Team Focus From The Mckinsey Engagement PDF

THE TEAM FOCUS
FRAMEWORK
FOR TEAM PROBLEM SOLVING
THIS ABRIDGED SLIDE DECK WAS PREPARED FOR THE WEBINAR ON

JUNE 26, 2009
SEE THE FULL VERSION AND SUPPORTING TEMPLATES AND SLIDES

AT WWW.PAULFRIGA.COM
Confidential material from the book: The McKinsey Engagement:

Dr. Paul N. Friga - 2009
A Powerful Toolkit for More Efficient and Effective Team Problem Solving
The TEAM FOCUS Framework
2
Interpersonal Analytical
F Frame
T Talk
O Organize
E Evaluate
C Collect
A Assist
U Understand
M Motivate
S Synthesize
Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga
The TEAM FOCUS “Rules of Engagement”
3
Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

• Communicate • Discuss group • Leverage • Identify unique
TEAM
constantly dynamics expertise motivators

• Listen attentively • Set expectations • Keep teammates • Positively
• Separate issues and monitor accountable reinforce
from people results • Provide timely teammates
• Develop and feedback • Celebrate
reevaluate a achievements
personal plan
FOCUS

TALK: Team Charter
4
Team Name CG2020 (Center Grove 2020)

White River Citizens United
Client Name (and Johnson County commissioners and county council members)
Project Description Investigate incorporation/annexation options for White River Township in Johnson County, IN
 Lack of relevant data

Potential Issues  Public resistance to ideas
 Clear recommendations that are understandable by the general public and supported by data
Success Goals  Usable document that will be used by the county leaders to make decisions going forward
 Employ the tools from the TEAM FOCUS framework
Guiding Principles  Ensure that all work is high impact
CONTACT INFORMATION
Name Role Email Phone (W) Phone (M)
Dr. Paul Friga Project Oversight
Chris Cannon Project Manager
Alan Burleson MBA Consultant
Tim Krzywicki MBA Consultant
Shalini Makkar MBA Consultant
Bhavin Shah MBA Consultant Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga
Rachita Sundar MBA Consultant Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga
TALK: Engagement Letter
5
CG2020 - Letter of Agreement
Dear Mr. Dorsett,
I am pleased to present the following overview of a proposed pro-bono project for the White River Citizens United (and Johnson County leaders). In this letter, I will address our project’s scope, timing, and approach, and I certainly welcome
your group’s input and suggestions.
We understand that the White River Township area of Johnson County is currently unincorporated, and that county leaders have not reached a consensus on the appropriate course of action. We believe that Johnson County has three viable
options: to incorporate as an independent city, to invite annexation by a neighboring town or city (e.g., Bargersville or Greenwood), and to do nothing.
The project team will consist of 4-5 MBA students at the Kelley School of Business, who will operate under my supervision (I have attached my CV for your convenience); our objective is to provide an independent perspective regarding
Johnson County’s options. In seeking to answer whether or not this area should seek to incorporate, we will gather and analyze primary and secondary data including, but not limited to, the following:
 Interviews with key constituents in Johnson County (WRCU members, county commissioners, mayors, etc.)
 Review of previous analysis/reports on this topic and articles written
 Possible comparisons to similar incorporation efforts (in or out of Indiana)
We plan to begin the project in January 2007 (although we may have a few internal meetings in December), and we expect to deliver our report by the end of the semester (May 2007). Our ultimate deliverable will include the following:
 Benefits
 Infrastructure – roads, services, trails, economic development
 Character – development, control
 Costs (both one-time and ongoing)
 Administrative
 Legal
 Physical
 Recommendation and risks/caveats
My team is very excited about making a real impact and helping Johnson County’s leaders guide the area’s future – I look forward to working with you and I welcome your input.
Consultant Client
Dr. Paul Friga Name: ___________________
Project Coordinator Position: _________________
November 20, 2006 Date:____________________ Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga
6

TEAM

personal plan
FOCUS

EVALUATE: Individual Plan
7
Name Tim Krzywicki
Project Center Grove Incorporation Study
Incoming Strengths and  Strengths: I have strong analytical abilities, legal knowledge, and work ethic
 Weaknesses: I am a bit shy in groups, so I sometimes delay in sharing ideas and
Weaknesses hold back in group discussions; I also lack business problem-solving confidence
Development  Communication: I plan to push myself out of my comfort zone and speak up more
 Knowledge application: I look forward to using my legal knowledge practically
Objectives  Confidence: I hope to develop business confidence and to trust myself more
Our team really gelled well – because I felt comfortable with the team, I found it
Results easier to contribute my own ideas and to debate others’ more. I realized that I really
do have a lot to contribute, and I feel much more confident in my abilities.

8

TEAM

personal plan
FOCUS

ASSIST: Status Report
9
Owner Work Stream Data / Research Findings Next Steps

Alan Services I have been primarily looking at My research has been I’m meeting this week with a
secondary data – statistics about inefficient so far – I feel like I’m subject-matter expert –
fire, police, water, waste, etc. spinning my wheels. hopefully he can point me in the
right direction.
Bhavin Roads My research has centered on JC roads aren’t keeping pace Now I need to find more
reports, interviews, and with home values – people in statistics and take photos of
observations. the area expect more. roads in poor condition.
Rachita Government / Taxes I have been comparing the tax Incorporation and annexation We need to build a strong case
rates of unincorporated and would both raise taxes, but that about the benefits that result
incorporated areas and would help to finance much- from increased taxes – the
examining the implications. needed improvements. public will be very resistant to
tax hikes.
Shalini Character Recently, I have focused on JC’s growth is approaching I will examine the results of
determining the effects of the unmanageable rates – this will incorporation and annexation on
area’s rapid growth. affect roads, services, schools, growth control.
etc.
Tim Incorporation / I have been meeting with an Our initial hypothesis – I’m shifting my research to focus
Annexation expert about city incorporation annexation – is not the best on incorporation as opposed to
and analyzing the legal option. annexation.
implications of our options.
10

TEAM

personal plan
FOCUS

MOTIVATE: Motivation Chart
11
Motivators
Person Driver
 Alan  Personal development
 Bhavin  Real impact
 Rachita  Career preparation
 Shalini  Being ‘part of something big’
 Tim  Experience, impact

12

TEAM

personal plan
Frame Organize Collect Understand Synthesize

• Identify the key • Develop a high- • Design “ghost • Identify the “so • Obtain input and
FOCUS
question level process charts” to exhibit what(s)” ensure buy-in

• Develop the issue map necessary data • Think through the from client
tree • Create a content • Conduct implications for • Offer specific
• Formulate map to test meaningful all constituents recommendations
hypotheses hypotheses interviews • Document the key for improvement
• Design the story • Gather relevant insight on all • Tell a good story
line secondary data charts

FRAME: Issue Tree- Profitability
13
Price
Revenue
Quantity
Profit Variable
Cost / Unit
Variable
Costs Quantity
Fixed

FRAME: Business Issues
14
Revenue Growth Mergers & Acquisitions

 New products  Strategic fit
 Add-on services  Synergies
 New markets  Financial implications
Cost-cutting Organizational Redesign

 Consolidation  Structural complexity
 Exit of business lines  Redundancy
 Outsourcing  Alignment with strategy
Geographic Expansion New Product Development

 Market size & conditions  Product line mix
 Government impact  Potential market size
 Resources and capabilities  Pricing
FRAME: Information Tree
15
Government
Structure
WRT Citizen Opinion
Situation
Condition of
Infrastructure
What’s Going
On
Status Quo
Options to Annexation
Consider
Incorporation
FRAME: Decision Tree
16
Remain
unincorporated
Incorporate as a
Key question: new city
How to maximize Additional money
long-term property will be generated
values in WRT Be annexed by for road
Greenwood improvement
Be annexed by Police protection will

Bargersville increase
The area will have

more control and
representation
FRAME: Articulate the hypothesis
17
Hypothesis
The best course of action is for WRT to be annexed by Bargersville.

18

TEAM

personal plan

FOCUS


ORGANIZE: Process Map
19
Phase 1 2 3
Frame, Organize, and Collect Understand Synthesize

Primary Objective  Develop a Situational  Create a  Finalize Report
Understanding Preliminary Storyline
 Work Plan  Ghost Deck  Executive Summary

 Preliminary Fact Pack  Interview Summaries  Final Report
Deliverables  Interview Summaries  Revised Fact Pack  Appendix
 Incorporation example
overview (Avon)
Completion Date February 19th March 13th April 16th

ORGANIZE: Content Map
20
Major Area Sub area Who Key Tasks Due Date

Services Fire Alan Meet with the fire department – discuss options and Feb. 19
concerns
Comparison
Police Alan Meet with the police department – discuss options and Feb. 19
concerns
Water Alan Research the impact of population growth on water Mar. 13
requirements
Waste Alan Research the impact of population growth on waste Mar. 13
removal services
Roads Bhavin Quantify the problem – how many miles of bad roads Mar. 5
are there in the unincorporated area? WRT?
Control Zoning Shalini Find current zoning policies/laws – business friendly? Feb. 26
Considerations Character Shalini Meet with citizens to discuss their area’s unique Mar. 5
character and how to preserve it
Economic Tim Research business growth in unincorporated areas – Feb. 26
development compare with incorporated areas
Ordinances/laws Tim Research laws – how do you actually incorporate? Mar. 13
Green space Shalini Research amount of green space in the unincorporated Mar. 5
area vs. Greenwood and Bargersville
Resource Financial Rachita Research the costs of incorporation Mar. 13

Requirements Organizational Rachita Find out what organizations/people will be involved Feb. 26
Legal Tim Meet with Alan Yackey – discuss Avon case Feb. 19

ORGANIZE: Story line
21
1 2 3 4
Executive Overview: Recommendation: Supporting Points:
Title Page JC is unincorporated – 1 – Roads
JC should be annexed
how to increase LT by Bargersville 2 – Police
property values? 3 – Finance
5 6 7 8
Point 1: Point 2:
Supporting Supporting
Annexation would Annexation would
improve JC roads Slide(s) Slide(s)
improve JC police
9 10 11 12
Point 3:
Supporting Conclusion: JC should
Annexation would Timeline be annexed by
be cost effective Slide(s) Bargersville because
1,2, & 3
22

TEAM

personal plan

FOCUS


COLLECT: Ghost Charts
23
Roads are in Poor Condition Police Coverage is Inadequate
% of Unpaved Roads
Officers per Capita
Citizens are Unhappy Resources are Limited

Tax Revenue
Quote
Quote Quote

COLLECT: Interview Guide
24
 Interviewee: Alan Yackey

 Date: January 24, 2007
 Interviewer: Tim
Topic: Avon example
Background of Interviewee 1. How does the annexation process in IN work?

 Attorney  General overview and history
 Led the incorporation of Avon, Indiana Process steps
 Significant experience with annexation in  Legal requirements
Indiana 2. The Avon incorporation example
Introduction  Rationale for incorporation
 Current project overview Precise steps and players
 My background  Documents produced
 Purpose and duration of the interview 3. Lessons learned and tips for White River
Key questions to ask Township
1. How does the annexation process in IN  Discuss hypothesis for Write River
work? Township
2. Ask about the Avon incorporation  Seek input as to challenges based on
example his experiences
3. Lessons learned and tips for White  Jointly develop recommendations for
River Township this project
COLLECT: Interview Summary
25
Key insights:
1. Avon is a relevant example 2. There are several challenges that can be overcome
2. There are several challenges that can be  Lots of analysis necessary
 He likened annexation to a business transaction. The problem
overcome
seems to be that an offer is made, but not accepted by some
3. Annexation is a slow and complex process because it is not explained. The offer needs to be clear,
translated into dollars and cents. People respond emotionally to
tax issues. Municipalities need to approach them with a benefit-
1. Avon is relevant cost analysis.
 It’s recent – 1995 Significant communication effort

 Rationale / motivation for incorporation was better services  Those annexations that involved good communication went well
and more control and those that involved poor or non-existent communication had
 Farmers were selling their land to the highest bidder, problems. People should have more power.
and the highest bidder was often an irresponsible  Notification and communication with citizens and townships are
developer – the development often wasn’t what the important.
town had planned or would like to see. If the town Funding for mailings and other process requirements

had incorporated earlier, they could have prevented 3.
Annexation is a slow and complex process
much of the bad development with zoning guidelines. It took a long time

 They had crime spilling over from Plainfield.  The fight lasted more than a year, during which Westfield
 Wanted to annex 1100 acres in Hendricks County launched an aggressive campaign to win over landowners.
 Citizen and govt. effort led to actual incorporation of a Legal requirements

new town  De-annexation is an option if cities fail to provide services- within
 They didn’t annex enough land, though, and they are a three-year time frame.
still dealing with bad development on the outskirts of It would be even longer and more complex for the size of the WRT

town. When Avon tries to annex more land, they are annexation
annexing poorly developed land, not free land that Approximately 10 – 30 times as large
can be used for business development. Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga
COLLECT: Key Secondary Sources
26
Competitor
Competitor Data
Data Industry Data Market Trends
 Datamonitor
 Factiva  Reuters Business Insight
 Consumer market
 General news  Global market
reports
 Detailed company reports
 Quick hits on key
reports  Includes healthcare,
trends within the
 Daily newspapers IT, transportation, etc.
industries
 S&P NetAdvantage  Investext Plus

 Mergent Online  Full text research
 Outstanding
 Deep data on firms reports
industry data
 Downlowdable  Prepared by
 Company
financials industry research
comparisons and
industry outlooks specialists
 Hoovers Online  Government Data

 Frost & Sullivan
 Company profiles  Census.gov
 Full industry reports
 Comprehensive  Fedstats.gov
 International
reports  BLS.gov
coverage
27

TEAM

personal plan

FOCUS


UNDERSTAND: Implications Summary
28
Constituent Implications / Concerns

WRT Citizens  New insights based on analysis
 Long-term considerations for their future concerns over tax
increases
Johnson County Leaders  Document for use in strategic discussions
 Clarity over potential role in the process
Kelley School of Business Students:
 Application of business-school tools
 Development of presentation skills
 Impact on the community
Kelley:
 Alignment with the university mission of outreach and
impact on Indiana communities
 Potential differentiation as a contributing business school
UNDERSTAND: Insight-titled Chart
29
Cash Flows Would be Negative for 6 Years

15
10
5
Cash Flows
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Cash Flows -2.5 -13. -15. -17. -7.9 -2.2 3.27 3.27 5.55 5.58 8.79 8.88 8.97 9.05 9.14

30

TEAM

personal plan

FOCUS


The story at a glance
31
 Introduction
 A team of Kelley faculty and students investigated incorporation options for Center Grove
 The pro-bono study spanned one year and included primary and secondary research
 Center Grove is an upscale community with many strengths, but it faces several challenges due to
dramatic growth – it should consider annexation or incorporation
 Conclusion
 Incorporation could improve the safety and condition of roads
 Incorporation could provide upgrades to important services such as police, waste, and water
 Incorporation could allow more local control over zoning and lead to more green space and
economic development
 Implementation
 An incorporation would take several years but would have positive long-term impact
 Incorporation could be financially feasible with funding through loans and bonds; it would require an
increase in certain taxes
 There are risks and challenges to completing the incorporation

Team Focus From The Mckinsey Engagement PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Team Focus From The Mckinsey Engagement PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

THE TEAM FOCUS

THIS ABRIDGED SLIDE DECK WAS PREPARED FOR THE WEBINAR ON

SEE THE FULL VERSION AND SUPPORTING TEMPLATES AND SLIDES

Confidential material from the book: The McKinsey Engagement:

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Team Name CG2020 (Center Grove 2020)

 Lack of relevant data

Dear Mr. Dorsett,

 Recommendation and risks/caveats

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Name Tim Krzywicki

Project Center Grove Incorporation Study

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Owner Work Stream Data / Research Findings Next Steps

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Frame Organize Collect Understand Synthesize

question level process charts” to exhibit what(s)” ensure buy-in

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Revenue Growth Mergers & Acquisitions

Cost-cutting Organizational Redesign

Geographic Expansion New Product Development

Be annexed by Police protection will

The area will have

The best course of action is for WRT to be annexed by Bargersville.

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Frame Organize Collect Understand Synthesize

question level process charts” to exhibit what(s)” ensure buy-in

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Frame, Organize, and Collect Understand Synthesize

 Work Plan  Ghost Deck  Executive Summary

Completion Date February 19th March 13th April 16th

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Major Area Sub area Who Key Tasks Due Date

Resource Financial Rachita Research the costs of incorporation Mar. 13

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate

constantly dynamics expertise motivators

Frame Organize Collect Understand Synthesize

question level process charts” to exhibit what(s)” ensure buy-in

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

Roads are in Poor Condition Police Coverage is Inadequate

Citizens are Unhappy Resources are Limited

Source: The McKinsey Engagement by Paul N. Friga

 Interviewee: Alan Yackey

Background of Interviewee 1. How does the annexation process in IN work?

 S&P NetAdvantage  Investext Plus

 Hoovers Online  Government Data

Talk Evaluate Assist Motivate