Friday, October 16, 2009

Communicating in work teams (Lesson 3)

A team is a group of individuals who depend on each other and work to achieve a common goal. Teams are often superior to individuals as they are more creative, have more information and more interpersonal communication dynamics. A team's contribution often exceeds the sum of the individuals contribution in a business environment. However there is a danger of teams wasting time through 'social loafing' or avoiding individual responsibilities on the pretext that someone else in the group will do it.
Variables of group communication: Conflict, conformity and consensus are the three variables of group dynamics.
Conflict is generally misunderstood as a deterrent and counterproductive in group behaviour. However, conflict is an essential part of team dynamics and call resolve issues through debates and testing of ideas before they are implemented. Every one's point of view is to be heard before consensus is reached. If the group does not exhibit conflict there is very little use for them to be together, they may as well achieve individually.
Conformity is agreement with regard to rules, ideas and principles. Members can disagree on issues but there has to be conformity on fundamental principles as to how the group should operate. Though cohesiveness and conformity are a must for group dynamics, too much of stress on unity can result in what is called Groupthink which is a communication barrier resulting in the stifling of ideas and opposing points of view which enrich the body of information that the group produces. The pressure to unite may become so great that negative information is not discussed and questioned. Thus the group loses perspectives arising out of conflict. Conflict therefore is a pre-requisite to collaboration.
Consensus means reaching a solution acceptable to all in the group, that which best reflects the thinking of all the members. Consensus should be supported by all members. Consensus is not a majority vote or even a unanimous vote it is the collective thinking of the group. Productivity of the group is the highest at the point where conformity peaks and falls as the Groupthink increases.
Feedback: Giving feedback is essential to any group process. When giving feedback some points are to be noted: (a) It should always be constructive (b) Give both positive and negative feedback. People assume that feedback is given only when problems arise. This is not true. Positive feedback helps inspire and encourage team performance. In learning how to give feedback note these two aspects:
  • Be descriptive. Relate objectively what you saw and heard. More recent the better and be specific.
  • Avoid using labels. Words like undependable, unprofessional, irresponsible are labels we attach to behaviours. Drop the label and describe the behaviour itself. Whenever feedback is given pause for the receiver to respond. Let there be a discussion rather than a discourse.
  • Don't exaggerate. Don't say things like you are "always" late for meetings. This maybe untrue and unfair.
  • Speak for yourself. Don't speak for anyone else and don't refer to absent persons.
  • Use "I" statements. Instead of saying " You are late for meetings"; say -- " I get annoyed when you are late". "I" statements create an adult-peer relationship.

To minimise conflict in a group that is not productive. The group has to mingle before the meeting and members should get to know each other personally so that they can support each other's point of view objectively and oppose without fear. Consider each problem as a group problem -don't make a scapegoat of one member. For eg: " We would be done with meeting if Rekha had finished her task in time". Rarely is a single member responsible for the failure of a group process. As every role is a function of the individual personality and the group personality, thinking in terms of the group is a must for resolution of conflict. While making comments be realistic and goal-oriented, factual and constructive. When the atmosphere becomes tense diffuse the tension with a light-hearted comment or a joke. Restore harmony in a fighting group as soon as possible. Discussing is not the same as arguing.

There is an ethical dimension to accepting membership to a team. The team's needs, aspirations, goals and gain are put before personal gain. The attitude should be-- "I don't care who gets the credit as long as we achieve our team goal together". Finally each member has the duty to promote the team's welfare. "One for all and all for one" is the motto. However this varies much in different cultures. In the USA and Canada individual achievements are put before group achievements. This sometimes creates competition and bickering. In Japan however " a standing nail is hammered down". Meaning group consensus is a must for all action. Japanese insist that a majority consensus is not enough. Every member of the group HAS to agree before action is initiated. This takes time and effort.

Finally there are 4 strategies for communicating effectively in a group:

  1. Maintain formality
  2. Show respect
  3. Communicate clearly (avoid slang, jargon)
  4. Value diversity

Ask your doubts by adding comments to this post......

7 comments:

  1. Sir, first of all let me congratulate you on the commendable job and effort. This post is really informative on communicating to the team. But i'm confused on how and when do we decide to claim what is rightfully ours. How do people recognize the individuals effort..

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Vicky. First of all there is no need for you to go blowing your own horn about your achievements as long as the others in the team are appreciative of your contribution. Nevertheless every member of the team HAS to be proud of his or her own contribution to the team effort. But we don't go around patting our own backs. Let the others do it for you. If you truly believe that you have contributed to the team's success, let your comrades and your boss shower the praise. Stay quiet and self-confident. Team work is all about putting the team's welfare above personal welfare. Reminds me of what Frank Beckenbeur, the German national football team coach said in a TV interview when Germany won the FIFA world cup long ago....he said: "Now that we have won the cup, I 'll say 'we did it'. If we had lost I would have said - 'I did it'. Get that buddy?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello Sir,
    These lessons give a very good insight into the chosen topic.
    How do we handle a team which is not ready to think different? I mean, how do we override pre-occupied thoughts and put our points without damaging the decorum of a meeting or conversations?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Pavan,
    Good question!
    The scenario you have described is basically one of conflict between your ideas/stance and that of the adamant team members. Refer the section on conflict in the above lesson again.

    Conflict is not necessarily useless. It provokes the communicants to think up different dimensions, gain greater perspective of the problem and brainstorm solutions. In Japanese corporates 100% consensus is mandatory before any action is taken. However, this is not so in India and other parts of the globe. We usually settle for a majority vote.

    But you have described a situation wherein the team is completely deaf to your side of the story. Such a situation can end in a deadlock where decisions are unduly delayed or the wrong decision is taken simply because the one proposing it argues louder than the rest.

    Here are some ways in which this can be avoided:

    1. First get the adamant people to agree to something, even if that something is insignificant. Once they have done that,move progressively upwards in terms of the significance of the issue to get them to agree to bigger things till they are willing to your final stance. This requires immense tact and patience. It also eats up a lot of precious meeting time.

    2.Offer a "payoff". Payoff does not necessarily mean money. It can be anything from a simple pat-on-the-back to a promotion. Don't try to "bribe" them. Be sincere and commit only to those "extras" that you can afford to provide to make them soften their stance.For detailed info on "Payoff" read Dr. Eric Berne's 'Games People Play' or 'Born to Win' by Muriel James and Dorothy Jongeward (both books on Transactional Psychology). This is a far more effective strategy than the first one.

    3.Probably the best thing to do in a deadlock scenario is to adjourn the meeting indefinitely. In other words "strategically ignore" the troublemakers for sometime. Usually if your opposition wants "some" decision taken as quickly as you want it, then THEY will come back to the table willing to re-negotiate. It is then that you strike a powerful blow and demolish their obstinacy. Because in the second or third round (in case you adjourn twice, which is not a bad idea in some cases),you have the upper hand.In this kind of a tactical move, your opposition will not feel defeated because the issue has been discussed over and over and beaten to death!

    Your last resort is to use your official authority and override proposals. Repeat,last resort.

    A good communicator & great leader wins hearts and minds and avoids fueling conflict by taking rash one-sided decisions without due discussion.

    Observe and master human psychology my friend and you are a winner for life!!

    Good luck negotiating! Stay cool:)

    ReplyDelete
  5. sir your lectures are wonderful...

    ReplyDelete
  6. That looks very interesting to me. I am also entering the business world and would like to utilize the best approaches so that we can send our alluring offers to the customers swiftly. I am quite interested to work with texting software for business.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The situation has not improved since you wrote this either!
    I think cybersecurity needs to be taken into context with all other forms of electronic communications too. When we buy ANYTHING for communication we always consider the security aspect. I'm just wondering what your thoughts on these are https://nrcradio.co.uk/walkie-talkies/?
    Thanks,
    Dan

    ReplyDelete