Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 5691984caab8c96f2598348d10a89a77c67bc9b1ca5549e11908ed70a3083da2

# Hackman Five-Factor Team Diagnostic Workshop

Participants rate their team across Richard Hackman's five conditions for team effectiveness, analyze low-scoring priority areas in small groups, and agree on concrete short- and medium-term action plans.

**Time:** 185 minutes. Source specifies a 3.5 hour (210 minute) workshop. This plan sets 185 minutes of active facilitation time, leaving 25 minutes for mid-session breaks.
**People:** 4 to 20. Whole-group plenary, shoulder pairs, individual assessment, and breakout groups of 3 to 5 people.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Evaluate team functioning across five structural conditions and agree on operational improvements.
**Use it when:** Use during a team retreat, quarterly planning session, or operational review when an intact team needs to diagnose and improve its structure, direction, and support.
**Skip it when:** Skip for newly formed groups without shared working history or when acute interpersonal conflict requires mediation before diagnosing structures.

## Materials and tools

- One printed Hackman Five-Factor Diagnostic Worksheet per participant
- One commitment card or 4x6 index card per participant
- One pen per participant
- Pad of 3x3 sticky notes for each participant
- One flip chart easel pad or dedicated whiteboard for each breakout group
- 4 markers per breakout group
- Central whiteboard or large wall chart for tallying scores
- Central tracking poster for logging final agreed team actions
- Slide deck or printed summary sheets presenting the five factors
- Countdown timer visible to all participants
- Digital whiteboard and videoconferencing platform for remote or hybrid delivery

## Before participants arrive

1. Arrange physical room seating in table clusters of 3 to 5 chairs, creating up to 5 breakout stations.
2. Place one diagnostic worksheet, one pen, and one pad of sticky notes at each physical seat.
3. Draw a five-column tally grid on the central whiteboard labeled: Real Team, Compelling Direction, Enabling Structure, Supportive Context, Expert Coaching.
4. Place a flip chart easel, pad, and 4 markers at each physical breakout station.
5. Post the blank central action tracking poster near the main display area.
6. For remote or hybrid delivery, pre-build digital whiteboard frames: a five-column score-entry grid, factor summary cards, dedicated group breakout workspaces, and a central tracking sheet.

## Say this to open

Welcome. Today we examine how our team works through the lens of Richard Hackman's Five-Factor Model. Rather than focusing on individual personalities, this model looks at five operational conditions: a real team, compelling direction, enabling structure, supportive context, and expert coaching. We will complete individual ratings, identify priority gaps in small groups, and leave with concrete action commitments.

## How to run it

### 1. Welcome and pride check-in (15 minutes)

Deliver the opening script and outline the agenda. Invite each participant to answer: 'What is one thing that makes you proud of being part of this team?' Give each person up to 45 seconds to respond or pass. Jot common themes on the room board.

### 2. Introduce the Five-Factor Model (20 minutes)

Present the five factors: Real Team, Compelling Direction, Enabling Structure, Supportive Context, and Expert Coaching. Give a concrete workplace example for each factor. For instance, Enabling Structure means clear role boundaries and shared meeting norms rather than undefined assignments. Instruct participants: 'Turn to the person sitting next to you to form a pair. If your table has an odd number, form one group of three.' Give pairs 5 minutes to discuss which factor feels most relevant to their workload right now.

### 3. Solo diagnostic rating (15 minutes)

Direct participants to complete the Hackman Five-Factor Diagnostic Worksheet independently. Each person scores every factor from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) and notes one specific strength and one observed gap. Keep the room quiet during this time so participants record uninfluenced ratings.

### 4. Diagnostic data tally and whole-group review (15 minutes)

Collect scores anonymously. For fully in-person sessions, participants write numerical scores on paper sticky notes and post them under the columns on the central whiteboard. For hybrid sessions, all participants post sticky notes onto the digital tally board. The facilitator sums each column, calculates the average, and writes the average at the top. Rank factors from lowest to highest score to identify priority areas for team improvement.

### 5. Breakout root cause analysis and action design (55 minutes)

Form 3 to 5 breakout groups of 3 to 5 people. The facilitator assigns one of the lowest-ranking factors to each group, ensuring all lowest-ranking factors are covered. In hybrid delivery, remote attendees form dedicated breakout groups and receive assigned factors alongside in-person groups. On flip charts or digital frames, groups record strengths, root causes of lower scores, one immediate operational action for the next 7 days, and one 1 to 3 month goal with a named owner.

### 6. Breakout report-outs and alignment (35 minutes)

Breakout groups present their proposed actions. Limit the room to at most 5 reporting groups. Allocate 4 minutes per group for presentation followed by 2 minutes for clarifying questions and plenary alignment. Use the remaining 5 minutes to confirm alignment across teams. The facilitator records accepted actions and named owners directly onto the central action tracking poster.

### 7. Individual commitments and debrief (30 minutes)

Hand out index cards. Ask each participant to write: 'To support our team agreements, I will personally [action] by [date].' Invite 4 to 6 volunteers to read their commitment aloud. Choose 1 or 2 debrief questions from the list and gather 3 to 5 room responses. Confirm the scheduled follow-up date and close the session.


## Debrief questions

- Which factor showed the widest divergence in our ratings, and what explains that difference?
- How will completing our 7-day immediate actions change our day-to-day work next week?
- What recurring routine will we use to track progress on our 1 to 3 month goals?

**Finished output:** A team diagnostic score across Hackman's five factors, breakout charts detailing 7-day actions and 1-3 month goals, a compiled central tracking sheet with assigned leads, and individual commitment cards.

## Remote

Run via videoconference and a shared digital whiteboard. Pre-build frames for each factor, an anonymous score-entry grid, and breakout workspaces. For step 2, assign 2-person breakout rooms for 5 minutes. For step 4, participants post anonymous digital sticky notes simultaneously onto the shared digital tally grid; the facilitator sums each column and types the averages. Run step 5 in breakout rooms of 3 to 5 people using shared digital template cards. Reconvene in plenary to share screens and record agreed actions on the central digital board.

## Hybrid

Set up a shared digital whiteboard accessible to all participants. To maintain fairness, both in-person and remote participants submit their anonymous factor scores directly into the digital tally board. The facilitator computes and posts averages on the digital board, projected in the physical room. For step 2, pair remote attendees together in video breakout rooms while in-person participants pair at tables. For step 5, remote attendees form dedicated remote breakout groups working in digital frames, while in-person groups use physical flip charts or laptops. Cap total groups at 5 across in-person and remote. All report-outs happen over the central room audio and screen share.

## Access and participation choices

- Worksheets can be filled out on paper or digitally using accessible text formats.
- Speaking during check-in, report-outs, and debrief is voluntary; participants may pass or contribute via chat or shared notes.
- Task ownership during action planning must be accepted voluntarily by the individual.

## If the session gets stuck

**Scores cluster tightly around 4 and 5 because people hesitate to show criticism.**

Remind the room that the assessment diagnoses organizational conditions rather than personal competence. Ask: 'Even in our strongest factor, where is there friction that slows work down?'

**Breakout action proposals are too broad, such as 'improve communication.'**

Prompt the group to specify the tool, schedule, and person responsible: 'What document or meeting changes, on what day of the week, and who sends the update?'


## Terms used here

- Enabling Structure: Team design covering task structure, member skill balance, and group norms that support productive collaboration.
- Supportive Context: Organizational backing including access to tools, clear data, adequate resources, and recognition.

## Participant material: Hackman Five-Factor Diagnostic Worksheet

Hackman Five-Factor Diagnostic Worksheet

Rate each factor from 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent) based on our team's current day-to-day operations.

1. Real Team (Clear boundaries, stable membership, shared identity)
Rating [1 - 5]: ____
Observed Strength:
Observed Gap:

2. Compelling Direction (Clear, challenging, and consequential goals)
Rating [1 - 5]: ____
Observed Strength:
Observed Gap:

3. Enabling Structure (Clear roles, balanced skills, clear ground rules and norms)
Rating [1 - 5]: ____
Observed Strength:
Observed Gap:

4. Supportive Context (Access to necessary tools, information, resources, rewards)
Rating [1 - 5]: ____
Observed Strength:
Observed Gap:

5. Expert Coaching (Constructive feedback, mentorship, reflection on process)
Rating [1 - 5]: ____
Observed Strength:
Observed Gap:

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in WorkshopBank, referencing J. Richard Hackman's Five-Factor Model of team effectiveness developed at Harvard University.

Retained the 5-factor model, 1-5 rating scale, small-group action design (7-day action plus 1-3 month goal), and personal commitment cards from WorkshopBank. UWT structured the facilitation flow into 185 active minutes, aligned the scoring method across in-person, remote, and hybrid modes, clarified factor assignment rules for breakouts, and specified digital preparation steps in setup.

[WorkshopBank](https://workshopbank.com/tools/hackmans-five-factor-model-workshop)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/hackman-s-five-factor-model-workshop-workshopbank/