|
Building a Healthy Team |
||
|
|
|
|
Lencioni's model starts with the premises that true teamwork is elusive, and that teams "unknowingly fall prey to five natural but dangerous pitfalls." The antidotes for these pitfalls are straightforward, yet challenging to put into practice: build trust, engage in constructive discussions and debate, make appropriate commitments, embrace mutual accountability, and scrupulously attend to results and collective performance. Each part builds on the other, and a deficit in any one of them will wreak havoc on a team. The main strength of the book is also its weakness: the use of a "simple" model that emphasizes open, direct communication. Of course, teams are not always so simple. Team members from different cultures—including organizational, gender, disciplinary, and generational cultures—have different preferences for "doing teams." This is especially true in the areas of negotiating "power distance" between leaders and members, showing respect, tolerating diversity, and welcoming opinions. Often it seems that the most articulate and verbal will influence their teams the most. And this puts others at a disadvantage. Further, when those "others" are from a different culture, with the team language being a second or third language for them, and they are dependent in some ways (financially) on the other more verbal folks, then we see what regularly happens in multicultural groups: namely, cultural domination, even if it is not "intentional or malicious." The book also deals a lot with trust, and this raised some questions for me about how trust is built and broken. What can we do once trust in teams is shattered? It is so easy to destroy trust. Team building, when trust is unstable, often seems more like team re-building. I like to distinguish between functional trust and foundational trust. Lencioni does not. Nor do most of the teams with which I have worked. Functional trust is assumed, and needed so that we can work together. Foundational trust is earned, and developed over tough times together. These two types of trusts overlap. Yet it is a real mistake to think that being friendly colleagues in a work context (functional trust) is the same as being true friends in a non-work context (foundational trust). The shift from functional to foundational trust is slow, easily hindered, and essential to understand as a team! "Trust shifts" happen via consistent demonstrations over time that people are seriously and sacrificially committed to each other. This is especially evident during crises, such as a natural disaster that forces people to work together closely, with mutual dependency. Further, there is the genuine willingness to put someone else's best interests over one's own. There is also the deep sense that people are doing their utmost to respect and understand each other. People communicate regularly and equitably. And finally, people simply follow through on their promises. Where foundational trust flows, entrenched conflicts usually break up—or never form in the first place. Here are some more ideas that may help create or re-create this foundational trust:
Another consideration for me is Lencioni's emphasis on "debate." Teams are encouraged to passionately discuss important ideas and issues of an ideological rather than personal nature. In practice however, it is not always so easy to separate the ideological from the personal. Also, people wound easily. As part of our commitment to "love truth and peace" in our relationships (Zech. 8:19), we want to discuss matters in ways that honor each other and help us to connect. Yet I do appreciate the author trying to free us up from just being nice with each other when honesty and sharing differences are more important. I want to advocate for responsible openness, which acknowledges that personal disclosures must consider the best interests of the group. For example, "spontaneous and authentic" comments can actually be too much for a group to handle at times, especially poorly-timed, negative ones shared by a person of influence. I also want to endorse the idea of having realistic relationships which acknowledges that there will be different levels of intimacy between team members. Not every one can be best friends with each other, and so connecting with most people as colleagues rather than as confidants is likely to be the norm. I find that the prevailing organizational culture in YWAM—reflected in our YWAM values—can really help us to harmonize our cultural diversity, and provide common ground for relating well (e.g., confession, reconciliation, laying down rights, hearing God, hospitality). The weakest area in Lencioni's model for us, generally speaking, would be the fear of conflict. We need to continue to develop acceptable, safe forums where people can share their ideas and concerns in ways that foster trust, commitment, accountability, and ministry effectiveness. In summary, I really appreciate this creative book and recommend it widely. Get it, consider its multicultural applications, and discus it in depth as a group! --Kelly O'Donnell is a psychologist with YWAM Frontier Missions and Member Care Associates, based in Europe. He works internationally in the member care field. Contact him at MCAresources@gmail.com. Multicultural Team Resources
'International YWAMer Magazine', February - May 2007 |
||