| | If you have something of
reputation for spotting
problems ahead of other
members of your team, you
may have found that some
colleagues don’t respond
well. It's not easy when
people see you as the
prophet of doom, but take
comfort from the fact
that every successful
team needs someone to
play that role.
A few years ago,
Meredith Belbin produced
a study of what made some
business teams successful
and others not. He
concluded there were a
number of roles, which a
successful team needed.
If a role was
over-represented, or
missing altogether, there
was a good chance the
team’s performance would
fail when compared to
that of a better-balanced
team.
It sounds as if you
naturally fall into the
category of the | |
|
| | "monitor-evaluator".
Belbin's Wikipedia entry
describes this as a
"sober, strategic and
discerning member, who
tries to see all options
and judge accurately.
This member contributes a
measured and
dispassionate analysis
and, through objectivity,
stops the team committing
itself to a misguided
task."
And that's the problem
isn't it? The team is
beginning to see you as
the person who puts the
stopper on things,
instead of someone who
makes things happen.
Although you seem to be
sensitive to the reaction
of your fellow
consultants, an important
characteristic of the
monitor-evaluator is
concern for the truth of
the situation,
irrespective of
short-term popularity. So
people performing this | |
|
| | essential role in a team
can easily overlook some
options that will make
life easier for
themselves and everyone
else.
Your first task is to
build personal confidence
in your contribution. I
suggest you read up a
little on Belbin's work,
and check out my theory
that you fit into this
category. This will help
you to understand the
essential nature of your
role for the team, and to
meet defensiveness from
other team members with
understanding, rather
than becoming defensive
yourself.
Next, you need to find
some way to get others to
recognise your role and
see it in a positive
light. Collect your
facts, and then discuss
your track record with
whoever manages your
team. If other team
members see your | |
|
| | contribution as a
constructive way to
prevent embarrassing
mistakes, you may well
find that you are given a
slot to say your piece.
At first this might be
done in a jocular way
that you find irritating,
but it's better to have a
recognised role, than
simply be seen as a
gratuitous irritant.
Third, think about
timing to make sure your
contributions don't spill
out at embarrassing times
for the team.
Monitor-evaluators tend
to hang about in the
background and leave
their contribution until
they are sure of their
facts. It can be
inconvenient, to say the
least, if you don't
become sure of your facts
until the client is
sitting in the room.
Which brings me to the
last point. A famous and
long-serving prime | |
|
| | minister once singled out
a member of the cabinet
for praise because he
brought solutions,
whereas others brought
problems." It may be that
your valuable capacity
for critical analytical
thinking gets in the way
of your potential for
creativity – it's often
the case. If this is so,
try to partner with
someone who is good at
ideas and innovation
(what Belbin calls a
"plant").
If you can work
together to bring
solutions to the team,
and find ways to
illustrate the added
value your changes bring,
you are likely to get a
better reception. Much of
it comes down to timing.
Someone once said,
"People can take good
news; people can take bad
news – but they can't
take surprises". | |
|
Previous Page 