Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading. （個體和整體）
The relationship between teamwork and inpidual strength, energy, and commitment is complex; whether they operate in a complementary or antagonistic2 manner depends on: the goals toward which the traits are directed, the degree of emphasis on teamwork, and the job of the inpidual within an organization.
A person's ability to work effectively in a team is not inconsistent per se（本質(zhì)上intrinsically） with personal strength, energy and commitment. If exercised in a self-serving manner-for example, through pilfering3 or backstabbing-these traits can operate against the organization. Conversely, if directed toward the firm's goals, these goals can motivate other team members, thereby4 advancing common goals. World War II generals Patton and Rommel understood this point and knew how to bring out the best inpidual qualities in their troops, while at the same time instilling5 a strong sense of team and common purpose.
Nevertheless, overemphasizing teamwork can be counterproductive for an organization. A successful team requires both natural leaders and natural followers6; otherwise, a team will accomplish little. Undue7 emphasis on teamwork may quell8 initiative among natural leaders, thereby thwarting9 team goals. Also, teamwork can be overemphasized with a commissioned sales force of highly competitive and autonomic inpiduals. Overemphasis on teamwork here might stifle10 healthy competition, thereby defeating a firm's objectives. In other organizational areas, however, teamwork is critical. For example, a product-development team must progress in lock-step fashion toward common goals, such as meeting a rollout deadline.
In sum, inpidual strength, commitment, and energy can complement1 a strong team approach; as long as inpidual autonomy is not undermined, alt can operate in a synergistic manner to achieve an organization's goals.