People Representative Groups – A Best Practice for Large Teams

I once spearheaded a dynamic and diverse team spread across multiple locations, harboring a strong desire to forge genuine connections with my employees. However, this aspiration was consistently confined to aligning with my periodic visits to these various locations. This limitation induced anxiety, as the absence of firsthand insights threatened effective communication and decision-making. Relying on second-hand information left me susceptible to biases and exaggerations. In the midst of a crucial and time-bound transformation agenda, it became imperative to engage with the teams on the ground, garner their support, and involve them in the process of shaping our organization into a world-class, future-centric business.

This imperative catalyzed the inception of People Groups (PRGs). The creation of PRGs involved a democratic selection process, empowering teams to elect their head representative. These elected heads underwent comprehensive coaching and training, enabling them to effectively communicate crucial information related to projects, company financials, special initiatives, challenges, and other pivotal aspects. Initially, I convened with PRG members weekly, providing a platform for them to bring forth problems, concerns, or clarifications. These matters were openly discussed, fostering collective problem-solving initiatives. Often, PRG members took ownership of resolutions, enhancing their problem-solving skills. The prestige associated with PRG membership grew, and due to an annual election process, those proving effective were consistently chosen by their teams. Several factors contributed to the effectiveness of this approach:

• Right-sizing Scope: Ensuring the PRG member scope aligned with the team’s size; for instance, a development team with 50 members in Hyderabad would have 2 representative positions, whereas a similar team in Pune with 25 members would have a proportionate representation.
• Democratic Elections: Conducting democratic and anonymous elections, necessitating canvassing and marketing efforts within the respective teams.
• Purposeful Briefing: PRG members were briefed in advance that their role extended beyond merely listening to employee concerns; they were expected to pose pertinent questions related to the gravity of the topic. Day-to-day workflow issues were to be handled through regular channels, with the PRG focusing on critical, high-impact matters.
• Emphasis on Honesty: PRG members were required to be transparent, presenting only factual information during meetings. While this required some calibration, they grasped the importance of avoiding false or inflated information over time.
• Empowerment over Resolution: Acknowledging that it wasn’t solely my responsibility to resolve all issues, council members were guided to connect with relevant individuals within the business and collaboratively address concerns. They had direct access to key stakeholders, including the CHRO and IT Director.
• Leadership Development: This approach not only facilitated issue resolution but also served as a breeding ground for future leaders. Certain members, consistently re-elected by their teams, demonstrated exceptional communication skills, unwavering support, and persistent dedication.

Implementing such a model proves particularly beneficial in large organizations spanning multiple locations and centers. I encourage you to give it a try and share your experiences.