Socio-Ecological Alternatives to WorkplaceTeamwork and Competition

 It is a well-worn, but sacred mantra of business that the workplace—and survival and success in it, as in a jungle—crucially depends and runs on “cooperation” and/or “competition”.

But the reflections that follow suggest that the roles of teamwork and competition may be seriously overstated and overrated, even if only with respect to how many of us really spend the bulk of our time at work involved with either.

True, a company or any other enterprise occupying a business environmental niche has its own “ecology”, in the form of systemic interactions in pursuit of resources, survival and growth—interactions mostly characterized by cooperation, competition or a mix of both.

Hence, from this perspective, it would seem that business “socio-ecology”—the ecological interpretation of social dynamics—is mostly about competition, cooperation and, less commonly, variations on other familiar ecological motifs, such as predatory and parasitic practices.

It also would seem that whatever the interactions are, they will fit within such conventional ecological categories. But do they really—and are there other categories that should be added to the list?

Surely, the bulk of organizational interactions—including employee interactions and inner-circle upper-management dynamics—involve cooperating at one moment or in one situation and competing in another. Right?

Teamwork and Competition—Overrated? Don’t be so sure about that. Ask yourself, “Do I actually spend most of my work day cooperating or competing? If not, what, in ecological or commonsense terms, am I actually doing all day?”

The most common trope of that workplace mantra is that companies, like NFL teams and hyena packs, succeed by blending intense in-group “teamwork” and individual competition with ferocious out-group competition.

In human enterprise ecosystems, alliances with otherwise out-group elements—e.g., former rivals forming a cartel—mitigates the ferocity of competition and transforms the “game” into a win-win, cooperative one.

This teamwork-competition model is so deeply entrenched, such enshrined conventional wisdom, that it is tantamount to heresy or regarded as being at least foolish to deviate from it in cover letters, resumes, job interviews, corporate pep talks, mission statements and daily operations and memes like these:

• “Looking for a sharp team player to give us a sharper edge”
• “The only thing sweeter than teamwork is winning.”
• “It’s us against them—until we do something about it.”

“Precology”: a Prior Form of Ecological Interaction

However, I believe that this cooperation-competition model ignores two important categories of ecological or socio-ecological interactions that even the science of ecology takes no account of: These are what I am calling “precological” and “para-ecological” relationships (the latter to be examined in Part 2 of this article).

As I see these, these two are indeed ecological relationships in virtue of involving interactions designed to find, gain, secure, keep or share resources, but do not neatly fit into the standard “harm-benefit” framework of possible ecological relationships, e.g., “mutualism” as benefiting both parties and “competition” as benefiting only one party (despite free-market ideology to the contrary).

[These payoffs are usually indicated by pairs of “+” and “-” signs. For example, the most common form of symbiosis, which is “mutualism”, in which both players benefit, is (+,+), whereas parasitism and predation are (+,-).]

What I am calling a “precological” interaction or relationship (short for “pre-ecological”, connoting prior to any of the standard ecological relationships) in nature or in the workplace is one in which the main point of the interaction is to figure out and assess what kind of relationship, interaction, benefit, costs or harm it and follow-up interactions will afford.

Intuitively, (0,0) or (?,?) seem to capture that, at least for specific and momentary interactions, if not also in the long run, since an initial, exploratory interaction is neither inherently beneficial nor harmful to either player, inasmuch as curiosity can unpredictably thrill or kill the cat.

Precological Kitten and Puppy Dynamics

This is charmingly illustrated by the photo above, featuring a kitten sniffing and sussing a puppy by means of a kind of “ecological reconnaissance”, with an eye and a nose on figuring out what to make of it all—in terms of opportunities, risks, etc. Is there any predictable benefit or harm to either the puppy or kitten? No.

Note: If you are inclined to believe that “workplace ecology” is a misnomer and that humans simply aren’t just another species of animal, don’t: In every environment, for every species, all interactions and relationships have ecological dimensions and implications. Ecology is something that comes with the “territory”, construed literally, as well as figuratively.

Hence, workplace relationships have ecological elements and fall into ecological categories—whether standard or, like those I am proposing, novel. For example, the precological relationship between the kitten and puppy has many analogues in business.

The Precology of Sales Sniffing

Commission sales, including real estate, is largely a matter of precological relationships, rather than hunting pack “teamwork” or “dog-eat-dog” competition among agents.

Indeed, the job consists largely of “sniffing”, “recon”, going off on wild-goose chases just to determine whether there is likely to be a real deal, assessing the odds of benefiting or losing from the investment of time “qualifying” leads among prospective home buyers, and patiently waiting to see how it all turns out.

Perhaps more than feisty teamwork or an indomitably competitive spirit, what jobs like these require, from an ecological perspective, is large doses of precological preliminary interactions—themselves neither inherently beneficial nor harmful to either “species”, unlike parasitism, predation, mutualism, etc.

Sales Agent Precology

For example, consider the first meeting between a real estate agent and prospective buyer: Whether or not the initial interaction will ultimately prove to be ecologically or otherwise of benefit to either or a waste of their time, that precological, preliminary interaction is absolutely essential to the interactions to follow.

And that is irrespective of whether the sales game is conducted cooperatively (with a win-win agenda) or competitively (zero sum agenda)—selling a customer a home or a lemon that the agent knows is such.

Applied Precology

One practical consequence of recognizing precological interactions is that it provides an incentive to reprioritize and revise job descriptions and interviews—for example, elevating patience and reconnaissance skills above teamwork or competitiveness in the hiring of real estate agents and other sales staff.

This shift could manifest itself in everything from the job ads and questions asked in job interviews to the content of training courses and articulation of company mission.

It could even reframe the ecological relationship between a writer like myself and readers like you and at least guarantee me, as you orient yourself to exploring this article and as a minimum, a neutral ecological “score”…

…however unappealing (0,0) otherwise sounds.

________

Next: in Part 2, workplace “para-ecological” dynamics