According to Google, this is the key of an effective working group

At Google, which employees create the greatest impact on the development of the company 10 years ago? Besides options like Larry Page and Sundar Pichai , I also proposed HR director Laszlo Bock . Under the direction of Laszo, Google also began hiring processes and challenged actual data-based management hypotheses, which led to significant transformations. For example, the "giant" no longer considers university tests as a criterion to predict the success of a "Googler".

Another important question is "What makes a team (successful teamwork) (or unsuccessful)?" To answer this question, Google conducted a study and results published by NYTimes Magazine in an article last year.

According to Google, this is the key of an effective working group Picture 1

It would be reasonable to start with a hypothesis that the success of a working group is always tied to how it is structured in some way, such as the proportion of skilled engineers compared to technical he is inexperienced / amateur, or the percentage of senior leaders compared to young employees. However, when Google tested these variables, no connection was detected.

"We have observed 180 teams throughout the company," Dubey (research participant) said , "Although there has been a lot of data collected, there is nothing that indicates a synthesis. There are different types of personalities, skills or backgrounds that will make a difference, "the" Who "part of the equation doesn't seem to matter."

So what is this study - also known as the Aristotle Project - discovered? It is the rules of a group - the way the team members show consensus in work and behavior - and it is far more important than a team that is merely made up of the gathering of members.

However, what makes researchers most excited is that teams that do well on a task will often do well when assigned other tasks. On the contrary, the group that cannot complete something will often fail in everything. From there, they concluded that what makes the difference between an effective working group and an inefficient group is the way that team members treat each other. In other words, appropriate rules can promote collective intelligence while wrong rules can ruin an entire team, even when considered individually, each member will shine. their way.

This finding may surprise employees at Google. Because they are proud to own " natural intelligence" (raw intelligence - capable of creating many thoughts, such as abstract views that can encapsulate many experiences and ideas. unique idea) and also believe that only data and the brain can provide the best solution for all problems.

So what are the rules of a successful workgroup?

1. First , in an effective working group, members can express their views to the same degree, a phenomenon that researchers refer to as "fair distribution of the number of times spoken." in a conversation ".
2. Second, an effective working group must have all the "high average social sensitivity" ⁽¹⁾ - a great way to say that they are proficient at Directly feel other people's emotions based on the tone, facial expressions and other gesture languages.

(1) Average social sensitivity of a working group is an indicator of the average sensitivity of all group members to society. More specifically, it is how each person has the ability to read other people's thoughts and feelings based on nonverbal gestures.