I think the term “team player” has developed a wide range of meanings. There are some who consider that being a “great team player” is about agreeing with – and doing everything in strict accordance with – your peers’ or leader’s expectations. I don’t concur/ agree with this definition, and think it is fatally-flawed for it reflects a “control” mentality rather than a “management” mentality.
For me a “great team player” is a person who is:
a) Willing to contribute ideas in a constructive way for the greater good of the organisation.
b) Willing to constructively challenge ideas and/ or the status quo, in order to discover new/ improved ways of achieving a desired outcome.
c) Willing to compromise in order for a decision to be made and for action to unfold.
d) Willing to support the final decision made in a democratic forum, despite not necessarily agreeing with that decision either wholly or in part.
To be clear, “yes people” – people who agree with everything and sundry that is communicated by others – are mainly concerned with “pleasing” others; and in my experience such people aren’t capable of objectively challenging the status quo in order to discover improved solutions/ outcomes.
Some of the best/ most effective people I have worked with have been those who have:
i. Spoken their truthful views, despite peer pressure to conform with commonly-held views.
ii. Been open to having their views challenged constructively.
iii. Have been able to separate themselves (at a personal level) from making the right decision that is in the best interests of the stakeholders who they represent/ act for. That is, they have been able to make the best decision possible without their own view forming a personal bias.
So as a “team player”, try and be accommodating of others’ views as best you can; yet don’t feel compelled to “agree” with everything that is communicated by your colleagues…and be sure to support the final democratic (majority) decision that is arrived at.