Choose: A or B?

Polarities in teams.

We live in an increasingly polarised world. Algorithms reward and promote the most incendiary opinions, and everything gets reduced to choosing between A or B.

Up or down.

You’re either with me or against me.

How does this affect teams, and how is polarity experienced on a day-to-day basis?

Here’s a very real example:

A. The relationally-oriented leader — connection, trust and emotional safety.

B. The task-oriented leader — clear goals, execution and measurable outcomes.

This is just one example of polarity. Both are valuable, and incomplete without the other.

Every day, teams face different polarities they must take a position on. Sometimes (rarely) they do so consciously, and other times (more often) unconsciously — but all teams constantly navigate through the following polarities:

• Stability – Fluidity

• Execution – Reflection

• Centralisation – Decentralisation

• Profit – Purpose

• Individual needs – Collective needs

• Short term – Long term

• Control – Trust

• Consolidation – Growth

• Speed – Quality

• Tradition – Innovation

• Differentiation – Alignment

• Collaboration – Competition

• Discretion – Transparency

The key, from my point of view, to all these systemic polarities is understanding that there’s no single solution or method.

These are challenges that will continue to surface.

These are perpetual challenges that will never be solved.

And the right balance point will be different for each team and will depend on their context.

For example, the same team will approach the speed–quality polarity differently depending on the task at hand, who it’s being presented to, its impact on results, etc.

So, how can we hold space for these polarities?

Imagine a newly formed team (due to a new leader, new members, etc.) that starts working on these polarities consciously from day one.

A team that has open, constructive conversations about how they want to show up in each of them.

A team that reaches agreements.

A team that sets clear norms and decisions about how they’re going to compete and collaborate, how transparent they want to be, how much risk and innovation they’re aiming for, how they’ll make decisions, how they’ll include dissenting opinions, what kind of control (if any) there will be, how much they want to trust — and how.

Imagine the power of a team that, from the very beginning, understands, discusses, and agrees on who they want to be — together.

A team 100% ready for the tensions that, sooner or later, will come.

Do you think that after working through all of this and doing regular check-ins, the chances of achieving objectives increase or decrease?

If a team is aligned, will they achieve results before or after the rest of the teams in the company?

I often invite teams to create a polarity map: two ends of a spectrum, each with their value and cost when overused. Then we explore: What’s the dance between these two for your context?

So start with just one polarity that feels most relevant to the team. Explore it together. What is the value of each side of the polarity? How can that be leveraged to create something new?

What’s a polarity your team is struggling with right now? Hit reply and share. I’d love to hear your story and offer my reflections

Or, if you're ready to explore these dynamics with your team, let's talk.

Win wisely,

Dino