Tampere
19 May, Sunday
11° C

The library of essays of Proakatemia

Are you House or Wilson?



Kirjoittanut: Amelia Ilga - tiimistä Sointu.

Esseen tyyppi: Blogiessee / 1 esseepistettä.
Esseen arvioitu lukuaika on 2 minuuttia.

This comparison or metaphor is by any means not a scientific or proven statement. It’s my personal observation that may simplify noticing different motions inside a team and hopefully acknowledge our own behavior. In this reflection, I’ve set beside one another two distinctive characters from a popular TV series “House”. Those personas with ill-matched attitudes are a hyperbolic metaphor for two, from many, stands that members take in a team setting.

 

Taking an inspiration from pop culture, I’m hoping for more approachable and relatable visualization, of two different conducts, one insubordinate but highly skilled and the other agreeable but coy.

 

Dr. House’s rebellious and assertive attitude is characterized by his unyielding pursuit of truth and his willingness to challenge authority and conventional wisdom. His propensity to question norms and push boundaries often leads to innovative problem-solving and unconventional insights. However, this same assertiveness can also alienate colleagues and create friction within the team, hindering effective communication and collaboration. While Dr. House’s approach may yield breakthroughs, it can also create a hostile work environment and impede the team’s overall cohesion. His attitude promotes innovative solutions, however endangering psychological safety of team members.

 

On the other hand, Dr. Wilson’s polite and cooperative nature fosters a harmonious and supportive team environment. His diplomatic approach and willingness to listen to others’ perspectives enhance communication and foster trust among team members. Dr. Wilson’s collaborative demeanor encourages open dialogue and enables the team to work together synergistically towards common goals. However, his inclination towards consensus-building and avoidance of conflict may sometimes result in a lack of decisive action or a failure to address underlying issues. His stand strikes into lack of action and assertiveness, promoting stagnation and not growing as a team.

In weighing the pros and cons of each approach, it becomes evident that both Dr. House’s assertiveness and Dr. Wilson’s cooperativeness have their merits and drawbacks. Dr. House’s rebellious attitude may drive a team into top performance, but it can also create tension and discord within the team. Conversely, Dr. Wilson’s cooperative nature fosters harmony and collaboration, but it may also result in indecision and lack of risk-taking behavior that leads a team into breakthroughs.

 

Ultimately, the ideal approach to teamwork lies in striking a balance between assertiveness and cooperation, leveraging the strengths of each while mitigating their respective weaknesses. By fostering an environment that encourages open communication, mutual respect, and constructive conflict resolution, teams can harness the diverse perspectives and talents of their members to achieve greater success. Knowing your weakness, open conversation, ambition oriented attitude  but also mutual respect is an ideal mix of those two characters.

 

 

Post a Comment