Building High-Performing Teams

If anything has become clear as a result of the pandemic, it’s that we can’t overstate the importance of teams. Now, there’s nothing new about the concept of teams, but with everything the pandemic threw at us – massive job loss (handsomely recovered over the last two and a half years), inflation (conquered), supply chain issues (cleared up, for the most part), war, climate, etc. – it was also clear that running a business as we move forward in the 21^st century would be vastly different from running it in the 20^th century.

Over the past half century, I’ve built teams as a member of organizational leadership in five industries and advised and coached teams as an executive coach in 25 industries.

Here’s how I see it.

What’s the difference between the 20^th and 21^st century? Teams.

The difference, we already know from both theory and practice, is not so much dependent on technology, products, finances, or any of the usual suspects, but mainly the result of high-performing teams. This may seem like a remarkable grasp of the obvious, but it’s no longer an abstract concept open to debate. So, let’s not question it. Instead, let’s examine why – and we’ll start by erecting the framework with these three questions:/

1. Why do some teams perform better than others?

Of the two types of decision making – rational and interpersonal – we do the first alone and can’t do the second alone. Since we were physically removed from our teams, we had to figure out how to recreate them under less-than-ideal situations: remote and fractious. But we did.

2. What accounts for the differences?

More than anything else, good communication led the way. Necessity was, as always, the mother of invention. Or, in this case, the mother of transformation.

3. How do these affect team outcomes?

When the quality of a decision and the degree of acceptance (buy-in) are high, team performance rises. Teams promote synergistic decision making, nothing new; it just became more urgent since 2020.

What is Synergy?

Synergy is the act of two or more organisms producing a result of which each is individually incapable. Synergy occurs when the interactive efforts of two or more people have a greater impact than the sum of their independent efforts, and when they are supportive of one another.

Kurt Lewin: The Father of Modern Social Psychology

Although his work is nearly a century old, it is still unsurpassed. Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) taught ung s the following in regard to high-performing teams:

Process Gain

The sheer fact of being a team member elevates one’s individual contribution as well as the team’s synergy.

Recognize and prevent bad solutions.

Perspective is the greatest tool we have against paradigm paralysis.

Teams are motivated.

Motivation is how we understand human growth, taught Abraham Maslow (1908-1970), and team members tend to have a higher motivation to achieve. No wonder he and Lewin were such close colleagues.

Teams are more secure in making “riskier” decisions.

Taking risks is what success and forward movement is all about. Think about how much easier when others have your back.

Teams display increased commitment.

That’s due to involvement in decisions. And the smaller the team, the greater the involvement.

Involvement in teams facilitates change.

When values, attitudes, and behaviors change – safely and securely – you have what’s needed to implement decisions.

Social facilitation.

Members promote each other’s success. Naturally.

Though polarization.

This may sound counterintuitive, but it’s just the opposite. Teams develop the security to adopt more conservative, aggressive, or creative positions when necessary. The thesis/antithesis/synthesis model arises from thought polarization.

From theory to practice.

Lewin’s observations of actual practices proved his own theories. The technology we use now may be different, the location of team members may have spread out, and the pace of business may have accelerated, but Lewin’s work still applies.