Technology, Business & Life in Digital Village

My Photo

Software Engineer by education, Entrepreneur by heart

Blog Feed

Subscribe in NewsGator Online

Subscribe by email

Powered by FeedBlitz

Click here to join nmcgroup
Click to join nmcgroup

Work on this blog is licensed under a Creative Commons License

Monday, May 02, 2005, 10:05 AM

Success Mantra for a team: diversified views

I do totally agree with Matt's view who says:

A management team that finds itself 100% in agreement, 100% of the time, is in trouble. A management team that can have disagreements and use that tension productively to drive decisions is much better off. Building such a team requires the CEO to seek out executives who view the world differently, who have the courage to speak their minds in the face of strong opposition, and who have the ability to see different points of view.

I have seen atleast one company which headed towards the downfall as the middle level manager(s) dont have courage to speak out their minds....the team broke apart.


Blogger psk said...

i totally agree with it.....

10:26 AM  
Anonymous gautham said...

I donot totally agree with this.
One point of view drives us to the conclusion that 100% disagreement is necessary. That is, all aspects of the problem will be considered and solutions suggested.

But until and unless there is a total agreement on the decision, the result would rather hamper the image of the company than doing anything better.

Just look at the case of HP where the chairman Carleton S.Fiorina, who had to step down which adversly affected the prospects of the company. The total focus area of the company was shifted which added to the bruises of the company.

Until you reach an agreement after all the disagreements, it will find itself in trouble 100% of the time.

10:08 AM  
Blogger Ruchit Garg said...

You are absolutely right Gautham. Its for sure that a company will have bad future if there isnt 100% (approx) agreement between the key managers for a task already on the anvil.

My point is to have a diversified idea pool in a team. To have a team which is intelligent enough to creatively contribute to the thought process and have enough courage to put forward their ideas on the table, even if thats retrogate to what his/her CEO has just proposed.

I am sure an Intelligent CEO will have enough understanding and guess is one of the most essential 'feature' in a CEO.

10:19 AM  
Anonymous gautham said...

So you want to stress that diversification in ideas should exist in the team comprising of one decision maker and the rest with no powers on changing the decisions but providing inputs.

10:52 AM  
Blogger Ruchit Garg said...

Final decision is always to be taken in consensus, obviously the Head should take the call and bear the respobsibility of the decisions.

11:08 AM  
Anonymous gautham said...

You are trying to reflect a hierarchical system whereas i was trying to project a more relevant scenario(of a professional firm)where we have these persons called CEO's responsible for the decsions rather than a single person.

These are the situations where the real conflict, disagreement,conflict of egos come into picture :)

12:55 PM  
Blogger Ruchit Garg said...

When I am saying Head, its a relative term for that particular decision process. It may be the CEO or a project manager...nothing to do with a old or new systems

I am just advocating that there should be enough space in the team for the free flow of the ideas

And yes there will always be conflicting ideas and ego which a CEO (or the Head) needs to take into account while taking any decisions.

2:49 PM  
Anonymous kittu said...

I am quite satisfied with ruchit's point of view. I think he is trying to put forward the idea that if a team comprises of people with different thoughts on the same idea it will definetly lead to a situation where a problem can be tackeled keeping in view all the pros and cons. It will reduce the chances of overlooking a possible consequence and undermining a good outcome.

3:27 PM  
Blogger madhu_hebbar said...

What I have seen is, not all will have the courage to put forward thoughts even if it is some simple meeting because of the fear. And some times, the simplest of points gets missed out bcos of this.
I think Ruchit's point was hinted at that and I think that is true.
I think it would be responsibility of the CEO/head who chairs those discussions to make sure that opinions are heard through, whether right or wrong.

Disagreements are bound to be there given the difference in thoughts that vary from one to another. And it is a good idea to amalgamate and see which is correct.
Finally a 100% agreement is reached taking into consideration about some ideas that may have to be adjusted as care points/risks etc

3:38 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home