High Performance Teams Using Culture

High Performance Teams

Using Culture and Diversity to Make Work Groups into High Performance Teams

Team work' is one of those words in the modern workplace that is frequently used but seldom explained. Everyone understands that no corporation can work well if every individual simply functions as an individual worker, with his or her eyes only upon personal achievement. One must have general organizational goals in one's individual vantage point for the organization to succeed. One must be part of a diverse infrastructure of different corporate functions, and not try to stand aloof. The very definition of an organization or an incorporated entity is something that is made up or incorporated of many components. This philosophy of team work and 'many hands making light work' as well more financially productive and creative work is at the core of creating an organizational 'work group,'

These groups are often composed of different workers with different skills, although the group has the same objective. The group, ideally, should form something more efficient and effective than all of the members of the group working alone. The whole of the team is greater than the sum of its parts and the objective of the individuals must be subsumed to the larger group task. But how can a work group made up of culturally, demographically, and ethnically diverse people become something greater than the mere sum of its parts? If the American workplace is no longer a melting pot but a salad bowl of personal diversity, what does this mean for the efficacy of work groups?

First of all, even in relatively homogenous structures, people often behave differently in groups than they do when alone with a few family members or friends. Some people are more extraverted. Others are more introverted. But often these differences become more exacerbated and evident in groups of mixed gender or cultural styles, or even regional differences within the Americas. Americans often think of themselves not only as coming from a particular ethnic heritage, but also of being part of a geographical region. (Millet, 2004) a Southerner may be less verbally definite than a New Yorker, for example. A Japanese perfectly fluent in English man may say 'maybe' when he means 'no,' because of his or her less directive cultural upbringing, while a Greek American might sputter, 'no way,' even when his or her position is open to negotiating.

For many women, saying, "I'm sorry" often doesn't mean, "I apologize." It means, "I'm sorry that happened" for the sake of our team. (Tannen, 1994)

Also, different communication styles in work teams can cause unfair or incorrect personal evaluations. For example a woman might be given a poor evaluation because her supervisor felt she knew less than her male peers. Her boss might have reached this conclusion because the woman asked more questions than the males on her team, simply because she was seeking information without regard to how her queries would make her look. (Tannen, 1994)

This real-world example does not bode well -- not simply for women, but for the ability of work groups to form cohesive units when the units are diverse in composition and are made up of individuals who utilize different communication styles and have different communication assumptions. Furthermore, in the case delineated above, the woman received a poor review for doing what she ought to be doing -- asking questions. Her femininity might also have made her questions seem less pointed in the eyes of her male supervisor, and her subsequent poor performance might encourage the males and women on her team to ask even few questions.

Even men with less directive styles, because of their cultural background, may find it difficult to compete for meeting time with those from more confrontational styles. A supervisor must be aware of such differences, and neither penalizes those with less directive stiles. By attempting to facilitate rather than stifle debate, a person with a less directive style might be heard more easily. Of course, if too inchoate and indirect a work group style is adopted, indecision may reign and precious time may be wasted. A balance must be struck, between different personal communication styles and a balance between all of the cultural and personal differences of the individuals on the team.

From the beginning there must be an acknowledgement, on diverse teams, of different workers communications styles. Self-awareness and awareness of others is crucial rather than willed ignorance and the ignoring of such differences. For example, when a woman knows that her tendency to say 'I'm sorry' is often misinterpreted by her male colleagues, she is less likely to use this method of communication in a reflexive manner. Likewise, a colleague from a highly confrontational culture or region of the country does not have to adopt a new persona, but can operate with the awareness that his or her abrasive style is not universal to the work team and he or she might have to be quiet for a moment after speaking, before a less confrontational colleague fills the silence with an opinion, a critique or an idea.

Self-awareness exercises regarding communication style differences and assumptions before the actual project is embarked upon can be profound ice-breakers and mark the difference between a group of individuals merely sitting side by side one another, and functioning as a team. Forcing individuals to not simply assume they are the norm but to ask, who am I and how do I communicate, forces them to understand their unique, as opposed to general commitment to the work team.

Also, broaching the discussion of diversity and demographic differences forces members of the team to confront personal stereotypes regarding their preconceived notions about other team players. A high performance team keeps its eye upon the goal at hand, and does not see, instead, someone as wrong before he or she advances a particular concept, based upon his or her race, gender, or accent. Of course, no one can be stripped of all of prejudices before commencing upon a project, but awareness on the part of the team leader and the company ethos helps prevent stereotypes getting in the way of quality work.

While diversity is often thought of as something to be 'managed' on a team, it is important to add that diversity in a demographic sense can also be a tremendous team contribution. Consider how someone from a different educational or corporate background can engender new approaches or ways of thinking 'outside the box,' if one can see past the individual's tendency to wear sneakers with a suit perhaps, as a vestige of the previous office culture he or she was a part of? Similarly, when approaching a multinational team project, to discuss different market strategies with someone from that region, even if they are Asian or Greek American, rather than from that nation originally, can be a team asset. A woman with a more stereotypically female style of accommodation might be able to bridge conflict on a team more effectively, and foster greater team discussion.