4 Mistakes I Learned Destructing a Team Project

By Alifia Afflatus

To impend the global positive change by accomodating youths as the stakeholder, AIESEC in Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia (one of 128 countries that are embraced in the global project) managed to open a number of projects last summer. AIESEC itself stood under UN, and is the 2^nd largest youth leadership organization in the world.

On its summer 2018 program, I led a team in the project which performed in accordance to environmental consciousness, only one issue orientation between five separated projects ran last summer. Obviously it was amazing to be given a chance volunteering in AIESEC, as a 16 years old girl, towards a saddening rejection back on summer 2017 – which then I evaluated.

The experience was exceptionally abysmal. Leading a team which consisted of older both foreign and local volunteers, was an idea that – in advance of the project – never been thought in mind.

AIESEC trains youths on leadership, which results on youths’ progress on their soft skills of communication and social consciousness.

Meanwhile granting blasts for the young volunteers, the organization also kindly opens opportunity for challenge enthusiasts, such as grand but classic problems my team experienced, that generate some failures. It’s dissapointing, - sigh – of course... but I’m thanking dear God that the scenario made me study some points:

1)   Unsupportive Co-Creators

A team partner from Netherland repined over locals in our working area, who were less supportive. I know he did really value times and works.

When there’s only one party who worked for the movement, we can make sure it wouldn’t work. In this case, team was the only one striving in the area we worked on. Meanwhile some urgent facillities weren’t within our team, mentioning funding and system. Waste management company, local settlers, and local authority were likely not open to commit partnership in the case. Not to blame other stakeholders, I felt that the team itself couldn’t optimalize the action on educating citizen.

To create sustainability, co-creation should be proposed as a solution. Professor Gert Spaargaren from Wageningen University says, “we refer to citizens as co-creator because they never operate alone. They work together with other companies, for example, companies, NGOs, municipal authorities, water boards, energy providers, software developers, urban planners, farmers, scholars, and so on...”

Therefore, such project could be effective and efficient for companies co-create and combine their abilities and specialization, without leaving anyone behind.

2)   Commitment Can’t Be Set Aside

Commitment means that a team meant to optimalize their work to achieve the mission and vision of the project. Susan Heathfield, a leadership and management expert – mentioned in her article (www.thebalancecareers.com/role-of-team-commitment-in-team-building-1919254) about how to spot and anticipate if there is commitment in a team – such as, members want to highly participate, value the team mission, value their own work and participation, are excited by the team opportunity, and recognize the progress. Apparently, a team with less resonated vision and degree of courage was the one I learned from, last summer.

3)   Cultural Understanding

In an intercultural communication, cultural awareness should be established. To achieve a mission, a diverse team needs to understand everyone’s cultural weakness and strength – and isn’t limited to personal characteristics.

For instance, combining a European member’s ambition with Asian’s less discipline culture needs some extra effort, meanwhile Indonesian’s admitted skill of communicating without offending should be put in the right place, alongside with how European and American say more confession and criticisms. For example, to communicate with local people (beyond team member) – who tend not to experience international communication and might not be too open to honest critical opinions – will need some local team member in order to bridge their opinion to avert miscommunication and cultural breakdown.

I learned that cultural misunderstanding might be the factor of my team’s breakdown, especially over working and management culture. And I’m grateful to finally recognize the cause.

(Source : www.pexels.com)

4)   Flexibility, transparency and clarity

These three were inspired by the tenets of Andy Stanley, a leadership motivator on his podcast episode titled Leading in Uncertain Times.

In a likely elaborate situation, he points out three things that might disrupt a team or project if they’re left without, including clarity in mission. In uncertain time, we are suggested to look back at the mission where we began, ask “why are we here” “what are we doing here” or... “what happens next?”, reassuring that being future oriented pushes a team into critically thinking and feeling confident to address the issue forward.

Next is flexibility of plan. External situation has always been unpredictable. Being flexible doesn’t mean giving up on the mission altogether, but seeking another approach that fit the situation, less risk.

The third point turns out about transparency of communication. Stanley once highlighted an interesting ‘alert’ which is hard but might result to positive consequences; to be brutally honest.

An unknown unknown is more dangerous than the known unknown. Being ‘brutally’ honest at direct communication – would perchance ‘hurt’, but worth it.

It brings along some things like criticizing a leader, showing errors in the working process or system, opening up about everyone’s concerns, and as for a leader, to inform the series of bad news the team confronts.

This is to dismantle (and saying it out loud!) the major misstep that the organization executed, then to avoid the same mistake and take different path. []