You are here: Start

Oscillation in the Goal SettingOscillation at the Team ParameterOscillation during Team PreservationOscillation in the Interaction PatternOscillation in Team ReflectionOscillation in the Goal ProcessingGuiding Process Goal SettingOscillation Processes in TeamsParadoxStabilisation of the GoalChanging the Goal

Oscillation in the Goal Setting

The guiding distinction stability/renewal, with regard to goal processing in teams, is an expression of a paradox. Its processing leads to oscillating effects, like it does with all paradoxes.

To stabilise a goal requires consensus in the team. However, to produce this consensus often creates an over-identification with the goal. If everybody has agreed (or were made to agree), then, as a rule, everybody is happy. The danger is over. One has decided or it is decided. Wonderful, or is it? This can be enjoyed or is technically successful as long as no new demands are placed on the flexibility of the team due to changing conditions. These usually cause conflict, because a team seldom agrees as to whether there are even relevant change demands, whether they are significant, whether one must react to them, or whether one can or is allowed to etc. These conflicts must now be processed. Thus, a new necessity for consensus is created.

The oscillating sequence then looks like this: consensus >> overidentification >> necessity for flexibility >> conflict >>, necessity for consensus >> consensus >>

Such oscillations between the decision-making poles are often lamented, because they are interpreted in such a way that one does not know how to proceed and what is now correct. In this theory, however, this phenomenon is seen as the unfolding of a paradox in time, and is, therefore, an unavoidable aspect of team dynamics.
The guiding distinction stability/renewal, with regard to goal processing in teams, is an expression of a paradox. Its processing leads to oscillating effects, like it does with all paradoxes.