Managing teams effectively - Essay Example

An obstructionist or a toxic group member is usually an individual who methodically and systematically impedes and blocks the progress of a project (Holpp, 1098). Hence, team leadership essentially involves the talent and the ability to deal with all forms of members in a team, be it the slackers or an obstructionist. As per the existing knowledge and theories of team management, the best way to deal with a slacker or an obstructionist is to follow a mixed approach, which aims at confronting the inherent propensities of such people, to bring them out into the open, while accompanied by soft tactics like acknowledging one’s best qualities and by motivating one to contribute to team effort (Holpp, 1998).

Such a hot and cold approach towards the personality types under consideration is bound to yield the desired results, because of its moderation and versatility (Holpp, 1998). A slacker shirks responsibility or work does not mean that one is devoid of talent, skills, insight or aptitude. So, simply speaking, a slacker stands to be a potential asset for a team if somehow one figures out a way to make one work (Holpp, 1988). Usually a slacker tends to avoid or by pass responsibility because one has a perception that the other team members are not consciously aware of one’s tactics of or predilection for doing so (Holpp, 1998).

So the most effective way to disarm a slacker is to confront one and make one realize that the others are well cognizant of one’s talent for shirking work. However, confrontation here does not connote to aggressive or brazen interactions. In fact it means making a slacker realize that in a friendly and decent way, while giving one a chance to save face. A slacker is a talented person who cheats on work, and once one realizes that others are well aware of one’s propensity to cheat, one will certainly avoid repeating such a behavior, at least conspicuously (Holpp, 1998).

Bringing things out into the open should be accompanied by meaningful soft strategies like defining the job responsibility of a slacker, appreciating one for one’s abilities and the immense contribution one could make to the team, allocating one short term targets with chalked out deadlines and the like. On the contrary, if a slacker continues to cheat even when one is revealed, then this calls for a timely disciplinary action. One way or other, sooner or later, a slacker will have to be confronted.

There is no other way out, or is there? The team is bound to lose or face unrest if it indefinitely allows a member to be a non performer (Holpp, 1998). When it comes to an obstructionist, they are the team members who stymie projects while strongly believing that their stratagems are not obvious to other team members (Holpp, 1998). Again, bringing things out into the open by confronting an obstructionist is the best possible way to desist one. However, such a confrontation is bound to fail if not accompanied by a revelation of the strategy and modus operandi of an obstructionist, as it will give one a chance to deny charges (Holpp, 1998).

There are many ways in which an obstructionist operates. Some tend to withhold the information required by a team to succeed. There are others who bring in an element of aggression and controversy in the group meetings to mislead a team from its real objectives. Then there come obstructionists who play on resources by allocating resources to