That establishes
several specifics. First, as the leader and focus of this activity, you will
organize and manage the work of different people to achieve a single end.
Then, there will
have to be communication in various forms through multiple channels. And your
responsibility will have to be subdivided. You retain it overall, but share it
and delegate it in the process.
You must satisfy
the expectations of those you answer to, and you must have productive response
from those who answer to you.
All that being
so, you are the director of multiple layers of teamwork. All of your constituencies
share a fundamental definition, but each of them is distinctly different in how
it works. You are in the catbird seat at every stage in every function.
None of this is
easy, which is why we see so little really effective teamwork in these situations.
When it’s a true project, all the challenges are hyped by some level of
complexity, risk and uncertainty – but the essentials exist in any group effort
to do something.
Whatever the nature of the activity,
the human involvement is the most crucial element. It’s the people who make the
thing work. The people asset also is the most volatile and unpredictable, which
makes it the most important in terms of leadership thought, attention and time.
In short, getting
the individuals to do their parts, and getting the group to properly manage its
relationships, is the definition of group leadership.
The whole thing
at work is called “teamwork.”
That term is
among the vital concepts we toss around so frequently and so carelessly. We should
think about it a little more, and spend some time working out just how we could
make it more effective.
Teamwork refers
to the behavior of people any time a number of them are engaged in a common
endeavor. It can be done poorly, or in a mediocre fashion – or superbly.
So what is it
like at the upper end of the quality arc?
A team is a group
of diverse people working together toward a common goal. If it is to be a
successful team, then the right people with the right skills are on it. If they
are working together well, there are certain things they do well. And they must
know and understand the goal, each individual making a powerful personal
commitment to making it happen.
Every one of those success indicators
is included in the primary demands the leader of the group must meet. If she or
he does not do that well, you get the unsatisfactory results we see so often in
our workplaces. It’s no mystery why prideful outcomes are so rare; people don’t
work to earn them.
And it is work.
First, getting
the right people. Senior management of the organization must believe in the
effort enough that people with the necessary skills are assigned to the work.
No more of this, “Hey, do what you can with who you’ve got!” stuff.
Second, making
sure the executives are clear on what is to be accomplished and the level of nonhuman
resources they therefore are committed to invest in it. And are the functional
managers willing to reallocate workload so people actually have time to devote
to this project?
Third, commitment
and collaboration among the people doing the work. Does each person buy in
thoroughly enough to ensure he or she can be relied upon to get the assignments
done, on time and up to expectations? Will they take the time to communicate
properly, and really help each other?
None of this is
all that mysterious, once we stop to think about it. And talk about it.
In most
organizations, though, the frank conversation is not comfortable, and doing the
teamwork right is not easy.
If you value the
results, you’ll do it anyway.
SEE ALSO:
The Teamwork Myth
http://jimmillikenproject.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-teamwork-myth.html
SEE ALSO:
The Teamwork Myth
http://jimmillikenproject.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-teamwork-myth.html
No comments:
Post a Comment