This industry is really big on teams, isn't it? We have internal project teams, subconsultant teams, and even proposal teams. There is also the larger team that includes the client and stakeholders we work with on projects, and everyone always seems to be on the hunt for a good teaming arrangement. If you are on a team, it signifies you're part of a mission, one of the "in" crowd. A team is a good place to be because it's more fun than working alone.

When we propose a team to a client, we are really showing off our strength, our ability to do more than we could do by ourselves, and the fact that we're wise in choosing great partners. When we put together our internal teams, we really are saying the same thing – just on a smaller scale.

If you're into acronyms, you've probably heard the one associated with the word "team" – Together Everyone Achieves More. When teams are assembled in a smart way, have a purpose, and leverage the skills and strengths of all the members, it really is remarkable what they can accomplish. In that case, the acronym is spot on.

When I worked in Germany, I learned another acronym for team – Toll Ein Andere Macht – which loosely translated means, "Great! There are enough people here that I can hide and let the others do all the work!" That's pretty funny coming from a nation typically associated with precision engineering and the relentless pursuit of excellence. But alas, the scourge of being part of a crummy team is an international reality.

In an architecture, engineering, planning, or environmental consulting firm, there are few things worse than being on a team where the German acronym applies. Even bad coffee in the office kitchen is better because at least you can bring in your own. If you are on a bad team or have at least one bad player in your midst, there is likely little chance of you being able to do anything about it other than sweat it out to the finish. And what waits you when that is done? Another project with the same bum players.

So, what's worse? Being a leader in the firm that allows this to continue – that's what's worse. Unfortunately, even though most folks in leadership know there are bad team players, they do little about it. There are all sorts of fabricated reasons why this issue isn't addressed; we can debunk a few of them right here:

• "No one will notice the slacker." People are so busy doing project work; perhaps no one will pick up on the fact that Jim isn't pulling his weight. Your employees aren't dumb, so you can be sure they'll identify the weak link on the team. They will approach every project with disdain, knowing they have to work with the slacker, and will be crushed – or angry – when bonuses are equally distributed. One bad personality can ruin the project for everyone else.
• "It's so tough to hire." This is true – it will be tough to rehire those who left because you didn't replace the poor performer or employee with the negative attitude. The damage this person creates in terms of direct and indirect costs is so extensive you simply can't afford to keep them. Getting rid of these people is a good thing and will boost the morale of the team, rather than kill it.
• "He's difficult to deal with but he's really good technically." This industry abides too often by the scarcity principle: Folks with strong technical skills are impossible to find except by sheer luck. We think they are irreplaceable and consequently allow them to behave any way they like. We're afraid they will leave and take all the technical knowledge with them. But people skills, good manners, patience, and a kind personality are important ingredients to build a strong team. Crabbiness and arrogance will do the exact opposite.

There often is insufficient concern about the teams we put together internally. So long as the bad apple isn't put in front of the client, we just deal with it. However, consider the folks who actually have to work with and around these types of employees – they are tired of dealing with it. Anything is tolerable in the short term, but eventually project quality slips, the teams are perpetually unhappy, and many will lose respect for leaders who won't deal with the problem. Teams are important entities – they can achieve great things or provide a place for some to sit back and relax while others work hard at their craft. What kind of teams do you have?

Christine Brack, PMP, is a principal with ZweigWhite specializing in business planning and project management best practices. She can be contacted at cbrack@zweigwhite.com.

Read this and other project management columns at www.aectechstrategies.com/project-management.html