This morning, like many mornings, I found myself in a line of traffic, waiting for the traffic light at our major downtown intersection to turn green. I looked at my watch; 11 minutes until work. I still had to drop off my sons at the preschool 2 minutes away. After a few minutes inside the school to say goodbye for the day, I would drive a handful of blocks to a parking spot, and then walk to my office - about 8 minutes in total. I looked up at the red light, and then the parade of cars in front of me, and concluded that there was no way I was going to make it through the light before it turns red again.
It turns out I was right, and had to wait through one more red light. As I walked to my office, a familiar thought entered my mind - what would happen if all the cars in front of me started moving at the same time, at the same speed, as soon at the light turned green? I remember having this thought as a child, when old enough to appreciate the concept of both traffic and impatience. Why couldn’t this work? If everyone was paying attention, we’d all get through the light without a problem. How about some teamwork, drivers?
Of course, the truth is it just doesn’t work that way. One of those drivers may be having engine trouble and be concerned about revving the engine too much. Someone else perhaps is busy changing the radio dial, and not paying attention to the traffic light. Perhaps another driver in the line just isn’t in that much of a hurry. Another still may have recently been rear-ended at a traffic light and pushed into another car, so is now adamant about keeping a good distance from cars ahead of her.
Each driver in my morning commute has a different agenda for their morning, and a different set of influences controlling how they drive. While we’re all headed the same direction, and most likely all interested in making it through the light quickly (it is the morning rush, after all), we still naturally drive at different paces and with differing concepts of what constitutes a “safe following distance”.
Teams are like this in the real world. If the team is functioning reasonably well, then each team member is contributing generally toward a larger goal, and has a vested interest in the team’s success. However, the team members will always approach that goal in different ways and with varying magnitude, and also with their own agenda. Consultants and motivational speakers will often talk about having everyone focused on a single mission, working in unison, seamlessly. This is a noble thing to strive for, and you should encourage a shared passion on your team, but don’t expect 100% unison in how that passion is manifested. Employees are not robots, and will work in different ways, with different views and attitudes. You can have everyone on your team drive in the right direction, but not all at the same speed and exactly the same time.
But is this truly a problem that should be fixed? Of course we want teamwork and likemindedness in our team for the sake of the project, but uniformity at the expense of creativity and variety isn’t worth it, in my opinion. If everyone had the same view, pace, and practices on a team then they would certainly make accomplishments. However, would those accomplishments ever vary in nature, to include new ideas and lead to different accomplishments? The diversity of approach among team members, even when conflicting, is an important catalyst for thinking outside the box (if you’ll forgive the now cliched term). I would rather cultivate and encourage the particular way an employee achieves success in his or her work than refine and promote my particular process and impose it on them. Teamwork doesn’t need to mean everyone works the same way. I think there is an “I” in “team”.
That said, if you’re in front of me during tomorrow’s traffic, kindly keep an eye on the light, and a foot ready on the pedal; I haven’t had my coffee yet.
Del.icio.us
digg
FURL
reddit
Technorati
Ma.gnolia
Stumble Upon
Bloglines