Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on google
Google+
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn

Four Actions

We all work in teams – at work, home, and in community groups. Very little of what we do, day to day, does not happen without people working together in some form or fashion. A team is merely a combination of people with varying interests, talents, and personalities – and every person on the team can enhance or detract from the overall functioning of the whole.

David Kantor developed a model that outlines four actions one may take on a team. They are to:

  • Lead
  • Follow
  • Bystand
  • Oppose

And each of these actions can be manifested in two different stances: negative or positive. Negative is reactive and damaging. Positive is proactive and helpful.

Here are my descriptions of each of the actions and stances:

 Action Negative/Reactive Positive/Proactive
  1. Lead
Takes the team off task. Creates factions. Source of disruption and dysfunction. Has a need to be the center of attention and action. Controlling. Sets vision and direction. Moves the team to a better place. Is able to size up a situation and enable the team to respond appropriately.
  1. Follow
Blindly follows. Does what they are told to do with little personal thought or input. Proceeds, even with misgivings. (I was only following orders). Supports the team by doing what needs to be done in an effective manner. Team player. Does the work of the team with minimal fuss.
  1. Bystand
Little personal responsibility for actions or outcomes. Sits back and lets others make the decisions and do the work. Keenly observes. Does not weigh in or detract the team if there is no value in doing so. Steps out of the way when needed.
  1. Oppose
Confrontational. Refuses to let go of a point or own personal opinion. Alternatively, may not express opposition directly; instead does so in a passive/aggressive manner. Expresses concerns and possible problems. Addresses tough issues. Brings forward different ideas and approaches. Comfortable in exploring alternatives.

 

I’ve been taken by both the simplicity and the completeness of the model – and it helps me identify how I show up. I find that by keeping the model in mind, I can choose my actions with intention, so that the way I show up helps, rather than hinders, the team. It also enables me to both see and value other actions – especially those in bystander or opposing mode – two of the behaviors that I tend to get frustrated with.

So I’m curious – what action mode and stance are you exhibiting on the teams you are a part of? Are you stuck in one mode? Are there times you switch into a negative action? And what results might you (and the team) get if you consciously chose your action in alignment with the best outcome for the team?

More to explore

Evergreen Leadership