Laserfiche WebLink
2/17/22, 1:20 PM Leading in a Crisis: Building High-Performance Teams <br />https://www.govtech.com/analysis/leading-in-a-crisis-building-high-performance-teams.html 5/8 <br />Each team member should be authorized up front to pull the "emergency brake” <br />through vigorous opposition at any time the group or key members slide into a <br />questionable (incomplete, self-serving, catastrophized or outdated) definition of the <br />situation or are leaning toward unworkable or unethical policies. Members with <br />certain professional roles in the team (the lawyer, the virologist, the engineer, the <br />emergency manager, the military or law enforcement officer, the communicator) <br />have a particular responsibility to make sure that the group acts in ways that are <br />legitimate and consistent with good professional practice relevant to the <br />circumstances at hand.   <br />Challenge 3: Micropolitics <br />When crisis teams kick into action, "microclimates" develop within them and <br />determine the quality of their performance. Importantly, these climates are partly <br />shaped by the quality of the pre-existing relations between the political, <br />bureaucratic and professional constituencies that team members represent. It may <br />also be shaped by gender divides. Although the prevailing norm is to suspend <br />politicking and unify in order to fight the crisis together, the reality is that under the <br />pressure of a crisis, pre-existing fault lines and protective, competitive instincts may <br />be amplified rather than attenuated. Just because circumstances dictate that <br />individuals join a leadership or coordination "team" does not mean that members <br />cast aside their set identities, situated interests ("where you stand depends on <br />where you sit") and relational baggage. <br />Recommendation: <br />Do not ignore, or try to wish away, this type of micropolitics and let it fester in the <br />shadows. Name it at the outset. Don’t suppress it but find ways to normalize and <br />even harness it in ways that allow the team to make balanced, well-scrutinized <br />decisions that will be understood and accepted by other groups and agencies — <br />from stakeholders who are dependent on group decisions to others who will <br />implement decisions. Adopt a practice of "multiple advocacies" where <br />representatives of different viewpoints on issues of strategic importance are given <br />license to argue their cases during team meetings in a structured process — <br />buffeted by their collective commitment to "fall into line" with decisions once taken. <br />Team leaders act as "magistrates" ensuring the integrity of the process and setting