Zero-sum thinking-shadow killer of Project Team Cooperation

First, let's talk about zero-sum thinking. The following is a suitable answer on the Internet: "the so-called zero-sum is a concept in game theory, meaning a game between the two sides, the benefit of one party is bound to mean that the other party suffers losses. It is called "zero sum" because the "gain" and "loss" of both sides are added, and the total number is zero ."

 

Is this thinking always wrong? No, it is correct in some environments, especially in A scarce environment. For example, if there are only 10 apples and two people, A and B will be less than one. But is it always right? The answer is no. In a win-win environment, for example, in a project team, it is not good, or even a very dangerous way of thinking.

 

Why is zero-sum thinking dangerous in the environment of teamwork? I would like to first talk about a case: I have met a team of three people and a senior developer with more than five years of experience, one is a beginner developer who just graduated for one year, and the other is an intern. The team is naturally led by senior developers. It is reasonable to say that such a team should not have any major conflicts even if it is not stable? On the contrary, in less than two months, the team members experienced two major interpersonal conflicts, both of which were senior personnel, this happens successively with the other two members of the team. Why? After in-depth understanding, we can find that all conflicts are trivial things that can be completely avoided, and behind them are all people's thoughts. To put it bluntly, it is the "zero-sum thinking" of this senior developer who believes that there is a zero-sum competition between members. Only one person can win and how much one person gets, others will lose much. Under the guidance of this kind of thinking, his external behaviors intentionally or unintentionally treat other members of the team that should have been teammates as opponents, for example, they can suppress their growth to prevent their income from being divided, and guard other team members from doing things they do not know, so as to prevent their solutions from being questioned and complain about insufficient member capabilities, let them take over all the dirty jobs. In this way, even a newbie has a lot of dissatisfaction. The result is to confront him and quarrel with him. The team is in this status, so it is conceivable that the project will not go well. As a result, the relevant customers finally expressed dissatisfaction, and the team thus paid for it.

 

In this case, you will know that the other two members of the team, even if ambitious, cannot pose any threat to the positions of senior developers for a period of time, so it is completely a plug-in to guard against the pressure. It has no meaning. Second, it is clear that there is not a zero-sum competition between teams, but a win-win relationship. For example, if everyone works together to complete the project, everyone will have more benefits, as the total benefits of the team increase, the allocable cake increases. Otherwise, if the project fails, everyone will not be able to benefit. In other words, the growth of team members will not lead to a decrease in the leader's ability, right? After the growth, we can do things faster and better. Is it also very helpful to relieve the pressure on the owner? In addition, the benefits of team stability to the Project do not need to be discussed? These principles are simple and easy to understand. However, at that time, this senior employee was blinded by "zero-sum thinking", so he could not look at the problem from a win-win perspective, but only saw competition, it not only causes project failure, but also causes your own failure.

 

Therefore, in a team, the idea of "zero-sum thinking" must be vigilant. It will greatly undermine the effectiveness of team cooperation and, in severe cases, cause many other negative effects. Project managers and project owners should strive to create a win-win situation at all levels to avoid the emergence of "zero-sum thinking". For example, do not select zero-sum awards in the team, at least do not encourage team members to compete with each other to obtain short-term performance.

 

In this case, my feelings may be represented by the following three sentences:

• What kind of thinking and what kind of reality are created? For example, if you think that all people around you are teammates, they will become your teammates. If you think they are opponents, they will become your opponents;
• The results of a project are the embodiment of the entire project team-so build people first, then build product;

• If you want to establish a person, if you want to achieve it, then the win-win idea is that you have helped others to succeed, and you will be more successful on your own;