FINAL REPORT OF THE
TEAMWORK QUALITY ACTION TEAM
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
Mission 1
Definition of Teamwork 2
Vision of Teamwork in OPPT 3
Methodology 4
Literature Review 5
FINDINGS 6
Organization of the Findings 6
Findings Related to Organizational Systems 7
Findings Related to Line Managers 11
Findings Related to Team Leaders 14
Findings Related to Team Members 16
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 17
Office Priorities 18
Team Coordination and Control 19
Customer Service 22
Individual Performance 23
Cultural Issues 25
Implementation Strategy 26
CONCLUSION 27
Appendix A - Details of Recommendations A - 1
Appendix B - Data and Analysis B - 1
Appendix C - Bibliography, List of Teamwork QAT Members C - 1
-------
INTRODUCTION
In February 1992, the Teamwork Quality Action Team (QAT) was formed to address
three items in the OPPT Action Plan developed by Mark Greenwood. These Action Items were:
1. How to devise an \incentive structure "for OPPT managers to support inter-
divisional teams.
2. How to provide effective feedback from Work Group chairs to OPPT managers
on the quality of their unit's contribution.
3. How to sort out conflicts among priorities in the branches to assure that the
Office's agenda is achieved.
Volunteer QAT participants were solicited from all OPPT divisions. The goal was to
include representatives from each division, and to have membership composed of staff from
different organizational levels below the Division Director level.
The QAT had representatives from all divisions at one time or another and included two
Branch Chiefs, three Section Chiefs, and staff from a various of specialty areas. All QAT
members had been team members on numerous cross-divisional teams, some had functioned as
team leaders and some had been line managers of team members. Thus, a variety of experience
and points of view was represented.
MISSION, DEFINITION OF TEAMWORK, AND VISION
Mission
The Teamwork QAT clarified and stated its mission as:
To improve the effectiveness of cross-divisional teams.
To carry out this mission, the QAT decided to examine the concept and practice of
teamwork in OPPT and to identify problems that impede the effectiveness of cross-divisional
teams. In this way, the QAT expanded the scope of the original assignment from the OPPT
Action Plan.
The purpose of improving teamwork in OPPT is to improve the productivity of the Office
as a whole, the quality of OPPT projects, and the processes by which work is accomplished
The focus is on improving products and decisions by improving how work gets done rather than
on the results of the work. A core premise of Total Quality Management is that if you improv. e
the processes by which work is accomplished, results are automatically improved in terms 01
quality, efficiency, and productivity.
-------
Definition of Teamwork
The first task was to define the concept of teamwork. The working definition that the
QAT used was:
Teamwork: Work done by several associates with each doing a pan but all
subordinating personal prominence to the efficiency of the whole.
With this definition in mind, the QAT decided how teamwork could apply to cross-
divisional teams in OPPT. Further, although not specifically addressed by the QAT, many of
the principles described in this report should also apply to teams which include representatives
from offices outside of OPPT, such as the Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM), the Office
of General Counsel (OGC). From this definition, a vision of teamwork was created.
-------
Vision of Teamwork in OPPT
The Teamwork QAT's vision for cross-divisional teamwork is of active involvement
at every level within OPPT in making teams successful. This means that:
Senior Managers create organizational systems and make decisions that enable
teams to function effectively, and remove organizational obstacles to the functioning
of teams. They set an example for the rest of OPPT by modeling teamwork among
themselves and in their interactions with staff.
Line Managers view teams as customers of their division/branch/section. They
understand and support the goals of the team, provide guidance to team members,
help solve team problems, and take steps to make sure that products provided to the
team are high quality and meet the needs of the group.
Team Leaders practice good leadership and project management skills. They
interact effectively with management and staff at all levels. They communicate with
the team suppliers about the quality of input to the team and keep the team focused
on the team's mission and goals.
Team Members are focused on helping the team meet team goals through a
commitment to providing high quality work products, practicing effective team
skills, contributing to the planning and functioning of the team, and communicating
effectively with their line manager about team issues, progress, and status. Team
members take ownership of the team's mission, goals, and work projects, and do
whatever is necessary to make the team successful.
All managers and staff involved in a team are responsible and accountable for the
success of the cross-divisional teams.
The findings and recommendations of the Teamwork QAT are intended to make this
vision a reality in OPPT.
-------
METHODOLOGY
The QAT used a variety of sources to gather information about teamwork and about the
problems impeding teamwork in OPPT cross-divisional teams. They are as follows:
1. Observations of QAT members. Because of the representation of different divisions
and organizational levels within the QAT membership, the perceptions and observations
of QAT members were considered a reliable source of information. However, additional
data were collected to confirm these perceptions.
2. The Functional Study of the Office of Toxic Substances, November 1991. This study,
compiled by Stonnell Associates, Inc., provided information about problems related to
cross-divisional teamwork.
3. Surveys of OPPT staff and management. Specific surveys were as follows:
Firedrill survey - A subset of branch chiefs was asked to keep "firedrill" logs to
determine the impact of high priority, unexpected projects on OPPT staff.
Tune Utilization Survey - All OPPT branch chiefs and section chiefs were asked
to estimate the percentage of time that they were engaged in activities related to
five different job areas. The goal was to determine how much time was spent
supporting the activities of cross-divisional teams and to determine the obstacles
to spending more time in this area.
fcOPFEt^orkgroup'-Suryey -^This survey of OPPT managers and team leaders
was initiated to determine how many workgroups exist in OPPT.
4. Focus-groups. Focus groups were conducted with:
Line managers - These groups included branch chiefs and sections chiefs who
L,...;_. 9«.:.»««iii.--ii ~«f'-- -r .. - -
supervise workgroup leaders and/or members.
Team leaders - These groups were made up of individuals who lead cross-
divisional project teams in different program areas.
5. Individual Interviews. Interviews were conducted with:
Division Directors - All but two Division Directors were interviewed.
Team members - QAT members interviewed co-workers who were members of
cross-divisional teams.
Analyses of data obtained through these sources are included in Appendix B.
-------
LITERATURE REVIEW
The QAT searched the available literature to learn how other organizations practice
teamwork. As one would expect, the concept of teamwork is not new. While many groups
attempt to practice "good team skills," few understand what teamwork means and, therefore,
how to successfully implement it.
Over the past twenty years, various public and private sector groups have incorporated
the team ethic in their organizations. Their collective experience is similar: teamwork, as
advocated in the literature, entails a sharing of power between management and staff and a
commitment to a management style that fosters cooperation between management and staff.
In recent years, corporate investment in teams has increased in hopes of regaining
economic competitiveness. Many view this change as a shift in paradigms from the top-down
form of management to that of the team concept. Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich has written
In this paradigm, entrepreneurship isn't the sole province of the company's
founder or its top managers. Rather, it is a capability and attitude that is diffused
throughout the company. Experimentation and development go on all the time
as the company searches for new ways to capture and build on the knowledge
already accumulated by its workers.2
This thinking posits that frontline workers best know the production processes and that they are
the most capable of recommending changes to these processes to improve quality. Some
companies even delegate personnel matters such as hiring, firing, and awards to teams. Overall.
the private sector is trying to become more competitive, resulting in organizations with less
management oversight and more direct responsibility and accountability for products produced
by teams.
According to the literature, teamwork does not mean that management cedes all power
of decision-making to staff. What changes are the roles of the manager and staff member
While still overseeing the work of employees, supervisors must also become advisors, coaches.
and facilitators.3 Managers must open the lines of communication in both directions as well
as give performance feedback whenever possible.4 Despite this increased ability to influence
decision-makers, staff must accept that final decisions rest with management and that, as staff
members, they share with management in both the successes and failures of their organization's
efforts.
'John Hoeir, "The Payoff from Teamwork," Business Week, July 10, 1989.
:Chns Lee, "Beyond Teamwork," Training, June 1990, p. 26.
'"Beyond Teamwork."
'Edgar H. Schein, "Corporate Teams and Totems." Across the Board: The Conference Board Maga^mt M
1989.
5
-------
FINDINGS
The QAT discovered both positive teamwork practices and problem areas in OPPT.
Because the mission of the QAT was to improve teamwork, the findings listed in this report
outline the problems only.
The different program areas in OPPT have established their own processes for
accomplishing work. Some program area teams demonstrate better teamwork than others.
Therefore, the findings listed in this report may apply more to some program areas than others.
When a finding only applies to certain programs, it is stated that way. When the finding is
stated as a general rinding, it points out problem areas in OPPT as a whole, but the problem
may vary in degree from program to program.
ORGANIZATION OF THE FINDINGS
The findings are organized by four major roles related to cross-divisional teams. These
four team-related roles are defined for the purpose of this report as follows:
1. Organizational Systems. This refers to the overall management policies, practices, and
processes of OPPT. This category refers to areas which are under the control of the
Office Director, the Deputy Office Director, division directors, and deputy division
directors.
2. Line Managers. Line managers are generally not members of a team, but have an
impact on the day-to-day operations of teams. They directly supervise the team leader
or a team member and may be a section chief, branch chief, deputy division director, or
a division director depending on their role in relation to a particular team.
3. Team Leaders. Team leader refers to the individual who is charged with leading any
type of cross-divisional team. This includes project work teams, quality action teams.
budget workgroups, etc. It does not include individual section chiefs in their role of
managing a section.
4. Team Members. Team members are the participants on cross-divisional teams. OPPT
staff and management may fulfill the role of team member on teams.
-------
TEAMWORK QAT FINDINGS RELATED TO
THE ORGANIZATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL SYSTEMS
1. No collective sense of responsibility or accountability exists for the success of a
team's effort. Management and staff seem to accept little personal responsibility for
helping teams succeed.
Whether or not a cross-divisional team succeeds has little impact on the support
divisions' managers. The sense of responsibility seems to end with the technical
contribution to the team; the contributions which would help the team as a whole succeed
are not viewed as part of the job.
No structure or work process exists to help support divisions gain ownership over the
performance of the team. They generally have no input into decisions about team goals,
strategies, and activities. They get little or no feedback about how well the team is doing
or about whether the team met its objectives. Support divisions are much less visible
than the lead division when issues are brought to the attention of upper management.
Without a sense of responsibility from other divisions, the burden for getting the team
to succeed rests squarely on the team leader and the lead division. This approach is
contrary to teamwork.
2. OPPT's performance evaluation, promotion, and rewards systems place little or no
emphasis on supporting inter-divisional team efforts. Individual effort and work are
the basis of ratings in the performance standards and in Office awards. Individuals seem
to be promoted based on their technical work only, and not on how well they work as
a team member, or on how well they are able to promote teamwork in others.
There are no clear benefits to managers for supporting teams. No rewards exist for
managers who are good team players. They may actually find themselves penalized
because .their attention to teamwork caused them to fall short in their divisional
responsibilities.
Evaluations and rewards are given vertically in the organization, rather than horizontally
There is no system to evaluate whether or not a manager or team member has been
supportive in helping a team reach its goals.
3. Teams are not viewed as important customers by OPPT staff or management. When
managers and teams meet, teams are nearly always considered the supplier while the
managers are the customer. Managers do not .take the extra step of identifying ului
teams need and then taking the steps to supply that need. Managers often do not prov idc
the direction, guidance, and resources needed for the team to be successful.
-------
4. Office priorities are not clearly communicated or disseminated. Lacking such
direction, individuals at all levels within OPPT base their own activities on their
perceptions of what the Office priorities are.
The way division management sets priorities tends to be according to the programmatic
or the division agenda. This sets up competition between divisions instead of cooperation
within the Office. The result is "turf battles" and managers competing with one another.
5. Office priorities change throughout the year, but there is no office-level coordination
of changing priorities. When a new project or activity needs to be performed, each
division adjusts their own priorities largely based on projects for which they are
accountable. Resources will generally be pulled from another division's project, and not
from a project which their own division is leading. By six months into the year,
divisions are operating according to different priorities than originally planned. This
causes major problems when working on cross-divisional projects.
6. There are over 350 workgroups in OPPT. While some workgroups may be well
managed, there isTho system in place to manage this many teams efficiently.
There is no office-wide system to charter new teams, set goals for new teams, track
existing teams, evaluate each team's performance, administer team and individual
rewards for teamwork, or to note completion of the team's work. One result is
overlapping activities between teams. While two teams may have different goals, some
of their'activities'may be the same: Without an office-wide tracking system, there is no
way to coordinate efforts and share information.
Many teams have become "never-ending workgroups." Sometimes teams just stop
meeting, but are never formally disbanded. Some workgroups have long penods of
inactivity and then suddenly become very active again. This contributes to the difficulty
in knowing what staff are working''on'and'how much timers committed to different
projects.
With so~ many teams and no team management system, it is very difficult for managers
to set up new teams, understand the purpose, goals, and strategies of teams, evaluate the
level of commitment needed by the team, select appropriate team members, and support.
provide guidance, and assist in problem solving with teams.
7. Organizational processes' and procedures have not been established to facilitate
cross-divisional teamwork. OPPT teams that are viewed as successful have well-
established and understood intra- and inter-divisional processes. The Existing Chemicals
Program appears to lack processes- and' deadlines that TRI and "the New Chemical
Program have that promote a clear sense of purpose and teamwork. Team members and
team leaders in these two programs have a good understanding of their role on the team
and what is expected of them. Many of the same line managers and team mer
8
-------
support all three of these programs, so the difference cannot be attributed to the people
involved.
Branches and programs within branches that have established processes for quality
control work better than those that do not. Some review each product before it is
submitted to a team. This seems to result in a higher quality product than those which
have no review process and those where managers sign-off without actually reviewing
the document.
Division Directors disagree about the appropriate role of a team in OPPT. Some think
that the role of a team is to provide technical input, gather data and formulate options
and that all judgement and decisionmaking should be left to upper management. Others
feel that teams should be empowered to make more decisions. They should still present
the options, but that they should also provide a recommendation. This disagreement
sends mixed messages to teams.
Ongoing training in team skills is lacking in OPPT. Staff at all levels need to continually
develop their knowledge and skills to work effectively in teams.
8. The administrative support systems for teams are unsatisfactory. Team leaders spend
a great deal of time finding meeting space, preparing meeting materials, setting up the
meeting room, and obtaining equipment. Secretarial support is often not available.
9. The matrix management system used in OPPT is not understood or practiced. Most
of the people interviewed provided a different explanation of how the OPPT system of
matrix management works. Some admitted that they didn't know how it worked.
Without this basic general understanding, the matrix management system is considered
by many to be ineffective.
This creates problems in how well people function in teams. For example, line managers
plan and manage their functional areas. They are not always able to plan for resources
they will contribute to teams. Requests for team members are viewed as a request to
take resources away from the functional work of the division. Managers and staff, while
committing to participate in a project, do so unhappily, thereby inhibiting teamwork.
10. The Office Director, Deputy Office Director, and Division Directors do not function
as a team. They often make decisions independently of one another, even when other
divisions will be impacted. Pulling resources from another division's project is one
example. An adequate forum for discussing office-wide issues and problems does not
exist. Leadership in team decision making is lacking.
-------
There is no method or procedure in place to resolve differences on issues between
divisions. As a result, problems are often ignored or left alone. Failure to resolve
important issues undermines the team process for upper management and for all OPPT
cross-divisional teams.
Trust among Division Directors is low. Most feel that they need to protect their own
division's interests and position rather than considering the good of the Office.
There is also the perception that some Division Directors are working on Mark's
priorities and some are working on Joe Carra's priorities rather than all divisions
working according to the Office's priorities. Integration of these perceived differences
in priorities does not take place. The result is that teams and team members are unable
to resolve differences in priorities among projects.
Lack of teamwork among upper management presents a poor foundation and model of
teamwork for the rest of OPPT.
11. The culture in OPPT is adverse to teamwork. People are rewarded through informal
as well as formal ways for putting their own interests ahead of the interests of the team
and of OPPT. Team spirit and cooperation, and subordinating personal prominence for
the good of the whole are not valued or rewarded.
Emphasis is not placed on running teams well. Team leaders who demonstrate good
interpersonal skills are often passed over for promotions because they are viewed as "not
tough enough" for management positions. Team leaders who lack good team skills
continue to run new teams without additional training, coaching, or guidance to help
them develop these skills.
At all levels, respect for one's peers is lacking. Little or no credit is given to peers.
Competition is much more prevalent than cooperation and support for others.
10
-------
TEAMWORK QAT FINDINGS
RELATED TO LINE MANAGERS
Teams are not viewed as customers of the branches. Line managers are not involved
in finding out what the team needs or in taking steps to supply what is needed.
Frequently, products submitted to the team are poor in quality, do not meet the needs of
the team, and are turned in late. Quality control at the line manager level is lacking in
many cases. Some branches have processes to review the technical quality of the product
before it is submitted. Other branches consider the absence of complaints as an
indication that the product was adequate. In general, line managers do not ask for or
receive feedback from team leaders about the quality of their branch's contribution to the
team. Poor quality work from a branch means that the team leader has to spend a lot
of time making up for the deficiency.
2. Communication between line managers, team leaders, and team members is
inadequate in some program areas. Line managers frequently do not know the goals
or purpose of cross-divisional teams or what their staff is working on to support that
team. Often, discussions between line managers and team members only occur if the
team member perceives a problem. Otherwise, there is "non-communication by mutual
consent," meaning that the staff member is trusted to handle the work for the team on
their own.
Some branches have an internal system to track staff activities on teams. Others rely
primarily on discussions between section chiefs and staff. Branch Chiefs rely on section
chiefs for information about cross-divisional teams. Division Directors rely on branch
chiefs to brief them on team activity. Therefore, the communication between the Section
Chief and the staff on teams is the primary source of information for most of OPPT
management.
Little communication and coordination occurs between line managers and team leaders
on team goals and purpose, what is needed from the branch, project schedules and
deadlines, major issues, and obstacles.
Line managers usually do not communicate and coordinate with other line managers
involved in the team.
3. Line managers are unclear about OPPT priorities and the priority of different
teams. Line managers and staff are constantly making decisions about where to spend
resources and time. In the absence of clearly communicated Office priorities, the criteria
for making these decisions vary greatly among the branches and divisions. In lead
divisions for projects, the branch and division priorities are with the project. In suppori
divisions, team participation on these projects is often a lower priority than projects for
11
-------
which the division will be held accountable. Therefore, branches and divisions
participating on the same team have different perceptions about the importance of the
team project in relation to other programs and projects within OPPT.
4. There is a lack of understanding and agreement about the role that line managers
should play in supporting cross-divisional teams. In general, line managers do not
view supporting teams as their primary role. Functional responsibilities are considered
more important because they are the basis of performance evaluations and rewards.
Line managers do not feel a sense of responsibility for the success of cross-divisional
teams unless they are the lead division. They feel accountable for the work product
submitted by their branch, but not for whether or not the team's goals are accomplished.
Line managers are not sure how to support teams. Many are concerned that too much
involvement in the team would be micro-managing the staff. Managers are unsure about
how to support the team without micro-managing. Because of this, many line managers
do not monitor the status of teams on a regular basis. Many managers lack the skills
necessary to support teams (e.g., coaching, team problem solving, group facilitation).
Line managers do not always provide strong direction when the team has a new or
inexperienced team leader.
5. A number of obstacles make it difficult for line managers to support cross-divisional
teams. Many of the obstacles faced by line managers are systems obstacles which are
described in the organizational systems section of this report. However, a few stand out
as particularly relevant to the issue of line manager support of teams.
Unless they are leading a project, line managers have no real incentives to support teams.
But they do have disincentives. Most line managers are rewarded for what their division
or branch accomplishes, not for what is accomplished by other lead divisions.
Therefore, if they send a good staff person to participate on a team, they have lost that
person's time to work on a project that they are accountable for in the division. So,
supporting the team can have a negative impact on the manager's own performance
evaluation. The line managers who support projects, unlike their counterparts in the lead
division, get no credit for supporting the team.
Performing technical work interferes with the amount of time a branch or section chief
spends managing and supporting teams. Section Chiefs, on average, spend the same
amount of time doing technical work as they do managing staff on workgroup projects.
Branch Chiefs spend less time doing technical work than section chiefs, but they also
spend less time managing staff on workgroup projects.
12
-------
Managers are overloaded. The responsibilities involved in performing technical work,
performing administrative tasks, managing staff on numerous workgroups, performing
other management responsibilities and numerous other tasks make it difficult to support
teams.
There are so many cross-divisional and inter-agency teams that it is difficult for line
managers to keep track of staff activities on each. Many branches have regular meetings
to discuss staff activities, but there are too many projects to be able to get a good handle
on all of the teams.
13
-------
TEAMWORK QAT FINDINGS
RELATED TO TEAM LEADERS
Team leaders often do not establish the goals of the project. Lack of clear goals
makes it very difficult to manage a project and develop a cohesive team. Team leaders
need to keep the team focused on goals throughout the process to provide direction for
team activities. Most teams do not spend much time upfront agreeing on ground rules,
a mission, and goals. This results in a lack of direction and focus for the project,
meetings without clear goals, wasted effort, and a high level of frustration for all
members.
Teams need to have clear goals against which to evaluate their work. OPPT teams
generally do not evaluate their work, their work process, or the quality of interactions
between team members, the leader, and line managers for the purpose of improvement.
2. Team leaders have the responsibility for the project, but no organizational authority.
For example, team leaders have little control over who is assigned to their teams.
Divisions select staff to participate on teams and the team leader generally has no input
into this decision. Yet they are responsible for getting these team members to perform.
Team leaders have no managerial authority with team members. Team leaders do not
evaluate the member's performance or give input to the line manager for use in
performance appraisals. Team leaders are not comfortable discussing a team member's
performance with that person's line manager.
3. The abilities and leadership skills of team leaders vary greatly. Whether or not a
team functions well is largely dependent on how good the team leader is in managing the
project and in interpersonal skills. Team members who have confidence in the leader are
much more committed to the team than when confidence in the leader is lacking.
Many team leaders have little or no training in leadership and management skills, project
management skills, meetings management, interpersonal skills, etc. Ongoing training is
required to continue improving skills in these areas.
4. Frequently, team leaders have too many other responsibilities. In addition to team
leadership responsibilities, leaders are often members of other workgroups and have
additional functional responsibilities. They are frequently spread too thin. For example.
RM "pool" managers have a full workload in their specialty area in addition to their
project management responsibilities.
14
-------
5. Communication between the team leader, team members, line managers, and upper
management is inadequate. Team leaders don't always keep team members, line
managers, and others updated on the status of the project. They don't check in with
team members often enough between meetings to find out the status of tasks or potential
problems.
There is no communication between the team leader and the line manager on the quality
of work submitted by that branch.
Team leaders often do not receive information about Office priorities that affects the
team.
Team leaders find it difficult to meet with division directors on a casual basis to get
feedback, ideas or guidance. They have to get on his/her calendar or relay information
through other layers of management.
Team leaders don't always elevate problems to their manager soon enough, which leads
to ongoing conflicts and frustration which can have a negative impact on the team.
15
-------
TEAMWORK QAT FINDINGS
RELATED TO TEAM MEMBERS
Team members'time is overbooked. Their time is spread among many tasks. Often,
team members agree (or their manager assigns them) to participate on a project without
knowing how much time they'll need to spend on that project and on other team-related
activities. This creates a situation in which they are unable to spend enough time on any
one team or project.
2. Team members lack information on or do not always agree with team goals and
their responsibilities on the teams. They are frequently not involved in discussions
about team mission and goals with line managers, upper management, or the team leader.
Team members do not always have a clear sense of what the team is supposed to
accomplish.
One result is confusion about what role team members should play and what they need
to do to contribute to the team. Team members may come to a meeting to represent
themselves, their science, their division, the "public interest," or some other interest
There is no clear sense of which role is appropriate.
3. Decisions which affect the team are often made without adequate involvement of the
team members. Team members often do not have an opportunity to contribute their
views on team issues. This leads to a lack of ownership for team decisions and products
4. Team members often lack enthusiasm for team efforts. On many occasions, they have
been told to report to a team without being given a choice to participate. Many are
reluctant to express their views and interests or to challenge positions taken by other
team members. Rather than focusing on helping the team meet its goals, team members
are usually only focused on their part of the project work.
In some programs, team members rarely see the results of their efforts. Teams and
individual members receive little or no feedback about whether the objectives of the
project were accomplished.
5. Work as a team member is not valued in the Office culture. Contributions to the
team process and function are as important as the technical contribution. Yet. team
member's performance on teams is not a factor in performance appraisals and
evaluations. Generally, the team leader gets the credit (and blame) for team projects
Members do not get to "share the spotlight." There is generally no team or team
member recognition for completed projects. There are few rewards for being a good
team player.
16
-------
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
These recommendations are intended to address issues in all of the findings categories:
organizational systems, line managers, team leaders, and team members. Many of the
recommendations cut across these categories and propose solutions to problems that are
described in a number of the findings.
The QAT organized these recommendations into five clusters. The clusters are
sequenced in an order in which they might be ideally implemented. Each cluster of
recommendations is a building block for the clusters that follow. If resource constraints limit
implementation of all of these recommendations, several could still be implemented and would
help improve teamwork within OPPT. The rationale for the sequencing is as follows:
1. Office Priorities. A common understanding among management and staff of the Office
priorities is the foundation for the QAT's recommendations. Upper management, line
managers, team leaders, and team members need to know what the priorities are in order
to make decisions about which projects to work on, when to form teams, and how to
allocate resources. When management and staff are operating according to the same
priorities, Office and individual activities can be coordinated to meet Office objectives.
2. Team Coordination and Control. Once Office priorities are understood, teams can
carry out the work of the Office. A management system is needed to charter new teams.
to make sure that all teams are performing work that is important to the Office, to
monitor for efficiency, productivity, and potential problems, to allocate necessary
resources, and to disband teams when appropriate.
3. Customer Service. The recommendations listed under the team coordination and control
cluster are intended to make sure that teams are working on the right projects and
following an efficient group process for accomplishing the work. The next step is to
make sure that the quality of work performed on the projects meets the needs of the team
and^ of the Office., These recommendation involve changing the way that teams are
viewed within OPPT. Teams are the customers of the divisions, branches and sections.
The role of these organizational units is to meet the needs of the teams because it is the
teams who are accomplishing the work of the Office. Branches and sections need
processes to insure that they are meeting the needs of their customers.
4. Individual Performance. Once the organizational issues related to teamwork have been
addressed through the clusters listed above, focus should turn to individual contributions
to teams and to making teams succeed within the Office. By resolving organizational
issues .first, organizational barriers to individual performance are removed. Individuals
can now be held accountable for their own performance as related to teamwork in OPPT
5. Cultural Issues. Recommendations included in this cluster are not part of.the cluster
sequencing for implementation. Rather, these recommendations are intended to he
implemented concurrently with the other clusters.
17
-------
I. Office Priorities
In addition to setting Office priorities on an annual basis, the Office Director, the Deputy
Office Director, and the division directors should meet quarterly to review priorities and
to make adjustments as needed.
The priority order of specific programs and projects needs to be reviewed. Resource allocations
need to be adjusted and agreed to by all divisions so that staff who are working on cross-
divisional teams all have the same perception of the importance of a project.
These priority review meetings will assist the office in maintaining one set of priorities, rather
than having different priorities in each division. This review process should also have the effect
of reducing the number of work teams. When a project becomes a low priority, the program
steering committees (described in the Team Coordination and Control section on p. 19) will
know to disband or deactivate a team. In addition, some "firedrills" may be eliminated, thus
reducing staff work load.
The QAT did not develop specific implementation plans for this recommendation or the
communications mechanism recommendation that follows. The QAT decided that these
recommendations should focus more on the need for these mechanisms in the Office and the
benefits that might accrue from developing them.
Create a mechanism for communicating Office-wide priorities and.for informing staff of
changes in priorities as needed.
OPPT should establish a central repository in OPME for written information on priorities and
policies. They should inform all staff of its existence and provide easy access to it.
For further clarification on the priority and policy statements, or to receive guidance on how
priority shifts impact specific .projects, teams or team leaders can meet with the steenng
committee.
Keeping all staff updated on the latest version of priority and policy statements will enable
project teams and individuals to better plan their work in line with the Office priorities.
Develop a strategy for handling "firedrills" within OPPT and within organizational units.
Unplanned, significant projects (e.g., glycol ethers) should be incorporated into the Office's
priority-setting process. The Office Director, the Deputy Office Director, and the division
directors should meet to agree on the priority of the project, which organizational unit vull
handle the request, and on areas- from which to shift resources. The relevant steenng
committees should have input into these'ttecisions.
Short-term, quick turn-around requests should be routed directly to the appropriate branch or
division. Each division or branch should appoint a person to serve as the "fire chief i\u ih«.-
18
-------
group. Part of this person's time for the year would be allocated to handling these firedrills.
In general, the fire chief should try to put out the "fire" him/herself, without asking for
assistance from staff who are engaged in team projects.
This strategy for handling firedrills will help staff at all levels to know the Office priorities,
know which projects are most important to the Office's mission,,and enable them to plan their
time accordingly. The problem of staff overload will be eased.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-2.
II. Team Coordination and Control
Establish a steering committee for each program area to coordinate and oversee
implementation of the annual operating plan.
These steering committees, composed of mid-level managers and other key staff would be
responsible for developing an action plan for implementing the annual operating plan, chartering
teams to carry out the projects, monitoring progress of teams, and taking action to solve any
problems, providing guidance and feedback to team leaders and members, reviewing and
updating the program action plan, and providing regular updates to upper management, and
participating in evaluations of teams.
The Existing Chemicals Coordinating Group's role and authority could be expanded to become
the steering committee for the Existing Chemicals program. In other programs, the budget
workgroups or standing decisional teams (e.g., the New Chemicals Focus Group) could possibly
become steering committees.
Establishing steering committees to coordinate and oversee programs and teams will facilitate
communication and teamwork among managers. It will create an atmosphere of interdependence
and responsibility for the success of teams and for the program as a whole.
The Office Director, the Deputy Office Director, and the division directors should serve as the
OPPT Steering Committee. This committee would serve a number of roles: 1) to coordinate all
activities that do not fall within specific program areas (e.g, the QATs); 2) to coordinate cross-
programmatic issues and teams; and 3) to serve as an "appeals board" or advisory group for the
program-specific steering committees when issues cannot be resolved at that level.
The steering committees need to work as a team and set the example for their specific programs
as well as the Office overall. Decisions within these groups must be made by consensus. All
members of the team should be held accountable and responsible for the decisions made by the
steering committee.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-3.
19
-------
Create a standard process that is followed in chartering OPPT teams.
New teams should go through an upfront chartering process that creates buy-m from
management, the team leader, and team members. To charter teams, program steering
committees decide when a new team is needed, decide the purpose, goals, and end product of
the team, determine the team's staffing and have the new team added to the work team database
(described on p. 21). The team meets and establishes a project action plan that outlines goals,
tasks, team member responsible for each task, key issues, and a project schedule with
milestones. The steering committee approves the project action plan and meets with the team
to provide guidance for revisions. The steering committee may seek upper management
approval for the plan at their discretion.
When team objectives have been met, the team is evaluated, "de-chartered," and removed from
the database of active work teams.
This chartering process would apply to all long-term work teams in all programs and to short-
term teams as appropriate.
A standard procedure to charter teams will decrease the number of new teams that are created
because duplication of team efforts will be avoided. The effectiveness and efficiency of all new
teams will increase because there will be management and team buy-in to the goals and action
plans for each team. Team members will be selected more carefully so that the needs of the
team can be met and so that team members will have the time to meet commitments made to the
team.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-5.
Reduce the number of work teams that currently exist in OPPT.
Duplicate work teams need to be identified and existing teams need to be prioritized according
to the Office priorities. Teams that are duplicates or that are working on low-priority
assignments need to be "de-chartered" by the steering committees.
By reducing the number of teams, the overall work load of staff members will be reduced
allowing them to devote more time to high priority projects. Line managers will be better able
to keep track of a smaller number of team projects and the activities of their own staff, and
manage the customer service programs (described in the Customer Service section on p. 22)
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-14.
20
-------
Maintain the database of OPPT work teams that was created by the Teamwork QAT and
make the information available to OPPT staff and management.
OPME should be assigned the responsibility of entering newly-chartered work teams into the
database of active OPPT teams and removing "de-chartered" teams. To make the database as
useful as possible, OPME should determine the needs of customers of this database to determine
their information needs. The database could be redesigned to provide needed information about
teams.
Maintaining a database of OPPT teams has many potential uses. For example, the Front Office
could use it to determine which branch should handle a "firedrill." Information from it could
be included in. the Annual Report to Congress. For the purpose of facilitating teamwork, the
database would be used by the steering committees to monitor teams under their programs and
to determine staffing for new projects (e.g., which staff are already booked).
See page B-4 for more information on the workteam database.
Establish a pilot standing team in one or more programs areas.
There are a number of benefits to having standing teams. For example, team members
understand their role on the team, continuity of projects is insured by assigning it to a clearly
identified team, and it provides a means to give technical divisions and staff a sense of
ownership.
A number of drawbacks and possible problems were also identified in establishing standing
teams. For example, every issue is unique, requiring a different set of specialized skills. A
standing team may not provide enough flexibility to respond to the requirements of the issue.
Although complete consensus was not reached on this recommendation, the QAT proposes
establishing a standing team in one or more program areas. The standing team would consist
of a core set of staff members-(4-5) who work on a set number of projects. Experts may need
to be called in occasionally to address specific issues, but would not be expected to devote 100
percent of their time to these projects.
By creating a pilot standing team, management would be able to.evaluate whether the benefits
outweigh the drawbacks, and would provide opportunities to solve any problems that interfere
with the success of the team. After a period of time, management can decide whether to expand
the concept of standing teams within the program and to other program areas, or to continue
forming new teams for each case.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-15.
-------
m. Customer Service
Each organizational unit (branch or section) should establish a customer service program.
fc ' _
A process would be developed by each unit to-obtain feedback from crdssrdivisional^teams on
the quality of their product and its usefulness to the team. Branches or sections wmfd hiaveT
routine process for using that feedback to evaluate and continuously improve the quality of their
product.
A customer service program would serve as a mechanism for creating a customer/supplier
relationship between cross-divisional teams and divisions/branches/sections. It helps to clarify
the role of line managers in supporting teams and increases the communication between team
members, team leaders, and line managers. This program needs to focus more on whether the
product meets the needs of the customer and not so much on the quality of the analysis.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-17.
Institute a Customer Product Feedback Survey to be used for products submitted to teams.
It would be an instrumental part of the customer service program.
Each time a team member submits a work product to the work team, they should attach a
Customer Product Feedback Survey. After soliciting comments from the team, the team leader
completes the survey and sends it to the team member and the team member's branch chief.
The survey focuses on the branch product, not on the performance of the team member. The
branch chief and division management use the results of the survey as part of the customer
service program, to make improvements to the quality of the products of the branch, to evaluate
the team member's contribution to the team, and to evaluate the organization's contributions to
OPPT.
A Customer Product Feedback Survey would provide teams with an opportunity to evaluate
products received for their use and review and will provide section/branch/division management
with information that they can use to improve quality and evaluate team contributions. It would
serve as a vehicle for communication between teams and management and allow team leaders
to discuss products instead of team member performance. The feedback is meant to focus on
continuous improvement and is not equivalent to a "peer review" of the 'product or analysis.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-17 with information on the
customer service program.
22
-------
rv. Individual Performanro
Create and distribute a list of Teamwork Guidelines which outline the role of team
members, team leaders, line managers, and senior management in support of cross-
divisional teamwork.
These guidelines could be shared with new employees as part of an orientation into OPPT,
distributed to current staff to clarify the role that they play in relation to teams, as a basis for
training staff in team skills, and as the criteria for a teamwork award.
The Teamwork Guidelines are important in clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all levels
of staff, creating a shared vision of what behaviors support teamwork, and in changing the
culture of OPPT so that it is more supportive of teamwork.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-20.
Include teamwork responsibilities in performance standards for all OPPT staff.
Accountability for teamwork activities can be tied to the performance appraisal process by
incorporating a teamwork standard into individual plans. A teamwork standard should be
included in all OPPT performance agreements, from team member to office director plans. This
concept is not entirely new for managers. Fiscal Year 1993 performance agreements for
supervisors and managers now must include standards for teambuilding as one of the critical job
elements.
Including teamwork in performance standards is one way to focus management and staff on the
importance of teamwork, and to provide incentives to supporting cross-divisional teams. For
team leaders and team members, incorporating teamwork in the performance standard ensures
that they will get some recognition for their contributions, but also gives them some incentive
to more actively support the team and its efforts.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-2S.
Create a Teamwork Excellence Award for team members, team leaders, and line managers
to individuals who have demonstrated outstanding support of teams.
This award could be given as a major award at the annual awards ceremony and/or as an on-the-
spot award similar to the one outlined in the OPPT awards policy. All staff should be eligible
to nominate individuals to receive an award - team leaders, team members, and managers. The
criteria for nominating and making awards would be the Teamwork Guidelines.
23
-------
A Teamwork Excellence Award is a vehicle for recognizing individual contributions to a team
and a way to provide incentives for good teamwork. By allowing team leaders and team
members to nominate individuals, the awards system will be perceived as more equitable - team
participants often have more information about who was helpful to the team than managers who
weren't involved in the team.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-28.
Enhance OPPT staff and management training to accentuate teamwork.
Emphasis is needed on training all staff and management about their roles and responsibilities
related to cross-divisional teams, ongoing team leader training, and teamwork skills for team
members.
In coordination with the Training QAT and the Human Resources Team in OPME, the
Teamwork QAT recommends the following:
Require all team leaders to participate in the OPPT Workgroup Management course.
Institutionalize the OPPT Workgroup Leaders Development Plan and require team leaders
to participate in ongoing training according to their own development plan.
Develop a specialized training course for branch chiefs and section chiefs that emphasizes
how to plan, track, and allocate resources in a matrix management system.
Create a training course for team members that teaches good team skills.
Emphasizing teamwork in training will encourage both behavior and cultural changes that will
create an environment in OPPT which is more supportive,teamwork.
A more detailed implementation proposal can be found on page A-29.
24
-------
V. Cultural Issues
Many of the recommendations already listed will serve to create a culture change in OPPT.
Additional recommendations include:
The Office Director and Deputy Office Director must make teamwork a central value of
OPPT's culture and create the environment to support teamwork. These values must also
apply to OPPT teams which include participation from other EPA offices.
The division directors must work as a team and set the example for the rest of OPPT.
They need to act as the OPPT Steering Committee on cross-programmatic issues and to
make decisions by consensus.
Promote and hire new managers who have good team skills. To successfully manage in
a team environment, managers must be adept at leading teams and in the skills needed
to support teams (e.g., coaching, team problem-solving, facilitating). These qualities
should be considered as important as technical skills when filling management positions.
Eliminate use of the term "lead" division and replace it with coordinating division.
Change "support" division to contributing division. These terms more accurately reflect
the team concept in accomplishing the work of the office.
During regular staff meetings, managers should reinforce the importance of teamwork.
This can be done by sharing the status of teams on which staff members are
participating, recognizing staff contribution to teams and making statements about the
importance of helping cross-divisional teams succeed. Negative comments about other
divisions should be turned into problem-solving opportunities.
25
-------
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
An implementation plan for each specific recommendation is outlined in Appendix A.
However, in order to avoid disruptions in activities already ongoing within the Office, an
implementation strategy is needed to coordinate and oversee the implementation of the
recommendations from all of the QATs.
The Office Director and Deputy Office Director need to take the lead in approving and
overseeing implementation of these recommendations. A strategy needs to include time lines
for implementing specific recommendations, methods for gathering data about the status of
implementation within the branches and program areas, and processes for evaluating the success
of each recommendation in solving teamwork problems. Implementation support could be
provided in several ways:
An implementation team of approximately ten people could be formed to plan.
coordinate, and oversee implementation. This team would need to consist of members
from upper and middle management, team leaders, and team members. Members should
be chosen from different divisions and programs.
Representatives from the original QATs could serve as the implementation team The
group would also include the Office Director and Deputy Office Director as well as a
few division directors.
The individuals selected for the team need to have a good general understanding of the
various programs within OPPT. In addition, members must be receptive to new ideas, ha\e
good interpersonal skills, and be able to work in a constructive manner with individuals
throughout the office. Overall, team members should have skills that complement those ot
others on the team.
Initially, the implementation team would need to prioritize, coordinate, and monitor
implementation of recommendations from all of the QATs. The team would first need to
logically sequence the various recommendations. After completing this task, the group would
need to establish timeline goals for implementing these changes.
To support any of these options, OPME could monitor the status of implementing speci tic
recommendations in the branches and program areas.
26
-------
CONCLUSION
The findings and recommendations included in this report are intended to make the vision
of teamwork in OPPT a reality. The QAT took a broad approach to examining teamwork in
OPPT so that action items specified in the OPPT Action Plan would be part of a larger strategy
for improving the effectiveness of cross-divisional teams in OPPT.
Through the implementation of these recommendations, the QAT envisions a working
environment within OPPT in which:
Senior Managers create organizational systems and make decisions that enable
teams to function effectively, and remove organizational obstacles to the functioning
of teams. They set an example for the rest of OPPT by modeling team work among
themselves and in their interactions with staff.
Line Managers view teams as customers of their division/branch/section. They
understand and support the goals of the team, provide guidance to team members,
help solve team problems, and take steps to make sure that products provided to the
team are high quality and meet the needs of the group.
Team Leaders practice good leadership and project management skills. They
interact effectively with management and staff at all levels. They communicate with
the team suppliers about the quality of input to the team and keep the team focused
on the team's mission and goals.
Team Members are focused on helping the team meet team goals through a
commitment to providing high quality work products, practicing effective team
skills, contributing to the planning and functioning of the team, and communicating
effectively with their line manager about team issues, progress, and status. Team
members take ownership of the team's mission, goals, and work projects, and do
whatever is necessary to make the team successful.
Most importantly, the QAT stresses that managers and staff at all levels within OPPT
should be held responsible and accountable for the success of cross-divisional teams within the
Office.
27
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
Recommendation: Develop a strategy for handling "firednlls" within OPPT and within
organizational units.
Narrative:
Priority projects are often pushed aside by line managers and team members to
accommodate short-term requests from senior management. At the same time, no
acknowledgements are made that priority projects may be delayed as a result of these short-term
"firedrills." As a result, staff time is often overbooked from these workload surges.
Firedrills generally fall into two categories: 1) unplanned projects that require a
significant amount of resources to complete; and 2) unplanned short-term, quick turn-around
projects. To accommodate the first type of firedrill, the QAT recommends that the request for
action be sent to the program specific steering committee (described on p. A-3). The committee
will determine how the request fits in with the ongoing projects under its supervision and how/if
to adjust resources to meet the need.
For the shorter-term firedrills, the QAT recommends that each branch or division could
designate a "fire chief." The person in this position would be primarily a "doer" rather than a
"coordinator." In other words, rather than passing along the assignment to another staff person.
the fire chief would try to handle the firedrill alone. This role could be handled on a rotational
basis or by a person who wants to handle items of a generalist nature. If the chief cannot handle
the request, the chiefs line manager would need to provide assistance.
Possible Benefits:
Reduces workload surges on team members and managers
Encourages the fire chief to take ownership for a project
Steps to Implementation:
Refer all long-term firedrills to the program specific steering committees for possible
incorporation into the specific program plan.
Each division or branch (as appropriate) should select a fire chief for FY93.
A critical job element should be included in the fire chiefs performance agreement to
handle these duties.
Division directors and branch chiefs assign their firedrills to the fire chief. If the chief
cannot handle the crisis, the line manager provides assistance in resolving the issue.
A -2
-------
Recommendation: Establish a steering committee for each program area to coordinate and
oversee implementation of the annual operating plan.
Narrative:
In order to better manage resources and monitor the status of workgroups within program
areas, steering committees should be established for each program area (e.g., New Chemicals,
Existing Chemicals, TRI, Lead, Asbestos, PCBs, etc.). For those issues that are cross-
programmatic in nature or do not fit within a specific program area, the Office Director, the
Deputy Office Director, and the division directors would serve as the OPPT Steering Committee.
This committee would function similarly to the program-specific committees but would also
serve as an "appeals board" or advisory group for the program steering committee when issues
cannot be resolved at the program level.
Membership on the program specific committees should be limited to the manager
(branch chief or section chief) of each organizational unit with a significant role in the program
area covered by the committee. The appropriate level of management participation may vary
from program to program and unit to unit.
These committees would be chartered to handle a number of responsibilities within the
given program area. Primarily, these responsibilities would include: 1) implementing the annual
operating plan in that program area, 2) chartering workgroups to carryout program-specific
projects and dechartering teams that have completed their assignments or that are of a low
priority according to the program plan, 3) monitoring the progress of teams and taking
appropriate actions to address problems or issues that arise from these groups, 4) providing
regular updates to the OPPT Steering Committee on program accomplishments, and 5) allocating
resources within the program to achieve program goals.
Among the first action items for these steering committees, the Teamwork QAT
recommends that each program steering committee analyze the list of workgroups currently in
the OPPT workteam database (see Appendix B) to determine which groups within the respective
program area are no longer in existence, are inactive, or are of low priority. These teams
should be disbanded in order to immediately free up resources which can be reallocated to higher
priority projects.
Possible Benefits:
Improves communication and teamwork among line managers who have key roles m
supporting teams in each of the OPPT program areas
Develops greater sense of responsibility among line managers for commitments made to
program goals
A - 3
-------
As line managers develop a more direct sense of responsibility for the success of teams,
they will start viewing the teams as customers of the branches
Creates a mechanism for more clearly communicating program-specific priorities
Should result in more thorough planning and allocation of resources, resulting in more
realistic workload assignments and, hopefully, overall reduction in staff workloads
Steps to Implementation:
The Office Director needs to announce the formation of these steering committees and
the program areas they will serve.
The Office Director, the Deputy Office Director, and the division directors should select
the members for each of these committees.
Each steering committee should be chartered by the Office Director along with the
Deputy Office Director and the division directors.
Each steering committee should develop an action plan for carrying out the committee
charter.
A - 4
-------
Recommendation: Create a standard procedure that is followed in chartering teams.1
Narrative:
Creating a new team should be viewed by OPPT as a major undertaking. Although the
decision to form a team may come from senior management or be based on the operating plan,
the program specific steering committees should have the responsibility to charter new teams and
de-charter ones that are no longer necessary for accomplishing the program's objectives.
When new teams are chartered, team members need to understand what OPPT
management their primary customer wants accomplished. In some cases, management sets
the goal upfront, while in others the team takes a crack at establishing the goal. In either case,
it is critical to get buy-in from team members and middle and senior management, since all will
be crucial in helping the team succeed.
Once the goal is established, the team needs to develop a project action plan (see attached
model). The plan should include key milestones to be accomplished with a rough timeline for
completing these aspects of the project. The project action plan should be approved by the
program specific steering committee.
While management is clearly a customer of the team, so too are teams customers of
management. In order for teams to succeed, managers, particularly middle management, must
view themselves as "suppliers" to teams. Managers supply the team with the resources
(including guidance and moral support) to help the team reach its goal.
Teams should develop status reports (see attached model) for the program-specific
steering committee on a regular basis. These reports would serve to provide information on
accomplishments achieved, any revisions to the original action plan, and requests for
guidance/additional support from middle management. .These periodic reports should also
include an evaluation of how the team is functioning: what's working well and what isn't
working so well.
At the end of a project, the team completes a self-evaluation (see sample questions
attached). This evaluation has many uses including passing new tools to other teams.
institutionalizing accomplishments, and providing information to line managers in the evaluation
of team performance for appraisals. This final evaluation also serves as a de-briefing for the
program steering committee.
'The Teamwork QAT envisipns that this formal chartering process would only applv to
projects'that'are expected to last'longer than 4 months in duration. PMN-specific teams m the
New Chemi<^rProgfanTrfol'exainpleT would"ribrbe'expectetl to be chartered." Other teams
within the New Chemicals Program (e.g., PMN Rule Amendments workgroup) would he
expected to undergo 'this chartering process.
A - 5
-------
Possible Benefits:
Increases management and staff responsibility and accountability for the success of team
efforts
Fosters the development of customer-supplier relationships between OPPT management
and work teams
Should help reduce the number of workgroups within OPPT by giving management an
opportunity to continually evaluate resource allocations across program priorities
Develops processes and procedures to facilitate cross-divisional teamwork
Provides opportunities for communication between line managers, team leaders, and team
members
Clearly outlines a role for line managers in supporting cross-divisional teams
Establishes project goals and creates buy-in from management and the team on the
project's mission and goals
Outlines the responsibilities of a team member on a work team and provides opportunities
for the team member to agree on the team goals and their individual responsibilities to
the team
Steps to Implementation:
1. At the start of each new team, the program-specific steering committee "charters" the
team and determines its staffing.
2. The team develops a project action plan (see attached model) that includes the team's
goal, who is responsible for doing each task, important issues to be addressed, and the
team's schedule with key milestones.
3. The team and the program steering committee reach consensus on the project action plan.
4. On a regular basis, teams submit project status reports (see attached model) to the
program steering committee.
5. Once the team's goal is achieved, the team is officially "de-chartered" by the steenng
committee. The team documents its accomplishments and any new processes developed
that may increase efficiencies for the program or Office. This dechartering includes
removing the team from the workteam database (see Appendix B, p. B-4).
A-6
-------
PROJECT ACTION PLAN
DATE: REVISION NUMBER:
1. WORKGROUP NAME:
2. GOAL STATEMENT:
This should describe the goal of the workgroup, including any expected outputs or
outcomes. The goal should clearly support the mission and goals of the office. A goal
statement is usually an overarching broad vision and is usually one sentence. The goal
statement may include strategies for achieving the goal if a specific strategy has been
specified by upper management (e.g., the goal is to reduce or eliminate the risk to human
health caused by the use of lead solder in plumbing applications by (the strategy of)
writing a regulation.)
3. BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTION:
This section will generally provide information to answer the questions:
0 What is the issue or problem the workgroup is addressing?
0 Where/how did the problem originate?
0 Why is this issue a problem? Why is there a need for a solution?
° What has been done to date on this issue/problem?
° Why is there a need for this workgroup?
° Are there any regulatory requirements or mandates that the workgroup is
responding to?
This section can also include any guidance from upper management to the workgroup
A -7
-------
4. LIMITS ON SCOPE OF WORKGROUP: (if any)
What restrictions are there?
What should the workgroup look at/not consider? (e.g., the workgroup will look
at lead solder in plumbing applications, not other uses of lead solder.)
5. KEY ISSUES: (if known)
6. POSSIBLE OPTIONS OR STRATEGIES: (if known or specified)
a) Describe strategies given to the workgroup by management and/or selected by the
workgroup to achieve the goal and the rationale for selection.
b) If relevant, describe other strategies considered but not selected.
7. WORKGROUP MEMBERSHIP:
Who are the workgroup members, and what Offices/Divisions/Branches do they
represent?
Workgroup Chair: (Name/Office/Division/Branch)
Workgroup Members: (Name/Office/Division/Branch)
Are there any groups not represented that should be?
8. EXTERNAL INVOLVEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS:
What other federal, state, or local agencies will be involved with this project, and
in what capacity?
What other organizations (e.g., industry, environmental groups, etc.) will be
involved, and in what capacity or how?
A - 8
-------
9. PROJECTED ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES:
What activities and analyses need to be done to implement each strategy selected? In
what areas? From what sources? To address what issues or requirements? Who is
responsible for doing each of these? With EPA or contract personnel? How will the
assumptions used in each analysis be determined and coordinated/standardized?
What is the level of detail expected/needed for each analysis/activity (e.g., screening or
hazard and exposure assessments to support dioxin in pulp and paper sludge regulatory
activities)?
What will the product be used for?
How much detail/effort is needed to support the decision the information is to be used
for (to avoid a situation where someone produces a product/document which is either too
detailed, has more information than needed and so wastes time, or frustrates the decision
maker because there is not enough information - e.g., PMN v. Section 6)?
List of products/outputs from workgroup:
e.g.: Hazard assessment
Exposure assessment
Risk assessment
Regulation
10. SCHEDULES:
a) Project Timeline: What is the proposed schedule for completing the project and
each of the activities? What are the major milestones, outputs, and decision
points? What is the deadline for completing the project (mandatory by regulation,
set by upper management, negotiable, proposed by group)?
b) Meeting Schedule: What is the proposed meeting schedule for the workgroup?
c) Status Reports and Briefings: What is the proposed schedule and format for
status reports to upper management (written, oral, etc.)?
A -9
-------
11. RESOURCES:
What is the level of effort and resources needed to produce the outputs at the
level of detail needed?
What resources will be required to complete this project?
Estimate of EPA personnel resources
Estimate of contractor $
Availability of resources
12. RECORDKEEPING
What are the recordkeeping requirements and plan? (e.g., will meeting sum manes
be kept? Will members keep phone logs of conversations? Where will these
records be kept? Docket?)
Is there a need to set up a workgroup library? How will it operate (how will
workgroup members be advised what is in it, and how will they get copies)0
A - 10
-------
WORKGROUP STATUS REPORTS
Workgroup status reports should generally follow the format below or at least cover all the
relevant issues and address the questions under each heading.
WORKGROUP REPORT # : WORKGROUP NAME
Covering Period from Date to Date
Office and Report Date
1. Introduction
a. Indicate the workgroup meetings covered by this report, and any pertinent
introductory information.
b. Key Issues: List here or, if the list is very long, attach the complete list of issues
the workgroup is addressing as Attachment A to every workgroup report. Group
related issues if they fall into categories, and number issues. A question format
for stating issues is preferred. If new issues have emerged since a previous
report, add to issues list under appropriate category, and mark with asterisk or
indicate: New Issue.
2. Issues Resolved
For each issue resolved since the last workgroup report, indicate:
° Statement of Issue: What the issue is, preferably in the. form, of a question.
(Place an asterisk In front of new issues.)
Alternatives Considered: The alternatives considered, who eliminated any of
them, and why.
Approach Selected or Resolution of Issue: How the issue was resolved, including
(1) the decision made, and (2) the decision-making process used:
A - 11
-------
3. Unresolved Issues Under Discussion
For each issue under discussion (excluding those note yet addressed), indicate:
Statement of Issue: What the issue is, preferably in the form a question.
Status: Indicate the different offices' positions toward the issue, and why it
remains unresolved. Indicate if the lead program has established a process for
resolving the issue within the workgroup, or whether to elevate the issue for
resolution. If the lack of resolution relates to the inadequacy of available data,
indicate what data are needed, and the time and resources required to obtain
them.
4. Status of Technical and Analytic Support Work
a. Status of Studies/Analyses: Indicate the status of principal studies and analyses
supporting the rule-making.
b. Sufficiency of Studies: Are the current studies sufficient in terms of quality and
scope to meet project needs? If not, indicate what further studies are needed to
support the project.
c. Timeliness of Studies: Are the studies on schedule, and if not, what are the
implications?
5. Operation of the Workgroup
a. Participation: Is participation in the workgroup sufficient to address important
issues and other aspects of the project? (Attach list showing office representation
by meeting date, if pertinent.) Does the workgroup need additional participation
from any party, whether a current member of not?
b. Anticipated Delays: Do you anticipate any delays from the originally proposed
schedule, and if so, for what reason? Will anticipated delays cause the Agency
or office problems with any deadlines, and if so, can delay be avoided?
c. Significant Changes: Are there any other significant changes since the project
started that will affect workgroup operation?
A - 12
-------
SAMPLE QUESTIONS FOR TEAM EVALUATIONS
What factors/influences contributed to the team's success?
What factors/influences hampered the team's progress?
What aspects of the project best exemplify a "team effort"?
How might the team have run more smoothly?
What new innovations, process or otherwise, did the team develop in order to improve
the final team product?
What recommendations would the team make to improve the review/decision-making
process?
How might management have been more supportive of the team?
A - 13
-------
Recommendation: Reduce the number of work teams that currently exist in OPPT.
Narrative:
In order to validate comments raised by OPPT staff and managers that they are
overloaded, the Teamwork QAT enlisted Stonnell Associates to survey the Office to determine
how many workgroups existed within OPPT. The results show that there are over 350
workgroups within OPPT, a number that on the surface seems to be incredibly high and mostly
unmanageable.
In order to reduce the burden of OPPT staff and managers, the Teamwork QAT
recommends that the Office commit to reducing the number of work teams within OPPT. Those
teams that are duplicates or that are working on low-priority projects need to be disbanded in
order to free up resources (or at least staff arid management time) to devote to higher-priority
assignments within the various program areas.
Possible Benefits:
Reduces the number of staff and management commitments to individual projects
Frees up resources for reallocation to higher priority projects
Creates a more manageable number of workteams for the program steering committees
Gives management a better understanding of projects staff are working on
Steps to Implementation:
After formation and chartering of the program steering committees, these committees will
evaluate the current list of OPPT workteams by categorizing existing workteams into
low, medium, and high priority projects.
Those workteams that are of low priority, are duplicates, or no longer exist will be
deleted from the workteam database and the workteam will be disbanded.
On a regular (perhaps quarterly) basis, the steering committees should compare existing
workteams against the annual program plan and make adjustments as necessary.
After a workteam has fulfilled its mission, the workteam will be disbanded and deleted
from the workteam database.
A - 14
-------
Recommendation: Establish a pilot standing team in one or more areas.
Narrative:
Some private sector organizations have introduced the concept of a standing team in their
work environments. Rather than forming a new team for each new issue that develops, a
working team is created to handle several issues. A team may be created to work on research
and development initiatives or ways to improve management systems. The teams manage their
own resources and time allocation based on guidance received from management.
The Teamwork QAT proposes that OPPT adopt this concept on a pilot basis within a
number of program areas. The standing team would consist of a core group of 4-5 individuals
(e.g., project manager, technical integrator, hazard integrator, chemical engineer, and exposure
assessor) who would be assigned to work on 3-4 issues/chemical projects over the course of the
year. In general, these individuals would spend most of their time working on these projects
(perhaps 70-80 percent of their time). In instances where specialized expertise is required,
others would be called in on a temporary basis to provide this support. However, these
additional individuals would not become part of the standing team.
There was considerable debate among members of the QAT regarding which program
areas would most benefit from this type of approach. Some felt that the concept may not even
work. However, almost all of the QAT members agreed that OPPT might benefit from trying
this concept on a limited basis for one year to document the possible benefits and disadvantages
from establishing standing teams on a more permanent basis.
In selecting members for this team, some considerations are necessary. The team should
not be "stacked" to create the "Dream Team." On the other hand, the team should consist of
individuals who are willing to test the concept out and give it a fair chance of succeeding. More
specific criteria should be created by the individual program steering committees based on the
needs and circumstances as identified by those groups.
Possible Benefits:
Insures the continuity of projects by assigning them to a clearly identified team that meets
on a regular basis
Provides a means of quick development and concentration of skills that are needed to
complete projects
. Provides a mechanism for technical divisions and staffs to gain a sense of.ownership tor
projects that could contribute to strengthening teamwork
A - 15
-------
Eliminates the delays caused by having to establish working relationships among team
members for each new project
Establishes a system for management to identify the number of ongoing projects in the
program area as well as a means of determining staff workload
Motivates technical staff on the team by giving them the opportunity to develop skills
beyond their area of technical expertise
Possible Drawbacks:
Every issue that OPPT handles is unique which makes it difficult for standing teams to
handle the diversity.
May not provide flexibility to respond to the requirements of the issue
« May be difficult to implement in areas where units work on issues in more than one
program area (i.e., existing chemicals and new chemicals)
Steps to Implementation:
Each of the program specific steering committees needs to determine whether resources
are available to test out this concept
In areas willing to participate in the pilot, the program steering committees identify the
projects the team will work on and develop the criteria for selecting individuals for the
team.
Following this, the committees should solicit volunteers for the team. The program
steering committees should select the team based on the identified criteria and charter the
team.
On a periodic basis, the standing team should discuss its progress with the steenng
committee and recommend modifications to the standing team concept for that program
area.
At the end of one year, the team and the steering committee should evaluate the team's
accomplishments and determine whether to expand this concept to the overall program.
Results of the evaluation should be shared with the OPPT Steering Committee.
A - 16
-------
Recommendations:
1) Each organizational unit (branch or section) should establish a customer service program.
2) Institute a Customer Product Feedback Survey to be used for products submitted to
teams.
Narrative:
Some branches and sections now view their contribution to cross-divisional teams as
primarily a matter of assigning staff to teams as requested. The line managers and their units
do not view the teams as customers of the branches or sections. This view can result in two
problems: 1) it leaves the staff person assigned to the team largely without support from
management; and 2) it does not establish any means for the branch or section to evaluate and
improve the products it submits to teams. Simply telling line managers and their units to start
viewing the teams as customers is not enough to address this issue. Support for teams will
become a reality only when each organizational unit establishes a routine process for evaluating
and improving the products that they supply to teams.
Units could routinely meet to review and evaluate all the feedback from a program and
make plans for improvement. Such meetings might be supplemented with the assignment of a
staff person in the unit to take responsibility for organizing the review and improvement of the
products to a program. Routine distribution of feedback from teams to all unit members, regular
interviews with team leaders to discover needs, periodic revision of the unit's standard operating
procedures, and other mechanisms could be developed to supplement these periodic assessments.
The goal is for each unit to establish a clear and routine process that can make the customer
support of teams a reality.
Most importantly, the QAT envisions a review that does not focus solely on the quality
of the analysis. It is generally felt that the analytical work provided by the various
organizational units is of high quality. Rather, this evaluation process should more closely
scrutinize how the customer uses the analysis and what can be done to provide products that can
be more readily assimilated into the team's final product without significant additional work by
the team leader or other team members.
To supplement this process, the QAT developed a customer product feedback survey
This survey provides teams with a mechanism for evaluating the products received for their use
and review. The information from these surveys could be used to help improve the products
submitted by the organizational unit as well as to evaluate the team member and the
organization's contribution to the workgroup.
A - 17
-------
Possible Benefits:
Serves as a catalyst for re-inforcing customer-supplier relationships
Provides a forum for discussion of contributions to the workgroup
Opens a line of communication between the team leader and the line manager, while
providing feedback to the team member on their contribution to the workgroup
Provides an opportunity for organizations to continuously evaluate and improve the
products they submit to teams
Works towards improving the quality of the products submitted to teams
Steps to Implementation:
Each branch or division should establish a small group consisting of line managers and
team members to review the unit's existing standard operating procedures for preparing
products submitted to teams.
Following the collection and evaluation of these procedures, the group should solicit
feedback from teams on their quality of their contributions.
To aid in this data collection, with each new product submitted to the team, the team
member should attach a copy of the product feedback survey.
Team leaders should be instructed on:
1. the purpose of the feedback survey
2. how to involve the team in completing the survey
3. how the survey will be used by the branch/section
Within 2-3 weeks, the team should provide comments to the team leader who will
summarize the responses and send the form back to the team member and the team
member's line manager
The branch or division should use this feedback to continuously improve their
contributions to teams.
A - 18
-------
FEEDBACK TO DIVISION/BRANCH
ON WORKGROUP CONTRIBUTION
TO: Work Group Leader:
FROM: Manager:
Division/Branch:
DATE:
SUBJECT: Name of Work Group:
Name of Product Submitted from Division/Branch:
We want to make sure that we are meeting the needs of this Work Group. Please give us
feedback about our Branch's contribution to the Work Group Project.
1. Did you receive this work product by the deadline? Y N
If not, how did the'delay affect the workgroup's progress?
Please rate the quality of the work product:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Quality of content
Quality of writing/presentation
Meets the needs of the project
Comments:
Excellent
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
Poor
5
5
5
3. Status of Work Product: Check (x) one:
1. Accepted in full for use in Work Group Project.
2. Sections of Work Product will be used in Project.
3. Returned to Work Group Member for changes.
DueJback to Work Group: (insert date)
4. Was more analysis done than the workgroup needed? Y N
A - 19
-------
Recommendation: Create and distribute a list of Teamwork Guidelines which outline the role
of team members, team leaders, line managers, and upper management in
support of cross-divisional teams.
Narrative:
During the QAT's data gathering activities, individuals throughout OPPT indicated that
people within the Office did not understand or practice the "team approach" to doing work.
Both staff and management suggested various training and educational opportunities to learn
more about teamwork. As a basis for this training, the QAT developed Teamwork Guidelines
that should be practiced throughout OPPT.
Possible Benefits:
Outlines a role for line managers in supporting cross-divisional teams
Fosters an understanding of management and staff responsibilities to teams
Provides criteria for nominating and distributing awards to management and staff based
on their teamwork efforts
Provides criteria for evaluating teamwork performance standards
Steps to Implementation:
1. As a first step, distribute the attached Teamwork Guidelines to everyone in OPPT
2. Provide these Teamwork Guidelines to the Rewards and Recognition QAT as a basis tor
nominating individuals for the Teamwork Excellence Awards.
3. Provide these guidelines to the Human Resources Team for inclusion in the New.
Employee Orientation Manual.
A -20
-------
TEAMWORK GUIDELINES
FOR SENIOR MANAGEMENT
Role: Lead by example by working as a team and managing the office and divisions in a
way that promotes cross-divisional teamwork.
Recruit and promote into management individuals who are strong team players and
have exceptional coaching and interpersonal skills.
Reward and recognize instances of teamwork among team leaders, team members,
and line managers, with particular emphasis on the role of line managers who help
meet the needs of their customers on successful teams.
Visibly and actively support workgroup managers, regardless of whether they are in
your division.
Even in the midst of a crunch or a "firedrill," reinforce the team approach for
resolving issues; avoid the inclination to have only one person handle the crisis.
Empower teams to take on a project's responsibility as their own. Give clear
direction to the team leader.
Hold line managers at all levels accountable for the success of teams.
Analyze situations/systems that often produce "firedrills" for changes that may avoid
them in the future.
A -21
-------
TEAMWORK GUIDELINES
FOR LINE MANAGERS
Role: Fully support and be responsible for the success of OPPT's cross-divisional teams.
Recognize and reward your staffs performance on teams not only for their
substantive expertise contributed to teams, but also for their demonstrated team skills
in helping the group reach their goals.
As a team is formed, work with your team members and the team to develop a
common vision and goals for the team that all team members and managers share.
Help to determine clearly the customer and supplier relationships, and underscore the
value, importance, and responsibility of each.
Through your team member, take an active interest in the team and its progress.
Meet with the team leader and other line managers frequently to make sure the project
as a whole is proceeding well, as well as the part of the work you are responsible for.
Understand the needs of your customer (i.e., the team) upfront.
Recognize, formally and informally, good teamwork of others, even if they don't
work for you.
Before a product from your group goes to the team, review it to make sure that it
meets the needs of the customer. Develop a quality control system that assures a high
quality product in terms of customer satisfaction.
Don't constantly switch staff from one project to the next. Try to build continuity
into the environment, where staff have some sense of certainty about what they will
be working on.
Serve as a coach, trainer, facilitator, delegator, educator, sounding board, and
intermediary.
Solicit input from team leaders regarding your team member's contributions to the
project and overall teamwork.
A -22
-------
TEAMWORK GUIDELINES
FOR TEAM LEADERS
Role: Help accomplish OPPT's mission by successfully leading cross-divisional teams.
Attend the workgroup manager training course. Review the training materials
regularly to keep your skills sharp.
When forming teams, make sure that representatives of all interested parties
participate.
Conduct productive meetings by distributing an agenda in advance, starting meetings
on time, sticking to the agenda, and distributing meeting summaries. Review and put
into practice the recommendations of the Meetings Management QAT on how
effective meetings are conducted.
Develop a workplan and schedule with input from team members.
Keep management informed of project status.
Notify management as soon as it becomes apparent that a significant issue or change
in the workplan or schedule is likely to arise.
If a team member regularly does not attend meetings or participate, encourage them
to become more active.
0 Guide workgroup discussions towards a workgroup consensus. Listen actively to
your team members; ask open-ended questions to get their views and ideas.
0 Consider planning fun events to celebrate achievement of milestones.
Provide feedback to team members and their supervisors when team members make
important contributions to the team.
A - 23
-------
TEAMWORK GUIDELINES
FOR TEAM MEMBERS
Role: Help accomplish team objectives by making contributions both within and outside of
one's area of expertise.
Make sure that you, your team leader, and your line manager agree to the scope of
your contribution and deadlines.
Share responsibility with the team leader for getting work done. Volunteer to assist
others on the workgroup if you can. Advocate the team objective to problem solving.
Tell the team leader when you'll be out of the office for a few days or more.
Try to attend all of the meetings where you have a contribution to make. Ask the
team leader whether your presence is valuable.
Assist the team in following the meeting agenda. If you have another agenda item,
ask the team leader's permission to add it, or arrange for a separate meeting. Review
the Meetings Management QAT's recommendations on how team members can help
run effective meetings.
Speak up at meetings to make sure your opinions and feelings are known. Try to be
diplomatic. Be an active listener. Always consider the opinions of others and work
to understand why they feel that way.
Hold frequent, informal meetings with your "suppliers" and "customers" of
information. These important conversations should not occur during meetings of the
whole team.
Recognize that your reports have many readers other than your supervisor. Put
technical details in appendices. Make liberal use of abstracts.
When you reissue reports, highlight changes from previous drafts.
A - 24
-------
Recommendation: Include teamwork responsibilities in performance standards for all OPPT
staff.
Narrative:
Accountability for teamwork activities can be tied to the performance appraisal process
by incorporating a teamwork standard into individual plans. At the direction of the Office of
Human Resources Management, managers at all levels were required to include a standard on
human resources in their FY93 performance agreement. This human resources standard includes
provisions for supporting teamwork. The Teamwork QAT recommends extending this
requirement to all members of OPPT.
Possible Benefits:
Reinforces the customer-supplier relationship
Gives importance in the performance appraisal process to contributions to teams
Creates an incentive for line managers to support team activities
Steps to Implementation:
1. The Office Director should distribute a memo to all OPPT employees encouraging staff
and management to include a standard on teamwork in each performance agreement
(sample standards are attached).
2. At the most appropriate time (e.g., mid-year performance review), the standards should
be incorporated into all performance plans.
3. Consider establishing a quality action team to develop mechanisms for evaluating the
standard.
4. Use the customer feedback surveys as one means of assessing performance ot
management and staff.
A - 25
-------
Proposed Standards
Office Director/Deputy Office Director
CJE: Provides effective leadership, employee empowerment, customer satisfaction, and
improved staff capability in support of the Office's team and teamwork activities.
Encourages supervisors and managers to practice TQM principles to effectively
accomplish teamwork goals.
Fully Successful Standard:
Promotes and encourages productive working relationships both inside and outside the
Agency. Fosters employee development, cooperation, and team approaches to meeting
organizational goals and resolving problems. Creates an organizational climate that encourages
empowerment, prudent risk-taking and personal growth and development to ensure that customer
needs and services are met. Enhances individual performance within the organization through
the use of appropriate training opportunities, individual development plans, and development
assignments.
Division Director/Deputy Division Director
CJE: Provides effective leadership, employee empowerment, customer satisfaction, and
improved staff capability in support of the Office and Division's team and teamwork
activities. Encourages supervisors and managers to practice TQM principles to
effectively accomplish teamwork goals.
Fully Successful Standard:
Encourages teambuilding and cooperative work relationships. Encourages staff to act
independently and to be prudent risk takers. Fosters cooperation and the team approach to
meeting organizational goals and in resolving problems. Determines customer needs and
services. Ensures that products developed by the organization meet the customer's needs and
are delivered in a timely manner. Praises the quality and accomplishments resulting from
teamwork and rewards accordingly. Seeks staff and upper management input to improve the
quality with value-added efforts.
A -26
-------
Branch Chief/Section Chief
CJE: Provides effective leadership, employee empowerment, customer satisfaction and
improved staff capability in support of the Office, Division, and Branch's team and
teamwork activities.
Fully Successful Standard:
Promotes opportunities to further organizational goals. Fosters cooperation and the team
approach to meeting organizational goals and in resolving problems. Determines the customers
needs and services. Ensures that products meet the customer's needs and are delivered in a
timely manner. Praises the quality and accomplishments resulting from teamwork and rewards
accordingly. Seeks staff and upper management input to improve quality with value-added
efforts.
Team Leader
CJE: Using TQM principles in supporting the customer/supplier relationship, effectively lead
all team activities.
Fully Successful Standard:
Foster cooperation and utilize the team approach to setting the workgroup's goals which
includes team buy-in, and in resolving problems; evaluate the quality of a team member's
contribution which includes timely products, and inform line managers about accomplishments
resulting from teamwork; seek team input when making workgroup decisions.
Team Member
CJE: Actively participates as a full team member on an assigned team
Fully Successful Standard:
Demonstrates adequate level of involvement in each assigned team. Succeeds in
presenting views of the branch and/or division management to the team. Determines customer
needs for work products. Provides quality work products which meet customer needs. Ensures
that work products are in a format which can be easily utilized by other team members
Coordinates with other team members to ensure that products received meet project needs
Attends and participates in team meetings. Meets team schedule for project assignments
Informs management of team activities and progress. Informs management of outside
developments that may affect team assignments.
A -27
-------
Recommendation: Create a Teamwork Excellence Award for individual team members, team
leaders, and line managers who have demonstrated outstanding support of
teams.
Narrative:
Team members rarely see the results of their efforts. Teams and individual members
receive little feedback about whether the objectives of the project were accomplished. Likewise,
line managers have little incentive to support teamwork. Most line managers are evaluated based
on their ability to achieve the division's objectives rather than on their ability to serve as
coaches, advisors, facilitators, and mentors.
There is a perception that awards tend to be given out according to political
considerations instead of according to performance on teams. Many feel that high level
managers in lead divisions tend to receive recognition even if they had little personal
involvement with the project. More consideration is given to making certain that divisions and
offices are represented rather than high quality performance on the team.
Possible Benefits:
Provides recognition for contributions to teams
Creates incentives for managers and staff to support team efforts
Steps to Implementation:
Information describing the various awards available in OPPT should be prepared and
distributed to all staff.
The OD/OPPT should announce which OPPT awards may be nominated by staff other
than line managers.
Senior management and line managers should establish criteria for nominating individuals
for awards. The Teamwork Guidelines may be a good starting off point for developing
these criteria.
A committee should be chartered, such as the OPPT Human Resources Panel, to review
award nominations.
Implementation should occur in consultation with the Rewards and Recognition QAT
A - 28
-------
Recommendation: Enhance OPPT staff and management training to accentuate teamwork.
Narrative:
Training should be enhanced in three major areas: 1) roles of staff and management with
respect to teams; 2) team leader training; and 3) skills training for team members. In light of
the limited resource dollars available within OPPT, the QAT recommends that the Human
Resources Team in OPME concentrate on four specific areas:
Continuation of the OPPT Workgroup Management Course
Development of training on team skills for team members
Institutionalization of the OPPT Workgroup Leaders Development Plan
Development of training for line managers in resource management in a matrix
management system
Overall, training needs to be expanded to include all key team leaders, team members, and
management. In particular, the workgroup leader training course should be expanded to include
all program areas within the Office.
The team skills training could include some of the following elements: time management;
managing or participating in multiple projects; consensus building; dealing effectively with
people with different points of view; and communication skills. This skills training should be
on-going and periodic refresher courses may be warranted.
The resource management training for line managers will help develop a consistent
approach for planning and implementing team staffing in a matrix organization. This training
will help line managers deal more effectively with priorities, fire drills, and staff overload.
In addition, branches and divisions may want to consider setting up routine "Introductions
to What Our Branch Does" seminars. This cross-training will allow team members to better
understand what their colleagues do as well as provide opportunities for branches and divisions
to find out what their customers do with the products they submit to teams.
Possible Benefits:
Re-inforces the teamwork that results from the implementation of the other
recommendations already described
Creates an environment within the Office that is more supportive of teamwork
Increases opportunities for evaluating the customer-supplier relationship
Develops teamwork skills for all OPPT staff
A -29
-------
Steps to Implementation:
In light of the various competing needs and requests for training, the QAT recommends
that this recommendation be referred to the OPME Human Resources Team.
A -30
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
Results of Branch Chiefs Firedrill Survey
BACKGROUND
The Teamwork QAT tried to determine whether "firedrills" had an impact on teamwork
in OPPT. The QAT selected one Branch Chief from each of the divisions to participate in the
study. Each participant was asked to collect data on two types of firedrills: 1) unexpected high
priority items (not in the operating plan) that required a quick turnaround and 2) unexpected high
priority items of a longer term nature. Based on discussions with many staff and managers
within the Office, the QAT believed that firedrills may be pulling people away from their
workgroup work to complete short-term, fast action projects.
STUDY DESIGN
The QAT asked the participants to record data on a daily basis in the following areas:
Source of Request e.g., Office Director, Division Director
Type of Request e.g., management, administrative, technical
Time Demands e.g., turnaround personal hours, staff hours
What Suffered e.g., general management, specific project, availability to staff, morale,
personal life
RESULTS
Only 4 of the original 7 participants provided data. Of the four active respondents, only
2 provided adequate data outlining their experiences during the four-week period. Thus, there
is a question as to whether this was a representative sample providing good data.
Based on the data provided, firedrills do not appear to be a big problem in the Office.
In fact, the Branch Chiefs who responded seem to have accounted for firedrills in their Branch
work plans. From the limited data, it appears that although "firefighting" time is not formally
built-in to the budget and operating plan, it is somehow accounted for in the final product
CONCLUSION
The problems associated with firedrills seem to be more of a process or planning issue
There are no standardized work flow charts or workplans. In addition, firedrills tend to result
when the Office does not communicate priorities to staff.
B-2
-------
Results of Time Utilization Survey
BACKGROUND
The Teamwork QAT enlisted Stonnell Associates to asked OPPT Branch and Section
Chiefs to the percentage of time they spent in FY92 on each of the following types of activities:
1) doing technical work on projects; 2) divisional/branch administrative work, 3) managing staff
on workgroup projects, 4) managing staff on other (non-workgroup) projects, and 5) other
meetings/other work.
RESULTS
Section Chiefs
Section chiefs spend an almost equal percentage of their time, on average, doing technical
work themselves as managing staff on work group projects. The remainder of section chiefs'
time tends to be equally divided between administrative duties, managing staff on work other
than workgroup projects, and attending meetings or doing other types of work.
Branch Chiefs
Branch chiefs spend an almost equal amount of time on each of the five activities.
reporting a slightly higher percentage of time (24 percent) spent managing workgroup activities
and a slightly lower (17 percent) of time spent on other types of meetings and work. They
reported spending about 20 percent of their time on technical work, administrative duties, and
managing staff on non-workgroup projects.
CONCLUSION
A number of conclusions can be drawn from these results. Most significantly, section
chiefs and branch chiefs are spending considerable amounts of time doing technical work This
observation could lead one to believe that staff are working on more projects than they can
handle. In addition, these results suggest that the Office needs to reprioritize the projects "on
its plate" and may want to discontinue certain projects in order for section chiefs and branch
chiefs to perform their management functions as well as to lighten the workload on OPPT staff
B - 3
-------
WORKGROUPS IN OPPT
BACKGROUND
The Teamwork QAT enlisted Stonnell Associates to develop a database of information
on workgroups in OPPT. This information was needed to uncover the "base line" of matrix
management and utilization of teams in OPPT. Information sought included the number of
teams, how the lead is distributed among OPPT divisions, and the number of people in each
division who are involved in teams. Using this information, the QAT was better able to
develop recommendations for improving the general understanding and functioning of
OPPT's matrix system.
DESCRIPTION OF THE DATABASE
Criteria
To qualify for entry in the database, a workgroup had to meet these conditions:
1. Membership crosses Branch lines; that is, not all members work for the same
line manager, or if they do, the project is not solely for that Branch
2. The group will be meeting for more than two months
3. The work done is a project, in the sense that members play different roles and
provide different expertise
4. The group is active and current (though activity may be slight)
The information gathered on workgroups that met these criteria was entered into a
database with the following fields:
PURPOSE: Reason for existence of the workgroup
TYPE: e.g., regulatory, RM1, RM2, QAT,
LEAD GROUP: Division or office assigned lead responsibility
STARTUP DATE: Month and year of formation
END DATE: Termination date
MEETING FREQUENCY: Meeting frequency
MEETING LENGTH: Duration of meetings
NOTES: Miscellaneous additional information
MEMBER: Name, division and branch of OPPT members
FUNCTION: Role of member (e.g., chair, general participant,
technical expert, etc.
B -4
-------
Developing the Database
Once criteria were set, Stonnell Associates obtained lists of known workgroups from
those Branch Chiefs and others who (from interviews during the Management Study of OPPT
performed in 1991-92) were known to have such information. These preliminary lists were
corrected and expanded upon by spot checking with selected individuals known to be on a
workgroup, or to be in some way knowledgeable about the workgroup. This information
was entered into the database to form the first draft of a master list of OPPT workgroups.
The list was further refined through a written survey sent to all known workgroup chairs;
where a workgroup chair was not known, the survey form was sent to a known member of
the workgroup. The survey requested correction of listed information, designation of
potential duplicate entries, and the addition of valid workgroups not already listed.
This survey was quite successful. More than 70 percent of forms sent were returned.
The information received from the survey was used to correct and expand the database to its
current state.
LIMITATIONS OF THE DATABASE
1. Exclusion of New Chemicals Projects. The New Chemicals Program currently
reviews more than 2,000 PMN submissions each year. It was decided to set the
criteria for inclusion in the database to exclude most of these cases from the database
in order to avoid swamping out information on the other projects in OPPT. While
this facilitates analysis of these other workgroups, it should be noted that the database
seriously underestimates the involvement of CCD as project lead group, and may also
under-represent some divisions' involvement in workgroups in general.
2. Duplication. Despite extensive efforts at quality control, some duplications remain in
the database, although the number is probably lower than 15 percent.
3. Workgroups not reported. The method of obtaining names of workgroups to enter
relied on voluntary reporting and broad-based sampling. It is likely that most of the
high-priority workgroups were reported, but an unknown number were not entered.
4. Incomplete data on listed workgroups. Only 86 of the 381 workgroups listed are
thought to be complete in all data fields. Most have the lead group, chair, and
purpose entered, and some members. Many lack information on startup date, meeting
frequency and duration, and functions of the members.
5. Inaccurate survey data. The plan for this database did not allow for the quality-
control procedures that would rigorously prevent such errors. The extent of such
possible errors is unknown.
6. Data entry. Stonnell Associates provided quality-control checking of data entry to
minimize this type of error.
B - 5
-------
FINDINGS
OPPT Workers Are on a Large Number of Workgroups. The database contains
entries for 381 workgroups (Table 1). After deleting duplicates and adding those that
should be listed, the number may be about 300; it could be even larger.
2. The Lead is Not Evenly Shared Among Divisions. Before construction of the
database, it was assumed that certain divisions served as lead in more workgroups
than other divisions, but it was not known to what extent this assumption was true.
The following numbers were extracted from the database:
Division Workgroup Leads (division personnel count in brackets')
CCD
ETD
OPME
HAD
ECAD
IMD
EED
HERD
Number
36 [54]
23 [69]
6 [21]
13 [46]
15 [61]
10 [83]
8 [73]
5 [70]
Number per division member
0.67
0.33
0.29
0.13
0.23
0.12
0.11
0.07
Total 116
Again, it should be noted that the lead role of CCD is under-represented because of
the exclusion of PMN-specific workgroups (for all of which CCD serves as lead)
from the database.
3. All Divisions are Heavily Represented in Workgroups. Although the lead is not
shared equally, the representation on workgroups appears to be more uniform among
the divisions:
Division
Membershios
on Workgroups
Number Number per division person
ETD
HERD
EED
EAD
OPME
CCD
ECAD
IMD
229
220
208
129
39
94
106
101
3.3
3.1
2.9
2.8
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.2
Total 1126
B-6
-------
4. Individuals Differ Greatly in Workgroup Participation. The attached bar graph
shows the distribution of memberships in workgroups among OPPT workers. It gives
independent confirmation of the importance of teams in OPPT, since more than 80
percent of all personnel are involved with at least one workgroup. The median is 2
workgroups per person (excluding participation in PMN workgroups).
CONCLUSIONS
The database of workgroups in OPPT described in this report provides ample
evidence of the central role of teams in the organization of work in OPPT. While this was
previously known only "intuitively", we can now quantify the involvement, and note the
differences across divisions. Those divisions that are less heavily involved in cross-divisional
teams should nonetheless realize that such teams are very important to OPPT as a whole, and
should be fully supportive of team principles.
Another "intuitive" observation is the differences in "lead role" among the divisions.
Even though OPPT management has attempted to distribute the lead more evenly among
divisions than had been done in the past, there still exist marked differences in this respect
The data compiled here suggest these differences between division lead may be greater than
is generally assumed. While it is possible that some of the problems OPPT is experiencing
in implementing teamwork stem from this imbalance in lead role among divisions, there is
insufficient information from this study to confirm that conclusion.
Although incomplete, the workgroup database has many potential uses for OPPT
1. Workgroup Chartering Tool
o Workgroups entered into database as part of chartering system
0 "Sunset" dates entered at time of chartering (for withdrawing charter at some
specified time, e.g., by deleting it from system unless it is renewed)
2. Resource-management Tool
0 Eliminate duplication of work group effort
0 Evaluate workload in making new assignments
0 Evaluate training needs
0 Budget planning aid (determine FTE committed to specific projects in each
program area)
3. Project/priority management Tool
0 Establish base-line for scope of work in OPPT
0 Use as aid in setting and tracking changes in priorities
o Use as aid in measuring progress and accomplishment against stated purposes
B - 7
-------
4. Higher-Management Tool
Characterize how OPPT functions as a matrix
Continually monitor and balance the divisional lead across the matrix
5. Communications Tool
Available on LAN, all OPPT staff could use as source of information on
purpose, accomplishments, and makeup of workgroups
Periodic summary reports could be generated and distributed to highlight
changes in direction and priorities
In the course of gathering information for the workgroup database, many potential
users of the database were identified. Following TQM principles, the next logical steps in
further developing this database would be to 1) identify all potential customers; 2) learn the
true needs of these customers, and 3) design-the database so that it meets customer needs.
B 8
-------
Table 1
List of OPPT Workgroups
(as of November 19, 1992)
cgroup
Type
1,2-Dichloroethane (RM2)
112 List of Source Categories
2-Nitropropane Work Group (RM2)
313 Listing of 16 CAA HAPS Work Group (Title III)
5(h)(4) Exemptions Work Group
8 (e) FYI Database Work Group
Acetone 313 Delisting Work Group (Title III)
Acrylamide Work Group (RM2)
Acrylates Limited Dermal Bioassay Protocol
Acrylic/Modacrylic Fibers Production (MACT Standards)
Acrylomtnle Work Group (RM2)
Aerosol Paints (RM1)
Agency Contracts Work Group
AHERA Interpretive Guidance Work Group
AHERA Rule Amendment Work Group
Air Quality Modeling Guid
Air Toxics Work Group
Alkali Metal Nitrates SNUR Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
pnium Sulfate Petition (SARA 313)
)g Profiles (PMN)
Analysis of Metals Work Group
Aqueous Solvents (CFC subs) Tech Integr
Architectural & Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
Aromatic Amine Work Group
Aryl Phosphates Work Group
Asbestos Ban & Phaseout Remand Work Group
Asbestos Design & Development Initiatives Work Group
Asbestos in Buildings Work Group
Asbestos NESHAPS
Asbestos Research
Asbestos Worker Protection Rule Work Group
ASH A A Loan & Grant Work Group
Atlas of Dermal Lesions
B Policy Work Group
Barium Sulfate 313 Delisting Work Group (Title III)
Batch SNURS Work Group
Benzidine Dyes (RM2) Work Group
Bioremediation Action Com
Bioremediation Work Group
B;oiech HA/Construct Analysis/Field Tests
ch Information Systems
RM2
Intra-agency
RM2
Title III
Title III
Post RM2
Intra-agency
RM2
RM1
Interoffice/Reg
Interoffice WG-
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Existing Chemic
Title III
Intra-agency
Program Develop
Regulatory
Regulation Deve
Interoffice
Intra-agency
Interagency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Existing Chemicals
Policy Formulation
Title III
New Chemicals
RM2
Intra-agency
Program Develop
B-9
-------
Workgroup
Type
Biotechnology Monitoring Guidelines Work Group
Biotechnology Risk Assessment
Biotechnology Rule Work Group
Brominated Flame Retardants Work Group
BSAC Support
Budget SubQAT
Budget Work Group A
Budget Work Group B
Budget Work Group C
Budget Work Group D
Budget Work Group E
Budget Work Group G
Butyl Benzyl Pthalate 313 Dels. Work Group (Tide HI)
CAA Risk Management Plan Work Group (Title III)
CAAA HF Report to Congress (Title III)
CAIR Support Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
Cancer Risk Assessment Guideline Revision
Carbamates (Pesticide Mfg/Formulating) RCRA Listings
Carcinogen Mixture Databases
Carpet Testing
Centralized Waste Treatment Effluent Guideline Work Group
CERCLA Listing Work Group
CERCLA RQ Work Group
CFC and Substitutes - Coordinate Hazard and Review
CFC Technical Integrator
CFC Terpenes Work Group
CFCs Nonessential Products Work Group
CFCs Phase-Out Work Group
CFCs Refrigerant Recycling Rule
CFCs Safe Alternatives Work Group
Chemical Accidents Prevention Work Group
Chemical Evaluation Committee
Chemical Expansion TRI List Work Group (Title III)
Chemical Selection Work Group
Chemicals-m-Progress Bulletin Work Group
Chloranil Work Group (RM2)
Chlorinated Alphatics (Pesticide Formulating) RCRA Listings
Chlorinated Paraffins Work Group (RM2)
Chloroethane Work Group (RM2)
Class V Well Work Group
Closure/Post-Closure & Financial Assurance Rules
Communciations QAT- Obstacles subgroup
Communications QAT
Communications QAT - Systems Subgroup
Communications QAT- Inform Subgroup
Computer Search Systems for Mixture Databases
Regulatory
Test Rule
subQAT
Budget
Budget
Operating Plan
Budget
Administrative
Title m
Existing Chemicals
Inter-office
Intra-agency
Pollution Prevention
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Tide III
Inter-agency
Single-purpose
Post RM2
Intra-agency
RM2
RM2
Intra-agency
QAT
QAT
B - 10
-------
Workgroup
Type
f »uterized System for Ranking Chemical Mixtures for Cancer
mer Demand Study/OW P2 Work Group
Consumer Products & Toxics Committee
Consumer Sector Information Work Group
Cont Technology for VOC Sources
Contaminated Media Cluster
Contaminated Sediment Strategy Work Group
Correction Action Rule
Criteria for Petitions
Data Sets (Acute Toxicity Matrix)
Data Transfer QAT
Degreasing Operations (MACT Standards) Work Group
Developmental Neurotox Guidelines
Developmental Toxicity/Reproductive Endpoint Rule
DFE Printing Industry Project Task Force
DGBE Work Group (RM1)
Dilorane Work Group (RM1)
Dioxin Test Rule
Dioxin-in-Sludge
Dioxin/Furan Work Group (RM1)
Dioxins Work Group
Disperse Blue 79 (RM1)
" Cleaning NESHAPS
Administrative Issues
Eco Risk Guidelines
Ecological Valuation Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
EED Travel QAT
Effluent Guidelines for Disposal Wells
Effluent Guidelines for Organics, Plastics
Effluent Guidelines for Pharmaceuticals
Endangered Species Work Group - New Chemicals
Endangered Species/ExisCh
Energy Impact Assessment
Environmental Equity Work Group (Title III)
Environmental Hazard Communication Work Group
Environmental Indicators Work Group
Environmental Monitoring Management Council QA Work Group
EPA Coordination with ATSDR (110) (SARA) (CERCLA 104)
EPA Formaldehyde Work Group
EPA Test Guidelines for Oncogenicity (Dermal)
EPA/USGS Coordinating Committee
EPCRA Compliance Audit Program (CAP)
EPCRA Section 313 Form R Corrections Work Group
FPCRA Section 313 Steering Committee
«A Section 313 Trade Secret Claim Review Work Group
. RA Title III Implementation Work Group
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Existing Chemicals
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
In terb ranch
Intra-agency
Test Rule
Project Task Force
RM1
RM1
Beyond RM2
Test Rule
RM1
Intra-agency
QAT
Existing Chemicals
QAT
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Technical
Technical
Intra/Interagency
Intra/Interagency
Mandated by law
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Inter-office
Policy Development
B - 11
-------
Workgroup
Type
Evaluation Feasibility of Less Than 2 Species/2 Sexes in
Existing Chemicals Workload Assignments
Expert System for Predicting Carcinogenic Activity of Chemic
Feasibility of National Laboratory Accreditation Ad Hoc Pan.
Federal Asbestos Task Force
Fifra Biotechnology
Fish Consumption Rates Work Group
Formaldehyde Work Group
FOSTA Work Group
Fuels/Fuel Additives Registration Work Group
GENETOX
Genetox Dominant Lethal Work Group
Genetox L5178y Work Group
Genetox Salmonella Work Group
Genetox SCE Work Group
Geographic Specific Use of TSCA
GLP Revision Work Group
Glycol Ether 313 List Mod. Work Group (Title III)
Great Lakes Initiative
Green Lights Program
Hazardous Organic NESHAPS
HDI Final Rule
HF Study Work Group
Human Resources Panel
Human Resources Panel - Grapevine/Communication Subcommittee
Human Resources Panel - Professional Development Subcommmitt
Human Resources Panel - Work Environment Subcommittee
Hydrazme Work Group (RM2)
Hydrochloric Acid 313 List Mod. Work Group (Title III)
IMD Cross-Divisional Communcation
IMD QAT for Information Management
Import/Export-Basel Conve
Incinerators/Boilers/Industrial Furnances
Indian Coordinators Work Group
Indoor Air Cluster Work Group
Indoor Air Quality Committee
Indoor Air Source Characterization Project
Indoor Air Use Cluster Development Work Group (Existing Ch.)
Information Disclosure Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
Information Management QAT
Information Management QAT - Data Base Inventory Subgroup
Information Management QAT - Information Access Subgroup
Information Management QAT - Records Management Subgroup
Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing (MACT Standards)
Integrated National Report (Title III)
Interagency Fire Combustion Toxicity Work Group
Existing Chemic
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Technical
Inter-office
Title III
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
OPPT
OPPT
OPPT
OPPT
RM2
Title III
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Existing Chemicals
Existing Chemicals
QAT
QAT Subgroup
QAT Subgroup
QAT Subgroup
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
B - 12
-------
Workgroup
Type
Igency Pharmacokinetics Work Group
tor Architectural Coating Work Group (Existing Chem.)
International Paper Conference Work Group (Existing Chem.)
Interpretive Guidance
Intra-Agency Lead (Pb) Work Group
IRAG (FDA, CPSC Inter Regulatory Agency Work Group)
IRIS I Work Group
ITC Semi Annual List Review
LAN Work Group (CBI)
Land Disposal Restriction
Lead (Pb) FOSTTA Work Group
Lead (Pb) in Drinking Water Work Group
Lead Battery Recycling Work Group
Lead Cluster Evaluation & Planning Group
Lead Cluster Urban Lead Group
Lead Encapsulants Work Group (RM1)
Lead in Brass Fittings Work Group
Lead in Used Oil Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
Lead Paints (Non-Residential) (RM2)
Lead Pigments Work Group
Lead SNUR Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
Lead Solder in Water Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
* Solder Work Group (RM2)
Strategy Coordination Group
Lead-Based Paint Work Group (RM2)
Liners/Leakers Detection
Liquids in Landfills Rule
List of Substances/Petitions Work Group
Listing/Delisting Petitions (SARA)
Locational Accuracy Work Group
Machinery Manufacturing and Rebuilding Effluent Guidelines
Major Sources of Hazardous Pollutants (112 g)
MAP Revision Work Group
MBT/RM1 Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
Mentoring QAT
Mercury Work Group (RM1)
Microcosm Workshop and Report
Monitoring & Quality Assurance Subcommittee of P & TSRC
Municipal Sludge Disposal
Mutagenicity Risk Assessment Guidelines
NESHAP for Manufacture of Elastomers and Other Polyumers
Neurotox Guidelines Revisions
New Chemicals Exposure Limits (NCELS) Work Group
M-IW Chemicals Focus Team
Chemicals Initiatives Work Group
L^W Chemicals Pollution Prevention Work Group
Inter-agency
Existing Chemicals
Pollution Prevention
Program Development
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Test Rule
Intra-agency
Information Exchange
Existing Chemicals
Inter-agency
Program Development
RM1
Existing Chemicals
Existing Chemicals
RM2
RM2
Existing Chemicals
RM2
Program Development
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Interoffice
Existing Chemicals
QAT
RM1
Intra-agency
Intraoffice-OPP
New Chemicals
Intra-office
B- 13
-------
Workgroup
Type
New Regional Lead (Pb) Training Centers Work Group
Nitrosamines in Rubber (RM1)
NMP in Paintstripping (RM2)
NMP Work Group
NOX/VOC Study
OECD SIDS
ONE Committee (OSHA, NIOSH & EPA)
OPP Mutagenicity Guidelines Revision
OPP Peer Review Work Group
OPPT Biotechnology Work Group
OPPT Formaldehyde Work Group
OPPT Industrial Toxics Report Work Group
OPPT Locational Access Work Group
OPPT Pilot Career Development Workshop
OPPT Sediments Work Group
OPPT Structure Activity Team (SAT)
OPPT Transition Work Group
OPPT University of Michigan Pollution Prevention Center
OPPTS Congressional - "Hill Activities Group"
OPTS Biotechnology Policy Issues: Coordinate Responses
OPTS Research Com/Eco Fate/Biotech
OSW Pigment Hazardous Waste and Listing Work Group
OSWER Section 302 Technical Support: Explosives, Flammables,
Paint Stripper Users (MACT Standards) Work Group
Paint Wastes RCRA Listings Work Group
Paints, Coatings & Adhesives (MATC Standards)
Paper and Other Webs (Coating) (MACT Standards)
Pan 158 Exposure Guidelines
Pb-Call
PCB Disposal Amendments (aka Mega PCB Amendments and include
PCB Disposal Rule Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
PCB Exemptions
PCB Permits Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
PCB Program State Enhancement
PERC Drycleaning Work Group
Persistent Bioaccumulators Rule Work Group
Pesticide Formulating Effluent Guidelines Work Group
Pesticide Manufacturing Effluent Guidelines Work Group
Pesticides & Toxic Substances Research Committee
Pesticides Inert Work Group
Petroleum Refinery Cluster Work Group
Pharmaceuticals Production (MACT Standards) Work Group
Pharmaceuticals Production Effluent Guidelines Work Group
Pharmacokinetics Work Group
Phase II Drinking Water Regs Work Group
Phosphates Category 313 List Work Group (Title III)
RM2
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Inter-office
Regulatory Development
Work Group
Advisory Committee
Inter-office
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Interagency
Existing Chemicals
Existing Chemicals
Existing Chemicals
Test Rule
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Inter-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Title III
B - 14
-------
Workgroup
Type
hogypsum Work Group (RM2)
^horic Acid Production Waste (RM2)
Planning/Budgeting Process & Information Requirements QAT
Plywood/Particleboard Manufacturing (MACT Standards)
PMN LOREX Rule Work Group
PMN Polymer Exemption
PMN Risk Assessment
PMN Rule Amendments Work Group
PMN Technical Guidance Manual Work Group (New Chemicals)
Pollution Prevention Act - EPCRA Form R Amendments
Pollution Prevention Sector Strategies - Consumer
Pollution Prevention Sector Strategies - Energy/Transportati
Pollution Prevention Work Group
Polyacrylamide (RM1)
Polystrene Production (MACT Standards) Work Group
Printing and Publishing (coating)(MACT Standards) Work Group
Printing Industry Pilot
Printing Industry Use Cluster Work Group (Existing Chem.)
Prioritization of TRI Chemicals/Ranking Aka TRI Chemical
Proposal of National Hazardous Air Pollutant Emission
Proposed Agency Policy on Efficient Water Use
Pub & Paper Mill Sludge Proposed Rule Work Group
ind Paper Production (MACT Standards) Work Group
and Paper Products Effluent Guidelines Work Group
QAAPS Air Modeling Guidelines Work Group
QAT Chairs
Reauthorization Work Group
Rectification of PCB Transformers & PCB Contaminated
Red Border Review: Exemption of Perchloroethylene (PERC)
Refractory Ceramic Fibers (RM2)
Regional Lead (Pb) Work Group
Register of Lists Work Group (RoL)
Reinforced Plastic Composite Production (MACT Standards)
Reinforced Plastic Composite Products Work Group
Reinstate Mixture/Derived Rule
Relatively New Employees Work Group
Reproductive Tox Risk Assessment Guidelines
Resolution of High Priority Guideline Differences
Revision of Biennial Reporting
Revisions Policy Work Group
Rewards and Recognition QAT
Risk Assessment Forum
Risk Assessment QAT
n -k Assessments Methods Work Group
Communication
KFSK Reference Dose Work Group
RM2
Post RM2
QAT
Intra-agency
Regulatory Development
New Chemicals
RM1
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Existing Chemicals
Regulation Development
Rulemaking
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Information sharing
Intra-agency
RM2
Inter-agency
Intra-agency
Intra/Inter-agency
Subgroup of QAT
Planning
QAT
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
B - 15
-------
Workgroup
Type
RM1 Contracting Support
RM2 Checklist Work Group
Rubber Chemicals Production (MACT Standards) Work Group
SAR - Hazardous Waste Manifest NPRM
SAR - List of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP)
SAR - Pentachlorophenol Toxicity Designation
SAR - Procurement Guideline for Fiberboard Containing
SAR - Section 404 (b) (1) Guidelines - Clean Water Act
SAR for Non-Cancer Endpoints
SARA 313 Petitions Review Work Group
Science Advisory Committee
Screening Work Group (Existing Chemicals)
Secretarial Advisory Committee - Federal
Section 313 Listing/Delisting Criteria (SARA)
Section 4 Integration of Reviews
Section 4 Policy & Procedures QAT
Section II Performance Reviews
SemiCarbazides/RMl Work Group
SNAP Rule Work Group
Sodium Cyanide Work Group (RM2)
Solvents II RCRA Listings
Solvents III Work Group (RCRA Listings)
Staff Training & Dev. QAT - Career/Professional Development
Staff Training & Dev. QAT - Support Staff Skill Enhancement
Staff Training and Development QAT
Standards for Lead Paint Encapsulants
Storel/ODES/BIOS Modernization Project
Styrene Butadiene Rubber & Latex Production (MACT Standards)
Substantiation Subgroup
Sulfuric Acid 313 List Mod. Work Group (Title III)
Survival & Competition of rDNA Bacteria in Soil & Water
TC Rule
Teamwork QAT
Teamwork QAT - Matrix Management Subgroup
Teamwork QAT - Team Skills Subgroup
Teamwork QAT - Triangle Subgroup
Technical Committee Reviewing All Cancer Risk Assessment
Technology Transfer
Terpenes (CFC subs) Tech Integrator
Terpenes/RMl Work Group
Test Guideline Harmonization Work Group
Test Rules Engineering Support
Test Standards QAT
Title III Implementation Work Group
Title III Pollution Prevention Rule & Guidance Work Group
Title III Steering Committee (SARA)
Short-term
Intra-agency
Regulation Development
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
QAT
Existing Chemicals
Intra-agency
Post RM2
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
QAT Subgroup
QAT Subgroup
QAT
Intra/Interagency
Intra-agency
Intra-agency
Subgroup
Title III
Intra-agency
QAT
QAT Subgroup
QAT Subgroup
QAT Subgroup
RM1
Rule Development
B- 16
-------
Workgroup Type
Pollutants Lesser Quantities (112 a) Intra-agency
Release Indicators Work Group
loxics and Consumer Products Committee (TAG) Interagency
TRI Chemical Expansion Work Group
TRI Chemicals Work Group Test Rule
TRI Data Use Conference Work Group
TRI Facility Expansion Work Group Priority Rule
TRI Petitions Work Group
Triagency/Superfund Applied Research Committee Inter-agency
TSCA CBI Access QAT
US-Mexico Work Group
Use Cluster Work Group Policy/Technical
Used Oil Work Group Intra-agency
Washington State Indoor Air Study Intra-agency
Wet Weight/Dry Weight
Wood Furniture Manufacturing (MACT Standards) Intra-agency
Wood Furniture Manufacturing (NESHAPS) Intra-agency
B- 17
-------
85
80 -
70 -
60 -
50 -
40 -
30 -
20 -
10 -
0 -
82
69
42
41
29
19
18
16
44
iiiiiiiiiiiIiiIr r i' Tiii T i rii i
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Figure 1: Number of OPPT staff (vertical axis) who are on a given number of teams (horizontal
axis).
B - 18
-------
APPENDIX C
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chance, Paul, "Great Experiments in Team Chemistry," Across the Board: The
Conference Board Magazine, May 1989, pp. 18-25.
Cleaning Up the Act Through Employee Involvement: Arlington County Water Pollution
Control Plant. Presented by Susan W. Barrett, Alan F. Cassel, William M. Kohn, and Charles
R. Willis at the 1990 Ecology of Work Conference, Louisville, KY, June 28, 1990.
Dumaine, Brian, "Who Needs a Boss?," Fortune, May 7, 1990, pp. 52-60.
Hirschhorn, Larry and Thomas Gilmore, "The New Boundaries of the 'Boundaryless'
Company," Harvard Business Review, pp. 104-115.
Hoerr, John, "The Payoff from Teamwork," Business Week, July 10, 1989, pp. 56-62.
Klein, Janice A., "The Human Costs of Manufacturing Reform," Harvard Business
Review, March-April 1989, pp. 60-66.
Lee, Chris, "Beyond Teamwork," Training, June 1990, pp. 25-32.
Ost, Edward J., "Team-Based Pay: New Wave Strategic Incentives," Sloan Management
Review, Spring 1990, pp. 19-27.
Pasmore, William A., Ph.D., "Overcoming the Roadblocks in Work-Restructuring
Efforts," Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1982, pp. 54-67.
Schein, Edgar H., "Corporate Teams and Totems," Across the Board: The Conference
Board Magazine, May 1989, pp. 12-17.
Sherwood, John J., "Creating Work Cultures with Competitive Advantage."
Organizational Dynamics, (need pub. date) pp. 5-26.
Stayer, Ralph, "How I Learned to Let My Workers Lead," Harvard Business Review.
November-December 1990, pp. 66-83.
Stonnell Associates. Functional Study of the Office of Toxic Substances. November
1991.
Stonnell Associates and Eastern Research Group. OPPT/OCM Course in Effective Work
Group Management. 1992.
Stonnell Associates and Eastern Research Group. OPPT/OCM Work Group Procedure >
Guide. 1992.
C - 2
-------
TEAMWORK QAT MEMBERS
Rose Allison
John Bowser
Ethel Brandt
Frank Caesar
Randy Cramer
Mary Fox
Gail Froiman
Ted Jones
Bob Jordan
Rick Keigwin
Bob McNally, Chair
Edna Pleasants
Brad Schultz
Hank Topper
Contract Support Provided by:
Ruth Carstens
Suzi Power
Ron Brand
Chemical Control Division
Chemical Control Division
Chemical Screening and Risk Assessment Division
Information Management Division
Chemical Management Division
Chemical Control Division
Economics, Exposure and Technology Division
Chemical Screening and Risk Assessment Division
Chemical Management Division
Chemical Control Division
Chemical Control Division
Information Management Division
Chemical Management Division
Environmental Assistance Division
Stonnell Associates
Stonnell Associates
Science Applications International Corporation
C - 3
-------
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Estimated Resource Implications
At the request of the Division Directors, the Teamwork QAT has attempted to estimate
the FTE and extramural resources needed to implement the various recommendations proposed
by the QAT. The estimates provided can best be described as "bounding estimates" and may
actually overstate the resource commitments needed to implement the recommendations.
I. Office Priorities
In addition to setting Office priorities on an annual basis, the Office Director and Division
Directors should meet quarterly to review priorities and to make adjustments as needed.
The QAT estimates that this activity could take approximately 100 hours per year.
This calculation is based on the following considerations: OD, DOD, Director of
OPME, and DD's (11 people) meet for at least 2 hours for 4 times per year to
discuss priorities.
Create a mechanism for communicating office-wide priorities and for informing staff of changes
in priorities as needed.
The QAT estimates that this activity could take approximately 100 hours to
develop. Following its development, the cost should be less than 20 hours per
year which would include writing a quarterly message to managers and staff.
Develop a strategy for handling "firedrills" within OPPT and within organizational units.
Difficult to estimate without getting a good handle on how many firedrills occur.
II. Team Coordination and Control
Establish a Steering Committee for each program area to coordinate and oversee implementation
of the annual operating plan.
The QAT estimates that this activity would take approximately 9000 hours per
year. This assumes that 6 steering committees are created consisting of 9
members each and that members work at least 3 hours per week on program
management activities for the steering committee.
Create a standard process that is followed in chartering OPPT teams.
Before estimating that FTE resources this activity would entail, the Office needs
to determine how many teams are formed each fiscal year. The QAT assumes
that the chartering process would add little time to that already spent on project
management.
-------
Reduce the number of work teams that currently exist in OPPT.
This activity would be done by the program steering committees described above.
Costs associated with this activity are included with those for the program
steering committees.
Maintain the data base of OPPT work teams that was created by the Teamwork QAT and make
the information available to OPPT staff and management.
Actual day-to-day maintenance of the system should be minimal. However, the
database will need to be updated to more accurately reflect today's picture of the
number of workgroups within the office as well as completing the various data
fields in the database. Stonnell Associates used approximately 150 hours to
develop the original version of the database. Approximate FTE resources could
be as high as 200 hours to complete these tasks. Maintenance costs in future
years should be minimal. Extramural resources may be necessary if maintenance
cannot be handled in-house.
Establish a pilot standing team in one or more programs areas.
Assuming that 1 team was formed composed of 6 members and that each member
spent at least half of their time on projects assigned to the standing team, this
activity could consume 6000 hours per year.
III. Customer Service
Each organizational unit (branch or section) should establish a customer service program.
Assumption: Only branches established these customer service units. There are
24 branches. If each unit consisted of 4 members which met 15 times per year
(more in the beginning as the program was being developed), the total cost could
be about 4500 hours per year. This assumes the members spent 3 hours
preparing for and attending meetings associated with this activity.
Institute a Customer Product Feedback Survey to be used for products submitted to teams. It
would be an instrumental part of the quality assurance program in the branches.
The survey has already been developed. The amount of time estimated to
complete the survey should be less than 2 hours which includes dissemination to
the team and compilation of responses. Assuming there are 5 major projects
submitted to each team and 350 workgroups in the Office, this activity could
consume 3500 hours per year.
-------
IV. Performance-Based Systems
Create and distribute a list of Teamwork Guidelines which outline the role of team members,
team leaders, line managers, and upper management in support cross-divisional teamwork.
These guidelines have already been developed and need only to be distributed to
staff. FTE costs would be minimal. Most costs would be for photoduplication.
Include teamwork responsibilities in performance standards for all OPPT staff.
Sample standards have already been developed. Assuming 1 hour to incorporate
the standard times approximately 500 people in the Office, this activity would
account for a one-time cost of about 500 hours.
Create a Teamwork Excellence Award for team members, team leaders, and line managers to
individuals who have demonstrated outstanding support of teams.
A version of this award has already been created in cooperation with the Rewards
and Recognition QAT. The FTE costs associated with this activity lie mainly in
reviewing nominations.
Enhance OPPT staff and management training to accentuate teamwork.
The QAT has recommended a number of training programs for staff that should
be developed over time. Some of these programs are already in place, such as
the the workgroup leader training program, while resources will need to be
dedicated to developing new programs. This recommendation is the most
intensive in terms of extramural dollars. Funding decisions should be made only
after comparing and prioritizing the training needs identified by the other QATs.
------- |