HKSM

A team performance assessment is a structured review of how effectively the team collaborates and delivers outcomes, using both quantitative metrics and qualitative feedback. It identifies strengths, bottlenecks, and targeted improvement actions to enhance delivery and team health.

Key Points

• A technique to analyze how well the team is working and delivering results.
• Uses both data (e.g., throughput, quality) and feedback (e.g., surveys, retrospectives).
• Conducted on a regular cadence to support continuous improvement.
• Focuses on systems and processes, not blaming individuals.
• Outputs are concrete improvement actions, coaching needs, and updates to team agreements.
• Trends over time matter more than single-point measurements.

Purpose of Analysis

To understand current team capability and health, uncover root causes behind performance patterns, and guide decisions on process changes, resourcing, and coaching. The goal is to improve predictability, quality, and collaboration while maintaining a safe environment for honest feedback.

Method Steps

• Define assessment criteria and metrics aligned with objectives (e.g., flow, quality, stakeholder satisfaction).
• Collect data from tools and events (dashboards, retrospectives, surveys, observations, reviews).
• Analyze patterns and trends; compare to baselines, goals, or prior iterations.
• Identify likely causes using techniques such as the 5 Whys, fishbone, or workflow mapping.
• Co-create a short list of measurable improvement actions with owners and due dates.
• Share findings transparently with the team and key stakeholders.
• Follow up at the next cadence to review outcomes and adjust actions.

Inputs Needed

• Team charter and working agreements.
• Roles and responsibilities, resource availability, and skills inventory.
• Flow metrics: cycle time, throughput, WIP, lead time.
• Quality metrics: defects, rework, escaped defects, review findings.
• Predictability metrics: commitment vs. completion, variance, missed deadlines.
• Stakeholder and customer feedback (e.g., NPS, satisfaction surveys).
• Risk and issue logs, impediment tracker, and lessons learned.
• Team health data: engagement survey results, attendance, turnover.

Outputs Produced

• Findings summary and performance dashboard or scorecard.
• Prioritized improvement backlog with SMART actions and owners.
• Updates to team charter, working agreements, and processes.
• Coaching, training, or mentoring plan as needed.
• Updates to risk register, issue log, and lessons learned repository.
• Recognition items and communication to stakeholders.

Interpretation Tips

• Use multiple indicators to avoid conclusions based on a single metric.
• Look for trends and variability; consider context such as scope changes or staffing shifts.
• Balance lagging indicators (e.g., defects) with leading indicators (e.g., WIP, workflow age).
• Differentiate systemic constraints from individual performance issues.
• Guard against metric gaming; emphasize learning and improvement over targets.
• Discuss results with the team to validate findings and co-create actions.

Example

A team shows rising cycle time and more escaped defects over three iterations. The project manager reviews the workflow and discovers frequent handoffs and unplanned work interrupting priorities. In a facilitated session, the team agrees to limit WIP, add a daily quality check, and reserve capacity for urgent items. Over the next two iterations, cycle time drops and defects stabilize.

Pitfalls

• Focusing on velocity or one metric alone and missing the bigger picture.
• Using the assessment to blame individuals instead of improving the system.
• Collecting data without turning it into specific actions and follow-up.
• Infrequent assessments that fail to catch trends early.
• Ignoring external constraints such as tooling limits or policy bottlenecks.
• Overly complex scorecards that create confusion or invite gaming.

PMP Example Question

During a mid-project review, throughput has flattened while escaped defects have increased. To perform a team performance assessment, what should the project manager do next?

1. Replace underperforming team members to quickly restore productivity.
2. Facilitate a data-driven retrospective with the team to find root causes and agree on measurable improvement actions.
3. Ask the sponsor to increase scope to motivate the team to work harder.
4. Update the risk register and wait for the next phase gate to decide on actions.

Correct Answer: B — Facilitate a data-driven retrospective with the team to find root causes and agree on measurable improvement actions.

Explanation: A team performance assessment should use data and team input to identify causes and define concrete improvements. Options A, C, and D either blame individuals or defer action without analysis.