The success enjoyed by Davies' team is proof of the fact that he enjoyed a rather effective technology support team. However, as we can see, his team was composed not only of his colleagues, but professors and graduates as well. This fact seems to point out, that for team success, it is not necessary to have a group of geniuses with a plethora of experience. So, what is it that actually determines how successful a team is
Apart from having a well-defined objective, it is important for a team to have a clear process through which they will achieve that objective, i.e. the group defines and achieves a continuous series of 'small wins' along the way to a larger goal. In the example above, there were numerous problems the Stanley group faced along the way of the actual execution of the plan (such as the problem of controlling the car in dust and fog). However, the team was prepared for all the challenges they faced. Sure, they didn't have all the possible technologies they might need to get them through, but they had meticulously planned a specific line of action for each problem they might face. (Geoff Koch, former Intel editor, www.intel.com)
A team can only flourish when it exists in an easy yet involving environment, in the sense that there is a lot of healthy discussion in which virtually everyone participates, but it limited to the teams' objective. If discussion gets off track, someone (whose role is pre-assigned) brings it back to the task in hand. After listening to each other, members just voice any and all ideas that come to mind. They do net hesitate considering the fact that their creativity may be labeled stupidity. They disagree and criticize each other frequently, but they always scrutinize each others' reason for doing so, so that they might work constructively towards the objective of the team. The purpose is simply not to dominate the dissenter, but to resolve the issue. Conversely, the dissenters don't try to dominate the group; they simple voice a genuine difference of opinion. If there are basic disagreements that can't be immediately resolved, the group figures out a way to live with them without letting them halt its efforts. A decision is only taken when there is either unanimous or at the very least a general agreement, but never when there was confusion regarding both sides of a choice. (MacGregor D., n.d., The Human Side of Enterprise), (Kaztenbach & Smith, n.d. The Wisdom of Teams)
However, this is the scenario where a team has actually been assembled and it sets out to perform the task at hand. But how is that team chosen in the first place, i.e. how does team building actually occur
The first question asked about any team member is the level of intelligence. Are their brains capable of computing the amount of data necessary for the task When designing a particular system, there are a million different problems he might face.Will that person be able to address those issues Very simple put, does he have what it takes (patience, experience, judgment, analytical/problem solving capabilities, etc)to handle his job
Additionally, it helps if the team members are curious about the things they actually research into. For e.g.