Seeking Feedback on TeamDynamic - A SaaS to Help Companies Build Stronger Teams

Please consider adding your product to IH. Much easier for us to see your timeline, growth path.. how you tracking. Good, bad and ugly. it is what we are here for -- to help.

Here is the ugly

• strike 1 - I have coached teams for a long time in a business context. I would not encourage my clients to use a tool like this as the methodology adopted is way-off what really works. This is based on my real-life experience > 10 years.
• strike 2 - Given it would be wrong to assume the methodology I have used is the only methodology I went to find evidence your methodology embedded in tool works. Non provided
• strike 3 - What is your desired focus? Teams are a structure. Different types of teams exist. JIT, operational, cross functional, core + specialists sub etc.. Tool seems to assume all times are same, and their needs are the same.

In my world, strike 3 and your out - I look no further. But as your IH, and its a roast invite:

• strike 4 - copy is very stock and with many over-promises . Rather tell me of 3 scenarios that gave rise to significant benefit of a team. The claims need to demonstrated you know what your talking about in strengthening teams, and deliverying on results (smart goals) versus some over-promise marketing waffle.
• strike 5 - When I see the product got PH no 2 weekly -- my eyes roll. oh dear .. not another fake app (but always hoping I am just plain wrong). I already know PH is an easily gamified platform (so low trust), so if it got no 2, I have greater concerns. Means the creator willingly, heavily gamed to get no 2 (buys traffic to give impression of looking good) or not much business sense (sales required not traffic) . Basically time has been placed in a marketing gimmick rather than providing a trusted and solid solution. = low cred.

Here is the good:

• Focus on interaction is superb. Doing is king with teams. Too much talk with no action breeds frustration.
• The framework of the tool has the potential to be great. UX is intuitive. Could be more distraction free (less noisy )but that is low priority at mo, giving gap in content.

If the adopted team methodology embedded actually works (you would need to show evidence methodology used has worked). Whatever team methodology embedded must be transparent (PDF if need be, or wiki). There has been many books written about teams and many are a waste of space. You need to be super clear to your users what is your stance and why.

Alternate Team Methodology:
From. my experience, the most effective interaction to jump start a team along the high performance team curve, is to give them a challenge. Make sure the challenge is in their context e.g. solve x. Better challenges are something the team needs to solve anyways, rather than giving them more work.

From my experience, Team Methodology changes depending on the type of team. Broadly 2 types of teams exist and both can be remote, hybrid or site-bound.

• if team is an operational team (always exists, and has multiple projects at any one time), or
• a just-in-time team (team created for a specific project and will disband at end of project).

The most common issues are different for each type. For example for JIT team, the most common is either lack of alignment on the "real issue at hand", or feedback is not sufficiently participatory or transparent.

• To solve the lack of alignment, a tough conversation is facilitated and thru that facilitation team members learn how to spot lack of alignment and not make it a bad thing, but rather a good thing and tease each members different perspective and different assumptions.
• To solve feedback loop pains, we deploy Loomio https://www.loomio.com. Loomio is a superb simple participatory decision making app, that teach members to frame their "request" of team well versus clickbait/sloppy communication, and define action required for their request.

Hope this helps.