I don’t think I can add much more substance to what you’ve written, or to the ways others have already responded. I just want to gratefully acknowledge the trust you are modeling for us in opening up this survey, which represent such a wealth of your insights and experiences.

I trust that this will lead to more meaningful discussions (especially of [former] undiscussiables), stronger teams and mutual benefits for everyone … including, hopefully, the person willing to share so openly of the patterns that have emerged through years of cultivating trust in a variety of organizational settings.

Thank you.

Communication within a team really does have the power to influence whether or not the team is going to be a team.

And when I say “team”, I don’t mean just by its name. I mean by its functionality and true definition.

As with everything else within the team, team communication goes through an evolutionary process. I believe there are three basic levels in the evolution of the communication of a team.

1.Rubbish
Exactly what the name implies. The communication process is ordinary to say the least: Not in terms of the amount of communication, but more in terms of its quality.

At this level, the content has very little to do with anything that is going to help the team get closer to their prescribed outcomes. There is very little communication and mostly nothing that will rock the boat of the team.

The communication at the ‘rubbish’ level is more socially orientated than purpose or performance orientated.

2.Safe
Individually and in combination, the team has to start finding things out about itself. Where is it heading? Why is it not getting there? What needs to be done? etc.

Once this is realised by the team, both individually and collectively, the communication process moves from the ‘rubbish’ level to a more formalised and structured process to gather and disseminate information.

However, this process is still done in a very safe manner.

The majority of information is passed through covert type questions and peripheral issue discussions. Very rarely does anyone make a direct comment or give their opinion, or take a stand in front of the team on behalf of the team or anyone within it.

Rarely, if at all, does any one comment directly to anyone what he or she thinks of their performance in carrying out their role in front of the team.

Views are not going to cause friction as the people who probably need to hear what has to be said, never will. When the team operates at this level, the information is being exchanged but the team a long way from where they really need to be. No one wants to say anything that is going to upset anyone.

3.Real
This is where things that need to get said, start to get said. Opinions are aired, concepts discussed and arguments or heated discussions evolve. But the bottom line is that the things that need to be aired, discussed, heard and understood, are because of the introduction of ‘real’ communication within the team and for the team.

So — three levels of communication that every team has at one stage or another worked through.

What benefit does the advent of “real” communication provide to and for the team?

If people will not say what they feel and what they believe the team needs to hear; and if there is reluctance to openly communicate with each other, then the team will never benefit from the experience, insight and knowledge of the individuals within it.

If team members don’t say what they feel, then the team is missing out in so many different ways that it is almost impossible to comprehend.

The greatest problem is that lack of communication within any team or group situation is usually a reflection of a lack of trust within the team.

And as we know from what we have been taught and have witnessed first hand, without the element of trust within the team, you have a team with no foundation.

And with no true foundation, you really do not have a team.

Now I know this all sounds like a huge conclusion derived from the meagre fact that a team does not openly communicate, but let me explain this in some further detail.

Without the presence of conflicting opinions, open discussions and opposing beliefs, there can appear to be (quite understandably, from the outside), a strong, united and harmonious team.

However, the reality is that nothing could be further from the truth.

With the absence of “real” communication the team actually is sitting on a false harmony.

And the reason there seems to be harmony is because no-one will say what needs to be said for fear of upsetting the team or individuals within it.

Team members resort to agreement for the sake of harmony: they do not say what they think as they believe this is in the best interest of the team.

At most, their comments are guarded or worse, they do not say anything or contribute in any way.

They either know how the team will react or they do not know how the team will react. Either way the reason is simple. There is no trust.

They are reluctant to say what they think out of fear of how the team will react — because they know they will react.

Or they are reluctant to say what they feel because they don’t know how the team will react and they don’t trust them enough to just say it anyway.

The relationships within the team are not strong enough for the team to discuss or communicate certain things as to do so will create turmoil within the team or put strain on certain relationships, thus creating disunity and removing the “harmony”.

Once again, nothing could be further from the truth.

Harmony is great but not when it comes about because people hold back from saying what they think or believe to be in the best interest of the team.

If the team works at the real communication and what comes from it, including how to deal with the aspects of conflict and occasional disagreements that stem from the real communication, then the team will become so much closer, so much stronger, more trusting and therefore, so much better.

This is based simply on the fact that “What doesn’t get said in this team just gets worse.” (Jason Smith, Victoria Titans NBL team, 2001)

Those who do not speak up or do not speak the truth make it hard for others within the group to trust them. But they don’t say what they believe needs to be said to the team because they don’t believe they can trust the team.

And therefore, the entire aspect of “team” breaks down.

Trust is built when each team member sees and believes that each other team member is being true to him or herself and that their intentions and focus are in the best interests of the team.

The first and foremost advantage of ‘real’ communication is the fact that truth builds trust.

The Journey Continues!

Trust is such a key for me and for everyone I talk about in the workplace. I appreciate your work on putting this together, it is printing as I write this and I will take a closer look. I am reminded of the old statement: trust is a must or your game is a bust.

People tend to love inventories and questionnaires and I will look for an opportunity to use this and get you some feedback.

I will also write a short post on Slacker Manager as I am sure managers will want to know about this.

David

Great teaming is and always will be a worthwhile discussion to have in the workplace, and I think it may be more important than ever right now: Jobs and roles are getting reinvented daily, with the generational shift now occurring as more and more boomers retire, or think about their own “second acts.” I strongly believe that creating a workplace of stronger, trusting teams may be the best means to the end results we are seeking.