We Were Wrong About Teams

by Robert Hackman

Photograph by Getty Images on Unsplash+

Can’t you see that, baby, I was wrong?
Lyric from the song ‘I Was Wrong’

By Chris Stapleton 

We were wrong about teams. Or at least I was wrong about them. If asked, in addition to the required combination of functional expertise, I would have told you that the following were core elements of successful teams:

1. A mix of behavioral styles.
2. People with complementary personalities.
3. A willingness to work collaboratively.
4. The amount of diversity among team members.
5. The presence of a strong leader/manager heading the team.

I believed team makeup and leadership were the primary determinants of team success. Google, a company committed to identifying and leveraging vital correlations and causations, found no definitive relationship between the above fundamentals and a team’s success. 

While elements of group dynamics are still essential to consider, they are not the principal determinants of how well teams perform. I was wrong.

What correlates with team performance? What does this understanding mean for leaders? How can leaders raise team performance by creating and maintaining Psychological Safety?

What correlates with team performance?

After years of disappointing results, researchers at Google determined they had been looking in the wrong places. They identified that it is “how” teams operate that determines their performance, not “who” teams are comprised of.

In conducive environments that are well facilitated, the collective intelligence of teams is almost always greater than that of the smartest team member. Furthermore, teams do not have to be comprised of exceptionally intelligent people to be smart.

However, three elements must be present to challenge “group think” and allow the collective intelligence of a group to emerge:

1. Independence of action.
2. Diversity of opinion.
3. Decentralization of decision-making.

These attributes must be encouraged in small groups, such as teams.

What does this understanding mean for leaders?

These findings are significant because they determine where leaders and managers should focus their attention, time, effort, and resources. Less on strategically putting teams together and more on training team leaders and members about what makes teams effective and coaching them to succeed.

This discovery clarifies what needs to be measured in addition to the quality, quantity, and timeliness of the team’s output. The degree of psychological safety and verbal contributions of team members is the most accurate predictor of the degree of a team’s success.

Companies can regularly gauge these attributes and assess their direction by employing simple tools, such as checklists, regular check-in conversations with your team about how well it’s doing, and evaluating the thoughts, feelings, and experiences of members of larger teams through “pulse” technologies, to poll team members in real-time. 

How can leaders raise team performance by creating and maintaining Psychological Safety?

Team leaders need to model the behaviors that contribute to successful teams. Google developed a checklist for group leaders to follow:

1. Leaders should not interrupt –to interrupt establishes a norm of interruption and undermines trust. *
2. Demonstrate active listening by summarizing and reflecting on what people have said.
3. They should admit when they do not know.
4. They should not end a meeting unless everyone has spoken at least once.
5. They should encourage people to express their frustrations.
6. They should call out and name intergroup conflicts and resolve them through open dialogue. 

*Leaders sometimes need to interrupt associates when an associate goes on

  too long, moves off-topic, or spends too much time telling stories to keep

  meetings on track. Interrupting must be done with the proper intention

  and skill.

Leaders must never model or tolerate a culture of interaction.  

Leaders need to remain mindful of the messages their choices send. Undermining group safety can always be justified in the name of speed and efficiency and must be resisted. Psychologically safe teams are slower in the short term but more productive in the longer term.

A surprising consequence of psychologically safe environments is that the number of reported errors and missteps increases. Not because there are more of them. It is a result of people’s willingness to divulge them. Consequently, issues get addressed and resolved, resulting in improved execution.  

People have an inherent desire for control. This is why, according to Adam Grant, it is frequently beneficial for leaders to utilize “weak speech,” characterized by humility, curiosity, and respect when interacting with others. Rather than assuming control, ‘weak speech’ communicates that you value others’ opinions, insights, and ideas and do not believe you have all the answers. 

The fastest way for leaders to inspire the trust of others is to trust them first.

Companies committed to developing and maintaining high-performing teams would do well to train and coach team leaders in group dynamics and group processes to enhance their leadership abilities. These essential elements are relevant to teams across all business functions, including senior leadership, sales, operations, and cross-functional teams.

Creating safe environments and making sure everyone feels heard is how companies make high-functioning teams better. Higher-performing teams contribute to increased profitability and revenue growth over time.

Worthy Considerations:

1. What process does your organization use to create teams? What gets considered in its decision-making?  
2. How do poorly functioning drag down company performance? How do high-performing teams contribute to improved results?  
3. What are the consequences of team members withholding vital information and contributions because of a lack of psychological safety? As a leader, do you further psychological safety or undermine it?
4. How will leadership respond to a temporary increase in the number of errors and missteps that surface because of higher degrees of psychological safety? Are you willing to sacrifice short-term performance for long-term gain by making it safer?
5. Does your company currently train and coach its leaders in group dynamics to improve their leadership? If so, what is the impact? If not, why not?

If you want to discuss ways to develop and grow your leadership to benefit yourself, your team, your family, or your organization, please reach out to me. I welcome the connection. 

Robert Hackman, Principal, 4C Consulting and Coaching, helps people live and lead with fewer regrets. He grows and develops leaders through executive coaching consulting, facilitation, and training of individuals, teams, and organizations. He is committed to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. He facilitates trusting environments that promote uncommonly candid conversations. Rob is also passionate about the power of developing Legacy Mindsets and has conducted over 50 Legacy interviews with people to date.

A serious man with a dry sense of humor who loves absurdity can often be found hiking rocky elevations or making music playlists. His mixes, including Pandemic Playlists and Music About Men, among others, can be found on Spotify.

Bravely bring your curiosity to a conversation with Rob, schedule via voice or text @ 484.800.2203 or rhackman@4cconsulting.net.