In the lecture, the speaker shows his disapproval toward the statements made in the reading in three aspects.
In the first place, he says the process of cooperation in a team may not be as satisfying as stated in the reading. People who are not dedicated to the team may rely on others to take on more work and people who really dedicated can not be justifiably given recognition since rewards are usually given to the team as a whole. As a result, people may grow grudge about working in the team with a result that few would really shine in such a team.
In the second place, the speaker rejects the idea that work would be finished more swiftly in a team. People with different believes and routes of practice may diverge on some issues, adding to the time needed to finish a job.
In the last place, the speaker fully defies the positive role of authorities in a group in that more risky yet not worthwhile decisions would be made in a team. In fact, many decisions made by these authorities in a team may involve a lot of risks and others in the team may not dare to speak up the peril these decisions would put the whole team in so that dangers may happen. Besides that, some good and creative ideas could be blocked by these people if their personally do not relate to these ideas which can be valuable ones though.
In conclusion, team work in fact contains many potential risks. Contrary to the benefits in the reading, a team may not be able to bring so many benefits to individuals in it and the group as a whole. On the personal level, it may not allow brilliant people to shine but leaders to make unnecessary mistakes in decision-making. Also, the operation process may lag due to the time consumed reaching a consensus and the added wrong decisions made by leaders in that team.