Andrew Minko

Every semester when we got to textbook chapter on “Understanding Groups and Teams,” I would ask the class: “What does teamwork look like?”

People really struggled with that. Participants in the class started with words like “cooperation” and “friendly.” My job as the instructor was to press the point, so I’d rephrase the question: “If you were an anthropologist from another planet and you were studying humans, how would you describe teamwork in your field notes? What does teamwork look like to an outsider?”

Again, every semester, every class would struggle with this question. And, again, as the instructor I would offer a prompt: “I think people who work in a hospital emergency room are a great example of teamwork.” Then the proverbial lightbulb would go on. Then the class members would start saying things like: Emergency rooms are made up of people who are

• well-trained
• execute distinct roles
• help each other as needed
• communicate using well-understood terms and procedures

Members of an emergency room team also share some very deep values about saving lives, treating the injured and sick, and “covering” for a co-worker who might be overwhelmed.

Then, I would add: “Emergency room teams even practice how to handle situations before they occur. Can you imagine working for a company where teams actually practiced how to do a better job together?” After that, we’d have a good discussion about how to foster genuine teamwork in the workplace.

Also, in class, we’d have to circle back to the comments about “friendliness” or, as psychologists like to call it “cohesion.” One of the things that has been well-researched is that cohesion does not by itself improve productivity. “Let’s go bowling!” “Let’s do a group activity off-site!” “Let’s get t-shirts printed up!” These are almost a cliché in organizations, but they do nothing to improve productivity in and of itself. When a group has a high level of cohesion, they are more likely to achieve the group’s goals — regardless of how well the group aligns with the organization’s goals.

In other words, increasing affinity and cohesion can actually hurt productivity when the group is unhappy, misaligned with an organization’s goals, or the front-line manager “bad mouths” upper management.

Perhaps a simpler way of looking at it is this: Teaching a group to play together well doesn’t usually help them work together well. Any manager who has a lack-luster team should strongly consider these other ways of improving morale and productivity:

1. Clarifying roles (who does what)
2. Training in job skills (how can we do it better)
3. Uplifting and rewarding values such as customer satisfaction and service (aligning the group’s goals with the organization’s goals)

It should almost go without saying that any front-line leader who finds the above daunting has exactly the kind of challenge that a bowling event cannot help.

A final satirical comment: Sometimes managers will ask the team to propose a “team building” event. While indoor “skydiving” in a wind tunnel is fun, few teams are ready to try the following:

---

 

Research notes: C.R. Evans and K.L. Dion, “Group Cohesion and Performance” as published in the journal Small Group Research. B. Mullen and C. Copper, “The Relationship between Group Cohesiveness and Performance” as published in Psychological Bulletin. And, P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, and M. Ahearne, “Moderating the Effects of Goal Acceptance on the Relationship between Group Cohesiveness bad Productivity” as published in the Journal of Applied Psychology.