We are a social species, relying on others for survival. This is why most of the activities you engage in require other human beings, and why forming and working with others in teams or groups makes sense. It's also why you're likely part of many teams in both your personal and professional life.
Working on your own for self-interest, being part of a group, or competing with others are all different relational dynamics. Each requires different strategies and is suited for different situations to achieve varied results.
Here, we’ll focus specifically on group configurations, related power dynamics, and transactional mechanics.
What does it mean to work with a team mindset? How do we optimize the overall performance of a group of unique, sovereign individuals?
...
"One for all, all for one" means that every individual acts for the benefit of the group, and the group should act for the benefit of each individual. It’s a motto we’ve all heard countless times, but do we truly understand its significance? Do we fully leverage the wisdom and power of the collective?
When we honestly observe our local or global community, can we confidently say we use this principle to our advantage? Do we genuinely embody the values of teamwork in our culture and society?
Are we truly team players in the groups we belong to, or are we just a bunch of selfish individuals competing for survival, power, or meaningless glory? The truth is, we're probably a mix of both. We can be selfish and selfless, depending on the context and situation.
The key is to understand where your personal boundaries lie between these two extremes and be honest with yourself and others. You need clarity about when you shift between being ego-centric and group-centric in your perception of reality. You also need enough self-awareness to recognize whether you're being selfish or altruistic when engaging in a project with someone.
Even if you find yourself being a bit of both, it’s crucial to understand when and why you lean towards one or the other. Transparency with your team is essential.
You also need to understand where, why, and how your teammates shift between individual and collective perspectives. It’s important to discern what situations or topics might trigger ego-centric reactions in them and know how to skillfully and compassionately bring them back into the group dynamic.
Once you have a good understanding of your own and your teammates' ego boundaries, you can start forming a real group to work together on a shared purpose, intention, or objective.
To defend the interests of the group, you need a clear understanding of what those interests are. What is the group’s purpose? What are the benefits? How does the group contribute to your personal life and serve our shared reality?
If you don't know the real intentions, vision, and purpose of your group, you cannot effectively represent its interests or work for the team's benefit.
To be "one for all," you need to trust the group, know who they are, and understand what they stand for.
If you don’t care about or even know what your team is doing or why they do it the way they do, you cannot be a genuine team player. You’re probably there only for your own survival and comfort.
To be a true team player, you need to care about your teammates' success and the overall success of the group. You need absolute clarity on the purpose, intentions, and strategies of the team you’re a part of.
Ideally, the direction your team is going should align with where you personally want to go as well.
...
Now that we have more clarity on the first part, "one for all," and the minimum requirements to be considered a team, let's explore what "all for one" means.
I’d argue that it’s this part of the formula that has led us to the ego-centric society we live in today, where we’re willing to undermine each other to save ourselves.
People don't know how to be team players anymore because they’ve been let down and betrayed by the group too many times.
Many of us have experienced being abandoned by a team. We’ve all been in situations where "all for one" meant nothing to the group.
Most of us have been thrown under the bus to preserve the group’s interests, with no regard for the "all for one" principle.
In our culture, when a person stands against a group, they’re often seen as bad, immoral, rebellious, rude, or mean. We condemn those people harshly. But when an entire group turns against an individual, no one cares. We say it’s the individual's fault, that the group must be right, and that the person who was rejected deserves punishment and more suffering.
Groups often only protect those who are easy to protect and who don’t pose a threat to the team.
It’s rare to find teams that genuinely stand by the "all for one" principle. Most expect your complete dedication and commitment, but they rarely offer the same in return. The group might never offer you unconditional dedication and commitment.
They want you to be "one for all," but they’re not ready to be "all for one."
And this is where distrust is born.
People can’t fully trust the teams they’re part of because deep down, they know that the team probably won’t be there for them when they need it. They have no choice but to be selfish.
They also have no choice but to be angry.
You can’t ask someone for trust, selflessness, or deep commitment if you’re not ready to offer it in return.
A person can’t be a real team player for your organization if they don’t have complete confidence that the team will be there for them when needed.
It takes two to tango, even if your dance partner is an entire team.
...
To regenerate the social fabric and macro system, we first need to learn how to create strong, resilient smaller teams. We need to learn how to properly care for each other in smaller groups before we can care for humanity as a whole.
If your own co-workers don’t trust you unconditionally, how can your business ecosystem fully trust you?
If you don’t know how to be there and properly care for the people who work for you, how can you pretend to be there for your clients, investors, collaborators, or partners?
If you can’t manage a team of 10 people without throwing someone under the bus, how can you believe you can lead a strategy that impacts millions?
How can you possibly understand what your city or your people need if you fail to properly care for the needs of those who work for you?
How can you ask for trust from someone who doesn’t know you if those closest to you can’t give you their trust?
If you need to set conditions and rules for someone to be part of your team, you probably shouldn’t bring them on board in the first place.
If your professional relationship begins with distrust and a desire to control someone, what's the point of having them on your team?
If you already know that your team won’t be able to be "all for one" for this specific person, don’t bother offering them a job or bringing them into your group.
It’s pointless and meaningless for everyone: you, the person you don’t trust, and your entire team.
Bring people into your team whom you know you’ll stand by no matter what. Be there for them and protect them if needed.
Make sure you’re willing to fulfill your part of the deal first. Is your team ready to be "all for one" for the person you're considering bringing on board?
Only then can you expect that, at some point, the person might genuinely and sincerely fulfill the "one for all" part of the deal as well.
When we know how to unconditionally trust and authentically co-create in the most intimate and smallest groups we’re part of in our daily lives, only then can we venture to be part of more complex and significant groups that deal with bigger problems or are responsible for the well-being of more people.
So, maybe we should reverse the parts of this motto. Instead of expecting the individual to blindly follow the group, why don’t we require the group to commit to being there for the individual before the individual promises their power, dedication, or unconditional trust?
All for one. One for all.
Comentários