Every leader wants to lead a high performing team. A team’s performance is impacted by the behaviour of each team member. If one person isn’t playing ball, everyone suffers.
I spend a lot of time helping teams work better together. I help the team gain greater clarity, the skills of communication and collaboration, to deal with tensions and conflicts skillfully and the holy grail of high performing teams – holding each other accountable around behaviour and performance.
One thing I continually notice is 90% of people are actively seeking to be great team players. When a leader helps these team players (the 90%) gain greater communication, collaboration and self-awareness skills, performance goes up.
However, there are some people who are either stuck in a behavioural rut or are actively choosing not to be productive members of the team. Many team leaders find these people very challenging and difficult to deal with.
The problem is the teams operate at the pace and level of lowest denominator. Like an anchor, dragging on performance, harmony, collaboration and cooperation.
Justus von Liebig, a German chemist of the 1800s proposed a significant principle of nature. It’s called Liebig’s Law of the Minimum, or sometimes the Law of the Limiting Factor.
Liebig used a barrel as an illustration. The barrel can only be filled to the level of the shortest stave. Likewise, in many teams, one person can limit the whole.
This is why it is important not to ignore the 10% – which may only be 1 person amongst a team of 10 (what impressive maths). Many leaders, including me, try to work around, ignore or sideline that person with the hope that the rest of the team will perform well enough to compensate for them. The water level will not rise above the lowest performer.
What to do?
It is interesting that the microcosm where dysfunctional behaviours often show up, are within meetings. Patrick Leconioni has said[1], “Meetings are central to maintaining organisational health. No action, activity or process is more central to a healthy organisation than the meeting. As dreaded as the “m†word is, as maligned as it has become, there is no better way to have a fundamental impact on an organisation than by improving and even changing the way it does meetings.
In fact, if someone were to offer me one single piece of evidence to evaluate the health of an organisation, I would not ask to see its financial statements, review its products or even talk to its employees or customers. I would want to observe the… team during a meeting. This is where values are established, discussed and lived and where decisions around strategy and tactics are vetted, made and reviewed. Bad meetings are the birthplace of unhealthy organisations, and good meetings are the origin of cohesion, clarity and communication.â€
12 MEETING BEHAVIOURS THAT LOWER THE WATER LEVEL
There are 12 behaviours that individuals might exhibit that will lower the water level of the team. Leaders need to be able to identify these behaviours and address them.
Below are the descriptors and some quick ideas about how to address them. Many of them are reminders of what you are already doing. However seeing them all listed together is a stark reminder.
Keep the list handy by downloading the pdf here.
|
BEHAVIOUR |
DESCRIPTIONS |
LEADER ACTIONS
|
|
1. Backbiting |
Members of team complaining and finding fault behind one another’s backs; talking with non-team members instead of team members about team issues |
|
|
2. Blaming |
Not taking personal responsibility; pointing the finger at others/situations |
|
|
3. Bullying |
Being inconsiderate of other team members; attacking and intimidating behavior |
|
|
4. Discounting |
Interrupting others; ignoring comments or suggestions; putting down team member contributions as irrelevant |
|
|
5. Distracting |
Digressing, getting on tangents, conducting side conversations |
|
|
6. Dominating |
Pushing own (not group) agenda; excessive talking, interrupting others, criticizing, speaking for others; arguing too much on a point and rejecting expressed ideas without consideration |
|
|
7. Excluding |
Forming cliques or factions which result in members of the team distrusting and suspecting one another |
|
|
8. Feuding |
Bringing baggage or issues from other situations and creating an uncomfortable environment; members of team openly complain about and find fault with one another |
|
|
9. Joking |
Excessive playing around, telling jokes, mimicking other members |
|
|
10. Nay-saying |
More attention paid to what is wrong than what is right in the name of playing devil’s advocate; fault finding without providing alternatives; using “yes-but†language as a default |
|
|
11. Non-participating |
Acting with indifference; not contributing to discussions and activities; holding back opinions and ideas; not taking initiative; arriving late or leaving early |
|
|
12. Labeling |
Using labels that have an emotional charge or negative connotation to attack self-esteem rather than addressing the problem |
|
[1] The Advantage