TEAMING: Why No One Teaches How to Be a Good Team Member?

Leadership

Did you ever noticed that we teach leaders in countless growth programs, workshops, or mentoring processes how to be a great leader, and we almost never teach employees how to be great team members? To follow the TEAMING idea?

Why is that? Is it more important to have qualified leaders than people who know how to work well together? We know it’s not true. A part of successful leadership is to have a team that has an ability to cooperate effectively, ideally to like and understand each other as people.

During my post-grad studies in Transition Management area, one of the lecturers brought to the class a book named “Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in Knowledge Economy” by Amy C. Edmondson. And while having a conversation about the teaming, people, communication and how it creates great (or not so great) organizations, I’ve started to wonder how all those dots are connected. How one thing influences the other and makes success or failure at the end of the day?

How to think about TEAMING: is it even the real thing?

What is TEAMING?

TEAMING is a mindset. Based on Amy’s book, TEAMING is more about “being” with others in a certain way than “doing” things. Of course, the behavior is an important part of the whole idea, so we can tell that “behaving” is “doing”. But it’s not the point.

The point is that TEAMING covers the way of working, behaving, making decisions in work environment where we don’t have a luxury of a stable team structures. Where individuals, teams, departments, and projects need to work together somehow, while the circumstances change all the time. So, TEAMING brings to the table collaboration based on an eagerness to learn, be better every day and communicate as well as possible, despite the constant change that never ends. And it never will, let’s be honest about it.

Do we ever think about the qualities of a good team member? We for sure can list very quickly the qualities of a good manager within 30 seconds. But how about team members? Recently, I did this exercise with one group of leaders that I facilitated the workshop for. I asked them to give 2-3 things that they believe are qualities of a great team member. The results came up like this.

So, as we can see, there are a lot of things connected with taking responsibility and do the job, but mostly there are things connected to “being” with others. A person who shares knowledge, taking care of other team members, listen, be brave, mentor others etc. Not many “transactional” elements are there as we can see. Interesting, isn’t’ it?

How to lead a TEAMING process?

As leaders, we have a lot of influence (more that we think we have) on how the work environment looks like for our people. Pretty often we don’t use this power because we don’t believe that it would work, we don’t know how to do it, or we are afraid that we’ll get different outcome from what we aim for by certain actions. We don’t believe that we can actually change something.

Leading in TEAMING means using the mindset that will allow people to be a better team member. It consists of three things:

Encouraging speaking up. Creating space with high level of psychological safety, since without it, no one is going to speak up, ever. People need to feel that they won’t be judged, treated harshly by other team members. That they can tell what they think (of course from OK-OK space, with a good intention) and it can open an honest, interesting, and even groundbreaking discussion. The key thing is that they believe in not being snapped or punished for what they say or think.

Ask questions and allowing people to ask them as well. If we are genuinely curious about what our people think, we ask questions, using active listening skill all the time. When our team members see that kind of behavior, they are going to model it by building their curiosity too. They will learn that there is no such thing as a stupid question: every question is fine, if it has a good background, intention and is honest. Allowing people doing that in a safe space will support them in their growth and will make them better in communication, innovation, creativity, and problem solving. By developing this skill, you “accidentally” develop few other ones, important and insightful for you and your team to succeed.

Creating space for sharing ideas. It’s similar to making space to ask questions, but it goes one step further. One of the most important things for people in a workspace is autonomy. To make their own decisions, choose what’s right and wrong when it comes to the approach that they use to cover a certain task. To take responsibility for their careers and growth opportunities. And a part of autonomy is also bringing ideas to the table, discuss them with other people, and next: making idea owners responsible for moving further with execution once they are chosen to implement. Great atmosphere, like-minded people are crucial for those personality types that are more creative, visionary, but also for those who are more into data and facts, or relations with others.

A leader is responsible for creating a workspace for people to thrive. It’s all we need to do.

Why don’t we teach people how to be great team members?

It’s not very intuitive to start from teaching people about being a good team member. Definitively more classical way is to teach leaders how to be great and lead others successfully. But that way, we put all responsibility on the leader’s shoulders. I’m not saying that leader don’t need to grow, have certain set of skills, behaviors or mindset.

But when we think about improving the ability of being a great team member, we divide the responsibility into all people that making a team: manager AND team members. Both parties need to participate in the process of team creation: it influences the level of engagement, being in control and a part of something more than just my own scope.

Why don’t we do it more often? Maybe because it requires a mindset and approach shift, a creation of a new one to cover the different perspective. And it can be difficult, sometimes going far away into the stretch zone and recreate the growth options we have for people in the organization.

What do we need to make that shift?

The idea what kind of change we would like to see in our team.
Knowledge what kind of personality types we have the most visible in the team and based on that: what kind of TEAMING shift we can offer them to feel and think that’s a great idea?
Preparation of a plan: what do we want to achieve here? Who is going to responsible for what in this new model? What kind of change we would like to see after implementing XYZ?
Seeking for help in HR, L&D or external coach: find out with their help who had already done it, what was their approach, what are the lessons learned from implementation process. It can save a lot of time and effort in terms of looking for right answers and solutions.
Working incrementally, using leading with agility approach. Implement one little thing, gather feedback, work with the team on it. Decide together if we stay with it or not, and then move on to another idea. Remember about the grieving change curve: the smaller the changes and the more people will be involved with them, the less negative emotions and resistance there will be on the road.

Wouldn’t it be more efficient, nice, and engaging to have more than one people who takes care of different team building elements? Imagine that we all are taking part in building the environment where people are highly motivated, performing very well, create space to give different ideas and have sparing partners to discuss them? Where we learn from each other, share knowledge and the best ways of working?

Sounds pretty cool to me. And for you?

Udostępnij

Komentarze

0 0 votes

Article Rating

0 komentarzy

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Czytaj także

Leadership

3 Leadership Lessons I Learned from Bad Recruitment Processes

Recruitment is often described as both an art and a science—a delicate balance of intuition, data, and strategy. But sometimes, even with the best intentions, things can go awry. I’ve learned this the hard way. Over the years, my experience in leadership have taught me that recruitment mistakes are not just costly in terms of money but also in terms of time, energy, and efficiency. Today, I want to share with you three of my biggest lessons from bad recruitment decisions that I hope will help you to not repeat those in your leadership practice. #1 The Rush: When Speed Wins With Strategy There was a time when I was desperate to fill a position on my team. Aren’t we really in constant situations like that? I remember that we had a critical project coming up, I was drowning under the amount of tasks I had on my list and I convinced myself that having “someone”—anyone—on board quickly was better than waiting for the better fit. I rushed through the process, skipping some of the deeper evaluations and settling for a candidate who seemed “good enough.” The result? It ended up costing me more than I ever anticipated. The person lacked the skills and mindset needed for the role, and within six months, we had to part ways. Not only did this mean starting the recruitment process all over again, but it also disrupted my work, again. According to research by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the average cost per hire is around $4,700. However, if you make a bad hire, the costs skyrocket. Studies estimate that replacing an employee can cost anywhere from 8 to 12 months of their salary. For example, if you hire someone with an annual salary of $50,000, replacing them could cost you between $33,000 and $50,000. And that’s just the financial side—what about the lost productivity and influence on yourself? On the team? This experience taught me a crucial lesson: rushing to fill a position is like building a house on quicksand. It may seem like you’re saving time in the short term, but in reality, you’re setting yourself up for long-term instability. #2 The Bias Trap: Judging by Brands, Not Skills Another mistake I’ve made is being overly impressed by the organizations listed on a candidate’s CV. When someone came from a big-name company or a well-known brand, I found myself assuming they must be ready to do the job. After all, if they worked at such prestigious places, they must be highly capable, right? Wrong. One candidate I hired had an impressive resume filled with experience at top-tier organizations. I was so dazzled by their background that I overlooked some red flags during the interview process—things like their lack of enthusiasm for the role or their vague answers about past achievements. It turned out that their success in previous roles was largely due to the systems and teams already in place at those organizations. In my smaller, more dynamic team, they struggled to adapt and contribute effectively. This mistake taught me to focus on the specific person, not just their past affiliations. A brand name on a CV doesn’t guarantee a cultural, personality-based or skill set fit for your organization. Now, I dig deeper during interviews, asking specific questions about their contributions and how they handle challenges in different environments. #3 Ignoring the Personality Match As someone deeply invested in Communication Intelligence (CQ) and the Process Communication Model (PCM), I know how critical personality dynamics are in any working relationship. Yet, there have been times when I ignored this knowledge during recruitment—and paid the price for it. I once hired someone who looked perfect on paper: they had the right skills, experience, and even glowing references. But what I failed to assess was how well we would work together on a personal level. Our communication styles clashed almost immediately. Where I value directness and proactive problem-solving, they preferred a more passive approach and avoided conflict at all costs. Data vs emotions. Logic vs relationship care. Nothing wrong about that, don’t get me wrong! But it comes with a cost, especially when you work in a small setup. This mismatch didn’t just affect our one-on-one interactions; it also impacted the overall efficiency. When there isn’t alignment between a leader and their team members, it creates friction that slows down decision-making and execution. According to Gallup research, disengaged employees can cost organizations up to 18% of their annual salary in lost productivity. Imagine what happens when that disengagement spreads across an entire team! Now, I make personality assessments a non-negotiable part of my recruitment process. Tools like PCM are there to use: I’m not saying that you do a questionnaire for every single candidate since it’ll cost a lot (if you can afford it, go for it!). It’s about using the framework in practice. Listen, observe, connect the dots. Everything is there, you just need to know what you’re looking for. Moving Forward: How to Avoid These Pitfalls Here’s what I’ve learned to do differently: Prioritize Fit Over Speed: Take the time to find someone who aligns with your team’s needs and culture—even if it means extending your search timeline. Remember that fast recruitment can cost you so much more time in the future. Dig Deeper Into Experience: Don’t be swayed by big names on a CV; focus on understanding what the candidate actually contributed in their previous roles. Assess Personality Compatibility: Use tools like PCM or other personality assessments or knowledge from the framework to ensure alignment between you and your potential hire. Recruitment is never going to be an exact science, but by learning from past mistakes and implementing more thoughtful strategies, you can significantly improve your chances of finding the right person for your team—and avoiding costly missteps along the way. Final Thoughts As leaders, we often feel immense pressure to make quick decisions and keep

Czytaj dalej

16 February 2025 No Comments

Leadership

Mastering Tough Conversations: A Tech Leader’s Guide to 1:1s (That Nobody Really Wants to Lead)

As a tech leader, you’re no stranger to challenges—tight deadlines, complex projects, and ever-evolving technology are part of the job. But one of the most delicate challenges you’ll face doesn’t involve code or systems; it involves people. Leading tough conversations with employees is an essential skill that separates good leaders from great ones. Whether it’s addressing underperformance, delivering hard feedback, or navigating team conflicts, these moments can define your leadership. This guide equips you with actionable tools to lead tough conversations effectively, using a structured approach that combines contracting, Communication Intelligence (CQ), including the Process Communication Model (PCM). Let’s dive in. When Tough Conversations Are Necessary: Scenarios You’ll Encounter Before we get into the how, let’s identify the when. Here are common situations where a tough conversation might arise: Underperformance: An employee is consistently missing deadlines or delivering work in a quality we agreed on. Behavioral issues: A team member exhibits disruptive behavior, such as frequent conflicts with peers or unprofessional communication. Career Development: You need to inform an employee that they didn’t receive a promotion or that their role is changing. Restructuring: Delivering news about layoffs or departmental changes. Personal Concerns: Addressing sensitive issues like burnout, mental health, or personal struggles impacting performance. Each of these scenarios requires a thoughtful approach to ensure the conversation is productive and respectful. And none of those are easy: there’s no one-size-fits-all approach so it might sound like a hell to a tech leader. But we have some algorytms that you can use to run the meeting with success. The Framework: Contracting, CQ, and PCM To handle these conversations effectively, use three elements to have a success no matter what kind of situation you are facing. Contracting: Establish clear agreements on three levels—administrative, professional, and psychological. You have more about the contracting itself, the levels and what to do to make sure the contract is fully covered in this article. Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle: Flex your communication style to meet the employee where they are emotionally and mentally. Managing reactions that are always emotional (you like it or not) is our job as leaders: we need to know what triggers which behavior and what to do to overcome or address it when it appears. Process Communication Model (PCM) Framework: Tailor your approach to the employee’s personality base for maximum impact. Match the language and way of communication they need, not your favorite ones. That’s crucial for the conversation to be successful: you’re leading it for them, not for yourself. Part 1: Contracting—Setting the Stage for Success Contracting involves creating clarity and mutual understanding before diving into the conversation. What are the essentials of 3 levels that are inside? – Administrative Contracting: Define the logistics. Where will the meeting take place? How long will it last? What’s the agenda? Example: “Let’s meet in my office at 2 PM for 30 minutes to discuss your recent project performance.” Take care of this during and after as well. “What is the deadline to implement what we’re talking about?” – Professional Contracting: Clarify roles and expectations. Emphasize that this is a professional discussion and its goal is to find solutions, not to blame anybody for anything. Example: “My role is to provide feedback and support you in improving; I would like for your role to share your perspective and be engaged in the next steps we are going to create together during this meeting.” – Psychological Contracting: Set the emotional tone by creating a space for a person. Acknowledge that the conversation might be difficult but make sure you are focused on the positive outcome. Example: “I know this might be uncomfortable, but I want you to know this is coming from a place of support and wanting to help you succeed.” Part 2: Flex Your CQ Muscle Communication Intelligence (CQ) is your ability to adapt your communication style based on the situation and the other person’s needs and preferences. In tough conversations, this means balancing focus with accountability. What are the easiest 3 things that you can do as a leader to make sure you’re using your CQ muscle? – Listen Actively: Truly hear what the employee is saying without interrupting or jumping to conclusions. Make notes. Paraphrase, check if you understand as your employee intended you to. Don’t assume, ask. – Acknowledge Emotions: If the employee feels upset, angry or defensive, name the emotion without judgment. Example: “I can see this feedback is frustrating for you.” or “I understand that situation is infuriating.” Don’t underestimate the state, let it be, check what kind of information is hidden below this emotion. Use it in the solution creation phase. – Stay Calm and Focused: Keep your tone steady and avoid escalating tension, even if emotions run high. I know that’s one of the hardest things to do: most of the time we go angry when the other person is angry. We mirror each other, that’s how our brain is wired. But by being conscious of that, we can stop the automatic pattern and break it by being more mindful and goal-oriented. When you observe something like that, say to yourself: “What is the goal of this conversation? What I want to achieve here?” That kind of reminder is going to take you back to the OK-OK state and continue with more clear view of mind. Part 3: Tailor Your Approach with PCM—Speak Their Language The Process Communication Model (PCM) identifies six personality types, each with unique communication preferences and stress patterns. Understanding these types allows you to tailor your message effectively. Here’s a quick breakdown: Thinker: Logical, organized, values data and structure. – Approach: Be clear, factual, and provide detailed explanations. – Stress Behavior: May become overly critical or perfectionistic, attack others for lack of thinking or logical approach. Persister: Principled, dedicated, values integrity and commitment. – Approach: Appeal to their sense of purpose and principles. – Stress Behavior: May become judgmental or

Czytaj dalej

8 February 2025 No Comments

Leadership

What Are Most Common Beliefs That Hold Tech Leaders Back?

As a Tech Leader, you’re tasked with guiding innovation, meeting deadlines, and managing diverse teams—all while navigating the complexities of human dynamics. It’s no small challenge. But what if I told you that some of the beliefs you hold about leadership might actually be holding you back from creating an environment where people want to stay and thrive? Let’s take a closer look at three of the most common beliefs that I encounter when working with Tech Leaders and explore actionable solutions to shift your mindset and approach. Belief 1: “If I’m not the expert in the room, I’ll lose respect.” Many Tech Leaders feel immense pressure to always have the answers. After all, you’ve likely climbed the ranks because of your technical expertise. But leadership isn’t about being the smartest person in the room—it’s about enabling others to shine (it hurts, I know). The problem is that when you focus on showcasing your expertise, you risk micromanaging or overshadowing your team’s contributions. This can stifle creativity and lead to disengagement: your people think won’t have enough space to try out new solutions, make mistakes and learn from them to build their own expertise. Solution? Shift from being the “expert” to being the “facilitator.” Ask open-ended questions like, “What do you think we should do here?” or “How can we approach this differently?” Empower your team to take ownership of their ideas and solutions. Remember, respect is earned not by knowing everything but by fostering trust and collaboration. Belief 2: “Feedback will demotivate my team.” I often hear leaders say they avoid giving constructive feedback because they fear it will hurt morale. While it’s true that poorly delivered feedback can cause friction, avoiding it altogether is far more damaging in the long run. The problem is that without feedback, your team doesn’t know where they stand or how they can improve. This ambiguity can lead to frustration, disengagement, and even turnover: all those things are not the ideal situation for you, as a leader, and for your team as well. There are very costly: losing one employee is a cost of 8-12 monthly salaries of this person (in average). Solution? Reframe feedback as an opportunity for growth rather than criticism. Use a structured approach, even the most common ones like “Start-Stop-Continue” will be a huge help (and easy to implement): – Start: What new behaviors or actions could help them grow? – Stop: What habits or approaches might be holding them back? – Continue: What are they already doing well that they should keep up? Deliver feedback with using Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle, tailor the communication to your employee’s needs, be specific, and always tie it back to their potential and goals. Belief 3: “People leave because of better opportunities, not because of me.” It’s easy to blame external factors when someone leaves your team—higher salaries, exciting projects elsewhere, or personal reasons. While those factors do play a role, research consistently shows that people leave managers, not companies. The problem is that assuming turnover is out of your control absolves you of responsibility for creating a supportive environment. This mindset prevents you from addressing underlying issues within your team dynamic. Solution? Conduct regular one-on-one check-ins where you ask questions like: – “What’s one thing I could do to support you better?” – “Do you think that you’re challenged and fulfilled enough in your role? If not, what can we do to move a needle here?” – “What’s your long-term vision, and how can I help you get there?” By showing genuine interest in your team’s well-being and career aspirations, you’ll build loyalty and reduce turnover. It’s not so obvious to have a leader that actually care and think about their employees’ in more holistic approach. The bottom line Leadership is as much about unlearning as it is about learning. By challenging these common beliefs and adopting a more people-centric mindset, you’ll not only become a stronger leader but also create a work environment where people feel valued and inspired to stay. Remember: great leaders don’t just manage tasks—they cultivate trust, growth, and connection. That’s the kind of environment people don’t want to leave. Ready to challenge more leadership beliefs? Go and listen to the latest episode of Leman Tech Leadership Podcast!

Czytaj dalej

1 February 2025 No Comments