Par trazi pojedinca
Dating > Par trazi pojedinca
Click here: ※ Par trazi pojedinca ※ ♥ Par trazi pojedinca
Train the Trainer is a two-day training by designed for future training professionals and for the development of human potential. Each person occupying a position in a hierarchy is accountable for all operations performed by the people who report to that position. Everyday, through your own actions, you either reinforce the way things currently are or else demonstrate a different possibility and preference. Dušanove oblasti ekspertize su sistemski razvoj ljudskih resursa, procena potencijala i sposobnosti zaposlenih, kao i osnaživanje timova i menadžera kroz razvojne projekte sa fokusom na trening i poslovni koučing. Imamo devojaka, dama iz: Beograda, Novog Sada, Niša, Subotice, Kragujevca, Čačka, Kraljeva, Kruševca, Jagodine, Užica, Paraćina, Valjeva, Šapca, Zrenjanina, Kikinde, Vršca, Sombora, Pančeva, Požarevca... Garancija se ostvaruje preko mene jer su na moje ime. The same is not true for motivation, however. Luica Radivojević je sertifikovani NLP trener, HR konsultant, trener programa Persone Global, NLP Biznis kouč i sertifikovani PCM Process Communication Model® kouč.
Knowing how to work effectively in and through groups may be the single most important skill anyone can develop in today's collaborative, team-based workplace. Unfortunately, all of the resources available on teamwork put the emphasis on group process and ignore the role of-and benefits to-the individual. But effective teamwork isn't only a group skill set; it's an individual skill set as well. Teamwork Is an Individual Skill shows readers how to develop the skills to thrive on any team, under any circumstances. The authors show how and why your ability to assume personal responsibility-for your own work on a team and for the team's collective work-is the most important factor in ensuring a productive team experience. Teambuilding, the authors point out, is essentially a series of conversations between people who share responsibility to get something done. Teamwork Is an Individual Skill describes the way these conversations typically progress, and shows the reader how to predict and direct these conversations so that they can maximize the benefits to both themselves and to their team. Designed for easy access and for use by both individuals and groups, Teamwork Is an Individual Skill will equip readers with the mental skills and behaviors that will help them achieve personal goals while contributing to their team's success. From the Publisher The Alchemy of Teams By Terry O'Keefe A review of Teamwork Is An Individual Skill Getting Your Work Done When Sharing Responsibility by Christopher M. Teamwork, says Avery, is based on individual skills and attitudes that team members learn to bring to the team table. Avery is a well-known teamwork consultant. His interest in how groups work dates back to his doctoral studies on the Communication of Technology. Avery's passion is about uncovering what makes teams function and what makes them great. That's a question of growing importance in the business world, as corporate hierarchies flatten and the old command-and-control structures dissolve into self-directing teams. The book points out that in progressive companies like General Electric, there are often no more than five levels from the CEO to the most junior clerk. Having each member explore and agree on shared purpose - why the team exists and what it aims to accomplish - is the first step in building a top team. The same is not true for motivation, however. Every team performs to the level of its least invested member. Successful teams make agreements about team behavior -what each person owes to to each other with regard to performance, accountability, and relationship. Teams must create explicit opportunities for team members to participate and add value. Members come to clear and complete agreement on their shared purpose, and on their personal stake in the outcome. They make explicit performance commitments, and hold each other accountable with regular feedback. They exploit their differences to achieve breakthrough performance. They agree to be rewarded on team rather than individual achievement. Just following this kind of process with commitment and integrity can't help but build powerful teams and outcomes. Calling this a book about teamwork runs the risk of putting it into far too small a box. It contains more practical information and advice about the conditions under which we human beings optimize our work together than any other book you are likely to have read. If there is a book about the consciousness of working together, this is it. You don't have to be in the team-building business to benefit from Avery's book - any organizational structure and any work situation will do. Copyright Terry O'Keefe 2001 About the Author Christopher M. Meri Aaron Walker is a principal of Between the Lines, an Austin, Texas-based strategic communications consultancy and a Partnerwerks associate. © Reprinted by permission. This is the most common excuse for non-performance I hear as a business advisor, and it usually comes from highly skilled professionals! Finding oneself in a bad team is not a pleasant experience. But being in a bad team is to completely miss the point. More and more frequently people are finding that in the new workplace they have to get their work done through a team regardless of whether that team is good, bad, or somewhere in the middle. The point here is that people need to know how to make teams work for them. This book aims to show you how. For these and many other reasons that I will share as we go along, I firmly believe that teamwork should no longer be considered a group skill. Instead, teamwork must be considered an1 2individual skill and the responsibility of every individual in the organization. Not treating teamwork as an individual skill and responsibility allows otherwise highly skilled employees to justify their non-performance by pointing fingers at others. This is an especially critical issue for highly capable professionals seeking to remain employable in the future. People assigned to work in teams: developers, designers, creative people, coders, specialists, engineers, and scientists. People assigned to lead teams: program managers, product managers, project managers, team leaders, matrix managers, and technical exerts. Managers and executives who wish to empower people within and across their direct authority. This book is for anyone who works in an environment of shared responsibility. It does not matter whether the shared responsibility occurs in a formal team, in a hierarchical environment, or as the result of a management role. It does not matter whether the shared responsibility occurs in a public, private, profit, non-profit, or large or small organization. TeamWisdom refers to all the individual mental skills and behaviors that lead to highly responsible and productive relationships at work. Thus someone with TeamWisdom takes responsibility for ensuring that the group rises to the occasion, and in the process, makes sure his own work gets done and done well. Why should you take personal responsibility for the performance of every team in which you serve? Your ability to create high quality, productive relationships is fast becoming the most important factor in getting your work done at all. Now, organizations are doling out the work in larger chunks to teams and expecting the teams to divide and integrate the work in a manner that is most effective and efficient for them. TeamWisdom Can Help You… Get More Done with Less Time and Energy I have no interest in helping you learn to be a good and compliant team player. I consider that term to be an insulting label that connotes someone whose primary characteristic is compliance. Instead, my interest is in helping you make maximum use of a team of which you are a member. Use the team to get your work done and get your work noticed. Instead of thinking of yourself as a component in a team, I want you instead to think of yourself as being served by the team, which4 is a lever for you and your abilities. In my experience, people who approach every work relationship with the intention that they are going to take 100-percent responsibility for the quality and productivity of that relationship actually get more done with less effort. How is getting more from less possible, you may ask? Synergy is an overused term that few people accurately understand, but people with TeamWisdom understand it. The reason you can get more done with less time and energy is because any relationship that operates highly has far greater output than the individual input of the collaborators. This occurs because team members in high performing relationships do a much better job of applying the unique perspectives, information, and abilities that each member brings to the collaboration. I am convinced that if we all understood synergy better, we would be much happier when working interdependently because we would actually see that our reward can consistently be greater than our effort. I believe that we are not very far from the day when most professionals will be measured not on individual deliverables and output, but on how their teams perform and on how well they are able to get their work done. Instead, they are more interested in getting work done. Responsible relationships invite people to use their expertise in the most efficient way possible. Such relationships reward your psyche and spirit, and allow you to make an impact and be acknowledged. Imagine a place where people do not blame others or make excuses when things go wrong. Imagine a place where agendas are aligned instead of hidden and where everyone can win instead of living in fear of losing. Everyday, through your own actions, you either reinforce the way things currently are or else demonstrate a different possibility and preference. Understanding Hierarchies and Teams Change consultants promote and build teams both as a means for achieving change and as a means for accomplishing work in changing environments. Because of their integrative nature, teams, we hold, are more flexible, innovative, permeable, responsive, and adaptive than are hierarchies. Teams also engender greater commitment from members who develop a sense of purpose and ownership by having a voice in what gets done. But even teams can sometimes come up short. Teaming can be really tough to get started and maintain. Many individuals—especially smart, high achievers—can experience great angst if asked to serve in teams. They can go to6 great lengths to avoid anything that smells like a team. This general orientation is harder to engender among certain individuals and in some organizational environments. Teamwork often develops naturally and easily. Just visit any playground in the world to observe that girls and boys know innately by age five how to organize themselves around a shared task. This suggests that teamwork is a natural human process, and a skillset at least partially developed at an early age in every individual. Are Hierarchies and Teams Compatible? I have found that images and metaphors can help when drawing distinctions between hierarchies and teams. Consider the image on the left in Figure I. Tall Organizational Structure vs. Flat Organizational Structure 7 of command. The image on the left is likely to trigger our recollection of acts of authority, direction, delegation, accountability, evaluation, and performance management all characteristics of traditional management that are respected because they get things done, but are criticized for being overly controlling and stodgy. The image on the right, on the other hand, is likely to trigger our recollection of opportunities for participation, more diverse perspectives, emergent roles, a clash of differences, consensus, empowerment, and informal task-focused feedback all characteristics of what we like about teams. Two questions come to mind: Is either organizational structure right or wrong? Does any organization exist as purely tall or purely flat? My response is that there is good and bad in both structures. Although I am dedicated to understanding and developing team performance, I am not a hierarchy-basher at all. I find the hierarchy and its chain of command extremely useful. I have seen many large hierarchical organizations in which teams can and do flourish, however. Thus I conclude that teams and hierarchies are in fact compatible and complimentary organizing systems. And hierarchical structuring is not the only reason teams fail in some organizational systems. I am now confident that operating successfully in teams and operating successfully in hierarchies are complimentary skill sets that already exist within most professionals. My premise is simply this: Every individual at work can be far more productive if she will take complete responsibility for the quality and productivity of each team or relationship of which she is a part. What does this mean? In brief, it means: 9 You may indeed have individual accountabilities, but accomplishing these will almost always depend on successful relationships with others and their work. You can better attend to your own accountabilities when you assume responsibility for a larger, shared task or deliverable. Your success depends on teams. Teamwork is an individual—not group—skill and should be treated as such. Individuals make a huge difference in teams, for better or worse. You can easily learn what kind of difference you make and how to build and rebuild a team. To Take Full Advantage of TeamWisdom You Must Change Your Habits of Mind What must change so that you can treat teamwork as an individual skill, even within a competitive hierarchical environment? The single most important thing is to understand how you can take responsibility for relationships while being accountable for deliverables at the same time. Accountability is usually negotiated and assigned through employment agreements. Any hierarchy relies in large measure on accountability. Each person occupying a position in a hierarchy is accountable for all operations performed by the people who report to that position. The person occupying the position delegates his accountabilities without giving up accountability to others to perform. Each person remains accountable to whomever delegated the accountability to him. If you work in a hierarchy and are not absolutely clear to whom you are accountable the person who evaluates your 10 image Figure I. Understanding Accountability performance and for what you are accountable the quality and quantity of results , you may be in danger of never knowing whether or not your work is relevant. I suggest that you take responsibility for allowing this to happen and that you correct the situation. Responsibility, on the other hand, means, literally, the ability to respond. One of the first things I ask of any group with whom I work is that each group member operate from the position of taking 100-percent personal responsibility for her own actions and results. The Responsibility Chart, Figure I. Above the center line is an alternative. Look at my mess. Now, what can I learn from this so that I can improve and move on? Some have squirmed uncomfortably at first, but everyone has come to recognize the possibilities. Most find acting with responsibility refreshing. Some find it long overdue in their environment. Everyone finds it 11 challenging and appreciates being in a group that will support them in learning to operate from this mindset. Responsibility Chart For me, the toughest thing about taking 100-percent responsibility for my results in life, including the quality and productivity of my relationships at work, is admitting that I create my own results. If I want to have a different experience, it is up to me. The tough thing about taking 100-percent responsibility is accepting that I am operating from my own agency even when I attempt to deny it, blame others, or justify my poor performance with a creative story or excuse! A person who demonstrates responsibility holds an intention for overseeing the course of some process or activity such as a shared task. It is an urge, feeling, or mindset that facilitates the bringing about of some result. While responsibility is an internal quality, accountability is an external one. To say it another way, accountability can be assigned, but responsibility can only be taken. Accountability and responsibility are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are extremely complimentary. It is time for each of us in the workplace to take responsibility for relationships as12 well as accountability for deliverables, and to engage in the conversations that build productive relationships at work. That is, there are actions you can take to improve their results and yours. Sharing Responsibility Amazing things happen when two or more people commit themselves to operating from a position of responsibility: Mistakes are viewed as opportunities to learn; communication approaches authentic completeness; and learning and progress happen fast. And all it takes for a group to operate from responsibility is for one member of that group to demonstrate responsibility and request it of the others. To help you get the most out of this book, I will be that one individual, and here comes my request. In our organizations, we divide up large tasks into smaller tasks and distribute those smaller tasks13 to individuals. Whether manager or individual contributor, employee or contractor, exempt or non-exempt, we are all accustomed to taking accountability for deliverables. People with TeamWisdom however go a step further. They back away from their task, role, and deliverables to view the interdependencies upstream, downstream, and all around them. Then they commit to taking responsibility for the quality and productivity of these relationships that will help them meet their accountabilities. What do you have to do to develop your own TeamWisdom? The only person that you can change is yourself. If you want things around you to change, first you must change. If you are willing to adopt that stance, you are ready to consider how to take responsibility when you do not have authority. Responsibility without Authority The message of this book is that your workteams and other work relationships will increase your personal productivity to the highest level possible only if you are willing to take 100-percent responsibility for the quality of each team or relationship, regardless of who has authority. People in organizations frequently balk at taking responsibility without authority. Authority, we believe, is power, and the ability to get things done. But authority is not the only source of power, and there are better ways to get things done. The most important teambuilding principle that I know, which I write about at length in this book, contradicts the notion that authority is the best way to get things done. The most important teambuilding principle I know is: The task is the reason14 for the team. What this means is that teams are defined not by the people on them but by what the team must do. A teambuilder with TeamWisdom applies this principle in the process of constructing a team by figuring out how to organize the work so that none of the members can win individually but rather must win first as a team. This is a powerful way to get your work done. In summary, what needs to change for you to build TeamWisdom is the habit of mind that denies personal responsibility. You must be willing to own results that are larger than yourself. You must be willing to work interdependently with others. True collective leverage and power comes not from distributing and delegating accountabilities, but from collectively demonstrating responsibility for the entire result while doing your best to make your contribution useful to others. How Do You Get Things Done without Control? Teambuilding is simply a set of messages successfully shared among a group of people. Any individual can easily learn and practice teambuilding if she chooses. Professionals often use challenge courses, personality inventories, and other games and exercises to provoke groups into sharing this set of messages. But when such tools are used without understanding exactly why, critical communication skills can become hidden and results can appear magical. Individuals who want to get their work done through interaction with others must learn to make their wants and desires known without ambiguity and without magical thinking. To maximize team performance I recommend that team members engage in the following five conversations as the first order of business after the team has been formed:15 Conversation One: Focusing on the Collective Task If you are assigned to a team, or just want to create a team atmosphere at work, the first thing you should do is establish shared clarity about what the team was formed to do. Teambuilding starts with clarifying the reason for the team. It does not start with getting people to like each other better. The task itself, not the people performing the task, is the reason for the team. By the nature of its task focus, then, a team is temporary because that task has a beginning and an end. Thirty years ago the academic literature describing the concept of group cohesion focused on how much group members liked each other. Today, however, the literature points more to shared interest in a common result as the best predictor of group cohesion. So the first conversation for any new team should be how to work together to accomplish something larger than any one member of the team. If you think about it, you will understand that the move from independence to interdependence begins with asking for or giving help. You will find plenty of practical advice in the following chapters on how to do that. Making sure everyone is at the same level of motivation is far more important to successful teamwork than matching appropriate skills. The same is not true for motivation, however. Every team performs to the level of its least invested member. Freeloaders are actually an invention of institutions. This book will show you how. You can accelerate the development of norms, however, by initiating a conversation about appropriate and inappropriate behavior in your collective effort and then enforcing those agreements. The image on the right, the flat structure, has far fewer such inherent relationship guidelines which gives it its unique power! The third critical teambuilding conversation then focuses on how members should treat each other when working together in the team. Whatever operating agreements are made must be policed by the team. Conversation Four: Setting Bold Goals and Anticipating Conflicts, Breakthroughs, and Synergy Unless they have experienced it a number of times, few employees appreciate and anticipate how their work on a team can lead to real breakthroughs. This lack of understanding contributes to resistance toward team activities. The fourth conversation you must have with colleagues at the beginning of team formation then is about setting bold goals, the anticipation of conflicts in working toward such goals, breakthroughs, and synergy. When it comes to productivity, team performance corresponds to the first-half of the classic S-curve. If you understand this pattern, you can anticipate it. Teams, unlike institutionalized departments, do have beginnings and ends as their collective tasks begin and end and the high performance part of the cycle is at the end. Productivity on a High Performance Team Conversation Five: Honoring Individuals and Their Differences Differences in perspectives are powerful, especially when they are aimed at a collective task in an environment of trust. Team members must create explicit opportunities for each team member to participate and add value. The goal is to produce synergy through the discussion and appreciation of different perspectives. Two types of behavior kill synergy: people saying more than they know, and people saying less than they know. The fifth conversation, then, should be designed to discover what each member brings to the task and to honor differences19 in perspective and approach. From this utilitarian viewpoint, diversity is not about morality. Diversity is about productivity, breakthrough, and synergy. Individual contributors must learn how to stay engaged with each other under time and performance pressures. They must expect that their interactions will lead to breakthroughs that create results beyond their imaginings. More importantly, individuals must learn how to talk about these dynamic relationships in ways that create breakthroughs rather than breakdowns. Teamwork would be easy without the sometimes contradictory demands of the hierarchical chain of command, the politics and the bureaucracy. The issue for many in the new workplace, then, is learning how to cooperate under competitive conditions.
Last updated
