A520.6.5.RB_RuggerioSteven

Teams: The Secret to Success

“It takes every kinda people, to make what life’s about.  Every kinda people,

to make the world go ‘round.” – Robert Palmer, 1978.

From adolescence, we’re wired to seek-out people with similar interest and develop friendships.  School, sports, and our local neighborhood acts as a resource pool from which to choose our friends.  Negative responses to those who are different often warranted parental correction to those who didn’t share our affections.  That all change dramatically when I entered the Air Force and was thrust into an eclectic mix of people from all walks of life.  Avoiding people with different backgrounds was no longer an option.  Parents, teachers, and coaches tried regularly taught the importance of teamwork.  While they laid a foundation, it was the leaders and supervisors within the United States Air Force that developed and matured my leadership potential.  They demanded teamwork, acceptance, and unity.  Anything less would not be accepted.

The Air Force builds teams and makes leaders.  However, the requirement is a two-way street.  The airman must willingly follow and enthusiastically embrace the opportunities and training offered by the military.  It does not take long before airmen realize they cannot succeed on their own.  To be a leader and to achieve aspiring goals, one must understand and develop high performing teams.  Kouzes & Posner (2007) said, “Leadership is not a solo act, it’s a team effort.”  Moreover, “the winning strategies will be based on the “we not I” philosophy where collaboration is a social imperative—without it you can’t get extraordinary things done in organizations” (p. 224).  

Teams are built upon two overarching imperatives: tasks and relationships.  One without the other will lead to task accomplishment and destructive relationships or task failure but harmonious relationships.  For a win-win situation, both task and relationships must be considered.  Whetten & Cameron (2011) identify the dualism as task-facilitating roles and relationship-building roles.  Task-facilitating roles are those that help the team accomplish its outcome or objectives.  Relationship-building roles are those that emphasize the interpersonal aspects of the team (p. 514).

Whetten & Cameron (2011) identify ten primary task-facilitating roles and seven relationship building roles.  First, the ten task-facilitating roles:

Direction giving – identifying ways to proceed and clarifying goals and objectives

Information seeking – asking questions and analyzing knowledge gaps, requesting opinions and beliefs.

Information giving – providing data, offering facts and judgments, and highlighting conclusions

Elaborating – building on the ideas expressed by others

Urging – imploring team members to stay on tasks.

Monitoring – checking on progress, developing measures of success and maintaining accountability

Process analyzing – analyzing processes to improve efficiency

Reality testing – exploring whether ideas presented are practical or workable

Enforcing – helping to reinforce team rules, reinforcing standards, and maintaining agreed-upon procedures

Summarizing – combining ideas and summing up points made in the team; helping members understand the conclusions that have been reached.

Without having at least one team member displaying task-facilitating behaviors, teams tend to take longer to achieve their objectives and have difficulty staying focused (p. 514).  Everyone has experienced a team member solely focused on the task while completely disregarding other’s opinions or feelings.  Sure, things get done, but it begs the question, “Was there a better way?”  The task-facilitator roles are especially important when progress toward goal accomplishment is slow; when the team is distracted; when time pressure exist; when the assignment is complex; and when no one else is helping the team move toward task accomplishment (p. 514).

When discussing the tension between task and process for participants in meetings, Whetten & Cameron (2011) said, “Task-oriented participants are ‘all business.”  They have little tolerance for joking or for discussions of feelings and friendships. The task is accomplished efficiently, but satisfaction may be low” (p. 653).  They continued, “Process-oriented participants emphasize spirit de corps and participation. They are sensitive to participants’ feelings and satisfaction.”  If managers hope to lead effectively, they must also focus on building relationship along with achieving organizational goals.  Formerly considered as a soft skill for the HR department, social interaction has been highlighted as instrumental to goal accomplishment. The tension between task and relationship can be like one is walking a tightrope high above Niagara Falls; but to settle for anything less is as safe as going over the falls in a barrel.  Therefore, leaders must manage and leave room for the following relationship-building roles:

Supporting – praising the ideas of others, showing friendliness, and pointing out others contributions.

Harmonizing – mediating differences between others and finding common ground.

Tension relieving – using humor to reduce tension

Confronting – challenging unproductive or disruptive behavior

Energizing – motivating others toward greater effort; exuding enthusiasm

Developing – assisting others to learn, grow, and achieve. Coaching members of the team

Consensus building – helping build solidarity and encouraging agreement

Empathizing – reflecting group’s feelings and expressing empathy and support for team members.

Without both task-facilitating and relationship-building roles, teams struggle to perform effectively. They key is to have a balance between task-oriented roles and relationship-building roles displayed in the team (Whetten & Cameron, p. 515).  Understanding and applying these task and relationship truths empowers leaders with insightful perspectives to build a cohesive team.  It begs the question, “What kind of team leader and team member am I?”

Consider how you generally relate as a team-member.

Upon reviewing the two types of team members, I certainly find myself more focused on relationships than the task.  Oftentimes the task is unmoving.  It is a fixed point; an objective.  The goal rests on the horizon while managers create teams to reach and succeed it.  Conversely, the complexities of a team are fluid.  Relationships, emotions, investments, and collaboration rise and fall based on the level of trust within the team.  In The Speed of Trust, Stephen M.R. Covey said, “When trust is high, speed is high and costs go down.  When trust is low, speed is down and costs go up.” 

I believe in investing before you begin expecting.  In other words, invest into your people, gain their trust, and create a partnership toward a common goal.  As this is done, team members combine resources and invest energies into accomplishing the task.  When managers focus specifically on the task and little on the team relationships, individuals feel used and underappreciated.

Do you actively engage your team to accomplish its mission?

As a leader, I believe I should never ask someone to do that I have never done or am unwilling to do.  I’m a firm believer in the value and effect of personal contact and camaraderie.  In the military, there were many senior leaders who dictated orders from an office and rarely ventured into the work areas of their troops.  Lack of connection and communication led team members to work purely because of their obligation and rules. 

The supervisors who engaged their team were better able to motivate and inspire their team.  As a team leader, I consistently engage with my team to ensure they understand the mission, have all the necessary resources, and receive feedback and direction along the way.

Do you work to improve the team cohesion and collaboration?

In True North, Bill George (2007) highlights the leadership of Dick Kovacevich from Wells Fargo who said, “On the athletic field I learned that a group of people can perform so much better as a team than as the sum of their individual talents” (p. 9).  In light of the two different types of leadership and the many roles people take within team, Kovacevich also said, “Diversity of skills is an important element of any effective team.  I am amazed at leaders who surround themselves with people just like themselves” (p. 9).

Being strong in the relationships-building characteristic of team dynamics, I regularly utilize the following roles to improve team cohesion and collaboration: harmonizing, tension relieving, and energizing.  By demonstrating appropriate care and concern, team members are more apt to work together, deal effectively with conflict, and stay focused on the goal at hand (rather than be distracted by unnecessary “drama” in the workplace).

Lastly, there is more for managers to contend with than ensuring an appropriate balance of task and relationship focus.  In fact, members may actually take on unproductive roles that directly inhibit the team or its members from achieving what they could have achieved.  The following roles—referred to as “blocking” roles can destroy both morale and cohesion (p. 515).  Effective team members recognize when blocking roles are displayed, confront and isolate dysfunctional members, and provide feedback to those who are inhibiting effective team performance.  They are:

Dominating – excessive talking or cutting others off

Overanalyzing – examining every detail

Stalling – not allowing the group to reach a decision

Remaining passive – staying on the fringe and avoiding engaging in the team. Expecting others to do the team’s work

Overgeneralizing – blowing something out of proportion and drawing unfounded conclusion

Faultfinding – unwilling to see the merits of others’ ideas

Premature decision making – making decisions before goals are stated and information is shared or problems are defined

Presenting opinions as facts – Failing to examine the legitimacy of proposals

Rejecting – rejecting ideas based on the person who stated them rather than on their merits

Pulling rank – using status, expertise, or title to get ideas accepted

Resisting – blocking attempts to change, to improve, or make progress

Deflecting – not staying focused on the topic

Finally, George (2007) said, “Leaders are highly complex human beings, people who have distinctive qualities that cannot be sufficiently described by lists of traits or characteristics” (p. xxvii).  With nearly 30 different roles identified (task, relationship, and blocking), it is easy to see that teams are collective groups of complex individuals.  It requires a strong leader to manage and direct the various personalities within a team’s make-up.  Highlighting these elements can equip leaders with the knowledge necessary to ensure team and relationship success.

Steve

References:

George, B. (2007). True north. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Whetten, D.A., Cameron, K.S. (2011). Developing management skills. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.