UPDATE! Bulletin - TNNWC GROUP/ TNNWC Weekly Newsletter - 08.22.2010

Free Membership and Subscription? Click HERE.

Free RSS Newsfeed? Click HERE.
Free Daily Email Supplement? Click HERE.

UPDATE! Bulletin - TNNWC GROUP/ TNNWC Weekly Newsletter - 08.22.2010

Dear Friends, Members, Colleagues and Others Who May Be Reading This Over Someone Else's Shoulder (you really should get your own free Membership and subscriptions at http://bit.ly/JoinTNNWC ):

We've closed the polls on our last and most recent survey, and have the results here for you to see:

WHY NEW BUSINESSES TEND TO FAIL

RANK THE REASONS

While there are many reasons, sometimes operating in combination, that new businesses tend to fail (sadly, the successes are the striking exceptions!), Please rank each of the reasons below on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the LEAST significant and 5 being the MOST SIGNIFICANT. Thank you for your input. Polls will close on August 15th. Thank you for participating! At TNNWC, your opinion not only counts -- it is vital to our providing you with better service.


To repeat, 1 is the LEAST SIGNIFICANT and is the factor of least importance, and 5 is the MOST SIGNIFICANT and the factor of greatest importance.



Again, thank you for providing your invaluable input into this quick survey. Here are the issues to be ranked on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest):

1. POOR BUSINESS PLAN

2. THE PRODUCT OR SERVICE IS UNORIGINAL, "ME TOO," OR "PLAIN VANILLA" - There's plenty of alternatives (and competitors) out there in the market.

3. LACK OF ADEQUATE CAPITAL FOR LAUNCH AND OPERATIONS

4. POOR MANAGEMENT, WEAK LEADERSHIP OR UNCOORDINATED TEAMWORK

5. A DIFFICULT ECONOMY WITH INADEQUATE ASSISTANCE FROM THE GOVERNMENT

6. POOR PROMOTION, MARKETING OR BRANDING
-----------------------------

OUR READERS RESPOND!

AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONSES

Out of 180 completed responses, our readers ranked the the reasons for business failure as follows. Each percentage reflects the number of respondents who thought that that particular reason was the most significant reason for new and young business failures:

1. POOR BUSINESS PLAN
12%



2. THE PRODUCT OR SERVICE IS UNORIGINAL, "ME TOO," OR "PLAIN VANILLA" - There's plenty of alternatives (and competitors) out there in the market.
4%


3. LACK OF ADEQUATE CAPITAL FOR LAUNCH AND OPERATIONS
14%


4. POOR MANAGEMENT, WEAK LEADERSHIP OR UNCOORDINATED TEAMWORK
25%


5. A DIFFICULT ECONOMY WITH INADEQUATE ASSISTANCE FROM THE GOVERNMENT
27%


6. POOR PROMOTION, MARKETING OR BRANDING
18%


Take a look at the above statistics. It would seem that that most of our respondents believe that the government is not being as proactive as it should be in properly "stimulating" the economy. What should the government be doing? What if the government continues to "fail us?" What do we do then? This warrants further discussion!



With Our Very Best Wishes (and Actionable Plans!),

Adam J. Kovitz and Douglas Castle

TNNWC Group, LLC

---

Capital, Traffic Building, International Customers and unique SERVICES.
The National Networker Publications™ produced by TNNWC Group, LLC
“Empowering Emerging Enterprises”

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

UPDATE! Bulletin - TNNWC GROUP/ TNNWC Weekly Newsletter - 08.22.2010

KARL SMITH: The Diversity Challenge: Good Business Relationships Are Possible

By Karl Smith

Good business relationships are all about how you relate to people. The diverse South African society requires particular people skills to build your business. People not only come with different personality types but from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds as well. They are individuals who despite their differences have many similarities. Business owners, employers and managers who can motivate individuals to focus on common interests amidst diversity, have the edge over others who lack this vital skill. In my opinion, the ability to put oneself in the shoes of others – whether they are new contacts, employers, colleagues etc – is one of the most crucial people skills to succeed in business particular and life in general. This skill is also known as “empathy”: the ability to identify with and understand the wants, needs, and viewpoints of those around you. In fact UNICEF, UNESCO and World Health Organisation identified “empathy” as one of the ten core life skills that enable individuals to deal effectively with the demands and challenges of everyday life. You are not borne with this skill: you acquire it, your nurture it and you work on it as long as you live - it remains a project under construction. You think about it every time before you speak or act. I have recently interviewed Wayne Poggenpoel, Chief Operating Officer -.Global Synergic to solicit his views on networking. Global Synergic comprises of a network of diverse independent associates and specialists. Needless to note, entrepreneurs or professionals who operate within a network of associates – whether informal or formal – are challenged by diverse needs and independent minds.

Question:What is your understanding of networking?
Answer: Building relationships

Question: What role does it play in your life?
Answer: Building friendship and surrounding myself with like minded persons

Question: Your firm consists of independent companies. How does it make decisions as most entrepreneurs like to do their on thing?
Answer: There are governance structures in place that reflects key responsibilities and decision making powers

Question: How do you manage the different relationships and what is your biggest challenge?
Answer: We manage it in the best interests of the organization. All decisions made are firstly in the interests of the company and then the individual. The biggest challenge is trying to align the interests of the company and those of the individuals.

Question: In bringing in new networks, which qualities are you looking for in an individual?
Answer: We all like to do business with those we trust and like. Key qualities I look for include honesty, integrity and trust

Question: Your group comes from diverse backgrounds. How do you manage the diverse interests?
Answer: We manage it in the best interests of the organization. All decisions made are firstly in the interests of the company and then the individual. Why? We are all different individuals and all have different perceptions and thoughts. Now consider which scenario would be easier to achieve consensus? The company which has one interest or the individuals who have many interests?

Question: You say you believe in a mindset of abundance. What is it and Why?
Answer: This world has an abundance of resources. There is enough for all of us. It is about changing our mindset with the belief that this world has something to offer us all. The challenge is when the greed mentality sets in i.e. the belief that I cannot give others as it will be detriment to my wellbeing. It is not the belief I am concerned with but the behavior it creates. Let us think about it, can a greed-like mentality creating a greed-like behavior ever be sustainable in long term? You decide.

Question: Your top tip for networking?
Answer: Be yourself. People like you as the person you are and not the person you want to be.

Wayne’s comment “we all like to do business with those we trust and like’ resonates with my philosophy in business networking and business relationship building. I am convinced that leaders, managers, entrepreneurs and business owners who understand this approach will be winners.

You can read more about Wayne’s business by visiting www.globalsynergex.co.za. Karl Smith is the author of “Beyond The Business Handshake: Dare To Build High-Trust Business Relationship”, South Africa’s Business Networking & Referral Coach, and the owner of Business Networking South Africa.

Visit www.businessnetworkingsouthafrica.co.za to see Karl in action, see what Karl’s clients says, book Karl to speak or to do in-company training, attend a public event, subscribe to his newsletter or to use the free networking resources.


For more information, please visit Karl's TNNW Bio.
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

KARL SMITH: The Diversity Challenge: Good Business Relationships Are Possible

TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK: Getting (and Staying) on the Same Page

Teamwork - Creating Teams That Work with Douglas Castle

Dear Readers:

Teamwork requires many skills, a great deal of focus, and a clear, unconflicted vision of a common goal of great importance to all participants. If I am a basketball hot-shot who loves to have the ball all of the time, my team will suffer the effects of my personal agenda and my ego's actions. Further (and the analogies only get worse), if we are on the same side in a tug-of-war, or a rafting race, we had better all be pulling or paddling in the same direction...otherwise we will either go flying forward or spinning in circles.

Conflicting agendas and differing priorities are the bane of effective teamwork, and are the ultimate destroyer of any team effort. Some simple guidelines follow that will help you keep your team members "on the same page" all of the time:

1. The Team must have an assigned leader. The types of decisions made by consensus must be few, and they should be the exception rather than the rule. A leader who cannot maintain focus, order and the respective of his/her teammates will see his/her team disintegrate into a committee or an informal group.

2. Individual decisionmaking capacity ("judgment calls") by the teammates must be limited, by the leader, to certain types of tactical issues which will not affect the focus of the team's mission. If there is any doubt about the appropriateness of an individual tactical decision, then the leader should be consulted.

3. The leader should generally have the ability (and also must bear the responsibility and accountability) to override individual decisions after due consideration. It is the leader's responsibility to explain, in brief, what his/her reasons are to that individual, or to the team, if appropriate.

4. The team's mission must be unequivocally and simply restated by the leader in every meeting with team members, and in every business-related conversation with the individual team members. As Adam J. Kovitz, CEO, Founder and Publisher of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER has said, on many occasions: "We learn through repetition and reminders."

5. The team leader, or his/her appointee must make frequent evaluations and issue statements (with the use of as much supporting quantitative data as possible) to the team about the progress that they are making toward the accomplishment of the mission. If these reports indicate progress, the team will be inspired, more firmly bonded, and work with increased energy and enthusiasm.



Exceptions:

There are exceptions to the foregoing five rules (aside from "executive privilege," "national security," "I invested the most money!" and "I'm bigger/older/more experienced/much smarter than you."), but these are quite limited:

• Teams formed for the purpose of developing an initial plan or strategy;
• Teams formed for the purposes of "brainstorming" ideas;
• Collaborative efforts involving only two partners;
• Committee meetings, board meetings and stakeholder meetings where resolutions are put to a vote;
• Teams formed for the purpose of critiquing an idea, an action or a work -- a panel of judges is the classic example.

Generally speaking, if a leader fails to truly lead (rather like an orchestra conductor), the team will disintegrate (rather like the difference between performing a symphonic piece and an ethanol-powered and spontaneous chorus of "Waltzing Matilda" by a rugby team after a rough game).

If the directives above seem harsh, you must bear in mind that the team is not formed for the purpose of either stifling individuality or encouraging innovation, per se...it is formed for the sole purpose of accomplishing a mission for the benefit and common good of all of the teammates.

One analogy, which I particularly enjoy, if that a team is like a multicellular organism, and that each team player is a cell in a biological (life-giving or life-preserving) process. If any one cell should fail to cooperate, sabotage the efforts of other teammates, or misuse resources, it becomes cancerous. Overstated? Perhaps. But my mission in writing this article was to get a point across. An extreme analogy tends to be most memorable.

Get on the same page. Stay on the same page. Tight teams accomplish great things.

-DC http://aboutDouglasCastle.blogspot.com

THE NATIONAL NETWORKER- We Are Networking

BRAINTENANCE - Stay Razor Sharp

INTERNAL ENERGY PLUS - Human Potential

THE INTERNATIONALIST PAGE

THE GLOBAL FUTURIST

####
Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. All rights reserved.
####
To subscribe for your free TNNW Newsletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/ For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free continuous RSS feed (available either by traditional RSS or by direct email), go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK: Getting (and Staying) on the Same Page

TEAMWORK: BUILDING TEAMS THAT WORK: Who Will Lead?

Teamwork: Building Teams That Work with Douglas Castle

Dear Readers:

Teams are cooperative units constructed of persons with complementary skills who are each and all working toward the attainment of a common objective -- whether that objective is to build subscribership of 100,000 in readers for a fabulous publication and resources provider (I will not use any names here, and in particular, I shall make no mention of "THE NATIONAL NETWORKER," "TNNW," "We ARE Networking," at all -- I treasure subtlety and discretion, and seek to exemplify these attributes at every opportunity), or building a toolshed.


While the skills of each of the members are indeed critical, as is their ability to interrelate and focus on the mission at hand rather than on personal or irrelevant issues, every team requires a leader to serve as its person of ultimate responsibility and coherent and cohesive focus. Without leadership, entropy (disorder) can rapidly destroy teams that comprised of even the finest participants.


It is critical to understand some of the most significant attributes of a leader, and I've provided a quick summary of what these are. If you do not personally embody these attributes, you should not lead, and you should find a replacement who better "fits the guidelines." In exceptional cases when we are dealing with a very determined individual, many of the attributes of leadership can be developed through diligent training. Some interesting "shortcut tools" to becoming a better leader can be found at http://www.internalenergyplus.com/ .

At any rate, becoming a better leader requires becoming a better person, and a better personal example.

What is required and expected of every leader:

1. Clarity of vision, and the ability to explain and assist others in seeing that vision;

2. Passion for the mission...a dedication to the mission objective over any personal concerns;

3. Absolute, laser-like focus on the mission objective;

4. Constancy and reliability -- the ability to exhibit stability under pressure;

5. Maturity -- no childishness;

6. Decisiveness -- the ability to make clear, defined decisions, and to be certain that all members are aware of their respective roles and responsibilities in any decision which affects the attainment of the mission objective -- leadership involves tough choices;

7. Communicative Ability --A leader must be able to clearly and concisely put his or her thoughts into words, and to help others visualize the mission objective;

8. Integrity -- A leader who either cannot be trusted or who is a hypocrite will lose the respect of the team and foment desertion or rebellion;

9. Tenacity -- a leader is not permitted the luxury of weakening in his or her resolve to succeed;

10. The ability to listen, as well as to speak. Every Member has a need to be heard, understood and appreciated;

11. Assumption of command and authority -- a leader who is reticent, hesitant or skittish about his or her assumption of the role of leadership will fail;

12. Professionalism -- subversion of the personal ego (but not necessarily the personality) to the promoting, monitoring and leadership of the team toward the successful achievement of the mission objective.

It pays to develop your leadership skills and to keep them sharp. Ironically, true leaders can indeed make excellent teammates, provided that the ground rules and roles are clearly understood at the outset of the mission.

Faithfully,

Douglas Castle

DOUGLAS CASTLE

THE NATIONAL NETWORKER- We Are Networking

BRAINTENANCE - Stay Razor Sharp
INTERNAL ENERGY PLUS - Human Potential
THE INTERNATIONALIST PAGE
THE GLOBAL FUTURIST
_______________________________________________________
Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER.

To subscribe for your free newsletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/.

For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free, continuous RSS feed (available either by traditional RSS or by direct email), go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/.
You are also invited to click our buttons:

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

TEAMWORK: BUILDING TEAMS THAT WORK: Who Will Lead?

TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK: Lasers or Losers?

TEAMWORK - Creating Teams that Work with Douglas Castle

Dear readers:

There are numerous dynamics associated with creating and operating a successful team, e.g., a team that achieves its specified mission. The one variable that invariably proves the most difficult, but should (at least intuitively) be the simplest, is FOCUS.

Part of a team leader's responsibility is to maintain the team's focus on the mission objective, and to avoid forays into any places or projects that could potentially diffuse the unified focus. Sadly, when we, as Human Beings become weary, needful or disenchanted, we tend to abandon focus and seek diversions...we fly off on tangents. This propensity for a diffusion of focus is the default state of most people's personalities. And, even more dangerously, the longer or more complicated the path to a mission objective, or the more "distant" the perceived benefit to each of the team members involved, the more likely the deterioration of focus.

Teams are either comprised of lasers or losers. Even a team that is brought together hastily to accomplish a mission which doesn't have any immediate gratification associated with it can be astoundingly successful if leadership is able to unify the team's focus. This requires several steps:

1. Defining the objective clearly;

2. Describing the benefit to all of the members if the objective is successfully addressed;

3. Persistently "herding" the membership back onto the direct trail to the objective;

4. Repetition - reminding every individual member of the team of the objective, and monitoring progress.

5. Capturing commitment - leadership must obtain the promise, from each individual member that he or she will proceed as promised. Commitment leads to cooperation.

6. Monitoring results and providing feedback ("progress reports" are excellent) to members - giving them a solid feel that their efforts (the cause) are yielding results (the effect).

7. Setting an example - leadership must maintain laser focus on achievement of the mission objective. Members are reliant upon leadership to play a bit of a parental role in this regard. A leader who is perceived as a hypocrite, or as an uncommitted individual is tacitly sanctioning his or her team members to wander off into the woods.

As a leader, you must be every bit as good as you require your members to be. Be the exemplar. Be the laser. Be the best, most consistent example.

A team can accomplish tremendous things if it is fashioned into a laser. Everything, from the American Revolution, to the launch of a space shuttle, to the collective bargaining process, to the takeover of a company, to the making of a media celebrity has been laser-powered.

There is no object that resists the power of a laser-focused team. There is no goal too grandiose or impediment insurmountable. The concentration of the laser focus can stop a comet, or it can bring a song to the top of the charts.

The team, when properly focused, has the potential to be the most powerful of all entities. No matter what the mission objective -- the right team and the right leadership can accomplish it.

Faithfully,

Douglas Castle

BRAINTENANCE - sharpen your mind

THE GLOBAL FUTURIST - prepare, plan and prosper

INTERNAL ENERGY PLUS - transform yourself at the speed of thought

WINNING THEIR HEARTS AND MINDS - subliminal enhancement to your messages

www.LinkedIn.com/in/douglascastle

___________________________________________________________

Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. To subscribe for your free newsletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/. For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free, continuous RSS feed (available either by traditional RSS or by direct email), go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/. You are also invited to click our buttons:

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK: Lasers or Losers?

TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK: A Committee Is Not Necessarily a Team

Teamwork - Creating Teams That Work with Douglas Castle

Dear Readers:

A committee is not necessarily a team; axiomatically, a team is not necessarily a committee. The misperception on the part of many people regarding these two very different creatures (which bear a superficial resemblance to each other because they are each groups of people assembled for a particular purpose or to accomplish a specified mission) is largely responsible for their hesitancy about being involved in teamwork. To use a simple comparison, the functional difference between a team and a committee is at least as great as the difference between a brainstorming session and a military field operation... or perhaps (and more memorably) these two types of groups are not unlike chocolate mousse and freshly-churned organic fertilizer: they look quite similar, but taste rather different.

People are often resistant to the notion of teams because they tend to look at them as if they were committees. It would do us some good to understand the distinctions which characterize the two.

COMMITTEES

• are groups which are generally organized for the purposes of discussing, debating or evaluating an issue;


• are groups which permit a great deal of open, ideological discussion about broad possibilities;


• are groups in which the participants are each engaged in trying to pursuade the others about something, often amidst a great deal of heated argument, speechmaking, stalling, bullying and, on rare occasion, an actual duel fought with pistols [it has just been brought to my attention that this is now illegal in some states, but hurling epithets is not only permitted, but is considered fashionable];


• are groups in which the members tend to pull against each other, instead of pulling for each other -- the participants are each acting as self-advocates, and as independent entities;


• are groups which engage in a very cumbersome, fatiguing process in order to produce an idea, or several suggestions -- the only time that the participants act harmoniously is when they decide to call the matter at issue to a vote.

Most notably, the end-product of the committee process is, at best, a decision, and not an action. Very often organizational boards i.e., of directors, trustees, governors, advisors, ministers) are committees instead of teams. When time, money and lives are not at issue, committees make for fun sport, with lively debate, an exchange of ideas, and some decisions. A committee resembles a circle, with all forces pointed toward the center, while a team resembles an arrow, pointed in a specific direction and targeting a location or objective outside of the group itself.

TEAMS

• are groups of people who are assembled to achieve an identified objective, solve a particular problem, or to create a tangible product through their combined and cooperative efforts;


• are groups wherein each individual plays a contributory and complementary part in a calculated process, along a defined path, and with a shared vision of what, specifically is to be achieved -- each individual has a specific responsibility and accountability to the group, not unlike each cell in one living organism. Individual objectives are either in accord with the team's objectives, or they are subordinated to the team's objectives while the team is accomplishing its work;


• are groups of people organized around a leader or a facilitator, and unlike a committee, where the titular chairperson might be merely a moderator with a working knowledge of Roberts' Rules of Order, this leader or facilitator is ultimately responsible to coordinate the efforts of each of the members to attain the specified objective;


• are generally action-oriented, and once launched, have very little time for extensive debate, argument or "theorizing";


• are groups of people who are dependent upon each other to achieve an objective that is greater than any one individual team member could achieve individually.

In a recent conversation with Mark Sturgell, CBC, the president of Performance Development Network (http://www.pdncoach.com ), we discussed the "default setting" to which most members in poorly-organized or poorly-run teams tend to revert: "This d---ed team isn't working because of interpersonal issues."

Mark, who is an expert at "fixing" malfunctioning teams sees this as a misdiagnosis. If a team isn't functioning, the problems are not generally of an interpersonal nature, but of a structural, business nature. Mark cites numerous examples where, on private interview, 1) teammates did not even agree on the team's mission, or did not understand the nature of the mission at all; 2) teammates did not have clearly-defined responsibilities, or an understanding of their role in terms of its relevance to the whole team effort; and 3) teammates were not communicating with one another as effectively or as frequently as necessary.

Knowing the difference between a team and a committee, and conducting your activities or leading the group's activities accordingly, is a key analytical skill that every entrepreneur and networker must cultivate. There are two completely different behavioral codes -- and they must never be confused. Too many improperly-constructed or poorly-managed teams degrade into committees, and too many committees turn into personal free-for-alls.

Teams can be enormously productive entities, provided that they are viewed and operated as businesses instead of as sporting events.

-- Douglas Castle, THE CASTLE CONSULTANCY

THE INTERNATIONALIST PAGE; BRAINTENANCE; THE IEP FORUM; THE GLOBAL FUTURIST; ___________________________________________________________

Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. To subscribe for your free newsletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/. For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free, continuous RSS feed (available either by traditional RSS or by direct email), go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/. You are also invited to click our buttons:

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK: A Committee Is Not Necessarily a Team

Obama and the Art Of the Quiet Consensus

By Douglas Castle
Political Editor

President-elect Barack Obama is inheriting some tremendous problems from his predecessor administration, some of which include a ravaged, volatile, but macroscopically slumping economy (built upon a foundation of excessive leverage, fiscal gambling, dis-saving, and systemic and encouraged inefficiencies), and a severely diminished view of the United States in the eyes of the G-8 nations and all of our sovereign counterparts, many of whom we have routinely bullied or ignored during the past eight years.

Mr. Obama appears to be a reasonably intelligent and thoughtful man, who carries the torch of leadership but understands the need for the special quiet brands of networking skill which require pre-emptive salesmanship and reaching quiet consensus prior to coming out with policies or political pronouncements. An integral part of networking requires that we be cognizant of the egos, opinions, vested interests and positions of others -- if we simply choose the traditional one-sided approach of preaching and selling, we will fail to develop vitally-important relationships through our networking efforts. A quiet consensus is a means of 1) obtaining market-research intelligence, and 2) personalizing and strengthening our relationships.

In selecting his cabinet members and executive-level appointees, Mr. Obama is not taking the risk of alienating the many Washington "regulars" whose cooperation and support he will need in order to accomplish positive things during the term of his presidency. He and his representatives are going to many key network contacts (each of whom is a part of the Washington governance machinery, and each of them who is an individual) and doing some psychological networking magic:

• He is asking for their opinions on important issues, and giving them credit and gratitude for their responses;


• He is giving them "ownership" in endorsing any personnel decisions;


• He is giving them the gift of inclusion;


• He is setting a precedent of asking what others think, and in taking their opinions and comments into consideration (very much the opposite of what George W. Bush had done while waving a U.S. flag as he drove a bulldozer over any opposition "noise");


• He is converting contacts into bilateral, functional relationships, by humanizing and humbling himself in front of these largely egocentric characters who line the Washington, D.C. Landscape.

I suspect that he is becoming increasingly popular with a great many people who were his party-bound political opponents or doubters previously. I also suspect that he has a subscription to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER -- if not, he is looking over a constituent's shoulder who happens to have a free subscription. After all, every intelligent political or business aspirant should have a subscription.

Mr. Obama networked his way into the presidency...and now he is converting strangers into friends. He is converting liabilities and inert parties into assets through personal alchemy. Many had underestimated this proponent of change. I was one of them.

Let's watch Mr. Obama and see what we can learn, politics notwithstanding.

Faithfully,

Douglas Castle
________________________________________________________
Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. To subscribe for your free newletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/. For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free RSS feed, go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/.

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

Obama and the Art Of the Quiet Consensus

Colleagues Voice Their Concerns About Teams

Teamwork - Creating Teams that Work with Douglas Castle

Dear Readers:

I posed an open question to the LinkedIn community regarding the notion of the Team being the most powerful operating subunit in the coming economy, and received 18 responses, out of a reader population of in excess of 100,000 Linked In members (without correction for double-counting of certain members of multiple groups). Of those responses, 17 were either positive or of the "well....it depends" variety. The two which follow are interesting in that they articulate specific concerns and questions about the Team Entity, which are worthy of note, and deserve to be addressed if I am to further my team-creation and management mission effectively. Please read the comments by Ena and Gig, each of whom I thank, and then read my response in addressing those comments and assuaging some of their concerns at the end of this article.

Again, Ena and Gig, thank you for your excellent insights, and for your kindness in voicing and sharing your valid concerns.

LinkedIn
Date: 11/22/2008
Subject RE: THE TEAM ENTITY
Group: International Network of Social Entrepreneurs

Ena Jesani wrote:

Douglas - The team is the most effective entity, for 5 years I have run one of my companies as a staff co-operative and now my new consulting company as a collaborative. Two comments from me, firstly, Gig makes a good point, where is the leader? In the model you describe, all the network connections would be peers, with no incentive to lead. Secondly, the benefit of cross-pollination will only work if business practice is of equal standard, equal value and benefit to each and practised with equally shared and agreed ethics. How can this be when the team is made up of so much unknown quantity? The risk is too high for individuals to compromise. Cross-contamination comes to mind.

~~~~~

On 11/13/08 8:47 PM, Douglas Castle asked: THE TEAM ENTITY

Dear Colleagues:

We spend a great deal of time networking and acquiring new contacts. Then, some of us aggressively and positively go to work converting those contacts from mere names into good, two-way relationships. Why must it end there? I believe that the most powerful business operating subunit is the Team. Further, I believe that team-building is going to become a skill of increasing importance as the traditional corporate and institutional paradigms are put to the test. Kindly review: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/using-teams-to-fuel-exponential.html and let me know your thoughts.

Thank you.

Faithfully, Douglas Castle

THE INTERNATIONALIST PAGE http://theinternationalistpage.blogspot.com/
HUMANITAS MAXIMUS http://humanitasmaximus.blogspot.com/

~~~~~

LinkedIn
Date: 11/21/2008
Subject RE: THE TEAM ENTITY
Group: International Network of Social Entrepreneurs

Gig Hitao wrote:

I would guess that it is no coincidence that you have not had more comments here, so far. The irony is that people who join LinkedIn and are part of this social entrepreneur group are generally independently minded, self employed type people, like me. We all know the value of teamwork, but who will join our team? Real work teams, like in corporations or even on construction crews are formed by a leader who then pays followers to follow. Everyone but one person in a team is a follower and if they are really productive, they get paid to follow. We'll see how many people refute my statement here.

~~~~~

On 11/13/08 8:47 PM, Douglas Castle asked: THE TEAM ENTITY

Dear Colleagues:

We spend a great deal of time networking and acquiring new contacts. Then, some of us aggressively and positively go to work converting those contacts from mere names into good, two-way relationships. Why must it end there? I believe that the most powerful business operating subunit is the Team. Further, I believe that team-building is going to become a skill of increasing importance as the traditional corporate and institutional paradigms are put to the test. Kindly review: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/using-teams-to-fuel-exponential.html and let me know your thoughts. Thank you.

Faithfully, Douglas Castle

THE INTERNATIONALIST PAGE http://theinternationalistpage.blogspot.com/

HUMANITAS MAXIMUS http://humanitasmaximus.blogspot.com/
~~~~~

Firstly, some information is in order:

• Out of an audience of in excess of 100,000 recipients (without correction for double-counting through multiple group memberships) I have received 18 responses to date:


• Of these responses, 17 were positive, or conditionally positive, i.e., positive with certain caveats, as in the two excellent examples above;


• The caveats and concerns fell into several general categories - and bear in mind that these concerns came from active, practiced networkers:

1. The significance in choosing a good, responsible leader...an individual of intelligence, integrity and a propensity for firmness of focus tempered with some diplomacy;


2. The fear of being dominated by a leader who is selfish and overly controlling;


3. The fear of either an inequitable sharing of responsibilities, or an unequal sharing of rewards;


4. A need for a constitution, or for contractual definitions and protections;


5. A fear of "ganging up" of one group of members (ostensibly the majority) against another group (ostensibly the minority);


6. A need for accounting -- of efforts and monies invested, as well as results produced, divided and distributed;


7. A fear, on the part of the more entrepreneurial networkers, that their individual styles and creativity will be discouraged or squelched.

In reading the list of seven concerns above, you cannot help but notice that they are driven by fear and insecurity. There are sound psychological reasons for this:

• Negative experiences deeply implanted in the subconscious;


• A general hesitancy to trust in strangers and in a leader;


• A temporal deterioration in our faith in our own fellow Human Beings;


• A fear of making a "bad deal" that cannot be amended or fixed;


• When a survey is given, the greatest percentage of respondents tend to be the more skeptical, critical individuals -- this is a statistical flaw with many polls, surveys and discussion questions.

My suggested approaches to addressing these issues will be set forth in my next article on this subject.

Faithfully,

Douglas Castle, TEAMWORK - CREATING TEAMS THAT WORK

p.s. Be certain to visit our new page: THE NATIONAL NETWORKER SURVEYS. Your opinion counts, and you participation is encouraged.

p.p.s. Be certain that you have our link, our button and our blidget on your homepage, websites and blogs. To get easy directions, simply go to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER - THE RELATIONSHIP CAPITAL TOOLKIT

________________________________________________________

Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. To subscribe for your free newletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/. For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free RSS feed, go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/.

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:

Colleagues Voice Their Concerns About Teams