Teamwork Myths: I vs. We

In two earlier essays about teamwork myths, I explored myths about forming teams and myths about conflict within teams. In this third installment I look at myths about the supposed need to surrender the self to the team.

There's no "I" in team

This clever slogan (clever in English, that is) implies that team members can support team goals only if they abandon their individual goals. Many in management and team leadership roles believe that teams are manageable only if their members subscribe to this belief. Ironically, from the management perspective, it is a self-serving belief.

The reality can be disappointing. First, most performance management systems emphasize individual performance. Performance management focuses on compensation, which is essentially individual in many organizations. Second, although team performance is not the sum of individual performances, it does arise, in part, from individual performance. In most organizations, there is plenty of "I" in team; but there is also "we." The complexity and richness of this situation can't be captured in a slogan.

The inherent need of humans to be individuals limits team effectiveness

Plausible-sounding as this assertion might be, it offers no explanation or justification. Precisely how does human individuality limit team effectiveness?

Certainly there are examples of conflict and dissension in teams, but there are also examples of teams of people with complementary skills, offering each other mutual support. Tension there may be, but team members and team leaders around the world can learn — and have learned — how to manage it.

Ambition and insecurity always undermine cooperation

I've seen this myth in use personally. Job insecurity can indeed undermine the willingness to cooperate. When job insecurity or desire for promotion or plum assignments is in the air, cooperation seems risky.

The important word here is always. Managers who encourage cutthroat competition, or who use layoffs or pay freezes to deal with the consequences of bad decisions or bad strategy, or to protect shareholder value at the expense of employees, will undoubtedly limit cooperative behavior. Sadly, it's a tradeoff many managers make willingly, if sometimes blindly. But it's a tradeoff, not an axiom. Insecurity is less threatening to cooperation if we work to limit insecurity.

In a workplace where people
feel respected, they usually
respond by taking
the initiativeIn a workplace where people feel respected by peers, by subordinates and by supervisors, they usually respond by taking initiative. They seek not only to demonstrate their willingness and ability to contribute, but also to help their co-workers do the same. They do this, in part, because they benefit themselves when they and their co-workers excel. "I" and "We" blend together, in a way.

But even more important, these acts of contribution, collaboration, and support do create and sustain a sense of belonging. They make you feel good. Try it. First in this series   Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

For more teamwork myths, see "Teamwork Myths: Formation," Point Lookout for May 27, 2009, and "Teamwork Myths: Conflict," Point Lookout for June 17, 2009.

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Emotions at Work:

Never, Ever, Kill the Messenger

If you're a manager in a project-oriented organization, you need to know the full, unvarnished Truth. When you kill a messenger, you deliver a message of your own: Tell me the Truth at your peril. Killing messengers has such predictable results that you have to question any report you receive — good news or bad.

When It Really Counts, Be Positive

When we express our ideas, we can usually choose between a positive construction and a negative one. We can advocate for one path, or against another. Even though these choices have nearly identical literal meanings, positive constructions are safer in tense situations.

Toxic Conflict in Virtual Teams: Virtuality

In virtual teams, toxic conflict sometimes seems to erupt spontaneously. People who function effectively in co-located teams can find themselves repeatedly embroiled in conflicts that seem to lack specific causes. What triggers toxic conflict in virtual teams?

First Aid for Wounded Conversations

Groups that meet regularly sometimes develop patterns of tense conversations that become obstacles to forward progress. Here are some ideas for releasing the tension.

Human Limitations and Meeting Agendas

Recent research has discovered a class of human limitations that constrain our ability to exert self-control and to make wise decisions. Accounting for these effects when we construct agendas can make meetings more productive and save us from ourselves.

See also Emotions at Work and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming May 29: Newtonian Blind Alleys: II

Some of our decisions don't turn out well. The nature of our errors does vary, but a common class of errors is due to applying concepts from physics originated by Isaac Newton. One of these is the concept of spectrum. Available here and by RSS on May 29.

And on June 5: I Could Be Wrong About That

Before we make joint decisions at work, we usually debate the options. We come together to share views, and then a debate ensues. Some of these debates turn out well, but too many do not. Allowing for the fact that "I could be wrong" improves outcomes. Available here and by RSS on June 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenThiucGTlTcuZTAfMner@ChacDIftXNYTQvvqyXYzoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.