Great Teams

Key to Effective Teams and Leadership

One of the problems I hear often from both teams and leaders is that team meetings seem less productive than other tasks. In fact, there are team meetings where a superior will delegate attending it to a subordinate because the senior executive simply wants to avoid being there. Then the subordinate will report back to the more senior member the pertinent details of the meeting.

Obviously business and organizations do not want to turn people off to attending meetings. Meetings are called because business and organizations want to get things done that will require heads of various groups to meet because input is important of an expert nature and of a political nature. They can very productive ways to get things done related both the official agenda and informal agendas of the attendees. Stated differently the business of the larger group can get done while allowing for networks to be established.

Over the next several posts I will review ways that an organization can increase the chances of people wanting to be a part of a team’s meeting.

When I was in Junior College I signed up for a course in group dynamics. The class started with the instructor coming in and having us introduce ourselves. That was it for the next several weeks. Indeed, sometimes the professor was absent from a portion of the class if not the entire class.

Later we learned that the instructor was observing us. He was waiting to see one or more leaders emerge in the group. Much to his disappointment none did. Something he expressed quite a bit of angry about.

Why did we fail as a class to rise to expectations? The class was made up of students either fresh out of High School, who were the majority, and individuals recently out of the military. None of us either in high school or the military was taught to think for ourselves or to take the initiative. We all were taught to follow directions, orders. Neither the public schools nor the military wants young people to challenge or assume control without it being delegated. Any person who spent time in either institution knows why – anarchy.

What could have he done that would of given better results? First we needed to understand he valued. The value was that we would demonstrate an ability to function independently as a group. Next we needed to know his vision. It was that we be a group of individuals that demonstrated positive and effective group dynamics by following the chapters in the books, discussing their relevance to us, and adopting guidelines for group dynamics from our studies and discussions. Lastly, we needed to understand his mission to get us to independently function as a mature group.

Here is the point of today’s blog. If there is a reluctance to serve on teams within your business is it because an overall vision, value, and mission are missing? Next are they stated so clearly that if you asked the various members of the team what the vision, mission and values were and how their assignment related to them they would be able to give similar answers? Would their answers match the actual mission, vision, and values? If you do find that your mission, vision and values are unclear to subordinates then you may want to look to see if you understand the larger mission, vision and values. It could be that the department, division or corporation as a whole does not have these clearly stated. It may also be that there is a formal statement of the foregoing, but that there is an informal set the corporation operates under.

In review, you can not expect to get much out of a group unless they understand what is wanted, and how it relates to the bigger picture. Good teams regardless of their area of function generally have a good grasp of what the values, mission, and vision are. They are able to clear communicate them to others. Lastly, how they state them is fairly consistent from one person to the next. Getting these in place is one big bite of the elephant called, effective and positive teams.