|
Interesting question/issue. Here are some of my initial ideas aka ramblings;
1. The prospective team must have a goal/mission. Depending on the expected longevity of the team, you might have a main goal and several subordinate goals.
2. The team must "buy-in" to the team's missions. In business setting as discussed above, this motivation is often monetary in nature(for example, if the business does well, the employees receive a share of profits). However, it takes a lot of money to purchase enough motivation for a person to risk his life. That motivation is more often philosophical or spiritual in nature.
3. The team must delegate responsibilities/duties to each team member. Each dude(or dudette) must be a part of the team, or he/she will ultimately detract from the team.
4. The team, as a whole, must be ultimately responsible for the team's success/failure, so that each individual has a vested interest in the team's success. Any other mindset encourages sloth on the part of the lazier team members. We had a saying on my old team: "Peer pressure is a mother fuc##$".
5. In order to function at a high level, the team must have leadership. I still define leadership as "the ability to get people to do things that they otherwise would not want to do". Oftentimes, the better the leader, the better the team.
6. While it is preferable to be able to hand-pick the team members, that is not always possible. Oftentimes, the team must "go with what you've got".
I am sure that more knowledgable persons could articulate more and better points, however I think this would be enough to at least get started.
In my opinion, I would think that motivation and direction would be the two most important aspects of team-building. Without direction, the team might represent the "chicken with its head cut off", accomplishing nothing. Without motivation, the team will at best half-ass any task, again accomplishing nothing.
|