Team Team: Washington'S Law Of Cooperation

Summary of Washington's law of cooperation

Hua Hua

If you carefully observe the crabs, you will find that a bunch of crabs inside the basket do not need to cover the lid, and the crab can not crawl out.

Because if one wants to climb up, other crabs will pull it down, and finally no one can climb out.

What is the reason? In fact, it is not because the crab is well behaved and does not want to climb out. It is because the crab likes to fight with the crabs. As long as one crab wants to climb up, the other crabs will pull it down, and no one can climb out.

This small example illustrates the law of cooperation in Washington.

Washington's cooperative law has three major reasons:

1 bystander effect

The law of cooperation in Washington originated from the bystander effect discovered by two psychologists Latane and Barry: many spectators dispersed the responsibility that everyone should bear, and finally no one was responsible, so he failed to cooperate.

Concretely speaking, when a person is engaged in a certain job, there is no spectator, so he naturally assumes full responsibility by himself, though he is a bit perfunctory, but he can barely make things happen.

If there are two people, although two people are responsible, but because another spectator is present, two people will be hesitant and shirk each other. Finally, two monks will carry water to drink.

If there are three or more people and more spectators, the situation will be more complicated and the relationship will be more subtle. They will kick the ball with each other, so that they will never accomplish anything. The last three monks have no water to drink.

This shows that when many people work together, although members of a group are responsible, every member of the group becomes spectator and shuffle away from each other. In the end, no one is willing to assume responsibility, and the result is not successful cooperation, resulting in the law of cooperation in Washington.

2 the role of social loafing

The so-called social loafing means that when a group completes a task together, the effort of each member in the group will be significantly reduced than that of the individual in completing the task alone.

In the organization, the effect of social loafing obviously reduces the efficiency of group work, and directly brings about the effect of the law of cooperation in Washington.

Three

Organizational internal friction refers to organizational members' struggle, which not only costs the energy of the organization, but also reduces the efficiency of the organization. It also affects the normal efficiency of the organization and damages the overall efficiency of the organization.

Organizational internal friction is closely related to the size of the organization group. Generally speaking, the more members of the cooperative group, the more serious the internal consumption of the organization.

Therefore, a person completes his task with the highest subjective initiative and the least internal friction, because he has no other choice; when two people cooperate to complete a task, they may shift each other and increase their internal friction; the more people, the greater the internal friction, the worse the group's subjective initiative.

In our traditional management theory, there is not much research on cooperation. The most direct reflection is that most of the current management systems and industries are committed to reducing unnecessary consumption of manpower, rather than using organizations to improve human efficiency.

In other words, the main purpose of management is not to make everyone do the best, but to avoid excessive internal consumption.

Classic case

Murder and tug of war experiments in New York

In March 1964, there was a murder in the kyu Park in New York.

At 3 in the morning, a young bar manager was murdered by the murderer.

In the process of a half hour's murder, the victim kept running for help. 38 of the residents heard or saw it, but they heard and saw it. No one came out to stop it. Even a police phone that only needed a lift was not beaten.

This matter can not be simply summed up as alienation and indifference of human nature, but has a profound psychological background: when an emergency occurs, it is precisely because of other witnesses that the presence of each observer is indifferent, and more is watching other observers' reactions.

This is a systematic defect, that is to say, such things happen repeatedly at different locations and time. This terrible phenomenon is also a portrayal of the law of cooperation in Washington.

Let's look at the following experiment:

1930s, German psychologist

Enlightenment from the dwarfs

The law of cooperation in Washington reveals conflicts and ineffectiveness in cooperation, but we can also see that when everyone is working together to accomplish something, every participant will be proud to find the joy of cooperation and even long-term partners.

Let's take a look at the story of seven dwarfs.

Legend has it that in ancient Greece, Cyprus once had seven dwarfs in a castle. They lived in a damp basement and could not find anyone to help, no food and no water.

The seven dwarfs grew increasingly desperate.

Among these dwarfs, Archimedes was the first patron saint of Athena to dream.

Athena told him that in this castle, in addition to the room they stayed in, the other 25 rooms had honey and water in one room, and stones in the other 24 rooms, including 240 rosy red Lingshi, which collected these 240 Lingshi pieces and arranged them into a circle shape. The terrible mantra would be lifted, and they could escape from bad luck and return to their homeland.

Archimedes told the dream to six other partners, but only Alice and Socrates were willing to work with him.

In the first few days, Alice wanted to find some wood to make a fire first; Socrates wanted to find the room with food first; Archimedes wanted to quickly find 240 pieces of Lingshi, so that the curse could be lifted quickly.

But the three could not agree, so they decided to find each other for a few days, and three of them failed, but exhausted.

But the three did not give up. Failure made them realize that they should unite.

They decided to look for the seeds of the fire first, and then find the food. Finally, we went to Lingshi together.

This is an effective way. Three people soon found a lot of honey and water in the second room on the left.

After a few days of hunger, they gulp down a lot of food, and then take a lot to Troy, Angela, Aristotle and Melissa.

The hope of food and clothing changed the minds of the other four. They volunteered to seek Lingshi together with Archimedes.

In order to improve efficiency, Archimedes decided to divide the seven soldiers into two parts: the original three people, continue to find from the left side, and Troy and four others look for the right side.

But the problem quickly came out: because the three days had been sitting there, Troy and others had no sense of direction at all, and they were almost spinning around.

Archimedes resolutely redistributed Alice and Socrates with one person and guided them slowly to familiarity with the castle with their own know-how and experience.

However, things were not as smooth as they imagined. The first group was Socrates and Troy. They always thought the other two groups were too slow.

Finally, because of the unfamiliar terrain, people often look for Lingshi in the same room day after day, and everyone's confidence is beginning to lose.

Archimedes was very worried.

That evening, he gathered the other six men together to discuss the method.

However, the communication conference has just started and has become a critical meeting of recriminations.

After communication, it was discovered that some of them might have found the room quickly, but the stones that might be found in the room were all wrong, and those who were very accurate were often too slow.

So the seven dwarfs were reassembled.

Under Alice's proposal, we decided to have an exchange meeting every day, exchanging experiences and tricks.

After seven people worked together, they finally found all the 240 Lingshi, but at that moment, Socrates stopped breathing.

After all of the shock and fear, the fire suddenly went out.

Without fire, there is no light; without light, there is no way to form a circle of stones.

All of us came to help with the fire. How could we know that six people spent a long time trying to make a fire?

Archimedes regretted not having learned to make a fire from Socrates.

Finally, under the care of the gods, the fire was still born.

The dwarfs were victorious.

The story of the dwarfs gives us the following inspiration:

A good vision is the cornerstone of teamwork; a clear goal is the foundation for team success; teamwork is the key to teamwork.

Knowledge is productivity, an important means to improve efficiency, and experience is an integral part of knowledge.

A team needs knowledge as well as experience.

Team resistance comes from distrust and abnormal interference among members.

Especially in difficult times, this distrust and the power of abnormal interference will be magnified.

It is a good way for the team to get out of the difficult situation and to succeed.

Division of labor is conducive to improving efficiency, but division of labor must be compatible with personnel. If capacity and position do not match, efficiency will be low.

{page_break}

Only by effective management of the team can the team's goals be finally achieved.

Creating a cooperative culture of high performance teams

The law of cooperation in Washington shows that cooperation is a problem and how cooperation is also a problem.

To solve the law of cooperation in Washington thoroughly, we must create a cooperative culture of high-performance teams.

A monk carries water to eat, two monks carry water to eat, and three monks do not have water to eat.

This often leads us to misunderstandings.

A unit or an enterprise is not good in its efficiency. It often finds no cause in other aspects. Instead, it simply accuses the monks of being many.

However, in fact, this is not exactly the case. Some units and enterprises have not been able to increase their efficiency.

It seems that there is no necessary connection between the amount of water eaten and the number of monks.

How can we break the dilemma of three monks without water? Here are three solutions:

The first solution is: a monk suggested that we should take turns to carry water, and consequently, the problem of draught could be solved.

The second solution is: Division of labor, you carry water, I cut firewood, he cooks, everyone has a clear responsibility, and at the same time work together.

This not only solves the problem of draught, but also sets up a new management mechanism.

The third solution is to set up an incentive mechanism, who takes the initiative to undertake the task of carrying water, that is, make a significant contribution to the temple, give priority to material distribution, job promotion and so on. If the result is remarkable, the prize will be rewarded.

In this way, the problem of draught is no longer a problem, it also promotes the spiritual civilization construction of this temple, and the temple management has been raised to a new level.

In a unit or an enterprise, there are three key links for success in cooperation:

The first is whether the goal is clear and whether the goal is well known to everyone in the team.

The two is whether the responsibility of the post is clear, whether everyone knows what he should do, whether or not everyone will be responsible for everything.

The three is whether there is a clear definition of the interface between the posts, that is, the connection between the output and input of the two links in the process, and at the same time, it is necessary to avoid being ignored when the ball falls to two people in the volleyball court.

To solve the above three problems, the main means is to establish a communication mechanism and reach a common communication language.

In the process of cooperation, there must be an organizer to lead the cooperation of all sides. This is the reason why two people should have a team leader.

Do you have team spirit?

The following tests can help you check if you have team spirit.

Each of the following statements is a team behavior. According to the frequency of performance, it is always like this (5 points), often (4 points), sometimes (3 points), rarely (2 points), and never (1 points).

When I was a member of the group:

1 I seek facts, information, opinions, opinions and feelings from other members of the group to help group discussions.

(seeking information and opinions)

2 I provide facts and express my views, opinions, feelings and information to help group discussions.

(providing information and opinions)

3 I put forward the work plan behind the group, and remind everyone to pay attention to the tasks to be completed, so as to grasp the direction of the group.

I assign different responsibilities to different group members.

(direction and role definition)

4 I focus on the relevant points or suggestions put forward by the panel members and summarize and retell the main points discussed by the panel.

(summary)

5 I bring vitality to the group and encourage members of the team to work hard to achieve our goals.

(inspirator)

6 I ask others to summarize the discussion of the panel so as to ensure that they understand the group decision and understand what the group is discussing.

(Understanding examiners)

7 I warmly encourage all members of the group to take part in it and be willing to listen to their views and let them know that I value their contribution to the group.

(participants)

8 I use good communication skills to help group members communicate so as to ensure that each group member understands others' speeches.

(facilitator)

9 I will tell jokes and suggest working in an interesting way to relieve tension in the group and increase the fun of working together.

(stress relief)

10 I express support, acceptance and affection to other members. I commend them appropriately when other members show constructive behavior in the group.

(supporters and commenders)

11 I have facilitated public discussions among disagreed members to coordinate their ideas and enhance group cohesion.

When members do not seem to be able to resolve conflicts directly, I will intervene.

(interpersonal problem solver)

12 I observe the way the group works and use my observations to help you discuss how the group can work better.

(process observer)

Answer analysis:

The above 1~6 questions are a group, the 7~12 question is a group, the two group's score adds separately, compares own score and which group is closest.

(6, 6) only paid the least effort for the completion of the work. It was totally estranged from other members in general, inactive in the group, and had little impact on others.

(6, 30) you stress the importance of maintaining good relations with the group, helping other members, helping create a comfortable and friendly working atmosphere, but pay little attention to how to accomplish the task.

(30, 6) you focus on completing the work but ignoring the maintenance relationship.

(18, 18) your efforts to coordinate the tasks and maintenance requirements of the team have finally reached a balance.

You should continue to work hard to creatively combine tasks and maintenance behaviors to facilitate optimal productivity.

(30, 30) congratulations. You are an excellent team player and have the ability to lead a team.