Would you like to inspect the original subtitles? These are the user uploaded subtitles that are being translated:
1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,009
technology companies encourage their
2
00:00:02,009 --> 00:00:04,350
employees to work together because
3
00:00:04,350 --> 00:00:07,170
studies show the teams tend to innovate
4
00:00:07,170 --> 00:00:10,710
faster achieve higher productivity see
5
00:00:10,710 --> 00:00:13,590
mistakes more quickly and find better
6
00:00:13,590 --> 00:00:17,160
solutions to problems yet not every team
7
00:00:17,160 --> 00:00:20,340
is successful so how do you build a
8
00:00:20,340 --> 00:00:23,250
highly effective team that is capable of
9
00:00:23,250 --> 00:00:25,019
delivering expected results
10
00:00:25,019 --> 00:00:28,320
a study run by Google will shed some
11
00:00:28,320 --> 00:00:30,570
light on this question and help us
12
00:00:30,570 --> 00:00:32,790
identify trades that all successful
13
00:00:32,790 --> 00:00:36,360
Google teams shared several years ago
14
00:00:36,360 --> 00:00:38,640
who will launch an internal project
15
00:00:38,640 --> 00:00:41,850
Aristotle which was a huge data study
16
00:00:41,850 --> 00:00:44,730
focused on the teamwork the tech giant
17
00:00:44,730 --> 00:00:48,480
spent millions of dollars tracking 180
18
00:00:48,480 --> 00:00:52,500
separate teams for three years the goal
19
00:00:52,500 --> 00:00:54,750
of the project was simple yet ambitious
20
00:00:54,750 --> 00:00:57,719
to find out what are the traits of the
21
00:00:57,719 --> 00:01:00,629
highest performing teams in other words
22
00:01:00,629 --> 00:01:03,449
the company wanted to know why some
23
00:01:03,449 --> 00:01:07,040
teams stumbled while others sort
24
00:01:07,040 --> 00:01:10,710
initially the researchers hypothesis was
25
00:01:10,710 --> 00:01:13,560
that maybe best teams had members who
26
00:01:13,560 --> 00:01:16,530
liked each other a lot or there was a
27
00:01:16,530 --> 00:01:19,259
healthy mix of personality types while
28
00:01:19,259 --> 00:01:21,540
the team members were friends outside of
29
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:22,100
work
30
00:01:22,100 --> 00:01:25,229
yet none of these seemed to matter
31
00:01:25,229 --> 00:01:27,479
the researchers could not find any
32
00:01:27,479 --> 00:01:29,689
meaningful patterns in the data
33
00:01:29,689 --> 00:01:32,640
basically there was no evidence that a
34
00:01:32,640 --> 00:01:35,009
mix of specific personality types or
35
00:01:35,009 --> 00:01:36,900
skills or backgrounds
36
00:01:36,900 --> 00:01:40,140
made any difference the whole part of
37
00:01:40,140 --> 00:01:42,680
the equation didn't seem to matter as
38
00:01:42,680 --> 00:01:45,210
the researchers continued to study the
39
00:01:45,210 --> 00:01:45,630
group's
40
00:01:45,630 --> 00:01:49,049
they noticed two behaviors that all of
41
00:01:49,049 --> 00:01:52,380
the best teams shared first is that the
42
00:01:52,380 --> 00:01:54,479
team members spoke in roughly the same
43
00:01:54,479 --> 00:01:57,270
proportion a phenomenon the researchers
44
00:01:57,270 --> 00:02:00,320
call inequality in distribution of
45
00:02:00,320 --> 00:02:02,740
conversational turn-taking
46
00:02:02,740 --> 00:02:06,159
on some teams everyone spoke during each
47
00:02:06,159 --> 00:02:09,580
task while on others leadership shifted
48
00:02:09,580 --> 00:02:12,160
among teammates from assignment to
49
00:02:12,160 --> 00:02:15,520
assignment but in each case at the end
50
00:02:15,520 --> 00:02:18,459
of the day everyone had spoken roughly
51
00:02:18,459 --> 00:02:21,910
the same amount in other words as long
52
00:02:21,910 --> 00:02:24,489
as everyone got a chance to talk the
53
00:02:24,489 --> 00:02:28,060
team did well but if only one person or
54
00:02:28,060 --> 00:02:31,360
a small group spoke all the time the
55
00:02:31,360 --> 00:02:35,370
collective intelligence declined second
56
00:02:35,370 --> 00:02:38,650
the good teams all had high average
57
00:02:38,650 --> 00:02:42,030
social sensitivity a fancy way of saying
58
00:02:42,030 --> 00:02:44,860
they were skilled at reading how others
59
00:02:44,860 --> 00:02:47,920
felt based on their tone of voice their
60
00:02:47,920 --> 00:02:52,750
expressions in other nonverbal cues one
61
00:02:52,750 --> 00:02:55,150
of the easiest way to determine social
62
00:02:55,150 --> 00:02:57,519
sensitivity is to show someone photos of
63
00:02:57,519 --> 00:03:00,730
a person's eyes and ask to describe what
64
00:03:00,730 --> 00:03:03,880
that person is feeling an exam known as
65
00:03:03,880 --> 00:03:07,329
reading the mind in the eyes people on
66
00:03:07,329 --> 00:03:10,299
successful teams scored about average on
67
00:03:10,299 --> 00:03:13,510
this test they seemed to know when
68
00:03:13,510 --> 00:03:16,350
someone was feeling upset or left out
69
00:03:16,350 --> 00:03:18,940
people on less effective teams in
70
00:03:18,940 --> 00:03:22,870
contrast scored below average they
71
00:03:22,870 --> 00:03:24,790
seemed to be less sensitive towards
72
00:03:24,790 --> 00:03:28,090
their colleagues by the end of the
73
00:03:28,090 --> 00:03:30,489
project researchers came to conclusion
74
00:03:30,489 --> 00:03:32,680
that it didn't matter who was on the
75
00:03:32,680 --> 00:03:35,470
team what mattered was how team members
76
00:03:35,470 --> 00:03:37,060
treated each other
77
00:03:37,060 --> 00:03:39,459
teams were everybody talked and
78
00:03:39,459 --> 00:03:41,799
everybody showed respect by listening
79
00:03:41,799 --> 00:03:44,170
and paying attention created
80
00:03:44,170 --> 00:03:46,570
psychologically safe atmosphere inside
81
00:03:46,570 --> 00:03:49,540
the team and psychological safety of
82
00:03:49,540 --> 00:03:52,090
each member in the group had a positive
83
00:03:52,090 --> 00:03:57,390
effect on the team's ability to succeed
5847
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get subtitles in any language from opensubtitles.com, and translate them here.