“We did a team-builder- why do things seem the same?”

The phrase “Team-builder” makes me anxious. When I get a call from a manager looking for a team-builder I ask a LOT of questions. I hear a variety of reasons for Team-building such as “HR said we had to do some kind of team builder twice a year,” “no one is getting along,” and my personal favorite “I have budget I need to spend before the end of the year!”

The problem with each of these reasons is that they are not results-focused. Many companies call social activities team-builders and expect the general activity of interacting to solve conflict issues. I hate to break this to you- but it ain’t gonna happen!!!

A good team-builder addresses a specific, well-defined issue, challenge, or goal. The information and activities incorporated into the activity have to be easily applicable to the work the team produces, and there must be both action plans and constant follow-up work.

That seems simple enough, right?  So, why do I have an issue with the phrase team-building?

I have experienced a myriad of team-builders in my career.

While working my way through undergrad I worked as an Insurance Claims Rep. That job is inherently negative. Customers are stressed and just want their money, rental car, or car repairs immediately. There is no way to be empathetic enough, fast enough, or helpful enough. In addition, after a few months on the job most Claims Reps become cynical. EVERYONE in a car accident miraculously has a neck injury and wants to know how much they can get for pain and suffering. That job really changes your view of human nature.

So, how does one make an inherently negative job/work environment a fun one? The Fish Program of course!!!! Let’s be clear, I have no problem with the Fish Program story or book. It’s a fun vignette about a specific company with a unique environment. However, my problem is usually with the execution of the program. At the insurance company, we watched a one hour video on the Fish Program and were then told “Now, go make your work fun.” I thought, “you know what would be fun- if I chucked a fish at your head right now….that would be fun!!!!”

After a month, the same trainer came back to our team wanting to know why we still weren’t having fun. She decided we should institute MANDATORY fun time each week. No, I’m not kidding. Each Wednesday, for one hour, our conference room would be filled with Twister, Tiddlywinks, Checkers, a deck of cards, etc, and we were literally forced to “have fun.” Again, I’m not kidding. During one “fun session” I decided it would be more “fun” to just take a nap, however the trainer told me that was unacceptable and I MUST participate in a game. Seriously!

To add to the ridiculousness of this story, while we were in our mandatory fun hour, the secretary was taking messages from angry customers. By the time we each returned to our desks there were at least 10 messages from customers wanting to vent about how they can’t wait for their insurance payout. I really wanted to call them back and say I’m sorry this took so long, but I was having corporate-mandated fun!

The situation is not always this bleak, though.

At my last employer, the term team-building was used loosely….but it worked. I was a recruiter for a top-notch IT Consulting firm. The environment was intense, competition was stiff, and everyone was driven to succeed. However, everyone also got along seamlessly and had fun everyday. We worked in a bullpen setting so there was no choice but to interact constantly, and we were a very healthy team. This fostered a culture of cooperation and support. Somehow I was named the Director of Entertainment/Team-Building- probably because I had the shortest attention span and tried to recruit everyone to Happy Hour everyday at 3pm! I orchestrated everything from putt-putt courses around the office to trips to amusement parks to Halloween costume contests as Team Builders. Now, the reality is that NONE of these are really team-builders in a traditional sense because they had NOTHING to do with the job itself- but they worked for us.

These types of activities are what give “Team-Building” a bad name. You can’t do trust falls, go to Happy Hours, and watch videos about throwing fish and expect to solve real team problems.

I usually suggest the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator assessment as the opening session of a Team-Building curriculum. The MBTI gives individuals insight into their own preferences, opens the door to learning about others, and creates a common language for addressing issues. In other words, the MBTI is the starting point for change- not the result.

I then suggest the team look at concrete examples of conflict, decision making, communication breakdowns, stress factors, etc and we handle the issues at hand using the MBTI as a foundation. At the end of each Team-Building session, I suggest each member create an action plan for flexing to other team member’s preferences and recognizing their own blind spots. I then suggest a follow-up on that action plan to make sure development is on track.

Next, you have to integrate what you’ve learned into the actual work day and work tasks.  I suggest a second day of training where an experienced coach observes the team in action and coaches along the way.  A great example of this is in the book “5 Dysfunctions of a Team” by Patrick Lencioni.

So, then the team-building is done, right?

Absolutely not. A one-time team-builder is like taking your car for one oil change in it’s lifetime and being shocked when the engine explodes. Teams, like any relationship, take work and need constant maintenance and tune-ups!