So says George Kohlrieser, a professor at IMD International, according to this article in Fortune magazine. The lesson: Addressing a team’s most troublesome issues can be a lot like cleaning a fish. You’ve got to do the nasty work of cleaning the fish, but the reward at the end — a great fish dinner — is worth the trouble.

In the article, consultant David Nadler responds to the question of why most people don’t want to bring a team’s problems out in the open: “There’s a veneer of politeness or unspoken reciprocity - we won’t raise our differences in front of the boss.”

Too many nice guys/gals on team can be deadly. At times, a well-delivered bit of whining can be just what the doctor ordered.

It’s simple — but not always easy: Face reality.

Fortune magazine’s Geoffrey Colvin recently wrote an article about why dream teams fail. According to Colvin, one can find an excellent expression of the anti-dream-team philosophy in the movie Miracle. When an assistant coach objects to an American hockey team roster for the 1980 Winter Olympics which lacks the country’s greatest college players, coach Herb Brooks responds:
“I’m not lookin’ for the best players . . . I’m lookin’ for the right players.”
Here’s how Colvin attempts to dispels the myth of the dream team:

In our team-obsessed age, the concept of the dream team has become irresistible. But it’s brutally clear that they often blow up. Why? Because they’re not teams. They’re just bunches of people.

The most important lesson about team performance is that the basic theory of the dream team is wrong. You cannot assemble a group of stars and then sit back to watch them conquer the world. You can’t even count on them to avoid embarrassment.

His article also goes into some reasons why teams fail, and concludes with the claim that there was only one Dream Team — five members of which are shown on the SI cover above.

Thanks to Scoble for the pointer to a Beet.tv interview with Microsoft online video strategist Todd Herman. Todd’s top points in the video: think like a media company, and be prepared for community-generated video. Here are the highlights for those of you who prefer text:

If you have a web page, you are a media company . . . Part of media is video. Moving pictures – that way of telling stories has proven to be very, very compelling, across the world, across cultures.

There’s going to be a massive need for reactive media. Your consumers will point their video cameras at your desk clerk. They will point their video cameras at the person taking their order at the desk at this-or-that airline. If [someone records] a good example of bad treatment, that stuff is going to get viewed. If you’re in the business of having a brand image, you better adjust to the idea of reactive media.

Seems high time that I add a new video camera to my shopping list. Speaking of which, I noticed that Tara Hunt is shopping for a camcorder. Her camcorder questions and the accompanying comments are worthwhile reading for newbies navigating the camcorder market.