tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post4438377183594804981..comments2023-08-15T19:00:12.980+05:30Comments on Simplicity @ the other side of Complexity: Mysteries of 'being a good team player'Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-26188345373532289642009-09-13T00:32:54.778+05:302009-09-13T00:32:54.778+05:30Not being a good team player doesn't harm much...Not being a good team player doesn't harm much but acting too smart does <a href="http://www.ceveni.com/2009/09/group-work-vs-team-work-my-first.html" rel="nofollow">here </a>is my personal experiencecool geeknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-42967462037056320712008-03-10T14:15:00.000+05:302008-03-10T14:15:00.000+05:30Thank you very much for the comment. It is interes...Thank you very much for the comment. <BR/><BR/>It is interesting to consider the implications of 'individuality' of the team members on team effectiveness. Logically speaking, recognizing/celebrating/leveraging the uniqueness of the team members can contribute immensely to team effectiveness and individual happiness. <BR/><BR/>For this to be successful, there is at least one important condition to be met. "Roles for each of the team members need to be deigned to suit their uniqueness" AND "the roles should 'add up' to the team deliverable". <BR/><BR/>While it can be argued that the 'add up' mentioned above need not be restricted to 'simple addition' (i.e. that it can also include the 2+2=5 kind of synergistic 'add up'!) and that the team deliverable is not always 'cast in stone' (i.e. that the team deliverable can often be negotiated to some extent to match the team strengths), in many contexts it is still not easy to ensure that the 'condition for success' mentioned above is met - defining roles, managing interrelationships and combining outputs are often quite complex and messy. Of course, the situation would get more complicated if the team members perceive that the different roles in the team are not of the same status/importance. <BR/><BR/>Another important aspect here is the nature of the team deliverable and hence the nature of the interdependencies in the team. One problem with a generic name like 'team' is that it can stand for very different types of groups that have been put together to achieve very different kind of objectives/deliverables. So the degree of work related interdependencies among the members in the team can vary widely. It could be further complicated by the tendency to put together a team (since 'team work' is fashionable!) where a 'team' is not really required to achieve the objective (i.e. where a group of people working independently - with someone synchronizing their outputs - can achieve the objective)! It has also been observed that sometimes teams get formed part of the process/strategy of 'throwing people at problems'. This can lead to situations where the team is not even clear about the team deliverable. Of course, if the team deliverable itself is not known/ understood, formulating/understanding individual roles in the team is likely to become a 'designed to fail' exercise!Prasad Kurianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-54407566990627950962008-03-03T14:04:00.000+05:302008-03-03T14:04:00.000+05:30I think you make a valuable point. When we receive...I think you make a valuable point. When we receive blanket rejecting criticism, it is difficult to respond or even apologise effectively.<BR/><BR/>Roy Baumeister of Florida has shown the devastating impact of rejection. We look in a mirror less if a "computer" declines to play a game with us.<BR/><BR/>I suspect, and few of us could process see this when we are at the receiving end, is that the group was mirroring what they felt. They he rejected them.<BR/><BR/>The dynamic here was that he felt the initial role conflict as rejecting (they didn't appreciate his dilemma), he subtly communicated that, they responded.<BR/><BR/>Hats off to him for seeking mentoring. Few of us could have done that calmly.<BR/><BR/>My thoughts are that an older and wiser head needs to intervene to re-establish group loyalties, and when the bruising subsides, help anyone interested to imagine alternative ways they could have demonstrated loyalty to each other.<BR/><BR/>What do you think?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com