Jell or lose

Summary: Reality shows provide insight and learning from others’ experience.

On winner-take-all TV reality shows we glimpse the human side - the bonds and spats between individuals vying for one ultimate win.

The spice

Following Top Chef episodes won’t make us experts on exotic seasoning, or provide from the get go detailed knowledge on how to cook cordon bleu.

But as viewers we clearly understand that being a great cook isn’t all there is to getting the title.

Cameras almost everywhere 24/7 capture emotions, words and actions between fishbowl inhabitants. The more spice in interactions, the higher the viewer ratings!

Lessons

Entertainment also isn’t their sole utility. We’re provided insight, and the opportunity to learn from others’ experience.

The shows give us lessons on life. They make clear that collaborations matter in competition as do people skills for adaptability to situations.

Interaction counts

Technical skills count of course, for each competitor to complete tasks effectively – say, in cuisine. The initial rounds of the competition weed out the grossly incompetent.

But thereafter, the quality of interaction counts more than the competence or creativity of each individual contestant.

Keen memories

In the title round of Top Chef, teams of sous chefs chosen from those eliminated in earlier rounds assist the finalists.

Since these ‘others’ were once competitors, they might consider their own skills at least at par, if not better than the finalists themselves. They may also retain keen memories of earlier exchanges.

Win-lose ability

Being able to vibe with different backgrounds or age groups becomes important to win the title - or lose it.

The ultimate test is in the readiness of the winner to manage others’ performance as well. Thinking future is crucial. This, in life and work, we tend to forget.

Fish dish

The ‘top chef’ holds the overview, like a manager in any organization, and the goal (of dream cuisine). But self-absorption is weakness because if the getting across of what is to be done and how falters, it may soon hurt the enterprise.

When everything is heaped on one plate, something will slip off. The failure to include others in the thinking, planning and decision-making shows in the lack of teamwork in final execution.

For instance, for an unusual fish dish on Chef’s menu, the fish may be left behind.

The labour

Few people are born with the charisma to naturally attract a dedicated following.

The autocrat (“Silence in the kitchen!”) gets no feedback, and no fresh ideas. The poor communicator (“I had too much faith in their understanding!”) fails to share the big picture and finds the devil in the detail far too late.

Being acceptable to the group is labour for most. Micromanaging or abdicating responsibility is equally disastrous.

Showcase talents

At crunch time, whatever can go wrong does go wrong. If undercurrents seethe in the team, problem solving or creating alternatives on the fly become stressful.

Avoid the effort to jell the group, and the dream itself may be chopped to bits. Ensuring everybody else on the team also has opportunity to showcase talents motivates their working together.

The cohesiveness

Astute leadership fully utilizes available skills; recognizes who does what best, and delegates to individual strengths. The point is to channelize group energy towards the common objective - creating the best possible cuisine.

High performance needs group cohesiveness. This is built on knowledge and respect for one another’s abilities. People skills make or break career aspirations in any system. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding...and the Top title!

Comments/Opinions, Anyone??