teams outperform individual effort

teams outperform individual effort

Teams perform better not only because of putting more people on a single task but also because of the richness of their diverse skills and opinions, which have a multiplying impact. The biggest lesson I learned during the simulation is that teams outperform individual effort. As such, we had to make decisions as a team. The process was not always smooth because the team members often came up with different ideas and opinions on how to reach the summit of the mountain. An example of a situation in which the team did not agree on a collective decision was on the number of oxygen tanks that each member was to be given for the climb to the summit. Our decision-making process was not the most effective, but we could agree on some common issues that ensured we succeeded in getting to the peak of the mountain.

The team made decisions collectively and ultimately managed to finish the simulation, with many of the members getting sick at the very finish. Significant conflicts did not rock the team decision-making process. This, however, is not to say that the team did not disagree on some common issues. Such would be expected in a team environment where people have different perspectives and opinions on how to execute decisions. We had a model of dealing with conflicts, mainly if it emerged from one or two members of the team- allowing the aggrieved person to make a personal decision considered the best for him or herself. While this model was weak and did not support the nuances of teamwork, none of our members found themselves in this position, implying that our decision making was effective as a team.

To ensure effective decision making collectively, our team leader ensured that all members understood their roles well. Chapman and White (2019) explain that if team members do not understand their roles, then frustration and friction can grind team decision making to a halt. All roles and bases for the team were covered, and therefore we made decisions collectively knowing our roles in the team. The other strategy that was used by the team leader was to get input from individual members separately, and then share their perspectives. After gathering personal views, the team leader shared all the options with the whole team and then asked which route was the best for executing the roles.

Struggles faced by the team

Our team did not have significant battles in completing the Everest simulation. Still, we struggled in on communication and agreeing on some simple tasks that were to be completed as part of the simulation. The team members always pushed back on feedback and opinions voiced by other people. While these push-backs enriched the experience by improving the quality of decisions we made and made the team more diverse, they also hurt the team because we spent a lot of time agreeing on some of these issues. Some of the discussions we had prior or even during the climb were not complete. As a result of these incomplete and unclear discussions, some of the team members did not have a clear understanding of what was to be done or what they were supposed to do.

Therefore, the most significant recommendation that should be put on the table on the part of our team is making all communication and information explicit so that all the team members are on the same page in matters concerning the simulation. The team should have collaborated more and allowed divergent views from the team members. For instance, the team did not agree or have a clear understanding of how many oxygen tanks were to be assigned to each person, and therefore the team did not get an extra point. The team also had some slight disagreements about the roles of team members primarily through the chat session.

To achieve better success, our communication and decision-making process should have been more effective and tailored to the situation at hand. We did have some doubts, especially on agreeing on a specific course of action, and because of this, the team wasted significant time that should have been spent executing the task at hand. To make better decisions and improve on the communication challenges, the team should have focused more on the bigger picture- successful climbing of the mountain. Some of the disagreements the team had were occasioned by sideshows and distractions coming out of frustrations. Therefore, if the team focused on the bigger picture, then we could have endured some of the difficulties, make quicker and accurate decisions, and communicated better.

What I have learned in the course is that empathy towards colleagues and team members is like a universal solvent- any challenge immersed in the solvent (empathy) becomes soluble. To become more emphatic to the members, I should have worked on understanding their emotions and put these emotions in their context. Understanding people’s feelings, as supported by Thompson (2016), enables the team to resolve their conflicts, build each other, and improve their relationships.

To become more emphatic, I should have given full attention to the team members. Giving full attention to the team members is not limited to listening to what they say. The team leader must also demonstrate their understanding of the situation- and think about what they may have in their minds. Giving full attention also involves being flexible whenever the direction of the conversation changes. Thirdly, I should have considered the perspectives of other people in the team more. Considering other people’s perspectives starts with examining personal attitude and keeping an open mind. I realized that placing a lot of own assumptions and beliefs does not leave much space for empathy.