36. The relationship between teamwork and inpidual strength, energy, and
commitment is complex; whether they operate in a complementary or antagonistic2
manner depends on: the goals toward which the traits are directed, the degree of
emphasis on teamwork, and the job of the inpidual within an organization.
A person's ability to work effectively in a team is not in consistent per se with
personal strength, energy, and commitment. If exercised in a self-serving manngrfor
example, through pilfering3 or back stabbingthese traits can operate against the
organization. Conversely, if directed toward the firm's goals, these traits can motivate
other team members, thereby4 advancing common goals. World War II generals Patton
and Rommel understood this point and knew how to bring out the best inpidual
qualities in their troops, while at the same time instilling5 a strong sense of team and
common purpose.
Nevertheless, over-emphasizing teamwork can be counterproductive for an
organization. A successful team requires both natural leaders and natural followers6;
otherwise, a team will accomplish little. Undue7 emphasis on teamwork may quell8
initiative among natural leaders, thereby thwarting9 team goals. Also, teamwork can be
overemphasized with a commissioned sales force of highly competitive and autonomic
inpiduals. Overemphasis on teamwork here might stifle10 healthy competition, thereby
defeating a firm's objectives. In other organizational areas, however, teamwork is
critical. For example, a product-development team must progress in lock-step fashion
toward common goals, such as meeting a rollout deadline.
In sum, inpidual strength, commitment, and energy can complement1 a strong
team approach; as long as inpidual autonomy is not undermined, all can operate in a
synergistic manner to achieve an organization's goals.
相关文章推荐
