Bioteams

Gaia Theory, developed by the amazing James Lovelock, contends that our planet is a self-regulating system. An example of this is the incredible ability of nature to keep key variables like temperature, water salinity and CO₂ within narrow upper and lower boundaries – seemingly despite whatever else happens!

Most of this happens through continuous small adjustment mechanisms which are effectively invisible to us. However over time the stress on one or more of these variables may become too great for the normal regulation mechanisms to be able to maintain the necessary equilibrium. When this happens Gaia Theory suggests that exceptional adjustments may then occur!

This blog focusses on the bioteams concept – more effective teams based on nature’s proven models. If you would like a detailed overview of bioteams you can request a free copy of the 33-page Bioteaming Manifesto here.

The Bioteaming Manifesto has been downloaded 20,000 times over the last 15 years and is a very popular resource for anyone interested in the important discipline of developing and sustaining High Performing Teams.

Bioteams is structured around 4 levels of team maturity (“zones”) each of which operate around 3 guiding principles (“rules”) as shown in the diagram.

Janine Benyus, talking at TED, describes biomimicry as learning an idea from an organism and then applying it – the conscious emulation of life’s genius. Bioteaming, then, is the biomimicry of social structures- taking ideas from Nature about how groups perform and intra-operate, and applying them to enhance how we humans work together in groups and teams. Doug Philips aka teamite#222* and bioteams guest author muses.

Biological teams make extensive use of short messages as their main means of communication: Ants use chemical messages, Bees use visual messages conveyed through dance and Dolphins use sonar, however most human teams seem to have forgotten their Messaging Instincts.

There are many ways to analyse dysfunctional teams in organisations such as deficiencies in trust, absence of shared objectives, poor co-operative working practices or inappropriate leadership styles/models. However taking a purely biological perspective opens up exciting new possibilities for really transforming these teams performance.

Pheromone-based messaging is the oldest and most evolved form of biological signalling. It uses chemicals to effect communications between animals and insects through smell and taste. There is an excellent opportunity for today’s virtual teams and mobile groups to re-organise the way they use their internet, email, messaging and presence-aware technologies to gain huge benefits from it.

Beliefs are the fuel which can really energise bioteams
There is one, often neglected area, which a team needs to address as part of a bioteaming strategy if it wants to be exceptionally successful – team member beliefs.

This article is the final in a four-part series which describes each of the 4 Bioteams Zones, continuing with the Organization Zone.

This article was originally published in 2005 by Ken Thompson and Robin Good.

This article is the third in a four-part series which describes each of the 4 Bioteams Zones, continuing with the Execution Zone.

In a previous article I introduced the second principle of Bioteams – “Bioteams are highly connected virtual networks”. In this article I will introduce a third overarching principle of Bioteams: Bioteams are exceptionally good at taking action, co-operating and learning. I will then introduce the third triad of supporting action rules (rules 7, 8 and 9).

This article was originally published in 2005 by Ken Thompson and Robin Good.

This article is the second in a four-part series which describes each of the 4 Bioteams Zones, continuing with the Connectivity Zone.

In a previous article I introduced the first principle of Bioteams – “Treat all team members as Leaders (and Adults)”. In this article I will introduce the second overarching principle of Bioteams, “Bioteams are highly connected virtual networks”, and describe the second triad of supporting action rules (rules 4, 5 and 6).

This article was originally published in 2005 by Ken Thompson and Robin Good.