Here's a team challenge from Christophe
T:
I noticed we perform better as a team once we shared our fears, hopes, prides, etc. How can we go vulnerable to our team ?
Contrary to popular belief, and
certainly my corporate training, we can't leave our emotions out of
the workplace. As human beings it is not possible, as hard as we
might try. Nor should we. Both Spocks in the latest Star Trek movie
(2009) validate that learning.
We ask, for example, for people to
leave their egos at the door as they enter the boardroom meeting.
What we truly want is to reduce as much as possible the drama
associated with our personal agendas. Irrational behaviour driven by
extreme emotion often leads to behaviour well described by the Drama
Triangle. In the Drama Triangle the roles of Persecutor, Victim, and
Rescuer are assumed by those involved in the drama often moving
between people as the emotional energy escalates. And that is not
productive.
Nor is the emotion attached to grasping
for our personal agendas, persisting to have things our way. This
easily happens when each individual involved has their own vision of
success as opposed to a shared vision among the members of a team.
If I am stuck with “My way, or the highway” then we have a
dictatorship instead of collaboration.
In fact we could say that without a
shared vision a group of people is not a team; certainly not
according to our definition in Team Tips - 1. More precisely we can
say that such a group might have a common objective but no shared
concept of what that actually looks like: what is the picture of the
future once that shared vision is achieved.
Accordingly, to attempt to leave
emotion out of the equation doesn't work. And you may have guessed
already that we have observed that emotion plays an important role in
team behaviour. For example, how did Christophe make the observation
above? He knows that individuals on Great Teams use the Check In
protocol – from the simple tools – to share their emotional state
with their team.
Why do the best teams do this?
- first: simply in order to provide that information – to make explicit what is implicit in my attitude at that moment
- second: to give the team some insight into what is driving my behaviours and actions
- third: to remove the energy from a dramatic scene of possible accusations and rebuttals inherent in the Drama Triangle
- finally: to declare to the team that in spite of, or along with, or because of that emotional energy, I am still ready to adhere to the Core Commitments and so be fully engaged in the team's activities.
At least that is often our instinctive
reaction to such a foolish suggestion. I'm not about to be
vulnerable to others that way, nor vulnerable in any other way, we
say. I'm not interested in having the sharks smell my blood and
attack.
But, I'm not talking about swimming
with Great Whites. I'm talking about working with your associates,
your team, who are all sharing their “vulnerabilities” to some
degree as the level of trust between members grows.
If one is courageous enough to share
emotion, to open the kimono, to expose his or her thoughts and then does
get attacked – obviously or subtly – then, of course, that ends
that, and a “team” allowing attacks should be left behind to feed on someone
else. Sooner or later they will eat themselves.
Being vulnerable on a Great Team means
being open to sharing and receiving information of any type, being
willing to listen and learn, being willing to risk being wrong, being
willing to change.
And that kind of vulnerability comes
from great strength and power.
2 comments:
Great post and great answer!
Did you mean persecutor rather than prosecutor ?
Yes I did! Thanks for catching that; I've corrected the text.
Cheers, Paul
Post a Comment