When writing last week’s journal, my main confusion at that point in time was the ambiguity that this course entails. Leading up to the weekend, however, after downloading the MikesBikes Software, I had my first attempt then realised that I had just found my one and only problem of the course. The value of 25 dollars had never seemed as great of a value to me as it did whilst using SoloMike. After multiple attempts, I was beginning to give up as the due date for our CVs was near; after all, I didn’t need to reach 25 dollars in order to pass the task. With a lot of thought, I realised that I definitely would not like anyone in my team to have that same mind set as I did while using SoloMike, therefore it would just be completely unfair, not to mention hypocritical, of me to impose this on the members in my team.
Finally making it past a shareholder value of 25 dollars, I relaxed a little knowing that I had overcome this particular issue, yet at all times the thought of being placed in a team with complete strangers, that I’d have to work with for the next 10 weeks, was at the back of my mind. I suppose my main concern there is only ever referring to them as my group, instead of a team. Katzenbach and Smith (1992) briefly mention the “threshold” that exists between a collection of people that work together towards something that is important to each of them (a group), and a small group of people who share common goals and all hold themselves mutually accountable for the outcomes (a team). The time it would take to cross this threshold is unknown and it is this thought that I find unsettling. After being assigned into our groups at Thursday’s lesson, my group (emphasis on this choice of words) and I had decided that the most important thing we can agree on is that we must hold ourselves mutually accountable for the results. Considering this agreement, it would appear as though we are already half way towards this threshold, optimistically thinking that is.
Something that I thought would be worth taking note of was the fact that Katzenbach and Smith (1992) consider all the positives of working in teams and not much regard for the negatives. It’s been highlighted that the team level is the “critical building block” (Katzenbach & Smith, 1992) for productive and competitive businesses. This article accentuates the general impression that the concept of ‘teams’ has built which excludes the negative impacts of conflict between team members. In addition to this, this article seems to assume that every individual is better off working in teams and fails to acknowledge that some people feel more confident working on their own. Personally, I prefer relying only on myself when it comes to completing tasks and assignments as this is what I’m used to, and the stress of possibly letting a number of other people down is non existent. Despite this, I feel very confident with my team with only the first impression I had at Thursday’s class. I have high hopes of passing this threshold very soon in order to gain more confidence with working as a team (not a group) as opposed to working on my own.
Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1992). Why teams matter. McKinsey Quarterly, (3), 3-27