Re^5: Catalyst team change

There is only the parts. There is no 'addition'. The team consists of it's individuals. Period. I don't hold with this pseudo spiritualist malarky.

I disagree... a team is only as good as they function together.

You can lay all the pieces of a watch on a table, and all you have is the *potential* for a watch... Put them together, and you get a watch... There's nothing different about the pieces, but the way they are joined together for a purpose makes them 'more' than they are just being near each other.

The same is true of people... You can take four people and put them together and *call* them a team, but there's still four people... and they might make useful stuff

But take the same four people, and let them bond and *really* become a team, and you'll see amazing things from them.

All I'm saying is that there's a difference in 'a bunch of parts' and 'a bunch of parts put together for a common purpose'.

That's the meaning of 'the whole'... The 'whole' is the purpose that joins the parts... that's what makes it more.

Trek

Comment on Re^5: Catalyst team change

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^6: Catalyst team change
by apotheon (Deacon) on May 06, 2006 at 11:26 UTC

It's the characteristics and behaviors of the parts that make up that whole, though. A whole is only the sum of its parts if you consider that assembling the whole to form a cohesive team involves redefining the parts. A team learning to work well together doesn't require some magical addition of aggregate entity mojo (pun intended) -- just that the individuals on the team grow and change so that they work well with the other individuals.

print substr("Just another Perl hacker", 0, -2);
- apotheon
CopyWrite Chad Perrin

[reply]


Don't ask to ask, just ask
	PerlMonks