{"id":4627,"date":"2017-10-30T13:59:03","date_gmt":"2017-10-30T18:59:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thedisciplemaker.org\/?p=4627"},"modified":"2023-06-30T16:33:08","modified_gmt":"2023-06-30T16:33:08","slug":"3-teamwork-assumptions-that-choke-organizations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.navpress.com\/sites\/thedisciplemaker\/2017\/10\/3-teamwork-assumptions-that-choke-organizations\/","title":{"rendered":"3 Teamwork Assumptions that Choke Organizations"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

From diet trends to politics to management styles, we are drawn to drastic solutions. Armed with more information than patience, we don\u2019t just fix a problem as soon as we identify it. Instead, we keep fixing it until it\u2019s a different problem.
\nHow often have you seen someone who, after reading an article or attending a conference, is now ready to foist some sweeping, system-wide solution upon his or her organization? Armed with good intentions and insights, this person is eager to correct something, and quickly. How often do these abrupt shifts in focus swing a team in the opposite but equally unwanted direction? And so the fishtailing begins. For some churches and teams<\/a>, these wide swings happen too often. Do not succumb this time. There is hopefully much truth in what we\u2019ve already discussed, but heavy-handed turns of the wheel can easily become overcorrections\u2014almost automatically.
\n\"\"
\nOver the last few decades, strategic emphasis has gone from silos to mixing vats. From organizational to organic. From cubicle farms to free-range office spaces. From departments that saw one another at the Christmas party to daily meetings in the ball pit at McDonald\u2019s. In the pursuit of Silicon Valley ingenuity, people now brainstorm, spitball, and cross-pollinate in one big multidisciplinary play zone.
\nIs that a good thing?
\nSome of it could be. But is there a danger of overcorrecting? According to data collected and reported in the Harvard Business Review, the time spent by employees in what the researchers call \u201ccollaborative activities\u201d has increased by more than 50 percent in the last two decades.<\/a>[i]<\/a> According to these researchers, people at many companies now spend about 80 percent of their time participating in meetings or answering colleagues\u2019 questions.<\/a>[ii]<\/a> The opening line of their article sums things up: \u201cCollaboration is taking over the workplace.\u201d<\/a>[iii]<\/a>
\nApparently someone got the memo, but again: Is that a good thing?
\nIn our efforts to tear down the barriers and isolation of the past, let\u2019s now call out the risk (and even temptation) of overcorrecting. In my own experience with highly collaborative teams or those moving toward more collaboration, there is a very real chance that an overemphasis on us working as one can lead to an underemphasis on each one of us working.
\nAllow me to explain. There are at least three dangerous assumptions in collaborative environments that can slow a team down.<\/strong> The origins of each may have started with a benign or even well-meaning thought. But still there is potential danger here. If the following assumptions are left unchecked or unquestioned, patterns of behavior grow and intertwine around the ankles and arms of any ministry. What has the potential of breathing life into a team or church can, when overemphasized and misunderstood, choke and trip that same group with a new set of difficulties. That is why all three assumptions must be continually challenged even as newer ways of interacting are explored.<\/p>\n

Assumption #1: We Must Do Everything Together<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Growing up, my youngest daughter, Tori, played soccer most of her days. It was fun watching her and her team develop over the years. But have you ever watched really young children learn the game? Spacing is nonexistent, positions indistinguishable. Everyone drifts back to the ball like bees to the hive. En masse they move, bumbling and buzzing around the ball, but never really getting anywhere. It\u2019s more swarm-ball than soccer.
\nPeople on highly collaborative teams love checking in with one another before moving forward. If this is not possible in person, at the very least everyone must weigh in digitally. Since we do things together, we must all see everything and then hit Reply All so that we\u2019re all in this together. This is what makes us a team.
\nBut is it? Must we do everything together?
\nThe danger of co-laboring so much of the time is that we forget about the laboring part. To go back to our example from the previous chapter, the so-called Braintrust at Pixar does indeed gather to pool their insights and talents to create something much better than any of them could accomplish on their own. But those meetings\u2014essential as they are to both the organizational and individual success\u2014happen every few months.<\/a>[iv]<\/a> Not weeks, not days, but months.
\n\"\"
\nOf course, there\u2019s no formula for how often people should gather to collaborate effectively. For some, there will be brief or not-so-brief connections daily, depending on the tasks at hand. This connecting with others has a rhythm that is intuited at times and almost mandated at others. But the point of Pixar\u2019s approach should not be lost on the rest of us. In between those meetings, something else happens. People do their jobs. They hit deadlines. They make progress\u2014on their own. With that in mind, perhaps it\u2019s time to tweak our clich\u00e9:
\nThere isn\u2019t an I in teamwork, but there is work.
\nAs in your work. My work. We have individual jobs and roles to which we have been assigned, for which we volunteered, and in many ways to which we have been called. The only way this \u201cworking together as one\u201d works is if each one of us works even when we\u2019re not together.
\nSwarm-ball is cute when you\u2019re five. But now we need to spread out.<\/em>
\nIn our particular organization, which loves to have many voices in the mix, we\u2019ve had to assess when it is time to streamline the process. This takes many forms: take a few people off that particular e-mail stream, reduce the frequency of a standing meeting, and\u2014the really difficult one\u2014uninvite yourself from that project. This will cause a certain amount of angst and uncertainty for some on the team who are used to others thinking for them. It might also bring a sense of loss for the one who\u2019s used to being at every party. But this development is a good thing, it begins to challenge the second assumption.<\/p>\n

Assumption #2: Certain People Must Be Involved for the Best Ideas or Work to Emerge<\/strong><\/h3>\n

There\u2019s often a natural logjam that builds up around certain individuals in any organization or team. Without ever intending to do so, they have now become a hindrance to workflow because of their helpfulness and undeniable usefulness. As the Harvard Business Review observes, \u201cSoon helpful employees become institutional bottlenecks.\u201d<\/a>[v]<\/a> In other words, there are a few people in most organizations with whom everyone loves to work\u2014and for good reason. They work hard. They are fun. They are insightful. Nuggets of brilliance fall out of their heads as soon as they\u2019re apprised of a situation. Such teammates don\u2019t just succeed\u2014they help you succeed.
\nWho wouldn\u2019t want them at a meeting or on a project?
\nBased on that description, it seems almost foolish to move forward without such input. And sometimes it is foolish\u2014so don\u2019t. But the limitations of even the highly talented inevitably emerge. As it turns out, they are human. Their lack of omnipresence makes their constant availability a bit of a struggle. Projects and people needing answers start piling up outside the door of these valuable teammates, leaving them overwhelmed at their inability to help everyone and keep up with their own jobs.
\n\"\"
\nDoes this sound familiar to some of you? Being invited into such an intoxicating array of conversations is fun . . . until it isn\u2019t. You will run out of gas and ideas. It\u2019s only a matter of time. The best part of your day was just spent solving everyone else\u2019s problems. Meanwhile your own problems are still waiting patiently for you. No wonder the research is not too optimistic about those who collaborate too much: \u201cThey are so overtaxed that they\u2019re no longer personally effective.\u201d<\/a>[vi]<\/a>
\nThat can\u2019t be what God had in mind.
\nMeanwhile, those who have grown too dependent on this overcentralized person start panicking at missed deadlines, and ideas aren\u2019t as fresh as they used to be. Workflow congeals and frustration seeps to the surface.
\nIt almost seemed easier back in the silos.
\nHowever, there is a way to unclog things: The super collaborator must learn to say no earlier.<\/strong>
\nIf people are lining up outside your door right now (do you even have a door?), what is keeping you from using that two-letter word? Henry Cloud\u2019s very important Necessary Endings is worth more than a passing glance. He rightly suggests that \u201cendings often are absolute necessities for a turnaround or for growth to occur.\u201d<\/a>[vii]<\/a> This is not a suggestion that your super collaborating comes to an end, but that it become more refined and intentional. Do not allow all this activity to swirl around your schedule and significant abilities.
\nIf at this point you\u2019re thinking this particular chapter is a direct contradiction to the last, it is not. It is, however, an essential counterbalance. The nature of effective collaboration is both yes and no. But healthy boundary-setting does not mean saying no to everything. It certainly does not justify a Grumpy McBitterpants routine where you keep telling everyone to get off your respective lawn\u2014at home, work, school, or church. This does not warrant your complete isolation from everyone else so you can \u201cfinally get some work done.\u201d That would be an overcorrect of a different, crabbier sort.
\nThe rhythmic back and forth of \u201caccept\u201d and \u201cdecline\u201d is learned and relearned by the best teams and its members.
\nThis is the genius of working as one to the glory of God. It is both the joy of contributing and the necessary humility in letting others have their shot. But it is both.<\/strong>
\nCloud reminds us that when the super collaborator steps back, other opportunities for growth will now have their day. And this leads to the third and final assumption that has lingered far too long in the shadows of every church, team, and organization.<\/p>\n

Assumption #3: If Everyone Else Does His or Her Part, My Part Won\u2019t Matter<\/strong><\/h3>\n

When the rest of an organization leans too heavily on a particular player, it brings problems to both team and player. In the language of our larger discussion, a body part that is overused runs the risk of injury or at least fatigue. It also means the rest of the body is not functioning as it should. Other parts are underutilized and underdeveloped. This is not an efficient way for the many parts to work as one body. The many end up relying too much on one, and before you know it, you\u2019re walking with a limp.
\nThat\u2019s why the last section was for those talented people who might just do too much. But now that they are going to back things down and steward their collaborating a tad more wisely, it is about to be someone else\u2019s turn to contribute.
\nThat could be you.
\nIn this last assumption, the attention now turns attention away from the super collaborator and toward the under contributor. This is the person tempted to assume that the team does not need him or her. Again, in those environments where teamwork is stressed and fostered, there\u2019s usually much activity. But in the midst of that buzz, people can hide or get lost. For the overlooked and underappreciated, consider this your official invitation to join the others on the field. It won\u2019t be smooth, this transition, and it will require patience as others forget to explain the inside jokes and shortcuts that have existed for years. But don\u2019t let that stop you.<\/strong> Even if it appears from the outside that things are moving along swimmingly, you are more needed than you now realize. When certain others on the team actually start establishing more healthy boundaries for themselves, you\u2019ll be downright essential.
\n\"\"
\nBut there are others in these environments who do less because, well, that\u2019s what they always do\u2014less. If that\u2019s you (and it\u2019s been most of us at some juncture of our lives), hopefully this will serve as an honest but encouraging challenge to reject the lie that is this last assumption.
\nIn 1 Corinthians 12 we see Paul making the same point we\u2019ve already encountered in his letter to the Romans. God has designed and sovereignly assigned certain gifts and abilities to those who are now a part of what he calls collectively \u201cthe body of Christ.\u201d The mysterious and beautiful harnessing of all these lives is to be celebrated as a whole. But the value of each individual person and every Spirit-breathed gift is also stressed by Paul\u2019s favorite metaphor. Here, he has a little fun with the point by having body parts talk to one another: \u201cThe eye cannot say to the hand, \u2018I don\u2019t need you!\u2019\u201d\u2014is this what they mean by \u201cbad hand-eye coordination\u201d?\u2014\u201cAnd the head cannot say to the feet, \u2018I don\u2019t need you!\u2019\u201d<\/a>[viii]<\/a>
\nSuch prideful isolation is not God\u2019s design for the body of Christ.<\/em>
\nInterdependence is very clearly Paul\u2019s main point with this talking anatomy lesson. But implicit is the need for every part to actually do what it is supposed to do\u2014whether it be a prominent and highly visible part or not<\/strong>. Paul says the whole body can\u2019t be an eye or ear, sure. For all sorts of reasons that would be rather odd and ineffective. No, each part has a job to do, and for the brilliance of God\u2019s design to be experienced and enjoyed, each part must now contribute. The big toe should understand its value, for the rest of the body needs a big toe (or two). So do your job, big toe. Otherwise things are going to get off balance quickly. The same goes for those unseen and unsightly internal organs without which we won\u2019t make it very long.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Read chapter one for free.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

To assume we won\u2019t be missed is to assume we know better than God how all these parts work together. But we didn\u2019t design this body any more than we designed our own. He did. And we don\u2019t get to tell him how little our contribution would be missed. After all, \u201cGod has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be.\u201d <\/a>[ix]<\/a>
\nSo trust God and do your part.
\nThe beauty of the many working in unison will only happen if we all show up.
\nGo a little crazy when it comes to creative solutions. Dream big. Have fun. Jump in the ball pit every now and then.<\/strong> Tear down some silos. Make a habit of collaborating.
\nBut beware the overcorrection, because we\u2019re not playing swarm-ball. The buzz of activity is not enough. It\u2019s time to do your part. Not more than your part. Just your part.
\nThis is how highly collaborative teams get things done. It\u2019s how they run fast. It\u2019s encouraging. It\u2019s often fun. Even when it\u2019s not, it\u2019s worth it. And because we begin to bring our best to the table, not only do we call great things out of one another, but we also begin to relax a bit. I don\u2019t have to do it all. I\u2019m not supposed to do it all. And trust? Well, it starts showing up as never before.<\/p>\n

\n

You’ve been reading from Pastor Greg Holder’s The Genius of One: God’s Answer for our Fractured World<\/em>.<\/p>\n