Teaming Rubric[1]

 

“This is a composite rubric synthesized from several sources.  It is not meant to be a checklist—the descriptors under each level of performance are indicators of the quality of the performance rather than an exhaustive listing; not everything must be ‘checked off’ to receive a score of a particular level.  The rubric should be considered a work in progress.”[ATI]  (Note:  The work by Larson and LeFasto cited in the footnote[2] are the principal sources for elements of quality identified in the rubric.)

 

 

Suggestions for use:

 

  1. Conduct a brainstorm with the group (or class) on the essential performances of teams.  As brainstorm slows, as the group to synthesize their list and group the performances into 4 to 6 categories. 
  2. Compliment the group on their ability to develop a good list of ideas (as appropriate) and ask them if they are interested in what others who have worked on this problem have to say.
  3. Present the rubric that follows and ask the group to identify which elements in their list are represented in the rubric.  Identify which elements, if any, are missing.
  4. Develop the rubric for the group that uses the appropriate balance of language of the discipline and “user voice” by putting the descriptors identified by the group into the version used by the teams as appropriate.
  5. Reiterate the statement at the top of this page and ask the group to evaluate their performance based on the rubric’s elements. 
  6. Request user feedback and suggestions for improvements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trait 1:  Collaborative Climate

Guiding questions: 

  • Does the team create a working environment that promotes trust, open communication, and synergy?
  • Does the team recognize and use the strengths of each individual?

 

Level 5 The team establishes and maintains the environment needed for equal participation from all team members.

  • Leadership within the team is based on intrinsic human values such as trust, cheerfulness, loyalty, friendliness, courtesy, kindness, thrift, and respect (“principled leadership”).
  • The team uses processes that reveal the strengths of each individual and they create a shared understanding of how each individual contributes.
  • The team uses forward-focused evaluation.
  • The team uses processes that insure that each voice is heard and valued.
  • Conflicts between team members are brought to the team for resolution.  The team employs a conflict resolution process that solves the problems and promotes collaboration.
  • The team requires effective listening practices of its members.  This includes traits such as acknowledging, attending, reflecting, probing, summarizing, etc.

 

Level 3 The team does is aware of the need for an appropriate environment, but lacks the skills to establish it.

  • The team works to have meaningful, specific reviews of performance that promote genuine improvement, but sometimes fail in their efforts.
  • Some team members can identify individual member’s strengths, but the team doesn’t benefit from it because the strengths are not utilized.
  • The team aims for forward-focused evaluations, but periodically falls short.
  • New ideas are encouraged and sometimes considered fairly, or, at times, idea synthesis fails because all ideas are viewed as equally credible even after their consideration.
  • Occasionally, some voices are not heard.  Sometimes the dominant member rules the discussion or the quiet, shy member remains that way, or the concerns go unmentioned to provide “harmony in the team.
  • Conflicts are identified, but not effectively dealt with because of lacking skills or processes.  The team values conflict for team development but lacks ability in harnessing it’s potential.
  • Listening for understanding practices occur (roughly 50% of the time).

 

Level 1 The team does not consider an environment where each opinion is given equal consideration valuable.

  • The team does not review their performance, or they do it only when required to do so.  
  • All team members are unaware of the strengths of their teammates, or they believe that their idea is always the best method.
  • Evaluations are negative; they focus on what is wrong, and fail to make suggestions for improvement.
  • When a new idea emerges, it is routinely shot down.
  • Frequently, some voices are not heard.  One or several team members may dominate the conversation, a reflective or shy team member may fail to state their viewpoint, or in the interests of “harmony” a team member may not voice a concern.
  • Conflicts are ignored or denied.  The team believes that their focus should be “to all get along”.
  • Listening for understanding rarely occurs.
    Trait 2:  Performance Development

Guiding questions: 

  • Does the team strive for excellence?
  • Does the team hold individuals accountable for their performance?
  • Is there a focus on growth in performance for both the team and the individual?

 

Level 5 The team is constantly striving to improve overall team performance.

  • The team has a process for continuous improvement.  This means they regularly and routinely evaluate many aspects of individual and team performance.  In addition they implement ideas for improvement, and demonstrate improved performance over time.
  • The team uses roles to continuously develop the individuals’ talents and enhance team performance. 
  • The team holds individuals accountable for their performance.
  • The team strives to become an asset to the organization, supervisor, or other relevant entity.
  • The team embraces and takes on increasingly challenging tasks.

 

Level 3 The team considers their performance when encouraged by an outside source.

  • The team considers their continuous improvement important but lacks adequate skills to effect change.  They evaluate some aspects of individual and team performance.  They implement some ideas for improvement, and show fairly small performance improvement over time.
  • The team can relate to the use of roles in developing individuals’ talents and enhancing team performance, but lacks skills in establishing or using roles. 
  • The team has a method of accountability for individual member performance, but it is semi-effective.
  • The team sees how they could benefit the organization, supervisor, or other relevant entity.
  • The team accepts increasingly challenging tasks as part of their duty as a team.

 

Level 1 The team never formally considers their performance.

  • The team does not consider their continuous improvement.  They do not evaluate any aspects of individual and team performance.  They do not implement ideas for improvement because none are generated, and do not performance improvement over time.
  • The team is unconcerned with developing individuals’ talents and enhancing team performance. 
  • The team has no method of accountability for individual member performance.
  • The team does not see how they could benefit the organization, supervisor, or other relevant entity.
  • The team shuns increasingly challenging tasks.

Trait 3:  Infrastructure

Guiding questions:

·        Has the team established ways to work together and to use resources?

·        Does the team create goals that appeal and connect with each individual?

 

Level 5 The team has chosen methods to govern their work and help each member improve.

·       The team creates goals that appeal to each individual and that help create an atmosphere where team goals are more important than individual goals (unified commitment).

  • The team has well understood expectations (e.g. defined levels of quality, on time to meetings, acceptable contribution, etc.).
  • The team continually adapts plans and processes to meet the changing needs of the stakeholders involved.

·       The team matches the environment and resources to the task (i.e. shop for manufacturing, conference room for client meetings, etc.).

·       The team follows effective meeting practices.  This means meetings have clear objectives, have an agenda, are documented appropriately, begin/end on time, stay on task, and meeting time management is appropriate.

·       The team has a process for deciding if tasks are best done as a team individually.

 

Level 3 The team has some methods to govern their work and help members improve.

·       The team has goals that are accepted by many team members, but not all members are committed to their realization.

  • The team has developed expectations that appeal to most teammates. 
  • The team tries to adapt plans and processes to meet the changing needs of the stakeholders involved, but sometimes fails because of poor skills or lack of consensus.

·       The team considers the impact of environment and resources on successful task completion.  They are developing the ability to match tasks with the environment and resources appropriately. 

·       The team is developing their meeting practice.  The meetings have about 50% of the elements important to good meetings (i.e. objectives, agendas, appropriate documentation, etc).  They are developing abilities in managing time during the meetings.

·       The team is developing skills in determining whether work is best done as a team or individually.

 

Level 1 The team has no methods to govern their work or help each member improve.

·       The team has no goals. There is no sense of unity or commitment.

  • The team has not discussed expectations of the team members.
  • The team will not adapt plans and processes to meet the changing needs of the stakeholders involved.

·       The team never considers the impact of environment and resources on successful task completion.

·       The team has no meeting practice.  Meetings lack objectives, agendas, and appropriate documentation.  They do not begin/end on time or stay on task.  During meetings, time management is non-evident.

·       The team has not yet developed skills in deciding whether work is best done as a team or individually.

Trait 4:  Project Focus

Guiding questions: 

  • Does the team have clear and elevating goals?
  • Is the team focused on creating results?
  • Does the team consider the broad societal impacts of their work?

 

Level 5 The team has clear, compelling goals that elevate each member to a new level of performance.

·       Team goals are elevating and clearly understood by each member and by relevant stakeholders.  In addition team goals satisfy other criteria such those described by the SMART[3] acronym.

·       The team considers engineering ethics.  This includes loyalty to employers, societal issues and impacts, design for the environment, health, safety and similar issues.

·       The team is results-oriented.  They routinely and continuously create appropriate results in the process of completing a project.

·       The superior quality of the team’s work generates external support and recognition.

 

Level 3 The team is developing skills in creating clear, compelling goals that will elevate the performance of all members.

·       Team goals are clearly understood by each member and by relevant stakeholders, but are not yet elevating (or vice versa).  Team goals satisfy many of the other criteria such those described by the SMART acronym (the goals are SAT, SMT, or ART, etc).

·       The team considers some elements of engineering ethics.  This includes loyalty to employers, societal issues and impacts, design for the environment, health, safety and similar issues.

·       The team is becoming results-oriented.  They sometimes create appropriate results in the process of completing a project.

·       The team’s work generates internal support and recognition.

Level 1  The team has no goals, or the goals do not elevate team members’ performance.

·       Team goals are either not established or do not agree with the view of relevant stakeholders.  Team goals do not satisfy other criteria such those described by the SMART acronym.

·       The team never considers engineering ethics.  There is no conversation about loyalty to employers, societal issues and impacts, design for the environment, health, safety and similar issues.

·       The team has not developed a results-oriented view of design.  They routinely and continuously create inappropriate or inadequate results in the process of completing a project.

·       The poor quality of the team’s work prevents future external support and recognition of the team.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trait 5:  Personal Responsibility

Guiding questions: 

  • Does the personally strive maintain the high performance of the team?

 

Level 5 The individual demonstrates responsible and professional behavior

·       The team member is on time to team activities (as described by the team standards).

·       The team member gives positive and forward-focused comments.

·       The team member completes tasks on schedule and with a level performance that is judged high quality by the team.

·       The team member appropriately voices their viewpoint on all team issues.

·       The team member assumes leadership and responsibility on subtasks.

·       The team member accepts a role and is open to rotation of roles to promote individual growth.

·       Instead of spinning their wheels, the team member brings both technical and people problems to the team.

·       The team member places highest priority on team success rather than on personal benefits or acclaim.

·       The team member makes an adequate and appropriate contribution to the team.

 

Level 3 The individual demonstrates some responsible and professional behavior

·       The team member is sometimes late or misses team activities.

·       The team member occasionally spouts “killer-phrases.”   Positive comments occur about ½ of the time.

·       The team member points out problems with other’s viewpoint and gives some ideas for improvement.

·       The team member complete some assigned tasks, or the quality of their completed work is not always acceptable to the team and must be reworked.

·       The team member sometimes dominates the discussion or sometimes fails to voice their point-of-view.

·       The team member assumes dutiful responsibility on many tasks. 

·       The team member is willing to accept roles, yet struggles to understand why they are rotated.

·       The team member tries not to spin their wheels, but still gets “locked in” on some problems.

·       The team member is somewhat concerned with the team’s success.

·       The team member makes a half-hearted contribution to the team.

 

Level 1 The individual demonstrates irresponsible and non-professional behavior

·       The team member is often late or misses team activities.

·       The team member regularly spouts “killer-phrases.”   These are comments that are negative, cynical, derogatory, or overly critical. 

·       The team member points out problems with the viewpoints or ideas of others without giving forward-focused recommendations.

·       The team member fails to complete assigned tasks, or the quality of their completed work is not acceptable to the team and must be reworked.

·       The team member dominates the discussion or the team member fails to voice their point-of-view.

·       The team member does not assume responsibility on any tasks. 

·       The team member is unwilling to accept roles.

·       The team member spends far too much time trying to solve problems alone instead of asking for help when they get stuck.

·       The team member is most concerned with their personal agenda and success.

·       The team member makes little contribution to the team.


[1] ΣLED, 2002; developed with funding from NIATT expert consulting from ATI (http://www.assessmentinst.com).

[2] Larson, C. E., & LaFasto, F. M. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong. London, UK: Sage.

[3] Attributed to Rick DuFour (ATI conference, 2002), SMART is an acronym for Strategic and specific, Measurable, Attainable, Results-oriented, and Measurable.