by
Jeff Davidson, MBA, CMC
Word Count: 959
Each team is a unique entity in the universe, the members of which thrive on understanding, responsibility, autonomy and most of all supervision. Assembling a winning team means being able to lead your team through the rigors of challenging projects. It’s more than scheduling meetings, speaking to your team members, and broadcasting email messages. It calls for an interpersonal connection with each member of the team.
Veteran team leaders understand, however, that their overall ability to get things done is largely dependent on the quality level of the individuals added to the team. You want to start with good people; there is no substitute for this! The more competent your staff members are, the more competent your team is even though a team is more than merely the sum of the individuals who comprise it.
Lo and behold, the organization where you’re employed can help propel or thwart your efforts. Nurturing-type organizations enhance your ability to succeed. Such organizations have a track record for supporting teams, reward team leaders for taking appropriate risks, and have a realistic notion of what types of resources you’ll require in pursuit of your task or project. Unsupportive organizations tend to do the opposite. When each of your team members reports to you and no one else, you have the best chance to succeed.
Unfortunately, that often is not the case. Your team members may be reporting to you as well as other team leaders. You might have one staff person on board for 60% of his time, another for 20% and another for
100%.
If your staff is pulled in too many directions with responsibility for other tasks and projects, and cannot offer the requisite concentration and energy that would be desirable on your project, you’ll have to make the best of the situation. Your job as team leader will be more difficult, your progress slower, and your enjoyment probably less.

Teams of Different Stripes
In simplest terms, a team is an assembly of individuals who have been gathered together to accomplish a particular purpose. Presumably, these individuals working in unison will accomplish far more than any single individual could accomplish, and if the team is truly effective, will create a synergistic effect. Synergy is when one plus one equals more than two.
Two people working as a team should be able to accomplish much more than the sum of what each individual would accomplish on their own. A group of three would accomplish more than what three individuals working on their own would accomplish.
Different types of teams are more suited for different types of tasks.
High performance teams, which can be anywhere from four, five, or six people up to as many as 12, are committed to both achieving the team’s overall objectives, as well as committed to one another’s individual growth, success, and personal experience.
A real team has been described as a small group of people with complimentary skills. While holding themselves mutually accountable, they are focused on a common goal or objective, and strive to work in ways that most effectively achieve their objective.
A workgroup consists of individuals who exchange information, perspectives or procedures that help one another perform more competently in his or her area of responsibility. Members of the workgroup generally don’t share a common purpose and do not participate with one another in joint projects, at least those that would otherwise require a team approach.
Nevertheless, members of a workgroup can be highly supportive of one another and offer support on a continuing basis.
As you might guess, of these three types of “team” assemblies, the high performance team has the greatest potential for synergy and superior performance in pursuit of specific accomplishments.
Depending on where you work, what you’re trying to accomplish, and how large or small your team may be, there are nearly endless variations as to what form your team will take and what they’re capable of accomplishing.
For the discussion hereafter, the term “team” will be used to mean two or more people who have assembled to accomplish a specific task or project.
More Members, Greater Complexity
The larger the size of your team, the more complexity you will encounter. This may seem obvious, but perhaps you have never

contemplated the level of complexity as one transitions from, say, three to five members. On a two person team, there’s only one connection, between you and the other person. With a three-person team, the number of connections is three.
Now things get tricky. With a four person team, the possible connections grow to six, and with five it grows to ten. And, my goodness, should you have a six person team, the number of interpersonal connections grows to a whopping 15.
The fewer number of team members you require to accomplish what you seek to get done, the fewer connections, the less complexity, and potentially the greater harmony. Not that great things can’t be accomplished with teams of six or more people. Certainly, this happens all the time. Still, you have to pay homage to the increase in geometric complexity as more people are added to a team.
Jeff Davidson helps organizations and individuals manage the relentless enslaught of information overload. www.BreathingSpace.com
discusses Jeff's keynote speeches and seminars including "Managing Information and
Communication Overload" and "Prospering in a World of Rapid Change." Jeff is Executive Director of the Breathing Space® Institute; a popular speaker; and the author of numerous books, including: The 60 Second Organizer
(Adams Media), Breathing Space (MasterMedia), The Joy of Simple Living
(Rodale), Complete Idiot's Guide to Managing Your Time (Alpha/Penguin).
© 2011, Jeff Davidson. All rights reserved. For more information about this article or author, contact Susie@FrogPond.com
. For the most current local
Housing Trends, go to http://www.HousingTrendseNewsletter.com
.