As part of some team development work I have been reading Meredith Belibin’s book on team types. “Team Roles at Work”

Now lots of my clients like Belbin and I think that having a dispassionate conversation about how teams function based on Plant, Shaper, Completer Finisher etc can be really useful. However I do wonder about about some of the underpinning thinking that surrounds one of the best known business models.

One thing – women don’t seem to exist in Meredith Belbin’s world. I counted one reference to female workers in the book – never mind I thought, it was written in the 70s. However a quick look at the inner sleeve informed me that I was reading the 2007 edition…

I also take issue with the notion of the Team as expressed in Belbin ‘s (and others) work. The Team is frequently described as a “group of workers, possessing complementary skills working towards the same goal”. For me this is the like the “What’s Your Ideal Wife” kind of article found in some on the glossy magazines aimed at young men. The benefits of such characteristics are illusory and – of course – ultimately disappointing.

Teams seem to be more accidental. People are emploed promoted, moved for variuos restructural or resource reasons and find themselves working with quite a disparate group of individuals with various degrees of success. It is is the diversity of groups that delightes me and engaging with people – what they want and what they bring which excites me.

I do agree with Belbin though on the subject of adapting our natural tendencies – “the absence of team roles favoured….is a matter of less importance than the skilful management of whatever team roles a person possesses”

Comments