11.1 Teamwork & Team Dynamics
Key Takeaways
- Healthy teams rest on trust, communication, and cooperation — and AFH 1 states that trust is at the core of all healthy team interaction.
- The four stages of team building are forming, storming, norming, and performing.
- The five conflict management styles from Dr. Kenneth Thomas are competing (forcing), collaborating, accommodating, avoiding, and compromising, defined by levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness.
- Collaborating is high assertiveness and high cooperativeness and seeks a 'win' position for both groups; competing is high assertiveness and low cooperativeness.
- The three named sources of conflict are communication factors, structural factors, and personal behavior factors.
The Foundation of a Healthy Team
AFH 1 begins with vocabulary: dynamic "is a term used to recognize constant change, activity, or progress" and can also describe "a force that stimulates change or progress."
Then the core claim: "Healthy teams are high performing teams that most often have a foundation of trust, communication, and cooperation. While each is essential in building a healthy team spirit, trust is at the core of all healthy team interaction."
Three elements, with trust ranked first — an item asking which is at the core is keyed to trust.
Trust
Effective teamwork "requires a high degree of trust." Team members must share mutual confidence in the integrity and ability of teammates and feel comfortable enough to take risks, think outside the box, and share their thoughts and ideas without fear of being shut down or discounted. AFH 1 names the hallmark: "Freedom to communicate openly, honestly, and directly within the group is the hallmark of a trust-based team."
The handbook quotes Suzanne Zoglio, author of Teams at Work:
"Nothing reduces trust in a group faster than members saying one thing within the group and something else outside the group. When members are assertive enough to say what they need to say directly to the appropriate people and to refrain from talking behind each other's backs, trust is enhanced."
AFH 1 adds a distinction that shows up in SJT reasoning: "there's honesty and then there's brutal honesty. Feedback, critical thinking, and disagreements can be exchanged among team members without being brutally honest or offensive." Leaders build trust by setting the right tone, communicating openly and honestly, knowing and establishing good rapport with team members, and discouraging cliques or divisions within the team.
Communication
"Teams that don't allow honest, open sharing quickly lose their effectiveness." The failure mode is specific: some team members may purposely withhold vital information or disengage, causing confusion, frustration, and the inability to complete tasks.
The leader's obligation runs the same direction: "When leaders hold on to information, they can create an inaccurate, incomplete, or totally wrong picture of the expected outcome." Leaders increase team success by giving members complete access to all necessary data, discouraging the discounting of ideas and feelings, and encouraging the practice of active listening.
Cooperation
"Cooperation yields synergistic results and reduces the exerted effort it takes to reach a desired outcome." Successful teams have few turf wars, little competitiveness, and an ability to forgive and forget, and cooperation breeds shared ownership for performance results.
The diagnostic AFH 1 supplies is directly testable: a sign that a team is not performing cohesively is unhelpful competition among team members — observed when some members attempt to outshine others to gain extra attention or credibility. AFH 1 calls this "all-starring" behavior and attributes it to a power struggle. The prescribed fix: leaders should reemphasize each team member's specific roles and responsibilities, which eliminates potential barriers to cooperation.
The Four Stages of Team Building
| Stage | What happens |
|---|---|
| Forming | The initial period of uncertainty in which individuals try to determine their place on a team and establish or accept the procedures and rules. Members cautiously explore the boundaries of acceptable group behavior. This is when the transition from individual to member status occurs and when a leader's guidance may be tested, both formally and informally |
| Storming | Conflicts begin to arise as members resist the influence of the team and rebel against accomplishing the task. AFH 1 calls it "probably the most difficult stage," when members realize the task is different and more difficult than they initially expected, are impatient about lack of progress, and argue about what actions the team should take. Members may rely solely on personal experience, avoiding collaboration. Despite tension, team members are beginning to understand one another |
| Norming | Members establish cohesiveness and commitment, discover new ways of working together, and set norms for appropriate behavior. They reconcile competing loyalties and responsibilities and accept the team, its ground rules, their roles, and the individuality of fellow members. Emotional conflict is reduced as competitive relationships become more cooperative |
| Performing | The team develops proficiency in achieving its goals and becomes more flexible in its patterns of working together. Relationships and expectations are settled, so the team can diagnose and solve problems and choose and implement changes. Members have discovered and accepted each other's strengths and weaknesses. The team can be considered an effective, cohesive, and productive unit |
A useful anchor for scenario items: storming is normal and even productive — AFH 1 says team members are beginning to understand one another during it. A response that treats storming-stage friction as a discipline problem misses what the handbook teaches.
Conflict Management
AFH 1 refuses to treat conflict as purely negative: "Conflict is inevitable in every organization and is often necessary to reach high levels of performance." Conflict "involves differences between parties that result in interference or opposition," and those differences "can cause positive change or can decrease productivity."
| Positive conflict | Destructive conflict |
|---|---|
| Addressing problems for a solution, greater understanding, and enhanced communication between individuals or groups | Barriers to cooperation and communication, thus degrading morale and diverting attention from tasks |
AFH 1 notes that managers tend to avoid conflict because of possible negative repercussions, but that managing conflict effectively benefits the organization by reducing ambiguity and stimulating productivity by constructively looking at alternatives.
The Three Sources of Conflict
| Source | AFH 1's explanation |
|---|---|
| Communication Factors | "Communication often gets the blame for problems... however, the real crux of the problem is more likely to be miscommunication." Communication — or even over-communication — that is misinterpreted, inaccurate, or incomplete leads to frustration and stress |
| Structural Factors | The larger the organization, the more people there will be to potentially cause and participate in conflict. Scarce or high-demand resources generate conflict as parties compete. Line-staff distinctions cause disputes, partly because participating does not mean contributions are heard, valued, or accepted. Rewards programs can encourage healthy competition as long as rewards aren't perceived as unfair, unjust, or biased |
| Personal Behavior Factors | Individual differences in goals and objectives, perceptions, values, and personalities. Aligning personal needs and values with the USAF mission makes members more willing to change, set aside self-interests, and listen to others. Addressing issues through a realistic or positive perspective rather than based on emotion leads to fewer arguments |
The Five Conflict Management Styles
AFH 1 credits Dr. Kenneth Thomas, author of Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations, and defines the styles on two axes:
- Cooperation — how willing a person or group is to satisfy the other's needs
- Assertiveness — how active a person is in addressing the conflict
| Style | Assertiveness | Cooperativeness | What it does |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competing (Forcing) | High | Low | Attempts to overwhelm an opponent with formal authority, threats, or the use of power |
| Collaborating | High | High | Satisfies the concerns of both sides through honest discussion; creative approaches such as sharing resources may leave both parties materially better off. Requires trust and openness of all participants; seeks a 'win' position for both groups |
| Accommodating | Low | High | Often simply consists of giving in to another person's wishes |
| Avoiding | Low | Low | Appears to indicate a neutral position that can lead to "things working themselves out" — but can also escalate a situation by allowing it to go unresolved |
| Compromising | Some | Some | Requires a willingness of both parties to change, adjust, or give something up; partially satisfies both parties' desires and resolves the conflict |
Memorize the grid by the two extremes: competing is the high-assertive, low-cooperative corner; accommodating is its mirror image; collaborating is high-high; avoiding is low-low; compromising sits in the middle.
AFH 1 closes with a caution that also answers a common SJT trap: "All situations are unique, depending on the individuals involved, the criticality of the issues, and the urgency of the situations. When considering each of the conflict management styles, consider the who, the stakes, and the situation to determine the best approach." There is no single always-correct style — including collaborating, despite it being the only style described as producing a win for both sides. Additional resources are available from the USAF Negotiation Center.
Which conflict management style is characterized by high assertiveness and high cooperativeness?
During which stage of team building do members realize the task is more difficult than expected, argue about what actions to take, and resist the influence of the team?
A flight chief notices two Airmen repeatedly trying to outshine each other for credit on shared tasks. What does AFH 1 identify as the underlying issue and the recommended response?