This is a guest post by my friend Aaron Hunnel. Aaron is a public speaker that will help your organization and team members live with positivity, passion and purpose. Learn more about Aaron or how to hire him to speak at your organization at http://aaronhunnel.com/
People are one of the greatest resources we have at our fingertips to help us succeed in life. From the moment we are born into this world until the moment we pass away, we are influenced, affected and changed by people. Understanding this relationship is extremely important. We all have different strengths, talents and treasures. We all have different experiences, perspectives and definitions of success. What sets the human race apart from other species is our ability to look beyond our differences, find our similarities, and come together to support one another. This heuristic approach to life is one of the most sustainable and productive forms of building a community, or more particularly, a team.
Teams are quite commonplace in all levels of society. A band,
comprised of a guitar, drummer and singer is essentially a team. An
organization, made up of different levels of management, departments, and
leaders, again is essentially a team. Take a gander at what a quarterback, wide
receiver, offensive line, defense, and coaching staff all have in common – you
guessed it, they are all part of a team. See the pattern here? We have teams at
all levels of society. You could even stretch this conceptualization of
teamwork a bit further and argue that communities, territories, states,
nations, continents and even the world is one really BIG team. Some are
flourishing as teams, embodied with the collective values and vision to which
each member is committed. Then there are other teams, who are struggling,
much-in-part because of their inability to find a way to come together.
You’ve probably heard the term before, “A team is only as
strong as its weakest link.” Well, I believe that’s wrong, because all members
of a team play a viable role in each other’s success. If you believe that
someone is your weakest link, you’re likely to treat them as such. This mindset
can create an unhealthy dynamic, and put a lot of pressure on the “weakest” to
the point that it disrupts the team’s ability to focus on their vision, their
values and achieving that which they (the team) want to achieve.
A more appropriate saying would be – A team is only as
strong as its ability TO link. That means, a team’s likelihood of success depends
on how a team can gel, come together, and use the strengths of each other to
create a solid foundation for success. If you focus on someone’s weakness, you
are likely to miss their strengths. Capitalizing on strengths are necessary for
this “linking” to occur. Here are a couple ideas of how and how not to bring a team
together:
- Understand the following model in terms of how they relate to group dynamics.
- Forming – This is the initial stage were people in the team start to learn about others on their team. Some may feel a bit anxious about meeting new people or about what others will think of them. As relationships begin to grow, the team will move into the next stage.
- Storming – During this stage, the team starts to push the boundaries beyond a simple relationship with each other. Authority can be challenged. Conflict is likely to arise. Some may resist the direction of others. Understand that this is all part of the process. One very important piece during this stage however, is that there is some sort of mediation and resolution. Conflict can be healthy, but only if the intent is to resolve said conflict and use it to learn and grow together. Unresolved conflict can lead to various degrees of angst, turmoil and individualism within the team and prolong the ability to cohesively align vision, goals and values. Once a team can effectively surmount conflict, they will gain greater insight and clarity for what they are wanting and move into the next phase.
- Norming – During this stage, teams resolve to respect differences and appreciate strengths. Cohesiveness becomes particularly strong, and the commitment to each other trumps the commitment to self. As this mindset and dynamic increases and improves, teams move into the final phase.
- Performing – During this phase, teams begin to peak towards growth and commitment, and performance perpetually increases. Relationships are strong, strengths are affluent, and people are socially driven to perform in regards to the success of the team, rather than perform to the success of the individual.
It is important to note that a team can move between any
stages of this dynamic. This fluctuation can be healthy and empower teams to
become resilient and develop processes and procedures that help move towards
performance, true performance. Many teams are stuck in the norming phase. They
cannot move past this phase because there is too much focus on self, a lack of
leadership to guide the team, or criticizing others’ weaknesses, rather than
recognizing strengths. The most successful teams are fluid and can move between
each phase with the understanding, awareness and intention of learning, growing
and commitment.
- Another great concept around developing strong teams is the idea of groupthink. While many of us focus on what we Should do, we must also consider what we Should Not do. That’s where groupthink comes in. Groupthink is an inefficient decision-making process of teams who think that they are invulnerable to poor ideas albeit through a myriad of dynamics, most of which include members feeling that they can voice objections, alternative considerations, or unethical dilemmas. Sometimes groups develop ideas and implementations which result in disastrous courses of action. All-the-while this disaster could have been avoided had team members voiced their opinions. This term, introduced by Irving Janis in the 1970’s, includes 8 symptoms:
- Illusion of invulnerability – Having excessive optimism in the idea(s) around extreme risk-taking.
- Collective rationalization – Avoiding clear and present warnings and false or illogical assumptions.
- Belief in inherent morality – Believing that the cause is noble and ignore ethical and moral consequences.
- Stereotyped views of out-groups – Constructing negative views of those who are outside the group.
- Direct pressure on dissenters – Considering those who oppose and argue ideas, stereotypes or commitment in the group as disloyal.
- Self-censorship – Withholding a viewpoint that contradicts a perceived group consensus.
- Illusion of unanimity – Assuming that everyone agrees with the decision just because some are silent or do not express discontent.
- Mindguards – Protecting the group from information which threatens the group’s cohesiveness or complacency.
Examples of groupthink occur all the time, sometimes without
our awareness. For example, the tobacco companies made their industry seem like
the dangers of tobacco use was inconclusive and prolonged the buy-in from
Americans around negative health risk. A more practical example in the
workplace could be a manager enforcing a rule that prohibits employees from
talking with one another while at work. This example, which falls under the
pretext of “Belief in inherent morality,” suggests that employees will be more
focused on their work if they don’t speak with others. While this might seem
like a noble cause to get the most out of employees while on-the-clock for an
organization, one would quickly realize that depriving employees of such an
inherent need – basic human psychological need to connect with others – will
backfire. And what you would likely find is that whoever is enforcing this
illogical system has put into place a dynamic where team members are afraid to
speak their mind for fear of retaliation (self-censorship) and also does not
take input from those outside the group who provides negative, constructive
feedback (stereotyped views of out-groups) on the secondary and tertiary
consequences of this disastrous action. Consequently, the group will become
less productive, have greater frustration, and not support their manager- thus
failing as a team.
So how can you avoid the product of groupthink? Try the
following:
- Explicitly emphasize team members to remain impartial
- Encourage disagreement
- Assign a team member to be the “devil’s advocate”
- Ask for outside opinion
- Encourage discussion outside of the meeting
- Ask for everyone’s true opinion and value their input
Teamwork is often seen as something that is extremely
difficult or hard because of the work it requires to bring people together.
Some of us say, all I can focus on is myself. Well, that mindset will counter
any ability to increase group cohesiveness. Remember the best teams are those
who find a way to put their differences aside, and find the similarities which
bring them together. It may be challenging at first, especially if you have a
dynamic that has poor, highly-engrained processes and procedures. But, often
the hardest things are the most rewarding. Use the strengths of each other.
Find the best attributes of one another. Communicate, communicate, communicate
by listening first, and talking second. Above all, don’t focus on your weakest
link, rather focus on THE link that will empower members of the team to rise
above themselves, buy into the collective vision and values, and embark upon
the journey as a single unit, a team.
