The first myth of teams said that teams are in harmony progressing
group of people compromising all of their needs for team purposes. In reality, professionally
qualified teams are a group of people having different backgrounds and certain
needs that must be met (Wright, n.d.). Not harmonious team as a result of
differently confronting ideas and background can convert to be real strength
with good leaderships and guidance. Otherwise, conflicting issues will always
show up.
The second myth of teams described that the team conflict is
unhealthy. In psychological term, this unhealthy conflict is dysfunctional if
the outcomes do not make the teams productive. Otherwise, the team conflicts
are really healthy or functional. Therefore, rather than suppressed, functional
conflicts should be rendered useful (Wright, n.d.).
The third myth of teams stated that most people love teamwork. In reality, research showed that people have different opinion about the best way to work. One third of them prefer solo work, one third are unconcerned, and one third love the teamwork (Wright, n.d.). In my own observation and understanding of psychological extrovert and introvert people. The ones who mostly like the team work are the extrovert people. While the ones who mostly don’t like the team work are the introvert ones. In the Maslow theory of needs, getting involved in a teamwork is actually related to the needs they must satisfy. Even an introvert people, they will struggle and finally like to team work if their needs are fully satisfied in the team (Maslow, 1958).
The fourth myth of teams stated that the success of a business essentially
depends on the team work. In reality, it’s the fact that simple organization
can perform without a team having large group of people. However, complexity is
one of the factors to thrive the team. (Wright, n.d.). If the team has a branch
in every region so that a branch manager can handle the rules of the main team,
then this team is complex enough to share the influence throughout the country
and the good message or team purpose can be shared easily.
The fifth myth of teams stated that it’s easy
to influence and manage people in a team. In reality, leaders having high level
of awareness and advanced ideas on how to give motivation to the team are
really required (Wright, n.d.). In my experience on leading a team for voting
organizers consisting of mature enough and experienced persons, their own ideas
on how to overcome a problem always confronts my own ideas not based on their
experiences. As a new leader of the group, my manual hand book on the event
protocol can’t work against their well proven experienced ideas. As a good
leader, giving up on my interest throughout their ideas are a good way to solve
this team conflict.
The last myth of teamwork stated that teamwork is really encouraged by all senior managers. In reality, most people in upper level of management are afraid of team movement and activities. The manager act to keep the power and prevent the tendency to lose the control and power. In a presidential team, this issue can show up if a president has two strong teams to balance his power. The president needs to keep good communication to both of them. He also needs to keep good harmony between the team. A good example is socialist and military teams under presidency of a country can keep the power of the president balanced for a longer time. If the socialists or militaries have higher influence, they can coup the government with the result that the president will no longer have power. The other possible conflicts that may happen is that the socialists having huge and massive people power confronting the militaries having weapon and fighting machines may provoke a revolution bleeding and costing lives which is very detrimental to all parties.
References
Wrigth, D. (n.d.). Myths
and realities of teamworks. Retrieved December 24, 2020, from
http://www.consultwright.com/Chapter_1-Myths_and_Realities_of_Teamwork.pdf
Maslow, A. H. (1958). A Dynamic Theory of
Human Motivation. In C. L. Stacey & M. DeMartino (Eds.),
Understanding Human Motivation (p. 26–47), 26-47. doi:10.1037/11305-004
No comments:
Post a Comment