| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1039.1 | My needs/your needs/our needs | SUPER::EVANS | I'm baa-ack | Tue Mar 20 1990 13:09 | 18 |
| Well, in some cases, for the needs of the One to be met, the needs of
the Whole must be met. If any member of my race can be devalued because
of our common race, I will never be free until we all are free.
These things are on a parallel track, however, since my needs as a
motorcyclist have no relevance for others with whom I may share
commonality in other ways.
Then again, the needs of motorcyclists in general cross common
boundaries, too.
I don't see these things as all mutually exclusive of each other.
What's the difference between a group and a mob if their behaviour is
the same?
--DE
|
| 1039.2 | Is this Zen? | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Tue Mar 20 1990 13:19 | 12 |
| In "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home", that question arises and is
answered:
Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one?
Yes.
Do the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many?
Yes.
Ann B.
|
| 1039.3 | Suggestion | OACK::SMITH | Passionate committment/reasoned faith | Tue Mar 20 1990 14:04 | 5 |
| Would the originator consider making this string a FWO/FGD pair? I
believe that serious answers just may differ significantly along
gender lines.
Nancy
|
| 1039.4 | | STAR::RDAVIS | The Man Without Quantities | Tue Mar 20 1990 14:32 | 9 |
| I see far greater cohesiveness in RADIO_RADIO, AFTER_HOURS, COMICS,
FRIENDS, and that bunch of loony guys'n'gals, VMSNOTES, than in =wn=. But
those conferences don't punch my mob button either.
If individuals can be considered a group when they have interests in common
and are willing to talk about them, why should forfeiture of individuality
come into it?
Ray
|
| 1039.5 | | YUPPY::DAVIESA | Grail seeker | Wed Mar 21 1990 08:08 | 46 |
|
Teams are interesting, and how they form even more so. I've been
on some brilliant courses designed to develope and enable "team
work"........
It seems to work like this:-
1) The group shares a common fully-understood goal.
This is a goal that is *important* to each individual personally,
not something that they just pay lipservice to.
There is *passion* involved here....
2) The group agrees the tasks that need to be undertaken to enable the
reaching of that goal, and how they wish to structure the group
(if at all) - bearing in mind that.....
3) Each team member contributes their best skills to the most
appropriate task. Not the most visible, not the most "prestigious",
not the most "vocal" - just what they honestly do best.
If a task arises and there is no specialist skill in the group then
the team can elect to bring in that skill or use it as a learning
opportunity for volunteers within the team - depending on how cruicial
that task is to the overall success.
Being dishonest with yourself or others in the group about your
own skills does not therefore aid the overall goal. If working
well, old power plays like "who's the leader" or "who's at the
top" (or, if you like, "my skills/position are more valuable then yours")
disappear. Motivation becomes automatic - "work" becomes an exciting
and enjoyable activity.
Every individual in the team learns more about themselves and about
the other involved, and all feel equally (highly) valued within that team.
These seem to me to be the general rules within which a truly
productive team can work. There are doubtless other ways....
'gail
|
| 1039.6 | IMMATERIAL ENTITY | WMOIS::D_DUVERGER | | Fri Mar 23 1990 07:17 | 32 |
|
THE BONDING COMES FROM THE INNER HEART
I CHOOSE TO>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Identify with the underprivileged.
I CHOOSE TO>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Give my life to the hungry.
I CHOOSE TO>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Give my life to those who have been left out of
the sunlight of opportunity.....
This is the way that I am going.
If it means suffering a little bit,
IM GOING THAT WAY.
If it means sacrificing,
IM GOING THAT WAY.
If it means dying for them.
IM GOING THAT WAY BECUASE I HEARD A VOICE SAYING
Do something for others................
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
The answer to your question lies within this.
If you support your brother and sisters in this manner
you are part of the bond....
Ridge Runner
POW*MIA FREEDOM NOW!
CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN
|
| 1039.7 | teams can add flexibility... | KOBAL::BROWN | upcountry frolics | Fri Mar 23 1990 17:25 | 12 |
|
In terms of the two or three strongly bound teams I've been on,
there has been an external common goal (a product, a quality level,
etc.) and there has been an internal goal. The internal goal is
somewhat different for each member of the team but has some common
elements of support, trust, and respect. And in each of the cases,
I've felt that being part of the team has allowed me to be more
like myself, more of an individual, than if I had been going it
alone. Teams allow me to do what I do best and learn to do those
things I don't do as well from people who do them well.
Ron
|
| 1039.8 | What about "virtual teams"? | OLDTMR::DMCLURE | In search of a virtual team | Fri Mar 30 1990 14:01 | 45 |
| Well, I'm still not sure if much of this really applies to the
notion of a "virtual team" (as opposed to a traditional work group
team within one's own cost center or organization).
The way I see it, there is an increasing need to be able to effectively
organize "virtual teams" within DEC to tackle the many sorts of temporary
situations which tend to arise in this fast-changing market place. The
traditional approach to handling these sorts of situations is to wait
until corporate designates a "program office" and then count on this
newly formed committee to be able to adequately address the issues.
This is a strictly hierarchical approach to crisis management.
The problem as I see it however, is that the hierarchical approach
is too inefficient to be able to respond quick enough to market needs.
More recent trends seem to be focusing less on hierarchical solutions
to more of a peer-to-peer approach to solving problems of the global
scale. In order to effectively organize people towards such a peer-to-
peer approach however, a process of virtual team building and cooperation
must take place. A paradox seems to exist however because corporate is
not able to address global issues efficiently, yet on the other hand,
when it comes to peer-to-peer virtual teams, no individual group seems
willing to take ownership of the larger issues which effect the entire
corporation.
DECWORLD '90 is fastly approaching, yet as usual, the corporation
seems to be putting off any real organization to meet this need until
the last minute. I was heavily involved in DECWORLD '87 and noticed
the exact same thing. It wasn't until just a few months before DECWORLD
that we were ever given any marching orders for developing any DECWORLD
projects. As a result, we barely made it in time to deliver anything
in terms of demos. I wasn't in an "official" DECWORLD development
group then (nor am I now), but I somehow wonder if I won't be called
upon once again at the last minute to help out.
DECWORLD is one example, but there are many other such examples
in which a good virtual team building mechanism would help out in
such emergencies. I think the notesfiles are the closest thing we
currently have to providing a framework for virtual team building
(as well as virtual team project management), but there has always
been a DECWORLD notesfile, and few people use it either until panic
mode sets in and even then it is pure chaos. What I am wondering then
is whether there is some way of ordering the chaos by establishing a
given set of virtual team building guidelines?
-davo
|