Team effectiveness is less art, more science

Effective teams are essential to organisational success, yet myths about team dynamics often hinder performance. Research shows that 75% of cross-functional teams underperform on key metrics. Contrary to popular belief, stacking teams with top talent does not guarantee success. Instead, the dynamics of collaboration and interaction significantly influence outcomes.

Four key health drivers—trust, communication, innovative thinking, and decision-making—account for 69-76% of the variance between low- and high-performing teams. Teams scoring above average in these areas are 3.3 times more efficient, 2.7 times more innovative, and 5.1 times more likely to achieve results.

Four areas of team health

Team health is determined by behaviours in four areas:

• Configuration: Clear roles and diverse perspectives.
• Alignment: Commitment and shared goals.
• Execution: Effective day-to-day operations.
• Renewal: Sustainable practices for long-term effectiveness.

High-performing teams excel in an average of 11 out of 17 specific behaviours across these areas, including psychological safety, conflict management, and role definition. Organisations often focus on surface-level interventions, leaving root causes of team dysfunction unaddressed.

Debunking myths about teams

Teams are often unaware of their performance gaps, prioritising behaviours they already excel in or neglecting critical areas. For instance, teams rank trust and communication highly but undervalue innovative thinking and decision-making despite their significant impact on outcomes.

Another myth is the existence of a universal playbook for team effectiveness. Team success depends on context, including task and outcome interdependence. Teams fall into three archetypes:

• Cycling teams: Moderate task and outcome interdependence, requiring coordination but allowing for individual success.
• Relay teams: High task interdependence with moderate outcome interdependence, focusing on seamless collaboration.
• Rowing teams: High interdependence across both dimensions, requiring flawless coordination.

Building teams that are greater than the sum of their parts

Healthier teams deliver better results, but achieving this requires focused actions:

• Diagnose and prioritise behaviours: Teams should assess key behaviours, address blind spots, and align on goals. Diagnostics reveal gaps and guide teams to focus on critical areas like trust, communication, and innovation.
• Sustain change: Embedding new behaviours demands governance, regular check-ins, and clear commitments to avoid regression. Continuous reflection is essential to reinforce changes.
• Support team leaders: Leaders must adopt collaborative mindsets. Coaching and feedback help align leaders with team goals, reducing discrepancies between leader and team perceptions.
• Embed effectiveness organisation-wide: Scaling team effectiveness requires systematic integration into organisational processes. A ‘train the trainer’ approach allows effective practices to cascade through multiple teams. For instance, an Asian bank improved 200 teams by initially training HR staff, who later led the programme independently.

Conclusion

High-performing teams balance individual and collective capabilities with behaviours tailored to their context. By addressing misconceptions and focusing on trust, communication, innovation, and decision-making, organisations can create healthier, more effective teams. These efforts drive better efficiency, results, and innovation, delivering value across the organisation.