Over the past 15 years I have dedicated majority of my life to playing hockey. Every weekend was spent on the road for tournaments in Michigan, Iowa, Ohio, and many other states. Practices were 3 days a week for about an hour and altogether it took a lot of time away from other activities.
One of my best coaches made a statement that changed my opinion on my teams and also relates to this topic. He said "of all the teams that i've played on, the ones that were most successful were the ones that no one cared about earning themselves an individual scholarship, we all just wanted to win" which hit home with me since I was worried about earning myself a scholarship at that time.
What I took from his quote was that if all 20 something of my team mates and I put our efforts into helping one another succeed as a group, we would all earn ourselves scholarships somewhere down the road. It definitely made me feel like I had been a bad team mate growing up, because I always knew my personal stats and how I compared to everyone else instead of simply worrying about my team's record and chance at winning a championship together.
Another way I thought of looking at this approach in relation to hockey is how players determine their actions during a game. I find myself passing most of the time instead of shooting. I take just as much pride, if not more, in getting an assist as opposed to a goal. Another famous quote that I have heard is that "great players make those around him/her look good" which has always resided with me. If i hadn't scored or "contributed" to a team's win on paper then I was discouraged, but I also took pride in making plays and putting my teammates in positions for them to score or succeed.
In this case I believe that it is a share-the-spoils approach to have put my personal interest of earning a scholarship aside and done my part as best I could to make my team successful. As for the players now, only 2 kids went on to earn scholarships and one of them was drafted to the NHL. Now looking back on it, the player that was drafted was the least selfish of everyone on the team and didn't get much personal recognition at the time. He worked hard every day and scouts/coaches saw that which got him to where he is today.
In the future, I imagine that I will be working on a team or teams in my career. Each person will hope to eventually earn themselves a promotion, but should not sacrifice the success of the group. In order for our firm to maximize production we will each have to contribute as best we can and let everything else fall into place as it should. That doesn't mean that individuals can't put in extra work on the side or present individual ideas to distinguish themselves. As long as the first priority is to benefit the group then anything else would be considered pulling a rope for one's self.
I am curious to see how a work team environment will compare to that of a sports team, but I do believe that the concepts are interchangeable.
Interesting that given your passion about hockey you ended up attending a university that doesn't play hockey as an NCAA sport. When I was at Cornell, Hockey was the equivalent of Men's Basketball at Illinois.
ReplyDeleteWithout trying to probe into your entire childhood, let me note that much early education, such as at a daycare center or in kindergarten, is devoted to social development so each child can interact successfully with other children. Part of that sort of interaction is sharing. While the experiments that Haidt describes are meant to apply to kids before they have gone through such a socialization process, there is no doubt that such socialization has as its aim greater sharing as well as encouragement for group play.
I mention this because you talked about your hockey experience as either (1) it was the first time that teamwork really entered your mind, or (2) your earlier experience of the sort discussed in the previous paragraph were insufficient for you to refrain from some selfishness when you were a teen. On the flip side of this, getting a scholarship for college is a big deal. Might you have been less selfish in other settings where less was at stake?
I also want to take some issue with how you framed the lessons learned from your coach - particularly the line about all of you earning individual scholarships down the road. This makes it seem like contributing to the group is some quid pro quo - you end up getting a private return down the road. I suspect that was not the meaning your coach wanted you to take from his remark. When we contribute our own efforts for the benefit of the team, we do so without regard for whether that will subsequently produce a private benefit for ourselves or not. Being a team player is a good in itself and creates a " personal glow" quite apart from any other private benefit.
Hockey is one example of a sport where there really is team production. Individual good play typically can't get it done in itself. As to your last paragraph, there is the issue if the work you do will also require true team production. If not, the concepts may not be fully interchangeable.
As passionate as I am about hockey, in order to play NCAA at a university such as Cornell requires most players to play 2 years of junior hockey after high school and before starting college. I weighed the benefits of entering college 2 years later vs going to school right away. I was also being risk averse in that i didn't want to play 2 years of junior hockey just to get injured and be behind in school. As for my life at Illinois, I play on the D1 club hockey team. It is still very competitive and satisfies my passion for the game. I believe that it still helps me with my teamwork and leadership skills now that I am an upperclassman on the team. I am curios how the atmosphere was at Cornell. I have a friend who plays there and I would have loved to also if I had taken the risk and been given the opportunity.
ReplyDelete