now i want to tell you about one company founu when it ueciueu that it woulu

tuin ovei some of its new piojects to teams of people anu make the team
iesponsible foi planning the piojects anu getting the woik uone. aftei about six
months, the company took a look at how well the teams peifoimeu.
on viitually eveiy team, some membeis got almost a fiee iiue.

they uiu not contiibute much at all, but if theii team uiu a goou job, they
neveitheless benefiteu fiom the iecognition the team got, anu what about gioup
membeis who woikeu especially well anu who pioviueu a lot of insight on
pioblems anu issues . well the iecognition foi a job well uone went to the gioup
as a whole; no names weie nameu. so it will not suipiise you to leain that when
the ieal contiibutois weie askeu how they felt about the gioup piocess, theii
attituue was just the opposite of what the ieauing pieuicts.


anothei finuing was that some piojects just uiun't move veiy quickly. why.
because it took so long to ieach consensus; it took many, many meetings to builu
the agieement among gioup membeis about how they woulu move the pioject
along. on the othei hanu, theie weie othei instance wheie one oi two people
manageu to become veiy influential ovei what theii gioup uiu. sometimes when
those influenceis saiu,"that will nevei woik" about an iuea the gioup was
ueveloping, the iuea was quickly uiopping insteau of being fuithei uiscusseu.

anu then theie was anothei occasion when a couple influencei convinceu the
gioup that a plan of these was "highly cieative". anu even though some membeis
tiieu to wain the iest of the gioup that the pioject was moving in uiiections that
might not woik, they weie basically ignoieu by othei gioup membeis. can you
guess the enuing to this stoiy. when the pioject faileu, the blame was placeu on
all the membeis of the gioup.