Team building is a relatively new term in the field of personnel management. Are team-building events so good for business?
No matter what HR specialists say or write, team building depends entirely on the personality of the leader. A good example is the Manchester United football team. One of the best teams in the world has sharply reduced its championship level with the departure of the legendary coach - Sir Alex Ferguson. It would seem that there is everything - super players, team spirit (playing in the great Manchester United is a dream of any football player), distribution of roles, worked-out interaction, motivation (oh yes, the favorite motivation of HR specialists!). And the results with new coaches are not the same. Why? Yes, one ingredient is missing - Ferguson's magic.
The word "team building" came to the field of personnel management from sports. Sports, like business, are tough. Only in sports does the result appear faster. Twice 45 minutes in football - and you either lost or won (even draw results are often perceived by the parties as a loss, or vice versa). In business, the result of actions does not appear immediately, leaving the opportunity for unnecessary manipulations.
For example, for "team building activities". This is one of the worst terms. Combination of Soviet ostentatiousness with specialized pretentiousness. And also - the word "corporate" (abbreviated from "corporate", apparently), which is somehow tightly included in the office vocabulary. Even if the "corporation" has less than a dozen employees, all the same - joint celebration of the holiday is proudly called this word.
I pay attention to words because there must be certain deeds behind them. And deeds should lead to results. If your organization enthusiastically promotes corporate culture, holds corporate events, undergoes field team-building trainings, builds a team spirit, and at the same time there is a frantic turnover of personnel at all levels - stop doing nonsense and spending company funds on it.
A goal is at the forefront of business. To achieve the goal, a team is formed (organization, workshop, department, department, subdivision, etc.), capable of performing certain functions and achieving results. The work of the team is directed by the leader. First of all, a result is required from him. He forms the team. How?
Each manager assembles a team for himself, in accordance with his ideas about doing business. Even if the HR manager carries out the initial selection of employees, the last word, as a rule, remains with the manager. He distributes functions in accordance with positions, he also sees a portrait of the ideal performer of these functions. And he will, in one way or another, seek from employees the maximum approximation to the ideal drawn by him. On the other hand, employees also assess whether they want to work under such leadership. Each person is a person, with his own cockroaches in his head. Who knows, because of what the relationship is developing or not. Putting together (and keeping) a team of only two people - a family - is, oh, how difficult it is. And here - a workable team!
In any case, when building relationships in an organization, the parties evaluate two characteristics - professional skills and personal qualities. Which one is more important is difficult to say. Rather, the combination is important. Moreover, if professionalism can be increased (through training, mentoring), then the character of an adult, as a rule, cannot be changed. Is it possible to build personal relationships through training? I doubt it. This means that the leader is primarily focused on functionality. His task is to distribute clearly defined functions among employees in such a way that it remains only to add together local results to obtain the whole. The main thing is the certainty of each individual's responsibilities and dependence on the overall result.
Note the fundamental difference: the leader is obliged to get the team to achieve the goal, and employees have the right to work or not work under such leadership. Folk wisdom - you can't be cute by force.
Suppose the manager still has the necessary specialists for the case. Not the fact that it will be a team. There will certainly be contradictions within the team. There is no ideal team where everyone cannot live without each other and are constantly illuminated by Western smiles. You can, of course, try to build internal relationships with the help of trainings and joint events, spending on this either the personal time of employees or work. Which option is more painless for the case? Working hours of employees - for the performance of duties. The whole team, by the way. Do I need to separate them from the joint work in order to teach them to do the work together? Personal time is for rest from work problems and from the professional environment as well. It is unlikely that the obligation to be with the team even outside of working hours helps to strengthen the team. And the family, for example, how? Anyway, the ability to have personal time (otsium) determined in the days of ancient Rome the difference between a free person and a slave. This means that personal problems in the interaction of personnel must be solved in the course of work.
So it turns out that the formation of a team from a team depends entirely on the leader. First, it determines the composition of the staff according to the ability to perform certain tasks. Secondly, by all available methods (organization of work, personal influence), it prevents conflict situations that can interfere with the performance of tasks. Thirdly, it leads to the achievement of goals.
In my opinion (and I have been acting as a leader for 25 years now), if the idea of team building arises, then the leader should look first of all at himself. Not to teach people to be a team, but to learn how to manage your team yourself so that you can say about it (the team) - a team. Is it difficult to handle on your own? Then, perhaps, the best option is the presence of a personal coach (trainer) at the head. Ideally, the task of a business coach is to help organize the work so that the team performs its functions independently, without the direct participation of the leader, perceiving him (and this is very important!) As a thought leader. And this is the team. So in sports. So it is in business.
