CHAPTER 1

WHAT IS A TEAM?

The most distinguishing characteristic of a team is that its members have, as their highest priority, the accomplishment of team goals. They may be strong personalities, possess highly developed specialized skills, and commit themselves to a variety of personal objectives they hope to achieve through their activity; but, to them, the most important business at hand is the success of the group in reaching the goal that its members, collectively and with one voice, have set. The members support one another, collaborate freely, and communicate openly and clearly with one another.

Most nonteam groups, on the other hand, tend to be collections of personalities with their own agendas, which may be more valuable to those personalities than the agenda that the majority of the group members seek to fulfill. Discussions and relationships in such groups are often characterized by shifting agendas, power subgroups, a going along with decisions rather than a wholehearted commitment, and even a win-lose orientation: One person or subgroup gains its wishes over another.

KINDS OF TEAMS

There are many kinds of groups that can evolve into closely knit teams. Some of the most common are:

• Committees, which usually serve as investigative or advisory bodies reporting to the person or agency that has appointed and organized them.

• Task forces, which, most often, are temporary problem-solving groups formed to deal with issues that cross functions or lines of authority. A task force may, for its life, be full- or part-time.

Characteristics of Effective and Ineffective Teams

• Quality circles, consisting of groups of employees and supervisors who search for ways to increase the effectiveness of their work groups through higher productivity and improved quality.

• Project groups, organized to work specifically on a project, such as a new product, a new facility, or a computer program. Like the task force, the project group may have a temporary existence. When its mission has been accomplished, the group disbands.

Probably the most ambitious and complex team-building effort involves an entire work section or department, if only because in an ongoing operation the objectives change, requiring periodic review and goal-setting sessions among those who must commit and recommit themselves.

DIAGNOSING YOUR GROUP

A logical place to start your team-building effort is to look carefully at the group you manage or participate in. How is the group characterized? Complete the following diagnosticator. How many of the statements are true about your team?

For each “frequently” that you checked, give yourself a score of 1. “Occasionally” merits 2, and “rarely/never” rates 3. Multiply each number by the total number of statements to which you applied it. To illustrate, if you checked “occasionally” 10 times, “frequently” 10 times, and “rarely/never” 10 times, your overall score would be 60.

ANALYZING YOUR DIAGNOSIS

The higher your score, the more advanced your group in building itself toward team status. If your score is the maximum of 90 (30 times 3), you can count yourself exceptional indeed—and fortunate to have such an effectively functioning group without any (or nearly any) indicators of impediments or barriers to successful team operation. Conversely, if your score is 30, by no means can you describe your group as a team. If your total falls between 60 and 90, you are well on your way, but you still have some distance to travel before you and your associates can enjoy the plentiful benefits of working as a team rather than as a mere group.

Here are some of the meanings behind each statement:

1. If other members of the group talk to you about what is or is not going on in the group, that means a great deal of communicating occurs outside the group. The group’s progress or lack of it, to members, is not a group issue, to be discussed in and dealt with by the group as a whole. Group issues in a team are handled by the team as a team, not by members of it in outside conferences.

2. The group has not yet learned how to conduct effective meetings in which, because of good formal and informal leadership, the group focuses on its goals and the best ways to achieve them. In a successful meeting, members support one another in working toward goals, ward off any attempts to sidetrack the discussion, and progress toward objectives.

3. A healthy team makes sure that all information necessary for its effective function is available to all members. The information moves up, down, and sideways. It is an open system, with inputs, throughputs, and outputs.

4. When decisions have to be remade, it is often because they were not made initially by consensus; the team did not take sufficient time to ensure that all members contributed fully and freely. There may also be a problem with the lack of completeness of needed information at the time of the decision; thus, the issue has to be reopened when the additional information is available.

5. Again, this extragroup activity prevents the group from coalescing and working together on what are properly group issues.

6. The group members are not acting as a team in which there is support for anything that might advance the team toward its goals. Too many personal agendas create competition, so ideas are shot down when they threaten anyone. And the group is not taking action as a team to make sure that the contributors are supported and their ideas are given sufficient consideration.

7. In an effective team, everyone in the group takes some responsibility for making sure that the group stays on track in its discussions. When the discussions are interminable, it means that no one is minding the store.

8. The information is not being disseminated. Some people are finding things out and are perhaps withholding the data from others in the group. It could mean a power play on the part of those who know, or it could simply be that no one is assuming the responsibility for seeing that the information gets around. People are acting for themselves rather than for the team.

9. When some members seem to dominate, others must assert themselves and act as gatekeepers for all members of the group. (See Chapter 7.)

10. Probably too many personal agendas are operating and competing with one another. There is insufficient concern for achieving team goals.

11. Compromises usually mean that everyone has to give up something, which means no one ends up really happy. The group should take longer to arrive at consensus, where everyone is convinced that the best decision possible has been made.

12. The term confrontational style often means that people are attacking other people rather than the issues, in which case conflict and resentment impede the progress of the group in doing its proper work. When people in a team confront only issues, the work gets done. But it takes training to help members differentiate between people and issues.

13. It’s doubtful that a team doing serious work will appear in agreement and harmony all the time. Chances are that this group is backing off from anything that brings out conflict, anger, and disagreement, and such avoidance isn’t characteristic of a true team.

14. The minority team members may feel that they have lost. Consensus decisions are better in that everyone wins.

15. Members of the group are withholding feedback that you need in order to be effective. Are they intimidated by you? Do they not trust you? Have you inadvertently discouraged feedback from them in the past? If a deficiency in communicating exists, you need to find out why.

16. Too many personal agendas are operating. The group is fragmented. The members do not listen to or support one another because they are not yet committed to group goals.

17. The answer for 16 applies here.

18. When people in a team seek support, they do so openly and in the group. Extragroup activity is destructive in team building.

19. The discussions apparently ramble and are unfocused. Where is the formal and informal leadership that helps clarify the issues and keeps the group on track?

20. People in a true team not only cooperate but collaborate. That is, they don’t go along because someone convinces them they should do so. They willingly invest themselves in the group project. They want to be a part of the solution or result. That’s collaboration.

21. The people who regularly step in to take control see a vacuum, and they move to fill it. Others sit back passively and permit them to do it. Leadership in a true team is passed from member to member. Everyone in a healthy group becomes a leader at some time or other.

22. It is possible that no one is assuming sufficient leadership to make sure the group’s needs and goals are met. This statement describes a bunch of people sitting around and talking rather aimlessly.

23. Defensiveness may occur when people feel attacked or see no support within the group for their contributions. When a group is supportive and gives encouragement to its members, there is less defensiveness. When defensiveness does occur, group members move swiftly to perform certain roles that reduce the contributor’s sense of isolation or attack. (See Chapter 7.)

24. These people are still wedded to their agendas and to taking control rather than to advancing the interests of the group as a whole.

25. If you have to ask people regularly to leave personalities out, then the group is dysfunctional, if only in the fact that other members of the group should insist on issues-based discussion as well as you.

26. When people withdraw from discussions, it often means that they feel no one really cares whether they participate or not. A team would move quickly to reassure them, to invite them to rejoin the discussion, and to make them feel valued. Another reason for withdrawal is that the person feels attacked and the withdrawal is protective. Once again, the group should provide support.

27. When people disagree—and that’s normal in a vibrant, healthy group—other members can help to resolve conflicts, to find common ground, and to make the disagreement between two or more an issue for the whole group so that it becomes diffused.

28. Personal agendas and interpersonal competition destroy groups.

29. They believe that no one listens to them, supports their right to participate, or cares what they have to offer.

30. This refers to the “politicking outside” issue, which, as has been mentioned, can be deadly to the growth of the group.