« How connecting differs in person and on the web | Main | Quick clicks: Two-by-two edition »

Are We Suffering From Teamwork Fatigue?

I've read so much contradictory information about whether it's better to work by oneself or in groups that I finally needed some alone time to think about it.

Associations Now has done its bit to promote the virtues of introversion: We've run articles on the importance of finding time to think by oneself, on how introverts aren't the insecure souls the stereotype suggests, and on how social media helps introverts better engage with associations. Of course, we run plenty of articles about the virtues of collaboration too—our Volunteer Leadership Issue is, in essence, a handbook for how association boards and staff leaders can work together and be more productive. So which work style works best, in which contexts, and why?

The cheeky answer to those questions is obvious: Well, I'd have to think on it a little more, but if you want to talk with me about it, we can. (The rest of this week is booked pretty solid with meetings, though, sorry. How's your Tuesday?) What I can say is that it was a little dispiriting to read "The Rise of the New Groupthink," an essay in the New York Times by Susan Cain about how more and more activities in the workplace have become collaborative ones. "It's one thing to associate with a group in which each member works autonomously on his piece of the puzzle," Cain writes. "It's another to be corralled into endless meetings or conference calls conducted in offices that afford no respite from the noise and gaze of co-workers."

Cain points out plenty of downsides to that go-team office dynamic: Studies show that open office plans make employees sicker and more insecure, and though group brainstorming sessions produce a high quantity of ideas, there's no evidence that the quality of those ideas are any better than those generated alone by individuals. Her prescription is for "a more nuanced approach to creativity and learning" that allows us more time to hunker down, be it to generate ideas or just to knock things off our to-do lists.

It's a good idea, but how do you put it in motion? I've read plenty in the business and association press about how to create better collaborative environments; there's much less out there about how carve out more time for individual creativity and productivity. Is it something organizations can institute, or do we just hope our employees get around to it between meetings?

|

Comments

I have a host of problems with Cain's rambling essay in the NYT that IMHO tried to take on too much in one piece. I'm hoping her book will be better.

I think one principle that gets to your question Mark is making it a common part of the culture that individuals share works in progress (in real-time) and ideas and hunches they are pursuing. This would support Steven Johnson's assertion (Where Good Ideas Come From) that colliding hunches and ideas are often how innovation occurs.

In that sense, it becomes a bit less about the furniture in the office and more about the mindset to make public more regularly (think Johari's window) what you're working on and ideas you are exploring. Doing so enables others to react, share ideas and resources, build on your ideas, and connect with you and your work. It could be as simple as posting an idea in the break room and inviting others for feedback. Or having the FB equivalent of a work status update in an internal social network that spawns the same types of comments and connections we see in FB or LinkedIn.

So while the office furniture and configurations is most definitely one tactic for facilitating collaborative conversations, it by no means is the only way, nor is it sufficient in and of itself.

Picking up on Jeffrey's idea, maybe the goal should be more to share mind space than to share physical space? Organizations (mostly larger for-profits that I'm aware of) are experimenting with things like Yammer and Cisco's Quad to allow idea sharing and true collaborative work (which, in my mind, is VASTLY different than forcing 20 people to sit around a conference table together for 2 hours).

It doesn't have to be either/or. Sometimes collaborative processes, and sharing in real time, are best and other times they aren't.

In one association, I asked for Board member feedback on some suggested planning options, and they thought I did that because I didn't know which option was best.

Well, I could have made a good argument for any of the options. I wanted to know what they thought before I proceeded any further.

Be sure your audience is prepared for this type of idea sharing.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)