When I worked as a fifth-grade math and science teacher, there were concerns with my coming from a management consulting background. At the outset, I went against traditional assumptions by not dining with the principal and other teachers during lunch.

Building rapport with my students was a remarkable achievement. Mainly since many came from disjointed homes and worsening self-ridicule. Fellow teachers were exasperated that I eschewed their “congeniality” to know my students. We had designed team pods in class over traditional command and control teacher-student environment. “I say. You do.”

When I happened upon an article about former Mattel CEO Bob Eckert in HBR, I was astounded that someone else could see how to build a team and trust. At that time, Mattel was struggling. Eckert winced at his decision to be at the helm. A new industry and a once-formidable behemoth who now was trying to reestablish itself.

How was this former Kraft Foods executive “gain trust and start a turnaround?” Eckert determined he and employee partners should be face to face equals by eating meals in the company cafeteria, where he exchanged honest opinions and questions in a format that made employees comfortable. In meetings, how was he to create a safe place where employees shared ideas without fears of reprisal?

His job was to exceed the low expectations set by Wall Street. He made a table with an atmosphere that would foster honest feedback and assuage apprehension. According to HBR, “These include naming the source of tension and calling for honesty; deferring, when appropriate, to the other person’s realm of expertise; and recognizing common experience.”

Eckert wanted most to instill loyalty by permitting employees to know they mattered. A critical component to leading an organization of teams.

While many businesses more and more turn to teams from committees to self-directed workgroups, the expectation is that the new style will expand efficiency by increasing inventiveness, momentum, and execution. Still, our image of collaboration should be coupled with realistic expectations of a meaningful relationship among team members should be.

Are there limitations to teams?

Largely neglected are the array of challenges teams invariably create. Many organizations have found success in making conditions for independent work. But, what happens to those people who simply feel comfortable working alone.

Writes Leigh Buchannan Editor-at-large for Inc Magazine on Susan Cain’s book,

“They are contemplative and cautious: listeners rather than talkers. Drained by the stimulus that extroverts thrive on, they replenish their energy in solitude or small, intimate groups. They also spend much of the time inside their heads, a living arrangement that makes some wonderfully creative.”

Teams tend to experience diverse viewpoints about the direction the team should move. Frequently, research demonstrates that conflict can be beneficial for the team.

How can this be done? By changing our assumptions about the conflict in three ways.

Conflict naturally occurs in teams.
Conflict is not an isolated occurrence.
We must question the assumption that conflict and negative emotion go hand-in-hand, or that negative emotion is a type of conflict.

About Jim

Jim is President of Woods Kovalova Group headquartered in Denver, CO. With consultants and advisors located globally the sun never sets on their business. He has advised and trained Fortune 1000 companies, U.S. Military, Government, small business, and individuals seeking performance improvement. Jim is a former U.S. Navy Seabee and earned a master’s degree in organizational development and human resources. He has taught leadership and human resources at Villanova, Colorado Technical University, and Dickinson University. To have Jim work with your organization schedule an appointment here.