Temporary Archive: Suzanne Brockmann's Message Board

After reading this, how do you think this "How to build a Team" would work or looks like in a family situation? Interesting question. I think that inherently a family is too different than a team to function like one--but, I think that some of the important conepts in teambuilding/work might be a useful way set the family up to operate. One of the biggest of these that comes to mind is tolerance of non-mission related deviance. Basically, allowing family members to be individuals and truly tolerating different behavior as long as it doesn't too negatively effect the families goals. Another would be creating an environment of open discourse/input. My personal pet peeve --one of them--are families (parents) that don't allow challenges to authority. I have seen kids with a natural tendancy toward leadership have it snuffed by parents who "Won't put up with" challenges to their authority--incidentally, I think that mentality is dangerous also. So the question this brings to my mind is not how can the family function as a team--because I think the heirarchy and responsibility of the parents is too great for true teamwork--but what aspects of a team would benefit my family?

A few other comments:

"It doesn't matter what road you take to get the job done it is more important to get there." I understand this sentiment and don't believe it was meant with negative connotations, but I disagree with this thought. The ends only justify the means if the means are within the acceptable strategic parameters and long term interests of the organization. Recent history from Abu Graib to Enron to Nancy Kerrigan shows the problem--your means must support your strategic goal in all ways. That is why I was ruthless in not accepting success that was achieved outside of my set acceptable standard of behavior--it is always diliterious.

"OTOH, no one was *the* leader. That role changed according to what task was being handled. I don't think that teams which are put together in a work-related setting can operate that way" I disagree--in fact I think that this is the preferable way to operate if your "team" can achieve this level of uber-functioning. I start some of my leadership lectures off with a video of "surf passage" at BUDS. It was a huge surf day and boats and people were just strewn across the ocean--then in scene two, one the rocks in front of the hotel del. At the end I ask, "Who was the leader?" Now way to tell---it was a groupd of people with a clear and arduous task taking action to achieve their goal--though in reality, what was happening was people shifting seamlessly in and out of leaderships roles from Buddy pairs up to myself as class leader. The seconed question I ask is what is important to the organization---now this is an audience that has no real knowledge of SEALs--an I think I have always gotten "Don't leave anyone alone", "Be tough" and "Don't give up". Of course I also once got--"we love stupidity"--anway, point is I think that really highly functioning teams can operate without a stiff heiarchy--but most organizations can't afford the time or money to get to that level