Team Work: Changing from Smurfs to Gremlins

So the smurf stage is behind us. The team is now comfortable saying what is on their mind. This is a time where the leader (facilitator) must solidify trust. People trust enough to open up now. This is what is wanted, but it must be done in a manner that does not step on the rest of the members. Here is where the facilitator really earns the money. Take an incident where John says, “If Elijah was here in 1984 he would have known that we tried something similar and it didn’t work.” Or something along the line of, “If Elijah bothered to read up he would have known we tried that in “84” and it didn’t work.” Variations of these types of comments can shut members in a group down. This is especially true if the person making them has influence, whether it is formal or informal power (informal meaning John may not be a director or senior executive but he has a lot of support within the company or union). When person like John brings out a verbal hammer the best way to handle it is to say something akin to:

· I am glad John brought that up. Let’s pause though for a minute and make sure that the idea and not Elijah is being questioned. What is a way that John may have phrased his statement to minimize the chance Elijah will not feel attacked?

o John could have said, Elijah that is a good idea we tried it in “84” and it didn’t work.

§ This will help people to see what is expected and what they can expect from the person facilitating the meeting. What should be communicated is security. A person should feel safe on two fronts. One putting an idea out there and two making critical comments about an idea.

· Let’s consider Elijah’s proposal from the perspective of what has been tried before.
o What are the reasons it did not work?

o Is there something about that did work?

o Have things changed so that what did not work in 1984 can work today?

§ This protects Elijah’s dignity.

The outline I gave is not to be followed in a canned fashion. It is just tossed out to give a rough idea of how to handle an objection that was stated on a personal level. This gets people thinking about the feelings of others. Additionally it gets people thinking more exactly about the task at hand.

As a side note: It is always important during a brainstorming session to point out that censoring of ideas will be done later, after the brainstorming finishes. Important too is kicking off the round of censoring with a reminder and an example of how to disagree with an idea so the person offering the idea dignity is left in tact.

The rules decide on in the “smurf “stage is often first on the plate of critique. A prudent leader knows to really cover all that was agreed on during the time when the group was more smurfy. Other things to go over are how often feedback should occur (regarding group functioning), how ought conflicts be resolved, how resources will be obtained, who will negotiate for the group, identifying a spokesperson, determining what groups outside the team will receive communication and how often, settling on who will bring communication from outside the team to the team (this person ought to know how to buffer feedback if it is especially harsh.).

Other things to look at when dealing with the group at what has been termed the storming stage (I call them gremlins with water added) is when people do vary from the norm (behavior wise) point out how they are making positive contributions and show support for those whose participation or behavior may strike the group as odd.

Lastly, this is the time where increasing responsibility is going to the group. As a result it is important for the leader (facilitator) to praise and compliment the group for its efforts at self-management. The goal for the person that began leading the group is to pull back so the group is entirely self-managing with its own chosen leader(s). This, at the latest, ought to be accomplished by the end of the gremlin stage.