# data[].attributes.body
Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1913, Max Ringelmann performed a simple experiment using German workers.  He asked subjects to pull on a rope alone or in groups and measured the strain to demonstrate social loafing.  This video recreates this experiment and talks about the theory.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Forbes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Business, like football, basketball or cycling, is mostly a team effort, so it's no surprise that sport metaphors are so big in business. But there's more substance there than meets the eye. Many of the world's most successful business leaders once had athletic ambitions, including Sun Microsystem's Scott McNealy, General Electric 's Jack Welch, eBay 's Meg Whitman, NBC Universal's Jeff Zucker, real estate magnate Thomas Barrack, fashion designer Vera Wang, restaurateur Marcus Samuelsson, and Nike 's Phil Knight. According to Lucy Kellaway, of the Financial Times, an astonishing half of the chief executives of Britain's biggest companies have won awards for their sporting prowess. Many of them have said their sporting experience made possible their business success.

What can we learn about business teams from sports teams? Quite a lot, actually. After all, both depend on individuals who are very ambitious, focused and able--and sometimes hard to manage. Both compete in environments where tiny margins make huge differences. And both put personal relationships at risk as rivals have to compete for spots on an elite team.

Having spent long periods of time with high-performance teams in both sports and business, I can straightaway dismiss two widely held myths. First, it is not true that high-performance teams are generally comfortable places to be. Second, it is not true that the best teams are usually made up of the best individuals. Why? Here are four observations based on my ongoing research with teams of sportsmen, lawyers and military surgeons. All of them operate at the top of their games, some of them in the most ferocious conditions imaginable.

1. What makes teams good can make them difficult, too. The qualities that make individuals useful for high-performance teams--drive, focus, perfectionism, high expectations and above-average intelligence--can make them difficult for others to work with. For example, self-confidence can aid your decision-making but alienate others when you come across as domineering. A superior intellect can help you get your head around complex problems but also lead you to too easily dismiss the contributions of others. High expectations lead to setting ambitious goals but sometimes leave others feeling unable to satisfy them. So you have to figure out how to maximize virtues while minimizing the risks they entail.

2. Individual star performance travels poorly across teams. Whether in basketball, law or investment banking, individual star players can find it difficult to replicate their superior performance when they move from one team to another. It takes NBA basketball players an average of 21 games with a new team to recover their pre-transfer performance. A group of Harvard researchers discovered that 46% of a sample of 1,052 investment analysts, all star performers, were unable to replicate their outstanding performance when they moved to a different investment bank, even after five years. One plausible explanation for this is that teams develop highly idiosyncratic routines, even in what appear to be very similar environments, and newcomers take time to adapt. A more interesting explanation is that the success of individual star performers is rarely the result of raw talent alone but also builds on the support structure around them. In other words, your organization may owe you as a star player, but you owe it for allowing you to be as good as you are.

3. High-performance teams are invariably fragile. Teams in sports and business are rife with tensions. Individuals cooperate even as they compete with one another for resources or opportunities. Camaraderie and rivalry coexist, as do control and autonomy, the need to be creative and protocol, loyalty and open-mindedness, and focus on developing oneself as well as those around one. Those tensions can make teams feel dysfunctional even if they are anything but.

4. Occasionally it makes sense to sacrifice competence in favor of sociability. As seasoned coaches know, the best individuals don't always make up the best teams. Real Madrid famously spent over 400 million euros acquiring the likes of Figo, Carlos, Zidane, Ronaldo, Raúland Beckham only to see their investment return the worst sequence of short-term results in the club's history, between 2004 and '06. On the other hand, the Oakland A's spent less on their payroll and won more baseball games than almost any other club between 2000 and 2006. Why is it that a technically suboptimal team can outperform an all-star cast? Team managers, when asked, will often answer in terms of personalities, perhaps pointing out that a socially gifted colleague can smooth the edges of those at the top of the food chain who are oblivious to the emotional harm they inflict on others. The tradeoff between competence and sociability raises thorny issues for team selection. After all, how can you justify sacrificing someone who is, by any objective measure, technically superior for someone who is merely good enough, yet expected to gel a team socially--a judgment call that more often than not is subjective?

Of course a socially cohesive team need not be a harmonious one. As Richard Hackman, a Harvard psychology professor, explains, the relationship between team performance and harmony is a tricky one: Is interpersonal harmony a cause or a consequence of good performance? Experiments seem to suggest the latter, but a socially cohesive team can defuse, or at least constructively handle, interpersonal conflict. And that is no mean feat.

What are the leadership implications of all this? Choose your best team rather than your best individuals. Decide what level of destructive behavior you think the team can absorb and where to draw the line, knowing that what makes the best members effective can make them difficult too. Realize that high-performance teams are likely to feel fragile and dysfunctional at times, but that the tensions that give rise to that fragility are entirely natural and can be put to good use. When considering moving a star performer onto your team, bear in mind that star performance doesn't easily transfer (which can make the new transfer feel terribly insecure). Remind one another of what you are here to do, why what you do is important, and what is expected of everyone involved. And finally, help create an environment in which your team members can make a little bit of progress every day.

That's all easy to say and tough to do consistently well. Small comfort, then, that Fabio Capello, Raymond Domenech and Marcello Lippi, despite impressive track records in managing star-studded teams, failed to get it right with England, France and Italy respectively in the World Cup this year.

Mark de Rond teaches at Cambridge Judge Business School, at Cambridge University, and is the author of The Last Amateurs: To Hell and Back with the Cambridge Boat Race Crew. He is working on a new book on teams for Harvard Business Review Press.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Business, like football, basketball or cycling, is mostly a team effort, so it's no surprise that sport metaphors are so big in business. But there's more substance there than meets the eye.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Harvard Business Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We all have too much to do and too little time to do it. As a boss, you may have already learned how to plan, prioritize, and streamline your work. But how can you help your team members do the same? Should you dictate the processes and tools they use? How do you keep people from taking on too much and burning out or continuously spinning their wheels?

What the Experts Say
In today's complex and collaborative workplace, the real challenge is to manage not just your personal workload but the collective one, says Jordan Cohen, a productivity expert and the Senior Director of Organizational Effectiveness, Learning & Development at Weight Watchers. "Helping your team manage its time well is a critical factor for its success." Elizabeth Grace Saunders, author of How to Invest Your Time Like Money and the founder of Real Life E Time Coaching & Training, agrees. As a manager, your role is to both "set the strategic vision" and serve as "the buffer for unreasonable expectations" from the rest of the organization. Here are some tips to ensure that your team works productively.

Set the example
The first step is to get your own house in order (if it's not already) and exhibit good time management practices yourself, says Saunders. Be smart about how you allocate the hours of your own workday-the meetings you attend, the emails you respond to, and the projects you sign on for-so your team can follow your lead. "If you're stretched and overloaded, you can't think strategically about your own time let alone anyone else's," she says. Adds Cohen: "Model the behavior" and show them that you make time for work that matters.

Set goals
To get a handle on how everyone on your team should be spending their time, you have to "step back" and "think about what exactly you want your team to be working on," says Saunders. Outline key goals and analyze your team's capacity to execute on them. This will help you decide what people should be working on and what they shouldn't and accomplish more by committing to less. It's your job "to set boundaries."

Clarify expectations
The next step, according to Saunders, is meet with your team members one-on-one to communicate the priorities and expectations for their respective roles. "Tell them the top two or three areas where you want them to focus," she says. Be specific. "The last thing you want is for someone to begin his day thinking, 'I have seven projects to work on, where do I start?'" Also be explicit about how much time you expect people to devote to tasks that crop up from time to time. Does an unexpected client pitch meeting require a day, half-day or a few hours of prep? To prepare for an upcoming brainstorming meeting, should someone spend an hour or just a few minutes jotting down ideas? "Help him understand the quality of the work you're expecting," she says. But don't micromanage, Cohen warns. "Describe the outcome you are trying to achieve and then get out of the way-let them determine on their own how best to get there," he says. " Telling them how to do their jobs every step of the way creates bottlenecks." Remember, adds Saunders, there isn't one "right" approach to time management.

Encourage open communication
Conversations with team members about time management should be ongoing, according to Saunders. "Encourage an honest dialogue," she says. She suggests asking reports about the challenges they face, how you can help them allocate their time more effectively, and whether they need more resources. "It's when people don't tell you that they're overstretched and then don't follow through at the last moment that leads to problems." Cohen suggests holding a quarterly team powwow for colleagues to discuss priorities. "Look at the objectives you set back in January and ask, 'Are these still relevant? Are we on the right track? What has changed?'" he says. If you have a direct report who still isn't making progress on his work despite ostensible effort, do "some digging" to uncover the root of the problem, suggests Cohen. "Is it the workload? Is it the way the job is structured? Or is it the person? You need to peel it back," he says.

Give team members autonomy
The key to improving individual productivity is to eliminate or delegate unimportant tasks and replace them with value-added ones, says Cohen. So "give your employees permission to make decisions" on which meetings they attend (or skip), which email lists they are party to, and which responsibilities they hand off. Saunders recommends encouraging them to block out large chunks of time on their calendars to get their day-to-day work done, as well as smaller chunks for "fixed expenses" like daily planning, email, and other "maintenance" chores.

Rethink meetings
Meetings: the worst office time-suck. And yet, you need them to share information, solicit ideas, and make decisions. You can't get rid of them, but you can surely eliminate some and study up on techniques to make the ones that remain on the calendar more effective and efficient. (Read: shorter.) The Golden Rule of meetings, says Cohen, is to "make sure you have a clearly defined purpose for each one." He also recommends "sending out meeting material beforehand" because "it takes the reading part out of the meeting and puts the collaboration part in." Also consider other ways to keep people in the loop, says Saunders. You could, for instance, ask each team member to create and circulate "a list or report of what he or she accomplished last week and priorities for the week ahead. This keeps the team on track and keeps everyone aligned," she says.

Reserve downtime
If your organization has a hard driving, 24/7 work culture, you should also consider mandating breaks for your team. Research shows that predictable time off improves productivity and morale. "The manager has to be deliberate about scheduling [downtime]," says Cohen. Even if your company's culture is more relaxed, it's still important to communicate when you expect your reports to work and when you don't, Saunders adds. For example, "if you send [someone] an assignment on Friday afternoon, be clear whether you want him to be working on it over the weekend or if it can wait till Monday. People are often willing to give the extra push, but if they push only to discover that it wasn't necessary, they end up feeling resentful and burnt out."

Staying on top of the overflowing inboxes and ever-expanding to-do lists of an entire group of people is a challenge even for the most efficient among us. So you may want to enlist "outside help in the form of a coach or an HR manager" to assist you, says Saunders. If an employee is really struggling, "there are things you can do-meet with him regularly, come up with daily plans, give him more feedback-but he probably needs a lot more help than you, the lone manager, can provide."
Principles to Remember Do:

Make smart use of shared calendars by blocking off hours for focused work and evening downtime

Apprise your direct reports of the team's progress in meeting its goals; this holds people accountable and lets them know what others are doing

Communicate when you expect your reports to put in extra hours and when you don't-failure to do so builds resentment

Don't:

Micromanage. Ask your reports about the challenges they face and how you can help them allocate their time more effectively

Overcommit your team to too many projects and initiatives. You should be a buffer for unreasonable expectations from the rest of the organization

Discount the idea of enlisting the help of a management coach to assist you

Case Study #1: Create open lines of communication and respect your team's downtime
David Miller, executive vice president of the Columbus, Ohio-based Cameron Mitchell Restaurants-which owns an assortment of high-end eateries across the United States-says he had trouble managing his time when he transitioned from his former job as vice-president of operations to his current role, where he oversees a nine-member executive team.

Then, one day, in an operations meeting, he had an epiphany. "I thought, 'I shouldn't be in this meeting.'" He realized he needed to let go of his former responsibilities and consider strategic priorities for himself, his team, and the organization. Once those were clear in his own mind, David scheduled one-on-one conversations with his team members, including the heads of finance, marketing, and HR. He talked about his vision for each of their departments, but he also encouraged feedback. "I explained to them that this was a new role for me and that I was trying to learn and be as effective as I could be," he says. "I asked them, 'How can you and I best work together? And, 'what do you need from me?'"

He also avoided telling them how to handle their individual work schedules, focusing on results not process. "Everybody's different-from how they manage their to-do lists to the books read-I don't want to micromanage them; I want to support them."

This includes making sure his team isn't "always on." A few years ago, for instance, he heard complaints about the weekly project and status updates he'd asked his executive team and senior managers to send out every Sunday. "I was hearing that this was not necessarily something they wanted to be spending their Sundays writing, so now I ask them to do it only every other week anytime between Friday [morning] and Sunday [evening], which gives people more leeway," he says. And "I want to make sure that my team members have personal time to recharge and to be with their families and friends."

Case Study #2: Communicate expectations and track progress
Jim Keane, the president and CEO of Steelcase, the Grand Rapids, Michigan-based manufacturer of office furniture, says there's no one-size-fits-all approach to time management. "When you're a new manager, you try to help your team get better by telling them what you've figured out," he says. "But one of the humbling things you come to learn is that what works for you doesn't necessarily work for everyone."

He's learned that frequent one-on-one conversations are the best way to make sure that individual team members are managing their time in ways that works for them. If people are feeling overloaded, stressed about "stuff going on at home" or "pushed in ten different directions," that tension will come through. He says he approaches these meetings from "a point of empathy." Sometimes he needs to extend a deadline or ask the stretched employee to recommend a colleague who might help with a particular task. "The job of senior leadership is to align resources around priorities," he says.

Last fall at a management off-site, Jim and his team of 12 senior leaders decided to enter a new line of business. "We got everyone involved to create the objectives, the strategic initiative, and the timeframe, and soon realized that all of the people that needed to execute-that is, most of the executives in the room-were already very busy with their day jobs."

So Jim enlisted the help of his chief-of-staff to block off time in the managers' calendars for work and regular check-ins on the project. "In order for an enterprise initiative to be successful, you have to force it into people's schedules," he explains. He also asked the chief-of-staff to provide regular updates on everyone's overall progress and continues to meet with the team to review expectations and priorities. "It's essential for everyone to be on the same page," he says.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We all have too much to do and too little time to do it. As a boss, you may have already learned how to plan, prioritize, and streamline your work. But how can you help your team members do the same? Should you dictate the processes and tools they use?

# data[].attributes.body
Website: Strategic Management

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Strategic Management :: Task Interdependence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Strategic Management :: Task Interdependence

# data[].attributes.headline
Examples of Task Interdependence in Manufacturing Companies

# data[].attributes.subject
Examples of Task Interdependence in Manufacturing Companies

# data[].attributes.body
Article excerpt: Chron (website)

# data[].attributes.body
Blog: New York Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Are you tuned in to the emotions of others? Or have you been accused of being insensitive?

If you are among those people who are mystified by moods, new research offers hope. A new study shows that certain types of reading can actually help us improve our sensitivity IQ. To find out how well you read the emotions of others, take the Well quiz, which is based on an assessment tool developed by University of Cambridge professor Simon Baron-Cohen.

For each photo, choose the word that best describes what you think the person depicted is thinking or feeling.

Understanding Your Score
The average score for this test is in the range of 22 to 30 correct responses. If you scored above 30, you may be quite good at understanding someone's mental state based on facial cues. If you scored below 22, you may find it difficult to understand a person's mental state based on their appearance.

(If no final score appeared, please double check to be sure you didn't skip a question.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are you tuned in to the emotions of others? Or have you been accused of being insensitive? If you are among those people who are mystified by moods, new research offers hope. A new study shows that certain types of reading can actually help us improve our sensitivity IQ.

# data[].attributes.body
Quiz: MindTools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Let's look at how you can develop good skills in each area.

Self-Awareness (Questions 1, 8, 11)

In his 1995 book "Emotional Intelligence: Why it can Matter More Than IQ," Goleman explained that people with high self-awareness are "aware of their moods as they are having them." [2]

To increase self-awareness, learn about mindfulness. This involves focusing on the present moment - including how you're feeling. And keep a journal in which you write about and analyze the emotional situations you experience from day to day.

Self-Regulation (Questions 2, 4, 7)

Motivation (Questions 6, 10, 12)

Self-motivation is strongly affected by your emotions. When you're distracted by your emotions, you may find it hard to see tasks through.

Boost your motivation levels by developing self-discipline, and by looking for and celebrating small wins - simple jobs that, when you've completed them, give you a sense of achievement.

Empathy (Questions 3, 13, 15)

Empathy is the ability to recognize other people's emotions and understand their perspectives. Goleman calls this aspect of EI "the fundamental people skill."

Social Skills (Questions 5, 9, 14)

Even if you're not a natural "people person," it is possible to develop better social skills.

Start by taking our quiz to see which communication skills you need to improve on. Then, find out how you can develop trust and rapport with people - this is an essential part of building good working relationships.

Five Ways to Show Emotional Intelligence Infographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Emotionally Intelligent Are You? - Boosting Your People Skills

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Take this quiz to find out how strong you are in five areas of emotional intelligence, and learn what you can do to boost it.

# data[].attributes.headline
7 Ways to Create Emotionally Intelligent Teams

# data[].attributes.subject
7 Ways to Create Emotionally Intelligent Teams

# data[].attributes.body
Article: The Economist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When Daniel Goleman released " Emotional Intelligence " in 1995, did anyone think that this best-selling book would transform the role of leadership?

After selling more than 5,000,000 copies and being dubbed "a revolutionary, paradigm-shattering idea" by the Harvard Business Review, it's clear that Goleman struck a chord with business leaders.
But, is it possible to create emotionally intelligent teams?
In their landmark research findings published in "Building the Emotional Intelligence of Groups", Vanessa Urch Druskat and Steven B. Wolff assert that emotional intelligence underlies the effective processes of successful teams and that such resulting processes cannot be imitated; they must originate from genuine emotional intelligence at the team level. Druskat and Wolff use the following analogy to back-up their point: "a piano student can be taught to play Minuet in G, but he won't become a modern-day Bach without knowing music theory and being able to play with heart."

While creating successful teams isn't as simple as mimicking the processes of emotionally intelligent groups of people, what you can do is create the necessary conditions in which team members can develop their emotional intelligence. Those three conditions are: trust among members, a sense of group identity and a sense of group efficacy.

Here are the seven things you can do to foster these three conditions that constitute emotionally intelligent teams:

1. Have a ring leader

Before you can start improving your team's EI, you have to work on yourself by cultivating:

Self-awareness - leaders aren't only self-aware; they also know how to recognize their emotions.

Emotional management - leaders are able to maintain their cool.

Effective communication - leaders are able to clearly express their thoughts.

Social awareness - leaders can realize what's going on and give valuable feedback.

Conflict resolution - leaders can effectively handle conflicts and offer a resolution.

On top of these EI traits, leaders should also be respected by their team members. That can be accomplished by working on these five traits of business leaders who are respected:

Act polite and respectful - leaders treat everyone with common courtesy.

Show a willingness to change - leaders learn from their mistakes and failures so that you can grow.

Listen - leaders don't just listen, they ask their employees what's going on and leaders ask for employee feedback.

Avoid excuses - leaders own up to their own mistakes.

Help others - leaders are always willing to lend a helping hand whenever someone needs it.

Remember, if you want your team to become more emotionally intelligent, then you must first work on building your own personal EI and becoming a leader that your team can respect and someone they can rally behind.

2. Identify team members' strengths and weaknesses

Your team members are more than just employees or a job title. They're unique individuals who have great stories to tell. Your employees also have diverse skills, talents, and knowledge that could be beneficial to your overall goals.

If you want to make the most of every team member, then start by getting to know them better. Preferably, you should learn to know more about them outside of a project so that you can see what they can bring to the table outside of their traditional job role or title. Hewlett-Packard, according to Druskat and Wolff, likes to have each of their employees work at cross-training. This means team members see, "if each member could pinch-hit on everyone else's job."

Additionally, you want to look beyond first impressions, encourage innovation, let your team members do the teaching, and offer rewards and recognition.

When a team member does make a mistake, offer useful feedback so that the leader shows the person that they are more important than the process of merely being reprimanded.

3. Spark passion

First, as a leader, make sure that you hire the right team members. I'm not just talking about people with the skills or experience. I'm talking about individuals who fit into your company's culture and are passionate about their work and your business.

Even though you've hired the right individuals, this doesn't mean that they won't run out of passion from time-to-time. To prevent sagging energy from occurring, you can spark passion by doing the following:

Recognizing the accomplishments and hard work of your team members

Having a flexible and engaging work environment where teamwork is valued

Making sure that your company has a mission that you are working toward so that everyone has a sense of purpose

4. Build team norms

As Druskat and Wolff state in " Building the Emotional Intelligence of Groups ":
"Group emotional intelligence is about small acts that make a big difference. It is not about a team member working all night to meet a deadline; it is about saying thank you for doing so. It is not about an in-depth discussion of ideas; it is about asking a quiet member for his thoughts. It is not about harmony, lack of tension, and all members liking each other; it is about acknowledging when harmony is false, tension is unexpressed, and treating others with respect."
Remember, when you do establish rules, make sure that they connect to your values. When these guidelines support both your business and your team members beliefs, they'll be more inclined to jump to support and back these rules.

5. Develop creative ways to manage stress

Stress can lead to your employees getting burned out, as well as harm their overall health. Because of this, your team should be able to handle situations such as deadlines and grievances with other coworkers in a healthy way.

To help keep the stress levels of your employees down, try some of the following tactics:

Stick to schedules: Rushing and extending projects can affect your team's time management habits and skills.

Encourage team members to disconnect from work and take breaks: Give everyone a chance to rejuvenate by giving them some time to focus on activities that can help them relax.

Discourage multitasking: The multitasking technique does not work. In fact, it can double the amount of time it takes to complete a task. Encourage employees to focus on one task at a time.

Resolve conflicts: Not everyone in the workplace is going to get along. However, addressing any issues before they disrupt the office is a great stress reducer.

Be empathetic: You should be aware of what motivates your team, as well as any challenges, that you're team may be experiencing. For example, if a team member has lost a loved one, then you should be compassionate and understand that their mind is elsewhere and ask how you can be supportive of them.

6. Allow team members to have a voice

Having excellent communication skills is an absolute must. You can help your team members develop stronger communication skills by having them work on active listening, gaining a better understanding of body language, and giving them a channel to vent their frustrations or concerns. However, don't let those negative emotions drag the entire team down. Instead, use it constructively so that your team can solve a problem together and figure out how to way to address the problem.

Additionally, you should also give your team the opportunity to share their ideas. The Hay Group, a consulting firm, uses a 'storyboarding' technique where team members create a small poster that represents their ideas. And, make sure that you even ask and encourage your quiet team members what they think.

7. Encourage employees to work and play together

While there can be disadvantages to spending every waking moment together, having employees who spend time with each other outside of the workplace can actually be beneficial to the workplace.

Stephen Ufford from Trulioo tells SUCCESS:
"Team members should definitely hang out outside of work. It makes working together more enjoyable and helps co-workers stay motivated during crunch time. These types of relationships fuel open communication, a good work ethic, flexibility and a better understanding of each person's roles and expectations. If you hire the right professionals, workplace drama will be minimal."
Grant Gordon from Solomon Consulting Group adds:
"Whether you have a customary Friday afternoon beer with your co-workers, take the whole team to a baseball game a few times a season or sweat together in corporate challenge events, the result is the same: Colleagues who are in each other's lives work harder. You're no longer a collection of individuals who gather in an office but a true community pulling for group success."
Raoul Davis, Ascendant Group, says:
"Culture isn't only built within the four walls of your business. Having employees that enjoy spending time together can help make work that much more enjoyable and lead to their hearts being more into the day-to-day work they are doing for the company."
Here's to creating a much more emotionally intelligent team this year!

--
John Rampton is an entrepreneur, investor, online marketing guru and startup enthusiast. He is founder of online payments company Due.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Ways to Create Emotionally Intelligent Teams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When Daniel Goleman released "Emotional Intelligence" in 1995, did anyone think that this best-selling book would transform the role of leadership? After selling more than 5,000,000 copies and being dubbed "a revolutionary, paradigm-shattering idea" by the Harvard Business Review, it's clear that Goleman struck a chord with business leaders.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: The Balance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The expression "There is no "I" in team," is oft-repeated in the workplace and of course in sporting activities at all levels. I have lost count of how many workplaces I have visited where some variation of this saying is found on a motivational poster hanging on a wall. The reference, of course, suggests that no one person's needs, abilities or ideas are any more important than the combined abilities and efforts of the entire group.

For youth sports coaches and team leaders in the workplace, it is an interesting saying, but is it true? Is the essence of group collaboration all about suppressing the individuality of the team members for the benefit of the group? The answer, in my opinion, is a resounding, "it depends." Or "maybe." Or, "maybe not." Now that this is clear, let's dig in just a bit.

Teams in the Workplace:

In the world of work, the purpose of the team is to harness the skills of the individuals to accelerate progress and improve performance. The theory suggests that the team should be (operative phrase) collectively more intelligent than the smartest member and be able to make better decisions than any one individual. Of course, the theory forgets to take into account the nuances of humans being humans and introducing all of the noisy, nasty complexities of ego and bias.

In studies on idea generation (often referenced as brainstorming), teams should, in theory, generate more and better ideas than individuals working on their own.

Guess what? The studies suggest that those egos and biases and the inherent socialization issues often get in the way of achieving this lofty objective.

The foremost researcher on workplace teams during the past few decades, the late, Dr. Richard Hackman, offered:

"I have no question that when you have a team, the possibility exists that it will generate magic, producing something extraordinary, but don't count on it."

The operative phrase in his quote is, "don't count on it." All types of human issues are of course the culprits that degrade performance and keep teams from realizing their lofty potential.

The Suppression of Individuality in Pursuit of Team Performance

The evidence would seem to be overwhelming that the essence of achieving high team performance must be about stomping out the performance degrading biases and issues of the individuals and finding a way to get them to march in lockstep fashion toward a shared goal. From ample experience, however, I believe that the issue is not one of knocking out individuality, but rather finding ways to enhance the skills and abilities of the individuals for the tasks along the way.

Consider the primary issues cited by Dr. Hackman and others necessary for the development of a high-performance team:

A clear and compelling purpose.

Clear membership.

A supportive organization.

Enabling systems and structure.

Team coaching.

If you decompose each of these somewhat arcane sounding requirements, you begin to find terms we can all relate to, including shared values; strong, effective leadership, supportive sponsorship from executives and managers and incentives that support not inhibit group collaboration.

Nowhere in the conditions required for an effective team does it suggest that the personalities of the individuals be reduced to some borg-like (science fiction term for a collective group of automatons who only think and perform in unison) performance.

The fundamental conditions for success do suggest there must be alignment around the purpose of the project. Inherent in this purpose is the notion of a well-defined customer and an agreement on what is to be delivered to that customer. While this suggests a singular view, it does not require the sacrifice of individuality for success.

Another core issue for group success is the emergence and application of a clear set of values: shared values that guide acceptable behaviors and promote accountability. Much like the purpose, the values are understood and shared across the group, however, they do not require the "I" to be eliminated from the team.

They do require that each individual in his or her own way aspire to support and behave according to the spirit of the values. And yes, this does leave some room for interpretation.

The Role of the Leader and the "I" in Team:

Leading group initiatives is one of the more challenging exercises in our world of work. Project Managers live this daily with their temporary and unique initiatives. Product Managers accountable for their offerings must guide groups of individuals, often without much authority. In all circumstances, group, team or initiative leaders are dependent upon the participation and support of others for success. Experienced group leaders understand the importance of the following five priorities:

1. Defining their role as one accountable to team members for success and safety.

2. Guiding the emergence of a team culture where values are understood and supported.

3. Identifying or allowing the individuals with the right skills for the situation to step-up and contribute or lead.

4. Policing the ego issues that degrade performance, by drawing upon the team values.

5. Working with individuals and groups to both promote collaboration and ensure that individual genius is not lost in the translation.

The Bottom Line:

In reality, there is "I" in team, especially when the "I" is aligned with others around shared values and encouraged to offer his or her best in support of group objectives. Perhaps it is time to update all of those motivational posters.

--Updated from original by Art Petty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Debating the "There Is No 'I' in Team" Management Cliche

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The expression "There is no "I" in team," is oft-repeated in the workplace and of course in sporting activities at all levels. I have lost count of how many workplaces I have visited where some variation of this saying is found on a motivational poster hanging on a wall.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Surprising Problem of Too Much Talent

# data[].attributes.subject
The Surprising Problem of Too Much Talent

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Scientific American

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advertisement

Whether you're the owner of the Dallas Cowboys or captain of the playground dodge ball team, the goal in picking players is the same: Get the top talent. Hearts have been broken, allegiances tested, and budgets busted as teams contend for the best athletes. The motivation for recruiting peak performers is obvious - exceptional players are the key to team success - and this belief is shared not only by coaches and sports fans, but also by corporations, investors, and even whole industries. Everyone wants a team of stars.

While there is no denying that exceptional players like Emmitt Smith can put points on the board and enhance team success, new research by Roderick Swaab and colleagues suggests there is a limit to the benefit top talents bring to a team. Swaab and colleagues compared the amount of individual talent on teams with the teams' success, and they find striking examples of more talent hurting the team.

The researchers looked at three sports: basketball, soccer, and baseball. In each sport, they calculated both the percentage of top talent on each team and the teams' success over several years. For example, they identified top NBA talent using each player's Estimated Wins Added (EWA), a statistic commonly employed to capture a player's overall contribution to his team, along with selection for the All-star tournament. Once the researchers determined who the elite players were, they calculated top-talent percentage at the team level by dividing the number of star players on the team by the total number of players on that team. Finally, team performance was measured by the team's win-loss record over 10 years.

For both basketball and soccer, they found that top talent did in fact predict team success, but only up to a point. Furthermore, there was not simply a point of diminishing returns with respect to top talent, there was in fact a cost. Basketball and soccer teams with the greatest proportion of elite athletes performed worse than those with more moderate proportions of top level players.

Why is too much talent a bad thing? Think teamwork. In many endeavors, success requires collaborative, cooperative work towards a goal that is beyond the capability of any one individual. Even Emmitt Smith needed effective blocking from the Cowboy offensive line to gain yardage. When a team roster is flooded with individual talent, pursuit of personal star status may prevent the attainment of team goals. The basketball player chasing a point record, for example, may cost the team by taking risky shots instead of passing to a teammate who is open and ready to score.

Two related findings by Swaab and colleagues indicate that there is in fact tradeoff between top talent and teamwork. First, Swaab and colleagues found that the percentage of top talent on a team affects intrateam coordination. For the basketball study, teams with the highest levels of top performers had fewer assists and defensive rebounds, and lower field-goal percentages. These failures in strategic, collaborative play undermined the team's effectiveness. The second revealing finding is that extreme levels of top talent did not have the same negative effect in baseball, which experts have argued involves much less interdependent play. In the baseball study, increasing numbers of stars on a team never hindered overall performance. Together these findings suggest that high levels of top talent will be harmful in arenas that require coordinated, strategic efforts, as the quest for the spotlight may trump the teamwork needed to get the job done.

The lessons here extend beyond the ball field to any group or endeavor that must balance competitive and collaborative efforts, including corporate teams, financial research groups, and brainstorming exercises. Indeed, the impact of too much talent is even evident in other animals: When hen colonies have too many dominant, high-producing chickens, conflict and hen mortality rise while egg production drops. So before breaking the bank to recruit superstars, team owners and industry experts might want to consider whether the goal they are trying to achieve relies on individual talent alone, or a cooperative synergy from the team. If the latter, it would be wise to reign in the talent and focus on teamwork.

Are you a scientist who specializes in neuroscience, cognitive science, or psychology? And have you read a recent peer-reviewed paper that you would like to write about? Please send suggestions to Mind Matters editor Gareth Cook. Gareth, a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist, is the series editor of Best American Infographics and can be reached at garethideas AT gmail.com or Twitter @garethideas.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

Cindi May is a Professor of Psychology at the College of Charleston. She explores mechanisms for optimizing cognitive function in college students, older adults, and individuals with intellectual disabilities. She is also the project director for a TPSID grant from the Department of Education, which promotes the inclusion of students with intellectual disabilities in postsecondary education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Surprising Problem of Too Much Talent

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whether you're the owner of the Dallas Cowboys or captain of the playground dodge ball team, the goal in picking players is the same: Get the top talent. Hearts have been broken, allegiances tested, and budgets busted as teams contend for the best athletes.

# data[].attributes.headline
Competition Or Collaboration: Which Will Help Your Team Produce The Best Results?

# data[].attributes.subject
Competition Or Collaboration: Which Will Help Your Team Produce The Best Results?

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Forbes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What makes for a better work culture: competition or collaboration?

It's a question C-suite executives are asking with more frequency - perhaps because reported rivalries among White House staffers have them wondering about the most effective approach for their own leadership teams. Does encouraging rivalry result in everyone bringing their A-game?

When the executives I work with ask me this question, I answer by sharing a story from my own personal experience.

At one point in my career, I worked for an organization where the CEO created intense competition among the leadership team. He even hired two people to do the same job and didn't tell them. His intention was to decide which one was best and to fire the other.

Did the tactic work?

Hardly. Instead it created a culture of back stabbing, in-fighting and resource hoarding. No one on the leadership team trusted each other. I watched talented people walk out the door, and then I did the same.

If you want to create a culture that will produce breakthrough results, collaboration trumps competition by a long shot. You want people to understand what their individual strengths are so they can pool those strengths and move toward a common vision.

Once collaboration is in place, people are much more trusting of each other, more willing to stretch themselves and more likely to create amazing results.

The opposite happens when competition starts showing up. People hoard systems, information and support staff. They're less likely to share all kinds of resources - physical and intellectual. Those who see solutions for problems don't share them until they can be sure they'll get the credit. It's impossible to get to the best ideas when people refuse to share and work through thinking together.

When competition is in play, people don't trust each other enough to authentically create stretch goals that will enable everyone to grow beyond where they are now.

If you sincerely want a group of people to be high-performing together, you don't want to create a culture of internal competition within the team.

That being said, I have seen other organizations who use healthy competition between teams to produce cutting-edge ideas. In these cases, two or three teams were charged with doing the exact same thing. They knew the other teams existed, but these teams didn't share resources (budget, people or ideas) across the groups. Each team wanted to get to the end result on its own to be the winner.

This kind of competition between teams can create an intensity that generates powerful results for an organization. When you do this, you need to be transparent, and you want to clearly establish that they're all working toward the same goal that will ultimately benefit the whole company and everyone in it. It's also a good idea to let people know ahead of time that those teams will be shuffled up into new groups when the competition is over and then everyone will be expected to share best practices with each other.

Ultimately, you want to create a workplace culture where people freely share information, opinions and perspectives. The best way to achieve that is through building trust and emphasizing collaboration, not competition.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Competition Or Collaboration: Which Will Help Your Team Produce The Best Results?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What makes for a better work culture: competition or collaboration? It's a question C-suite executives are asking with more frequency - perhaps because reported rivalries among White House staffers have them wondering about the most effective approach for their own leadership teams. Does encouraging rivalry result in everyone bringing their A-game?

# data[].attributes.body
Video: YouTube

# data[].attributes.body
Video: Dollars & Data (YouTube)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Project Mgmt: Google's "Project Aristotle"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn what Google's most successful teams have in common. * NYT Article: http://tinyurl.com/jbvmtmf * Harvard Research (2002): http://tinyurl.com/hwqyp44

# data[].attributes.headline
Google Spent 2 Years Studying 180 Teams. The Most Successful Ones Shared These 5 Traits

# data[].attributes.subject
Google Spent 2 Years Studying 180 Teams. The Most Successful Ones Shared These 5 Traits

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Inc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the years, Google has embarked on countless quests, collected endless amounts of data, and spent millions trying to better understand its people. One of the company's most interesting initiatives, Project Aristotle, gathered several of Google's best and brightest to help the organization codify the secrets to team effectiveness.

Specifically, Google wanted to know why some teams excelled while others fell behind.

Before this study, like many other organizations, Google execs believed that building the best teams meant compiling the best people. It makes sense. The best engineer plus an MBA, throw in a PhD, and there you have it. The perfect team, right? In the words of Julia Rozovsky, Google's people analytics manager, "We were dead wrong."

Selected to lead the efforts was Abeer Dubey, Google's director of people analytics (HR). Eager to find the perfect mixture of skills, backgrounds, and traits to engineer super-teams, Dubey recruited statisticians, organizational psychologists, sociologists, engineers, and researchers to help solve the riddle. Included in this all-star lineup was Rozovsky.

Fast forward two years, and Project Aristotle has managed to study 180 Google teams, conduct 200-plus interviews, and analyze over 250 different team attributes. Unfortunately, though, there was still no clear pattern of characteristics that could be plugged into a dream-team generating algorithm.

As described in an article in The New York Times, it wasn't until Google started considering some intangibles that things began to fall into place.

"As they struggled to figure out what made a team successful, Rozovsky and her colleagues kept coming across research by psychologists and sociologists that focused on what are known as "group norms" - the traditions, behavioral standards, and unwritten rules that govern how teams function when they gather... Norms can be unspoken or openly acknowledged, but their influence is often profound."

With a new lens and some added direction from a research study on collective intelligence (abilities that emerge out of collaboration) by a group of psychologists from Carnegie Mellon, MIT, and Union College, Project Aristotle's researchers went back to the drawing board to comb their data for unspoken customs. Specifically, any team behaviors that magnified the collective intelligence of the group.

Through Google's Re:Work website, a resource that shares Google's research, ideas, and practices on people operations, Rozovsky outlined the five key characteristics of enhanced teams.

1. Dependability.

Team members get things done on time and meet expectations.

2. Structure and clarity.

High-performing teams have clear goals, and have well-defined roles within the group.

The work has personal significance to each member.

The group believes their work is purposeful and positively impacts the greater good.

Yes, that's four, not five. The last one stood out from the rest:

5. Psychological Safety.

We've all been in meetings and, due to the fear of seeming incompetent, have held back questions or ideas. I get it. It's unnerving to feel like you're in an environment where everything you do or say is under a microscope.

But imagine a different setting. A situation in which everyone is safe to take risks, voice their opinions, and ask judgment-free questions. A culture where managers provide air cover and create safe zones so employees can let down their guard. That's psychological safety.

I know, not the quantitative data that you were hoping for. However, Google found that teams with psychologically safe environments had employees who were less likely to leave, more likely to harness the power of diversity, and ultimately, who were more successful.

Engineering the perfect team is more subjective than we would like, but focusing on these five components increases the likelihood that you will build a dream team. Through its research, Google made the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle proud by proving, "The whole can be greater than the sum of its parts."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Google Spent 2 Years Studying 180 Teams. The Most Successful Ones Shared These 5 Traits

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the years, Google has embarked on countless quests, collected endless amounts of data, and spent millions trying to better understand its people. One of the company's most interesting initiatives, Project Aristotle, gathered several of Google's best and brightest to help the organization codify the secrets to team effectiveness.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: New York Times