Team Plural

Within organizations there are many teams, each with their own leaders, objectives, interests and approaches.  There are sales teams and production teams.  Creative teams and analysis teams.  Revenue centers and cost centers.  Head office and network.

Like in a multi-color ball of yarn these teams intertwine in their actions sometimes with mutual understanding and collaboration, sometimes with contempt and conflict.  Theoretically each team has its own well defined role at macro level and objectives apparently adverse, but at human relationship level the differences and contradictions between various functions can lead to adverse positioning assumed by each team member.

Team spirit gets inflamed and acts as leukocytes against any “external” factor that might endanger the group objective.  Differences may get aggressive and they induce visceral personal reactions.  Quarrels and possible blockades will leave deep scars on the efficiency and success outlook at organization level, no matter the mini-victories obtained by guerilla teams.

The only peacemaker within the organization’s tempest in a cup is the leader – the one who has both the panoramic view and the maturity to accept the famous fight of contraries as an important condition for the solidity and viability of success.  He is the one to explain, if required, the need for diversity in opinions and roles.  He is the one to mediate or negotiate with the leaders of the other teams the “cease fire” or “truce” agreements.  He is the one to enforce, preserve and protect the common ground that should unite these teams.  Otherwise the Big Team will lose not only battles, but possibly the war as well.

Even if he loses some easy popularity and peer leverage, the leader is the one to declare and consistently act in the spirit of the team of teams based on the principle “Your team should cooperate with my team.”