Teamwork. Its touted as the magical formula to for corporate success. However, as is illustrated in the article above, teamwork doesn't work flawlessly all of the time. In the above-mentioned situation, the team tasked with
improving the process of getting mail to the intended recipient ended up complicating it. Worse still, no one dared to speak up against what they were doing, believing that to do so would be 'heresy'. Stupid as it may seem, this phenomenon is not as rare as we believe. Its in fact known as Groupthink, which is the result of members reaching consensus because they are trying to minimize conflict, and their strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.
According to Professor Amy Edmonson, teams fail because individuals don't realise that they have interesting and relevant information to share. This means that individual team members don't think that their opinion matter, or that the rest of the team don't want to hear it. Although there may be overly dominant members in the team, most of the team just wants to do the allocated task to the best of their ability, and if that means that someone truly believes 'it's a stupid idea' and has a better suggestion, they will most likely be willing to go along as long as it doesn't stretch the budget or time required.
Although we often view conflict negatively, functional conflict is necessary, and is in fact vital to combating groupthink. Most people, like Carmen Johnson, will toe the line, and even change their point of view to obtain the approval of the leader. However, this is not useful, as this means that the team isn't really a team at all, but a dictatorship full of puppets run by one or two puppet masters.
The next time someone in a group you're in voices an opposing view, don't be so quick to gang up on him or her, or think him/her a nuisance. Think about what they're saying first, and then give your answer, accompanied by a clear, logical explanation about why you feel that way.
Article Source:
Cubicle Culture: When teamwork doesn't work
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB109641717999730825.html
I think sometimes we tend to form our perceptions of others too quickly. Just because your group member is constantly arguing with your points and appear to have conflict with your opinions, you ought to keep in an open mind. Be open to criticism and although you might like the girl who is constantly in agreement with your words, she is not necessarily the most useful member of your group. The one who voices out the most or who has the most conflicts with you, is the most useful member of the group. He would be the one that contributes to the group's quality and faultless work.
ReplyDeleteSuch opposing voice may be seen as a contrast to the concept of groupthink as they are not herd-followers. This may spoil the collectivism culture of the group but they are still very essential to the group- for the growth of the group.
Its human nature to want other people to like you, and to do that, you don't argue with them even though you strongly feel they are wrong. If you do, your job or even your life may be in jeopardy.
ReplyDeleteJust look at Singapore. When we are NUMBER ONE we are so proud to tell the whole world. But when our airport is no longer the best or if American newspapers oppose our government, we will shoot them down and even threaten to sue them for libel.
This mentality is very dangerous, as we may just become very complacent, always thinking we are right just bcos we're the great Singapore. Even when other ppl give us good advice, we'll just ignore them.
Thank you Kelly for your insights. You're quite right to say that any opposition is seen as harmful, but is quite necessary if the group is to be effective.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that in our experience of doing projects we've found that the best members are not the ones who just keep nodding and don't say anything. I think part of the problem of no one daring to speak up in groups is diffusion of responsibility. Everyone thinks someone else can point out the problem, so they aren't compelled to action.
If you think something is seriously wrong about the way your group is doing things, tell them right away so the problem can be dealt with. Naturally, just don't be too aggressive about your opinion, but keep things civil and constructive.
Thank you Anon. Although I don't hold as cynical a view as you, we do seem to take criticism very personally at times. If even the Americans in the article don't dare to point out problems, what about Asians? Many of us Asians tend to view it as a matter of 'face'. If someone else says that we are wrong, we lose face, and that is just plain unacceptable. Because we wouldn't want to lose face, we don't point out problems because we don't want to embarass others either.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I feel that this mentality has to change. If something can be improved, the entire group will benefit. Should something go wrong, everyone will get blamed and end up in trouble, and have to do more work to fix any issues. In companies, bosses can take the lead by appointing a devil's advocate, and making it clear that everyone can make mistakes, regardless of whether they are the CEO or have a PhD.
You're right in saying that people in groups don't like to say things contrary to the majority. We're always told that the majority wins, and if you support the opposition in Singapore, many people will like to belittle your position by claiming that you're opposing for the sake of opposing. This same mentality carries over to the groups we form at work or in school. Just because you're not in the majority, for some reason your opinion doesn't matter, and you're just trying to be difficult. Just my humble observations and views here. :)
ReplyDeleteHi!
ReplyDeleteI feel that groups are important in the world today. It allows people to have a sense of belonging in this world and have channels to talk about personal issues which helps to release stress.
I agree with you that conflicts are important in groupthink. Conflicts enables people to think of more logical reasons for their decisions made and alternative methods to be used for more effectiveness.
Thus, with conflicts and agreements, can bring groupwork to a greater height.
Thank you for your comments, Belle and Sabina. :)
ReplyDeleteConflicts are good, although not everyone thinks so. To be honest, how many of us would have thought so had we not learnt that conflict can be functional? That is not to say that its not good if a team has no conflict at all. If a group can function well, that's good. Its when the group becomes inefficient that the lack of conflict truly becomes a problem.