Start with One Team

A practical approach to building better teams while doing the real work

Last week, I made the case that most organizations have a teamwork blind spot. We depend on teams to produce results, but comparatively few organizations have a disciplined approach for assessing, developing, and continuously improving the teams doing the work.

So where do you start?

My recommendation is not to launch another organization-wide initiative. Start with one important team.

START WHERE IMPROVEMENT MATTERS

Choose a team whose performance matters to the organization and a leader who genuinely wants to make it better. And don't assume you should begin with your most dysfunctional team.

Starting with a struggling team can reinforce the idea that team development is remedial, something we only do when a team is failing. There may be greater value in starting with a good team whose leader and members believe they can become even better. The objective isn't simply to fix problems. It's to develop the capability to continuously improve team performance.

Start where better teamwork would produce meaningful results and where the leader and team are committed to doing something with what they learn.

IS IT REALLY A TEAM?

Many so-called teams are not really teams. They’re groups with a common purpose or goal, but members work largely independently. Think of a bowling team. Having the same goal doesn't make you a team. Interdependence does.

• Groups consist of people who may share a common objective, leader, or organizational identity, but accomplish most of their work independently. Think of a group of regional sales managers who share a revenue goal but are individually responsible for results in their respective territories.

• Teams accomplish work interdependently. Individual members have different responsibilities, but achieving the objective requires them to coordinate their efforts, share information, collaborate on decisions, solve problems, and perform together. A surgical team, project team, or executive leadership team succeeds or fails in large part because of how effectively its members work with one another.

• Hybrids do some of both. Members perform much of their work independently but must also work interdependently on important shared responsibilities, decisions, or outcomes. Many leadership teams probably fit this description.

None is inherently better than another. A high-performing group may be exactly what the work requires. The problem occurs when we call every collection of people a team and then expect teamwork when the nature of the work neither requires nor supports it. Members of groups get frustrated when leaders conduct teamwork training that isn’t relevant and takes them away from getting work done. Members of teams treated like groups become frustrated when leaders control information and work primarily through one-on-one interactions rather than bringing people together to collaborate on shared work.

Before trying to improve teamwork, understand what kind of teamwork the work actually requires.

ASSESS BEFORE YOU INTERVENE

Now comes the question I raised last week: You believe your team is high performing. How do you know?

Don't begin with a retreat, workshop, or team-building exercise. Begin by establishing a baseline. There are several ways to do that. Ask the leader. Survey the members of the team. Look at business results and observe how the team actually works. For a more rigorous view, use a validated team assessment that combines quantitative and qualitative feedback with benchmarks and stakeholder perspectives.

One of the most valuable discoveries may be the gaps among those perspectives. A leader may believe priorities are clear while team members are working from different assumptions. The leader may believe people openly challenge one another while members avoid difficult conversations. The team may believe it is serving its customers well while key stakeholders have a very different experience.

Assessment matters. The primary purpose isn't to generate a score. It is to create an accurate enough picture of the team to have the conversations that matter.

Review the results together. Ask what surprises people. Where do perspectives differ? What strengths should be protected? What issues are creating the greatest drag on performance? That discussion alone can begin to move the needle because awareness changes how people see and respond to the way the team works.

Then decide together what deserves attention first. Is the team healthy? Is there trust, energy, and commitment? Is it aligned around its purpose, priorities, roles, and ways of working? Is it performing at the level the work requires? Diagnosis precedes prescription.

FOCUS ON WHAT MATTERS MOST

A good assessment will probably identify more opportunities than the team can effectively address at once. Resist the temptation to fix everything. Together, identify the one or two issues that would make the greatest difference in the team’s performance.

If priorities are unclear, clarify them. If decision-making is slow, define who decides what. If accountability is weak, establish clearer commitments and follow-through. If trust is low, identify the behaviors undermining it.

Don’t try to perfect the team. Work on what matters most right now.

IMPROVE THE TEAM WHILE IT DOES ITS WORK

Then use the team’s real work as the laboratory for improvement.

If decision-making is the problem, improve the next important decision. If accountability is weak, change how commitments are made and reviewed in regular meetings. If people are avoiding conflict, help them have the real conversation they’ve been avoiding.

There may be value in an off-site or an exercise to teach a concept. But the real test is whether the team changes how it works when everyone returns the next morning.

Teams get better by doing real work better.

LEARN FROM THE FIRST TEAM

After a few months, step back and ask another set of questions.

• What actually worked?

• What did the leader do that helped?

• What did the team respond to?

• Which tools or practices made a meaningful difference?

• What was unnecessary?

• What would we do differently next time?

Capture those lessons. Identify the few practices worth carrying forward. The objective isn't to create a rigid recipe. It is to identify a few consistent principles and practices that can be adapted to each team.

Then apply what you learned to another important team. And then another.

With the engagement and support of senior leadership, the improvement can become contagious. Leaders share a common language. Teams learn from one another. Better operating habits spread. Most importantly, team training stops being something reserved for an off-site or a failing team. It becomes part of the culture.

Don't just work on WHAT the team does. Dedicate time to improving HOW the team works. Done consistently, the gains compound as teams move closer to their potential.

That's how you stop leaving teamwork to chance.