A Typology of Team Interactions

---

"What Are We Really Doing?" was another title for this post I was considering. I went with "Typology" because of its academic standing (we want a little standing) and it's a cool word (we definitely want some cool in what we do!).
 
So, what are we doing as "team builders"?  In a way to set a foundation for this blog, On Team Building, let's focus in on a possible context. A language we can share during our conversations.
 
I am an advocate, and part of a crowd, supporting a language proposed in two different articles (and by three amazing people). In, Building Team Spirit (2015), by Stephanie Sibille and Paul Cummings and, Team Bonding, Team Building, or Team Development (2018), by Michelle Cummings, the authors pose that we are involved in team interaction programs that fall into three categories:

• Team Bonding
• Team Building
• Team Development

Team Bonding programs/events...

• are designed around a goal of having a good time.
• typically, do not include reflection, or processing, any part of the experience.
• are not centered around an "end workplace goal".

 Team Building programs...

• are designed around a particular goal or outcome important to the group.  
• are typically designed and led for newly forming or intact groups.
• are designed and/or facilitated by a trained facilitator with skills in experiential facilitated techniques.
• have a component of reflection/processing to enhance learning or "building" potential.

Team Development programs...

• are designed around long-term goals of the group.
• include multiple interactions and ongoing coaching for team members.
• are facilitated by a Master Facilitator who works closely with key personnel of the organization.
• have a component of reflection/processing to enhance outcomes of behavioral and organizational change.

​When we call all of our programs "team building", Stephanie and Paul stress, "it will marginalize the term" and, I believe, place all team interaction programs into one stereotype that may not support all the amazing opportunities we can provide for teams. (In other words, some "team building" providers are leaving groups with "team breaking" experiences. I will say they lack the skill sets and dispositions to be team builders.)
 
(Please refer to the articles for other suggested aspects of each type of program and Tips for Success when offering your programs to clients - see Page 2 of the "Building Team Spirit" article.)
 
So, what are your thoughts about this typology, this contextual language? What works for you? What's missing? What changes should we consider? Let's get the conversation started in the Comments section below. As the topics and conversation grow here at On Team Building, this typology we create can be a foundation to reference. 

Chris Cavert, Ed.D. 
FUNdoing.com (Activity resources for Team Builders)
TeamBuilderPowerUps (An online school for Team Builders)
YoungTeamBuilders (The voices of young Team Builders) 

---