to work for them?"

The better question is:

Can I get a raise here by showing up and looking busy? Or do I have to actually contribute something measurable to our success?

Unless your nets (goals) are established and your scoreboard is current, how do your people effectively work toward a self-funding raise or bonus?

In what arenas are you confusing activity with achievement?

Free Assessment: Take your organizational temperature

Tom Lemanski of Vista Development serves as an executive coach and performance facilitator for the strategic development of SMARTer executives, managers and sales professionals.

View Past Articles | Email your comments or feedback |

What is Working SMART?