TEAM BUILDING: WHY WE SHOULDN'T BE HASTY TO WRITE OFF THE "WEAKEST LINK", THEY MIGHT JUST TURN OUT TO BE THE STRONGEST!

TEAM BUILDING: WHY WE SHOULDN'T BE HASTY TO WRITE OFF THE "WEAKEST LINK", THEY MIGHT JUST TURN OUT TO BE THE STRONGEST!

We have all heard the saying " a chain is as strong as its weakest link.." Maybe in not so many words but the meaning and essence of the statement is generally well known and accepted. No matter how strong a team you may build with exceptional performers who deliver beyond expectations, if one of them is not up to par or delivers flawed results the whole team effort is affected and the final result of the team effort becomes always directly proportional to that one member's performance at each particular instance.

If that ball-dropping team member raises his game and puts in a good worthwhile effort the results show an improvement and if they perform as their usual mediocre self everybody is frustrated especially the leader who has to take flak for the whole team. The usually logical thing to do under such circumstances is to take the weakest link off the chain and get into winning ways with the remainder of the team with star performers right? Right, but if that happens every time with team effort kind of work we risk having no team at all at the end of the day because "weakest link" is a comparative term meaning that after the removal of the first poor performer someone will naturally take their place because as much as they may be exceptional amongst them would still be the best and worst, that's just the fact we ought to realise. So if the strategy of removing the weakest link is applied, the whole exceptional team as initially constituted will certainly be depleted at some point all because one member was a poor performer at the start.

There is certainly no need to hasten and hurriedly strike off one weak team member because of frustration due to their unsatisfactory performance. Because the rest of the team is that  good without neglecting it totally, the leader can afford dedicating more time and resources and pay attention to this "weakest link" with a view to build and strengthen it eventually bringing it to the required level with the rest of the team.

The fact that this "weakest link" was made part of the team in the first place should be the basis for giving them the benefit of the doubt, it means someone saw their ability at some point and acknowledged their potential.

Sometimes poor performance is a result of the system in which the team is operating and other external environment circumstances which just one member might not be able to address at individual level. This kind of scenario is not uncommon in organisational set ups with entrenched culture and static styles of leadership based on "the way we do things here" as opposed to the dynamic "the best way to do things here and now". Development and growth gets stifled and two likely outcomes result for the "weakest link" employee and team member ; (1) that employee struck off the team gets frustrated but still believes in themselves and their ability to make a meaningful contribution to a properly functional team, leaves to join another team elsewhere and becomes the new team's strongest link and main anchor! Huh? How come? Because they were never the cause of the problem in the first place as much as they were caught up in it!
(2) that "weakest link" employee having already been battered by the system and taking blame and all sorts of seemingly justified inappropriate punishment at every turn by the leader to start with and the rest of the team gets crushed on the inside, the fire in them and zeal to succeed gets extinguished
they become a pale shadow of their former self they get condemned or even condemn themselves to a dark corner of the whole big place just to exist from day to day looking forward to nothing but just getting by and watch life happen to them.

The second scenario is an indictment to those entrusted with leadership and authority over others who may not be as qualified or privileged to be in authority because as the leader every member or person who reports to you is your responsibility and building them up may not be explicitly stated in your contract or job description but it is the essence of true leadership. A little more attention and honest respectful engagement with that poor performer may just reveal where that individual would be best suited and better placed to perform exceptionally beyond expectation without writing them off due to what may even be an error of placement and human capital allocation on the leader's part.

This is a matter common and applicable to broader society and not only formal organisations. There are many examples in sport where a star athlete or footballer is never given the time of day by a new manager to the point where the athlete begs to be allowed to join another team even for lower remuneration only to arrive there and flourish, conquer the place, sweep awards and score hat-tricks against his former manager and team. We have seen it happen.

Team building and leadership calls for cool and constructive heads patient, transformational and dynamic leadership that believes in sufficient good existing in everyone.

THE GOLDEN WORD FOUNTAIN - (TGWF)