Susan Wheelan wrote, in replying to LO5765 --
>In our research, the conflict stage of group development lasts for quite
some time(at least a month). Mant things need to be resolved in order to
get organized and to feel trusting of others.
>It is necessary for goals to be aligned for this process to occur. If
leader and members are not "on the same page", conflict will continue.
However, this may or may not extend to the organization's goals. A group
may "circle the wagons" to resist the goals of the larger system.
When we play at a game or engage groups of diverse people in an exercise
of some type, it's my obsevation that the group can (and do) 'bond' within
minutes. (Note: We do organizational development games)
1) Their behavior becomes goal directed (if the missions and goals are
clear),
2) their motivation levels increase dramatically (if they understand the
task and have sufficient resources and time),
3) their group dysfunctional group dynamics are often minimized and,
3) they interact in a way to generate a team result.
A professional sports team will often demonstrate teamwork, shared focus
on success of the group, high levels of peer support for improvement.
Then after winning the championship, all of this often breaks down and the
team often shows a tendency for dysfunction. Few teams can maintain a
consistently high level of achievement and it is not simply a matter of
talent (exceptions seem to be the Chicago Bulls, The Boston Celtics of
yesteryear, and a few others -- I'm obviously American). Will the South
African Rugby and Soccer teams have recently achieved global success --
will the situational factors support their results long-term?
If my perceptions are right, teams _can_ function quickly and often do.
But workplace teams "take years" and it seems easier to disrupt team
performance much easier than create long-term performance holding talent /
skill levels constant.
Is this a matter of creating winners and losers in our societies and
generating some natural dynamics associated with the perception of
"losing"?
Any thoughts on what we can learn from this? Any suggestions on ideas for
improvement?
--"Dr. Scott J. Simmerman" <74170.1061@compuserve.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>