Trust vs. control
In workshops with managers on hybrid team excellence, we repeatedly come across the topic of trust vs. control. What is the right balance between the two components in a hybrid team?
At the end of the discussion, we often find recurring findings:
- Moderate, half-hearted or strongly technically interested managers did not focus more on employee development in mobile working
- Employees with moderate self-direction (in the office), do not increase this in the home office either
- Employees who were conscientious and high-performing in the physical workplace were usually the same remotely
So what changes in the design of hybrid team processes? Hardly anything, actually.
Most activities that can be carried out remotely and hybrid are difficult to monitor. Of course, milestones and results can be recognised and evaluated. But whether these are achieved efficiently and effectively was and is only visible to a limited extent in the office.
More control therefore does not bring about any improvement. Managers have the greatest leverage through confidence-building measures and activities that enable joint, strength-based team development and collaboration.
Formulate team rules and hand over responsibility
Experience has shown that rules help us when we enter new territory. The ORA principle (Orientation, Ritualisation, Activation) often helps in the professionalisation of hybrid teamwork.
The following rules have proven their worth:
- The camera is switched on in all hybrid meetings
- Agreement on 24 or 48 hours response time to create a balance between ‘always-on’ and ‘always-off’ meetings
- Using specific channels for certain communication: when is the phone enough?
- Disclosure of certain preferences, e.g. how do colleagues want to receive feedback or be addressed in early phases of conflict and disagreements?
Successful hybrid teamwork depends on EVERYONE helping to shape it. Not ‘only’ or ‘especially’ the managers.
