Friendly staff: pitfalls

The effectiveness of the work is largely influenced by the psychological climate in the organization. If it is favorable, the collective will be friendly and united. Work in such a team is arguing, becauseits participants work together, they are always ready to help and support each other. It's in theory. In practice, a friendly team is not always productive. Why is this happening?

The problem is that in some cases a friendly collective turns out to be so only in those cases when the matter does not directly concern work. Employees are happy to exchange the latestnews and anecdotes, they drink tea together, go to smoke and have lunch, celebrate birthdays and "light up" on corporate parties. But, unfortunately, when it comes to the performance of work duties, the team is not so friendly, and teamwork does not work out: the members of the collective are used to having fun together, but they do not work.

There is another underwater stone of friendly collectives: over time, a long-standing friendly team can become a sufficiently closed group that will hardly accept strangers. Therefore, newcomers who come to work in thisorganization, will have to work hard to join the team and prove that they are "their own". Of course, this does not mean that they will have to face baiting, no. Just a team will live their lives, not noticing that someone else has appeared. But such a wall of unintentional indifference can be hard to destroy.

And here is another paradox. Usually the more the collective boasts that it is friendly, the less it has in common with reality. A really friendly team does not stick outgood interpersonal relations, but takes them for granted. But if the statements from the category of "what we are friendly team" and "how we love each other" are often done, and clearly to the public (say, in the presence of customers), then this is just an excuse to suspect that the team is really something, then something is wrong. Such a game on the public often hides intrigues and frictions.

Of course, on the basis of these examples, we should not conclude that a friendly team is bad. Just The concept of amicable collective can be invested with different meanings, and a friendly team may well be successful - more often than not it happens.

In a friendly team, successful in professional terms, people should unite in the first place professional interests and a common cause. Of course, no one says that colleagues do not havethere may be common interests, hobbies and hobbies outside of work, but still "first of all planes", that is a common cause. In a friendly team there should not be a place for competition and attempts to "sit up" colleagues: everyone is doing their part of the job, and the overall success depends on the success of everyone. By the way, in such groups, even on vacation, talk often comes about work.

Usually in a friendly team all employeesapproximately the same age (within about a dozen years). Of course, there are exceptions, but in general people of one generation are easier to find a common language. In friendly teams, lower staff turnover, and if newcomers appear, it is easier for them to enter such a collective (except for the cases described above).

A friendly team is really a valid argument in choosing a place of work. But it is important that this collective was friendly both in work and leisure, and not in one thing, and was not a closed system in which people "cook in their own juice" and ignore beginners.