“When you meet someone, treat them as if they were in serious trouble, and you will be right more than half the time.” (President Henry B. Eyring)

THE IDEAL TEAM PLAYER: DEFINING THE THREE VIRTUES

HUMBLE

In the context of teamwork, humility is largely what it seems to be. Great team players lack excessive ego or concerns about status. They are quick to point out the contributions of others and slow to seek attention for their own. They share credit, emphasize team over self and define success collectively rather than individually. It is no great surprise, then, that humility is the single greatest and most indispensable attribute of being a team player. . . .

HUNGRY

Hungry people are always looking for more. More things to do. More to learn. More responsibility to take on. Hungry people almost never have to be pushed by a leader to work harder because they are self-motivated and diligent. They are constantly thinking about the next step and the next opportunity. And they loathe the idea that they might be perceived as slackers. . . . When I refer to hunger here, I’m thinking about the healthy kind —a manageable and sustainable commitment to doing a job well and going above and beyond when it is truly required. . . .

SMART

Of the three virtues, this one needs the most clarification because it is not what it might seem; it is not about intellectual capacity. In the context of a team, smart simply refers to a person’s common sense about people. It has everything to do with the ability to be interpersonally appropriate and aware. Smart people tend to know what is happening in a group situation and how to deal with others in the most effective way. They ask good questions, listen to what others are saying, and stay engaged in conversations intently. Some might refer to this as emotional intelligence, which wouldn’t be a bad comparison, but smart is probably a little simpler than that. . . .

These are not permanent characteristics embedded in a person’s DNA; rather, they are developed and maintained through life experiences and personal choices at home and at work. . . .

For those who lack two of the three in a big way, it’s also going to be an uphill battle—not impossible, but not easy. . . .

People who are only humble but not at all hungry or smart are the “pawns” on a team . . .

People who are hungry but not at all humble or smart can be thought of as “bulldozers.” . . .

People who are smart but sorely lacking in humility and hunger are “charmers.” . . .

Team members who fit into these categories lack only one of the three traits and thus have a little higher likelihood of overcoming their challenges and becoming ideal team players. Still, lacking even one in a serious way can impede the team-building process.

People who are humble and hungry but decidedly not smart are the “accidental mess-makers.” . . .

People who are humble and smart but not adequately hungry are the “loveable slackers.” . . 

People who are hungry and smart but lack humility are the “skillful politicians.” Unfortunately, because they are so smart, skillful politicians are very adept at portraying themselves as being humble, making it hard for leaders to identify them and address their destructive behaviors. . . .

Ideal team players possess the adequate measures of humility, hunger, and people smarts. They have little ego when it comes to needing attention or credit for their contributions and they are comfortable sharing their accolades of even occasionally missing out on them. Ideal team players work with a sense of energy, passion, and personal responsibility, taking on whatever they possibly can for the good of the team. Finally, they say and the right things to help teammates feel appreciated, understood, and included, even when difficult situations arise that require tough love.

(Patrick Lencioni, The Ideal Team Player, 157-173)