Admitting that one isnot a good team player is almost suicidal. And yet, few companies walk thetalk.
Even though everyoneagrees that teamwork is the best way of achieving a company’s objectives,implementing it is not easy.
A team’s objectives are notalways properly understood or agreed to by its members, who are often focusedon individual objectives. The bigger the group or organization, the morecomplex the
situation. Keep in mind that even in school, it was difficult toagree on who would do what for a group project. Cooperation between the personwho was always late in his/her research, the “slacker,” the A-studentworried about his/her final grade. . . and yourself often meant a stormy end ofsession. And it was invariably always the same people who ended up producingthe final document. In the workplace, the scenario is very similar, thedifference being that the objectives and timeframes are imposed by youremployer, who pays you for this. To become a better team player, it is importantto be familiar with the main teamwork paradoxes that exist in our organizations.
- Silo organization of work.Teams are organized by function and skills, and have few interactions, exceptwhen they have to. Even matrix structures, specially designed to get work unitsto cooperate with each other, have had little success. Take the case of the HRdepartment. It serves many internal clients, but is primarily composed ofspecialists, who have difficulty cooperating even with other HR specialists.For example, the compensation function is often caught between its internalsalary scales and the external job market. The result is that compensationspecialists are often pitted against their recruiter co-workers when the timecomes to hire someone from outside. A finance vice-president recently told methat his budgeting process was like a civil war, with the sales teams outright refusingto work with teams that did not agree with their method of calculatingoperating costs. The result was that it was almost impossible for him toaccount for certain expenses, and the entire process was spectacularlyextended.
- Performance evaluationand compensation systems. Although companies want to promote teamwork, theymostly reward individual performance. While part of the year-end bonus is basedon achieving the company’s objectives, it is often hard for employees tounderstand how it is allocated. The individual bonus is linked to individual performance,with the reaching of objectives measured at the annual performance review. Theoutcome of this evaluation determines the employee’s chances of promotion,in-house advancement, training opportunities and salary increases. Thesemechanisms do not foster mutual assistance or cooperation.
- Discrepancy betweencollective and individual objectives. Companies, for their part, are requiredto react quickly, innovate constantly and face increasingly complexenvironments, while employees seek a better work-life balance and feelincreasingly less engaged in the company. A gap is therefore created betweenemployers’ expectations and what employees seek to get from work. This is howheterogeneous work teams—in which the perfectionist, workaholic, nine-to-fiverand person who is there in body but not in spirit (presenteeism)—end up workingside by side. Not all employees are similarly engaged by the company’s growthand achievement targets.
- Team composition. Onerarely chooses one’s co-worker—when was the last time you were asked for youropinion about your cubicle neighbour? You should learn to get along with thisperson, as this may be the only thing you share.
It is undeniably true that, insofar as teamworkis concerned, there exists a form of hypocrisy—apparent in creativemotivational seminars, collective motivation “gurus,” paintballparties and other team-building activities.