Developing team spirit
By Taru Bahl

A CASUALTY of modern day living which stresses competition, professionalism and individual performance, is the diminishing of the team spirit concept and this has led to the emergence of the strong solo player. This may bring the individual accolades, pitch him in the limelight and enhance his chances in the numbers game, but it creates a negative group atmosphere. This leads to discord, tension and a slowing down of the overall growth process. In the ultimate analysis, the net result may fall short of expectations. We may not realise it today but this in an unhealthy trend. By isolating ourselves from the group, by becoming insular and by shutting ourselves from all that we find distasteful and/or not up to our standards we are not just facing the risk of being unpopular, selfish and closed but are also failing in our duties towards society at large.

British shipping companies want to steer clear of taking on Indian sailors, deckhands and officers because they feel that too many Indians on board means more politics, less team spirit and non-cooperation. They would much rather go in for the Chinese or the Phillipinos who work noiselessly, without disrupting work schedules and who, in moments of crisis, can be depended upon to work together effectively. Having all like-minded people with similar backgrounds, competency and comfort levels is an utopian situation. We also cannot live a reclusive life by severing ties with those we don’t fancy. Celebrities like Greta Garbo are exceptions. It then makes enormous sense to understand the dynamics of cooperation.

The dictionary defines cooperation as an act or instance of working together for a common purpose. This involves active association with a person, organisation or group. There has to be a willingness to cooperate, share, collaborate, synergise and join forces. This may or may not lead to mutual benefits and gains. There could be times when we choose to cooperate with somebody with the objective of making things easier for him, bailing him out of trouble simply because we love him and want to do everything in our power to make him feel good. However, in modern parlance the decision to cooperate stems more from the possibility of bettering one’s own prospects and adding tangible value to one’s end goals.

Cooperation is always a voluntary decision. One may have been influenced, coerced, and cajoled to cooperate but if one is forced, blackmailed or pressurised into cooperating then the entire effort loses steam. When a working mother has a demanding assignment on hand which requires her to keep late hours, carry work home and also makes her edgy and tense she will be lucky if her family members rise to the occasion and cooperate with her without her having to plead with them. In the worst case scenario, she may have to witness dramatic scenes where the family resents her ‘obsession’ and ‘lopsided priorities’. In spite of her ‘buying’ her children’s cooperation by ordering fancy food from takeaways, giving them extra pocket money and concessions she still has to face their ire, sarcasm and non-cooperation. Here even if the father or an elder intervenes and forces them to keep quiet, this ‘compliance’ will not be termed as cooperation.

Cooperative people are calm, helpful and amiable. This is largely because they have no unrealistic expectations from those around them. They also do not hesitate in lending a helping hand, offering a friendly shoulder and going that extra step forward. If they can do something, they do it. Most importantly they have the ability to look at things from others’ point of view.

For people to be cooperative, there has to be an atmosphere which is conducive to willing cooperation. In the corporate arena where there is a competitive individual performance criterion, cooperation cannot be elicited from team-mates. In competitive, low-trust situations, where one is constantly being measured against the performance and output of one’s colleagues, cooperation cannot thrive. It will be strangulated. Even if the willingness is there it will get suppressed. Instead, by developing information and reward systems, the value of cooperation can be reinforced. To do this, the human resources and corporate ethics has to be reinforced right from the top-most rung of the corporate hierarchy.

Philosopher and thinker Krishnamurti asks, "Is it cooperation when there is the compelling influence, pleasant or unpleasant, of authority? Is it cooperation when you are working for a plan laid down by another? Are you not then consciously or unconsciously conforming through fear, through hope of reward etc ? And is conformity cooperation ?" He goes on to explain that cooperation comes into being only when there is no fear of failure or punishment, rejection or hatred and no hunger for success or recognition. Cooperation is possible only when there is freedom from envy, acquisitiveness and the craving for personal or collective dominance and power.

Even in our daily lives, we do not have to compete with our spouse, child, neighbour, friend or colleague. Life is an interdependent, and not an independent, reality. Often results we seek depend on the cooperation of people around us. They could be servants, doctors, shopkeepers, community helpers, politicians or family members. Cooperation in the workplace is as important to free enterprise as competition is to the market place. The spirit of win-win cannot survive in an environment of competition and one-upmanship. For the win-win paradigm to work, all systems and departments have to support one another.

Synergistic people are those who build on their strengths and strive to complement their weaknesses with the strength of others. They delegate work and when asked for help, offer all support. They are not threatened by the fact that their cooperation would benefit the other person and in the process may take him/her closer to the finishing post. Cooperation in this case often leads to new alternatives and fresh insights as they exchange ideas, brainstorm and combine forces. They believe that there are enough resources available to accomplish their goals. It makes them happy to see friends and colleagues prospering due to the cooperation they extended. They believe that the more they give the more there is to know and learn.

In Musicians of Bremen, the popular Grims Fairy Tale, the donkey, cat, dog and hen join hands to drive the robbers away before sharing the booty and enjoying a life of bliss. Individually, each of them was old, way past their prime and not even gifted with a good and strong body and voice. But together they were a force to reckon with. Even though they produced a ghastly mix of vocal sounds, the combined effort was horrifying enough to send the terrified robbers packing. Had the animals decided to play it alone, each one of them would have been killed and cooked for dinner. To have a realistic picture of one’s strengths and weaknesses and then to elicit help and support is something every sensible person must do. Most partnerships, collaborations and mergers work wonders when people with different skill and resources come together and put in their 100 per cent towards achieving a common goal or objective. Sure, the profits and gains are shared but the strains and risks are divided and there is the added bonus of reaching the goal faster than if one were to traverse the path alone. Today, it is an accepted fact that organisational competence is based not on the principles of stability and control but rather on the principles of interdependence, flexibility and partnership, all of which are not possible without mutual cooperation.