36.        The relationship between teamwork and individual strength, energy, and
commitment is complex; whether they operate in a complementary or antagonistic
manner depends on: (1) the goals toward which the traits are directed, (2) the degree of
emphasis on teamwork, and (3) the job of the individual within an organization.
      A person's ability to work effectively in a team is not in consistent per se with
personal strength, energy, and commitment. If exercised in a self-serving manngr—for
example, through pilfering or back stabbing—these traits can operate against the
organization. Conversely, if directed toward the firm's goals, these traits can motivate
other team members, thereby advancing common goals. World War II generals Patton
and Rommel understood this point and knew how to bring out the best individual
qualities in their troops, while at the same time instilling a strong sense of team and
common purpose.
        Nevertheless, over-emphasizing teamwork can be counterproductive for an
organization. A successful team requires both natural leaders and natural followers;
otherwise, a team will accomplish little. Undue emphasis on teamwork may quell
initiative among natural leaders, thereby thwarting team goals. Also, teamwork can be
overemphasized with a commissioned sales force of highly competitive and autonomic
individuals. Overemphasis on teamwork here might stifle healthy competition, thereby
defeating a firm's objectives. In other organizational areas, however, teamwork is
critical. For example, a product-development team must progress in lock-step fashion
toward common goals, such as meeting a rollout deadline.
      In sum, individual strength, commitment, and energy can complement a strong
team approach; as long as individual autonomy is not undermined, all can operate in a
synergistic manner to achieve an organization's goals.