When performance issues arise with teams, the underlying belief is often that these issues have resulted from a lack of direction. In response to such performance issues, businesses too often add extra layers of oversight and encouragement to reinforce previously provided direction to the workforce, regardless of whether this direction was sufficiently developed to be actionable.

Too often (and especially when done in haste) these additional levels of review and pressure are implemented without resolving overlapping and fuzzy allocations of responsibility, or assuring the clarity and achievability of the underlying objectives. This often results in inconsistently and poorly communicated target outcomes, which further confuses the people who have to actually make progress towards achieving these goal, and can further erodes their efficiency and velocity. Unfortunately, since these teams are already the ones behind schedule, this may hurt, rather than help, their efforts to move in the right direction more quickly and more effectively.

In sports rowing, there are multiple roles which must be filled in order for a racing shell to travel efficiently from a starting point to a destination. Wind, currents, and fatigue always threaten to keep the crew from achieving their goal within the target time. Individuals can make mistakes, or not perform up to their potential, which further complicates their ability to function effectively as a team. The key to improvements usually is in refining a very small number of techniques that will reduce waste and get the most out of the team's efforts. These improvements will take time, training, practice, and focus to execute in a way that exceeds past performance. That's about all that can be accomplished in one race, but when you combine such improvements together over a season, they can make quite an impact on overall team (and business) performance. That is, of course, assuming the direction is clear, consistent, and useful.

In business, when team performance does not meet expectations, many approaches are often employed to reinforce what the goals are. Leverage can be achieved in examining how decisions are made, or refining insights regarding the forces that are at work that affect performance, but in the middle of a race, focus is critical. Between races, it is the time to employ more effective coaching, and focused practice sessions to refine your skills; during races, if you try to implement changes, you are just as likely to make things worse as you are to speed up the crew..

Managers play a key role in evangelizing and organizing these approaches. Too often, though, after recognizing that a business is falling behind their competition, businesses end up doing the equivalent of adding more coxswain to the team - a phenomenon that has become so frequent, it has now become a part of management folklore:

A Japanese company and an American company decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race. On the big day the Japanese won by a mile. Afterward, the American team became very discouraged and morally depressed. The American management decided the reason for the crushing defeat had to be found. A Management Team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and one person rowing. So American management hired a consulting company and paid them an incredible amount of money. They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent losing to the Japanese again next year, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the Rowing Team Quality First Program, with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. Even new paddles and medical benefit incentives were promised for a winner. We must give the rower the empowerment and enrichments through this quality program. The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the senior executives as bonuses.

Clearer definition of goals matters. Disambiguating responsibilities matters. Focused attention on individual performance matters. Meaningful strategies matters. The effectiveness of the platforms and tools you are using matters. But adding layers of bureaucracy will just weigh the boat down and wear everyone out, rather than realizing the target objectives that are desired.