During my time in business development, in that space between pure research and practical application, I observed that the reason the majority of collaborations failed had little to do with the technology, lack of due diligence or even the appropriateness of the selected partner.

The real reason for failure could inevitably be traced back to ‘people issues’, whether outright conflict or a more subtle incompatibility resulting in company research personnel refusing to work with the government scientific staff.

The reasons given were many and varied, however underlying them all was the fact that people ‘expect’ others to think and act like they do and are unwilling to accept and appreciate the differences that exist.  As a result they failed to recognize the advantages gained by taking a more flexible approach to working with others.

Each and every one of us is as unique as a snowflake.  No two are alike, not even so-called identical twins.  However when we communicate with others, we tend to assume that they see and respond the way we would.  This results in miscommunication which leads to the ‘people problems’ which can scuttle any activity were two or more people are involved.

To improve our ability to communicate with others to achieve the results we want, we need to understand our own preferences and identify the clues that tell us how others differ.  This in turn enables us to ‘flex’ our actions so that we achieve better results when working with people unlike us, in other words – pretty well the rest of the world.

Two of the many ways we differ are in our brain dominance and our approach to time.

1.  Brain Dominance: Research has identified two types of people, those whose left-brain is dominant and those were the right-brain dominates.  Based on the original work of Roger W. Sperry and others, the dominant left-brain is ‘content’ oriented, while someone with right-brain dominance will be ‘process’ oriented.

When the left-brain dominates, a person’s thinking tends to be logical, rational and based on facts.  They like details and usually excel in maths and sciences.  They see things in a linear, sequential fashion and like organization and structure – think engineer or accountant and you’ll very likely be able to picture what left-brain dominance looks like in action.

Someone who exhibits right-brain dominance on the other hand is seen as more emotional and their thinking is often labeled as illogical or irrational by those with left-brain dominance.  They tend to be ‘big picture’ thinkers and are creative and imaginative.  They often rely on intuition rather than facts when making decisions and are comfortable taking a more flexible, holistic approach to any project.  When you think of someone in the creative fields, such as acting or marketing, you are seeing right-brain dominance in action.

As a result of which hemisphere of our brain is dominant and controls our actions, we are ‘hard-wired’ to be better at some things than others.  When this isn’t factored into how teams and collaborative projects are structured in the workplace, friction usually results, productivity suffers and the potential for failure increases.

2. Our Approach to Time: The way we think of time also plays a powerful role in how we interact with others.  The two perspectives on time are “monochronic” and “polychronic”, and while initially considered to be a result of the culture we live in, there is now a strong indication that our brain dominance also plays a role.

Those with left-brain dominance fit the patterns associated with “monochronic cultures”.    In a monochronic culture time is seen as something to be managed and is segmented into distinct units.  The United States is seen as a monochronic culture, where time efficiency experts create schedules to increase productivity and people are sent on time management courses to improve their efficiency.

Monochronic people tend to work sequentially, doing one thing at a time, concentrating on the job at hand.  They take their schedules and deadlines very seriously and strictly adhere to plans.  They emphasize promptness, are committed to the job and are often accustomed to short term relationships.

People who exhibit right-brain dominance, regardless of their cultural background, closely match the patterns associated with “polychronic cultures”.  Polychronic cultures take a much less rigorous approach to time and are more flexible in scheduling time, with less emphasis on accounting for every moment.

Polychronic people tend to do many things at one – they are the consummate multitaskers.  Time commitments are seen as objectives to be achieved, if possible, but they do not feel tied to them.  They are highly flexible and easily change plans as they see necessary.  Their commitments are to people and relationships, rather than tasks and deadlines.  They also have a tendency to build long-term relationships.

When you compare these two approaches to time it is easy to see how friction can develop over the course of a project.  Understanding your own approach to time and that of your team members will help you better manage not only project time lines, but the assignment of tasks, ensuring that the person best suited to the task is in the right place.

As shown by these two examples, which represent only two of the many differentiating factors that exist,  it is our very differences that lead to poor communication and ineffective inter-personal dynamics.  The more you understand how people differ the more effective you will be as a manager and a leader.

©2010 Karen Switzer-Howse

Print PDF