Second, the on many different levels to re-establish “mind maps” exercise worked meaningful knowledge of each other, clarify personal and company goals, and define identity and character qualities that to enter into problem-solving with strengthen people’s ability “intention” and for the person(s) with whom they are working. This is far more effective than “appreciation” an intervention with a Johari window exercise to get people to look at their own behavior and its impact and then translate insights from an individual level, personal responsibility perspective, to the group or system. Third, a third-party intervention focused on the conflict and feuding, might have been appropriate for many conflict situations, however, would have been limited in its ability to address the that conflicts create including the symptom of systemic, “ripple effect” system “silence.” Even after the implementation of teambuilding, the conflict of different perspectives of moving forward remained, however, they were likely more easily worked through because of the foundational relational closeness that was built as a result of the teambuilding exercises. The lack of overall organizational structure and familiarity with organizational development practices seemed to necessitate an intervention that allowed for individualism, creativity, and a way of looking at organizational dynamics through a safe lens without emphasizing the weaknesses or failures of the management, the company or employees. Teambuilding offers an effective environment to view collective shortcomings and not tear them down, and in this case, provided the holding space to begin to collectively develop boundaries, lines of authority, and clarity of direction when no one individual was tasked with this responsibility. Again, this stayed true to the company culture. Finally, a leadership development program (training and development) may have provided unwanted or unwelcomed structure. While it would provide learning opportunities for managers to strengthen their skillsets and further define their roles, one drawback would be that it is too
Second, the “mind maps” exercise worked on many different levels to re-establish meaningful knowledge of each other, clarify personal and company goals, and define identity and character qualities that strengthen people’s ability to enter into problem-solving with “intention” and “appreciation” for the person(s) with whom they are working. This is far more effective than an intervention with a Johari window exercise to get people to look at their own behavior and its impact and then translate insights from an individual level, personal responsibility perspective, to the group or system. Third, a third-party intervention focused on the conflict and feuding, might have been appropriate for many conflict situations, however, would have been limited in its ability to address the systemic, “ripple effect” that conflicts create including the symptom of system “silence.” Even after the implementation of teambuilding, the conflict of different perspectives of moving forward remained, however, they were likely more easily worked through because of the foundational relational closeness that was built as a result of the teambuilding exercises. The lack of overall organizational structure and familiarity with organizational development practices seemed to necessitate an intervention that allowed for individualism, creativity, and a way of looking at organizational dynamics through a safe lens without emphasizing the weaknesses or failures of the management, the company or employees. Teambuilding offers an effective environment to view collective shortcomings and not tear them down, and in this case, provided the holding space to begin to collectively develop boundaries, lines of authority, and clarity of direction when no one individual was tasked with this responsibility. Again, this stayed true to the company culture. Finally, a leadership development program (training and development) may have provided unwanted or unwelcomed structure. While it would provide learning opportunities for managers to strengthen their skillsets and further define their roles, one drawback would be that it is too