Group or Team?

Recently, I worked with a new nonprofit Board of Directors. Within the first two hours the members had referred to themselves as "this group." I brought this to their attention. None had been aware they had not called themselves "board" or "team." I explained that their choice of words was telling of the nature they regarded their interactions--as a group of people without shared goals. A group is not necessarily a team, yet a team is a group of individuals with shared or compatible commitments. One of my outcomes for them at the end of the weekend retreat was that they felt like a team and functioned like a board. Their strategic thinking and planning tested their commitment to the organization and their accountability to one another. They skillfully negotiated core values selection and began the goal-setting process. I am excited to watch them grow into their mission and vision!

2015 Teamwork Tip

Invite each team member to contribute his/her strengths to the team as strengths on which the team can depend. Identify the skill sets the team lacks and seek future team members who possess those skills and abilities. Use creative recognition and intermittent reinforcement to support the team. A catered pizza party for lunch or a silly competition with another team will spark performance. Watch talent engagement and retention rise!

Group or Team?

Do you work as a group or within a team? The term "team" is overused in organizational environments. I have the advantage of observing a variety of workplace venues, and in my travels into the inner corporate and government sanctums, I witness many more groups than teams, despite the names of the work divisions. One of my coaching clients speaks of his colleagues whose supervisor calls them her "team," almost as if she wishes it and wants it to be, it will. As she micromanages her department by insisting ALL emails go through her, she misses the opportunity to build trust among the members. An employee may respond with "Am I so incompetent that you need to review every communication I produce?" (In responsible management, a supervisor may want certain emails copied with their name, such as upward messages, yet all email seems a waste of time for veteran and competent employees.) One valued and essential charateristic of a team is trust. If the leader displays a lack of trust through micromanaging all the employees, it may be impossible to even forge a group into a team. Groups are made from the outside-- Person A, Person B, Person C, and Person D are assigned to "work together" on Task X. If each person works independently toward the Task completion and under the micromanaging supervisor, the task may get accomplished--but not by a team. A newsworthy insight: Teams are made from the inside out! Shared struggles, strengths, and successes; member accountability; and seamless communication among the members and managerial support for resources will hone a group into a team. The advantage is a team is more efficient than a group. Simply calling a group a team does not make a team.

Conflict's Surprises

In a recent presentation of "Productive Conflict: Conversation to Collaboration," participants listed the positive outcomes of conflict. Among them were clarification of misunderstandings, innovation in seeking solutions, and trust in working relationships that could withstand disagreement.

By definition, conflict means a dispute or a disagreement, and by experience it means an opportunity has presented itself. Conflict is neither good nor bad, it simply is inevitable. This realization suggests each of us must be accountable to ensure that conflict becomes productive. We must stay in conversation to find our way out of the tangle of disputes arising from shared resources and goals, limited time and money, differing values and priorities, and changing skill sets and technology. Recently, several small groups struggled with some of the sources of conflict in a puzzle game designed to simulate real expectations and dilemmas. Each table team was given a packet of pieces of playing cards and the following instruction from the facilitator, "Put as many whole cards together as you can. I'll check in with you in 15 minutes."

Assumptions circulated: (1)we must put our cards together and get as many as possible to beat the other teams; (2) we have a deadine; (3) we have all the pieces we need to make whole cards; (4) each team must work independently from the others; and (5) whole cards are accomplished when the faces of the cards are complete as the original cards looked in the new deck.

As teams worked, tension and frustration crept into the interaction. A scarcity of resources eventually led someone to ask the facilitator, "Can we talk with other groups?" Then teams began sending runners out to find the pieces they needed for their dismembered cards: "Do you guys have Diamonds?" and "That group has the other half of the King of Spades!" Then a woman exclaimed, "Someone has pieces in their pocket--I'm convinced of it!"

Teams had different strategies to accomplish the goal. One team abandoned its table with their pieces displayed for others to take. Another team stayed in place around their pieces and observed as others traded pieces, ultimately assembling the observing team's cards through no effort of their own! One individual explained her behavior and ulterior motive, "I've been giving pieces away so we'll get out of here sooner." Still another team accomplished its understanding of the goal by arranging their cards into wholes by working the back of the cards into a congruent design. That really distressed some individuals who could not see the face side of the cards to see if the pieces they neeed were literally face down. One woman suggested, "Let's put all the pieces on one table," but no one moved to do that: later the teams agreed that it was too much trouble to do it.

When conflict arises, ask questions and listen to perspectives. Do you all understand the goal and how to accomplish it in the same way? What assumptions are apparent as the conversation uncovers misunderstandings, misconceptions, and misinformation? When instuctions or goals are vague or confusing, how do you find your way? Does your team work as independent individuals or as a unified front? Does our team process conflict to determine how to ensure performance and productivity?

After lots of laughs and negotiations, the five teams successfully assembled a deck of cards from 200 pieces in approximately 20 minutes. The surprise: push through the conflicts to identify the opportunities presented and to create the successful results worthy of the participants!

Choose Words Strategically

In How to Say It at Work (pages 16-17), Jack Griffin says to avoid these 53 words:
I, me, you, yours, afraid, bad luck, blame, cannot, cheated, circumstances, cornered, crisis, delay, delinquent, demand, disaster, excuse, experiment, fail, fault, fear, final, forgot, frustrating, guess, hopeless, impossible, impractical, inadequate, insist, loser, loss, lost, make do, must, nervous, no, non-negotiable, one-time offer, overlooked, panic, relax, slipped, sorry, stupid, tired, unaware, unfair, unreasonable, wasted.
The author calls this “vocabulary of limitation,” and I believe he’s on to something. Researchers in psycholinguistics would agree. Note that “avoid” from the opening sentence is not the same as eliminate. We should become aware of where, when, and how we express any of those words in Griffin's list because the word content (meaning)and context can override our intent. Words have a huge impact on behavior and outcome. Good leaders recognize this impact.
Vince Lombardi, the great football coach, was asked in an interview once about how he talked to his team to motivate them. His answer centered on pronouns: I, you, and we. His advice follows. Use "I" to limit bad news: "Our loss today means I failed to coach the team well this week." Use "you" to deliver good news: "You won!" Use "we" to frame neutral, legal, company, or collaborative news: "We have a moral and ethical obligation to our fans to do our best"; "We can do this together if we each commit to do what it takes to achieve our part."
To influence others' behavior and outcomes, be careful of language that limits and use pronouns strategically.