Working together in the work community is hampering our different ways of acting and communicating. It is about our different operating styles. Understanding and knowing them helps to develop teamwork and exploit the intrinsic strengths of people.
Swedish writer and researcher Thomas Erikson’s book “The idiots around me – how to understand others and themselves” has gained popularity in Finland over the past year. Probably because we all know what it is all about. There are conflicts in work communities and teams, many of which have different ways to act and communicate. Misunderstandings arise and applause the mind. What is it and what can it do to it?
The way we react to external stimuli is called a mode of action. It’s a different thing to personality and it’s not about expertise or skill. Everyone has our own style of action and different styles may be interfering with each other. Some of us are fast-paced and impatient and often want to change things. This is a burden to the more peaceful of us who think that change itself is not worth pursuing, but must have clear grounds and it must be carefully planned and unnecessarily priceless. The most important thing is to make sure that all the details will certainly be taken into account in the design work, and one is sorry that some people may experience the change difficult. Some of us need people around and love to do things together with a couple or a group, some want to retreat to their own peace to think things in peace and annoy them if they are disturbed. These differences can cause a variety of challenges for the community, especially if they are not identified, understood and respected. In the worst cases, conflicts arise which become personal and start to poison the entire work community.
The good news is that you can do something about it. Several types of workstation analysis are available on the market. Common to all of them is that they are based on certain types of archetypes of style, some of which we all are. When all groups are given a common orientation to styles and their characteristic features, people begin to recognize the natural modes of action of both their own and other members of the group. In the past, features that have been in the past are in a way an explanation and a common frame of reference for the group to address the challenging situations of cooperation. It is less fires to say that now the reds are ready to wait for patience to wait or that when I miss that style C can anyone have a precision that will require accuracy and I will focus on thinking about how people get involved in this change