3 ms·
I'd say that in very small teams (up to 6 people), it's better to not have a certain leader. Someone will become more dominant in the group anyways (usually a p
by emerongi 12y ago
I'd say that in very small teams (up to 6 people), it's better to not have a certain leader. Someone will become more dominant in the group anyways (usually a person whom everyone trusts and likes). In big teams, it's hard to get anything done without someone set to lead it.
- armed10 12y agoI think you're right. In my personal experience I've found that in most small teams, there are few who want to lead. If you have mature members, this becomes less of a problem. However, I still find diffusion of responsibility a common theme in small teams, appointing a leader to absolve them from any personal responsibility. Combining a "more dominant someone" with atomic responsibility is probably the best way to go with small teams.