Bringing the house down - Samson's solution, or working in a team but wanting my own way
1. Stamping “agreement”
-
We all have different
perspectives and quite often there are a number of possibilities whatever the
problem. Stamping out disagreement is a way of making ourselves “right” by
ensuring that others are shown up as “wrong”. But there are subtle versions of
this: retrospective correction (in my own time), or the saving up one’s own viewpoint
for a more advantageous moment (catching others off guard) are common forms of
power-play, manipulations that are less honest than outright tyranny. While win/win
thinking and behaviour tends to encourage better team-work, enabling
disagreement to be creatively channelled, using position or sheer obstinacy to
block discussion can turn the team-work of others into short-term personal
advantage, but at huge cost to the team & any project they undertake. The
crucial strength of team-work is that it can integrate different perspectives
& turn debate into seeking the best solutions for the activity
2. The only Horseman
-
A sense of entitlement & a
need to be special brings competition & a self-serving ethos into any
workplace, in a collegial one most of all. Entitlement is opposed to
collegiality, creating division while encouraging a “totemic” culture that is
common to many work-places. As the proud owner of the exceptional horse, the
self-entitled holds the reins of any discussion & thrives on the “flunky
tendency” (see 4). The alternative is to work as a true collegiate: in a way that allows everyone
to be recognised for their unique contribution. Everyone who is part of the
team is there because their contribution is valued. This does not exclude
“leadership”, but an effective demotic leadership depends upon the needs of
the specific situation, rather than mere status. Thus diversity becomes aligned to
creativity; & the quality of leadership & initiative are available to
all members of the team
3. Idle talk over
the back-fence -
Gossip is usually a form of speculation, often spiteful,
neglectful of facts or partial in interpretation. Such speculation can
grow and cause fear and discontent. Gossip usually includes & forms a
powerful underhand alliance with complaining (see 5). Not only is gossip a negative
force, in that it wastes time, but engaging in gossip about someone is rarely good,
tending to drive a wedge of distrust between everyone in the organisation (“Who
will be the next victim?”). The alternative is to create honest conversations
based on one’s own experiences, inviting others to contribute theirs. Sticking
to facts, not getting personal, discussing your own thoughts, feelings &
intentions openly, without attributing motives to others is a must for
effective teamwork
4. The Flunky tendency
-
People-pleasing results in a
lack of growth and a denial of unique talents and contributions. A need to
be liked, especially by those who appear more powerful, often stems from a
fear of not being good enough, or of being rejected for speaking up. This
is common to strongly hierarchical organisations, but also to ones in which
hierarchical relationships are covert rather than explicit. Weak leaders
encourage this trait in team members because it adds to their relative security.
The alternative is to speak your own truth, but to do it with respect for
the truths of others
5. Tut-tut -
Complaining is a method of
self-assertion that minimises the risk of contradiction. It thus dodges the
effort to communicate honestly. Complaining avoids having to forgive
others or to be forgiven. Complaining about someone else behind their back is opposed
to empathy, or any attempt to put ourselves in another’s shoes. Gossiping
complainers in particular tend to place a barrier around them, safe in the
certainty that what they say will change nothing. Good team-working
involves genuine criticism, sticking with the facts & contributing
positively even when the topic is uncomfortable
Watching out for these five
traps is easier said than done, which is why good team-working benefits from
effective facilitation. Each of the five “dangers” set out above can be used to
review a meeting. It is for each person to reflect upon whether they have
fallen into one or more of the traps. Using them to describe others is a
version of trap 2 & tends to lead directly into trap 3. Links between the
items indicates their co-dependence. Pulling out any one of these in order to
examine can help to SHIFT the problem
K..A.
25-07-2012
No comments:
Post a Comment