I was asked a question about reluctant team members recently, and while the specifics of this question might not be familiar, the general situation is likely something you’ve seen, wondered about or experienced yourself.
Let’s start with the question.
I have a problem in that one or two of my staff (of ~20) don’t value the time, responsibilities, and workload of the other team members. They protect their own time, won’t work as team players and won’t offer to help. This is bringing down the morale of the other team members and frustrating them greatly. A few in the group have asked me to do a team activity or group activity that will “teach” these selfish members of the group to value/respect everyone`s workload and help them realize that they aren’t the only one’s on the team with a heavy workload.
I can not think of any group activity that would drive this point home. I feel that these individuals will only hear this on a one to one discussion, but that doesn’t always go well because it comes from the “manager” and isn`t necessarily valid.
Do you have any suggestions?
My “Answer”
I believe there are two major principles at play here. When we start with the principles, we can then work forward to some solution or identify things that can change the behavior/situation.
Principle #1 – People operate and behave in ways that make sense to them, based on how they see the world.
Principle #2 – Teaching, training or education (call it what you want) doesn’t solve all behavioral problems. These approaches only help if the targeted person can’t do (which may be different from won’t do) the desired behavior.
Let’s start with principle #2. This question has largely been framed from the perspective of how can I help them learn new behaviors. My guess (and it is just a guess) is that won’t solve anything. If the team members in question could or ever have exhibited the desired behaviors, then this isn’t a training problem. Bob Mager, famous learning and development author taught the question, “Could they do it if you put a gun to their head?” If the answer to this is yes, it isn’t a training problem, and training aimed at changing the behavior could actually make the situation worse.
So, the first step is to determine if it really is a skill/behavior gap. If it is, then time spent doing some type of training, including a group exercise, might be helpful. The key word here is IF.
Given my assumption that this isn’t really a gap in skills – that the two team members in question are capable of offering help, and aren’t (or haven’t) ALWAYS been “selfish” team members, the the challenge lies more solidly in Principle #1.
My advice is to spend time trying to understand the perspective of these team members. What does success in their work look like to them? How do they view the requests of others (that the others see them as spurning)? Remember – they are operating based on their internally valid view of the world and what will make them successful. Once you understand their world view, you are in a much better position to coach them or help them see how either their behavior is being misunderstood, or how to help them see a different picture of success – one that includes them operating differently in the team setting.
Final Thoughts and Questions
Situations like these are complex, and by definition, my answer might not completely satisfy the asker. Which is fine, but short sighted. I started with principles, because the answer lies in applying principles to situations like these.
Perhaps you thought of a similiar or somehow related situation as you read this post. The best approach for you is to be looking for the similarities, rather than thinking about how my advice won’t work. Your leadership activity for today is to think about these questions:
What situation that I encounter is similar to or related to this one?
What lessons from this post can I apply to my similar, yet different situation?
What will I do first?
Sign up for my daily email and receive inspiring and challenging articles like the one you just read.
I think that your advice is solid. Each of us see things through our own “coloured” lenses. I see things through blue lenses and my wife through red lenses. In the end we are both looking at the same facts differently and understand what those facts to mean to us is the key to creating a clearing for something new.
“Remember – they are operating based on their internally valid view of the world and what will make them successful. “
Thanks for those insights, Kevin. There’s another very important learning principle, perhaps overlapping with your “Principle #1,” that may be at play here. Following basic reinforcement principles, people also tend to “do” that which gets them what they “want.” In other words, actions that bring rewards, reduce punishments, or avoid aversive situations are “reinforced” and will be repeated in the future. So, if these “contrary” team members find that their work lives are more satisfactory, less stressful, and equally rewarding to them by NOT contributing to the work effort of others, then they will likely continue that behavior until and unless something (or someone) makes it UN-rewarding to be a “solo pilot.”
Certainly, one might begin with the “coaching” conversation to assess what might be most motivating the negative behavior, but simultaneously, a clear message can be sent that the cultural expectations of this particular work unit include the idea that we “succeed and fail” together as a TEAM. Those who choose to positively contribute to the team performance can expect a particular line of rewarding consequences while those who choose otherwise, should also expect a different “line” of outcomes. Readiness to deliver on those outcomes must be a prerequisite of this approach, of course.
Just another perspective to consider.
Together, I believe all the aspects and principles that have been offered by Kevin and others are quite valid. I believe acknowledging others perspectives will build relationships with the persons who are being “selfish.” On the flip side, leadership holding the “selfish” memebers accountable for their healthy participation in the team will help the other discouraged memebers.
Kevin –
I was writing an article for my blog called, “Round Wheels and Godzilla influence Innovation” and was focusing on the issue of innovation in the workplace. In LinkedIn, I was engaging in a conversation that was focusing on innovavation as a skill and that old test of “If you put a gun to their head…” came to mind.
My thought was that this was from Tom Gilbert in his book, “Human Competence” (and it might be) but I had also remembered the Competence book by Bob Mager so I did a google check and who pops up but my old performance-focused pal, Kevin. Small world. Hope all goes well.
I think that an awful lot of the people and performance issues are simply those of perception, that people working in teams are looking at the perceived support and the possible issues around risk of failure and choosing to engage or disengage based on that. I think of the Dune books and the mantra that “Fear is the mind-killer” and things along that line.
My take on all this is around RISK and the perceptions we have about it. Whereas some people might see something as risky, others will not. Gene Calvert wrote a book called, “High Wire Management” many years ago that I thought was quite good on the issues and attitudes around risk. Simply put, much of it is perception.
I did up a little animation called, “Godzilla Meets Bambi” that cuts to the chase and shares my perceptions about risk and innovation and leadership and organizational dynamics and personal histories and all that. You can see this at:
http://www.performancemanagementcompany.com/Godzilla_Meets_Bambi_s/66.htm
Hope all goes well out there and hope to cross paths one of these days, once again.
Scott Simmerman