Aleka MacLellan, Ph.D. is a principal at Kilberry, a firm of management psychologists. She specializes in assessing and developing leaders, teams and organizational cultures.
Scientific principles can challenge myths about the best way to lead teams.Cecilie_Arcurs
Teams are a cornerstone of today’s organizations. Yet, leaders are often ill-informed by misconceptions of how to lead teams. Let’s challenge three ways leaders manage and think about team effectiveness with scientific principles.
Myth 1: Team conflict is detrimental to performance.
While conflict can be uncomfortable, the right kind of conflict can lead to creativity and better decisions. High-performing teams keep relationship conflict low – clashes that get personal and build tension and animosity – and embrace task conflict – clashes that focus on ideas and opinions about the work.
Such constructive conflict can improve a team’s effectiveness by encouraging diverse perspectives for problem-solving. Thus, it is not conflict, but rather conflict aversion that hurts teams.
Recommendation 1: Give feedback with candour.
Organizational psychologist, Tasha Eurich, facilitates “The Candor Challenge” with her clients, providing teams with an opportunity to hold each other accountable and exchange feedback. Each team member gives feedback to their peers in front of everyone by answering the following questions:
- What does this person do that most contributes to our team’s success?
- If this person could change one behaviour to make the team more successful, what would it be?
- What behaviour do I need from this person to help me be more successful on the team?
Recommendation 2: Actively listen to feedback.
How team members respond to feedback is equally important. Consider a process used in couples therapy, designed to promote active listening and empathy and create opportunities for each person to enhance their ability to hear and be heard:
1. Member A says what’s frustrating them about Member B.
2. Member B paraphrases what Member A said.
3. Repeat until Member A agrees with Member B’s summary.
Myth 2: A team of high performers is a high-performing team.
While individual skills are important, they don’t guarantee team success. Consider the 2004 U.S. men’s Olympic basketball team, which was stacked with existing and eventual household names from the NBA.
Despite this lineup, the team lost its opening game, ending their lossless streak dating back to 1992, and was the first – and thus far – last men’s team to not win gold for the U.S. since the same year.
Recommendation 1: Foster a collective identity.
As illustrated in Netflix’s documentary, ‘The Redeem Team,’ the coach of the 2008 U.S. Olympic basketball team did not simply rely on the individual talents of players, but rather ensured they played as a cohesive unit by fostering camaraderie, selflessness and representing their country with pride (over four years, I might add).
Doing so develops a collective identity within the team, giving individual members the psychological arsenal to recognize that they are working toward something bigger than themselves.
Recommendation 2: Conduct a postmortem.
A staple among sports teams is to watch film from past games to analyze the team’s collective strengths, areas of improvement and tactical adjustments. Such postmortems can improve team performance by 20 to 25 per cent. After a project or initiative, make the time to facilitate your own with the following questions:
- What were the original goals and to what extent were they achieved?
- What were the major wins?
- What were the significant challenges?
- What factors contributed to the wins and challenges?
Myth 3: Generic, annual offsites improve team performance.
The annual, one-day retreat where team members gather offsite to participate in a series of activities and facilitated exercises is a constant in the working world. While they make employees momentarily happier, don’t mistake that for team performance.
Genuine team development is not a one-and-done event and requires sustained effort over time. High-performing teams regularly dissect their performance, identify areas for improvement and implement changes to their processes. But also consider program design and facilitation.
Recommendation 1: Understand your context first.
Offsites must reflect your team’s distinct mandate in relation to the broader organizational strategy, culture and external operating environment. Before you even mention the word offsite, ask yourself:
1. What is the organization counting on this team to deliver?
2. What are the team’s collective strengths and areas of development?
3. What current and emerging trends impact this team?
Recommendation 2: Vet your facilitator.
Those outside the team, who can bring objectivity and neutrality to offsite discussions, are helpful, such as someone in the HR department or a consultant. If you are considering the latter, ensure they are not using a ‘lift-and-shift’ model, disguising a generic model as bespoke. Ask them these questions:
1. How do you tailor solutions to meet specific contexts and needs of clients?
2. How do your customized solutions differ from an off-the-shelf approach?
3. How are your programs between clients of the same industry similar and different?
The bottom line
The art of team effectiveness is a science. While leaders can take artistic liberties when working with their teams, there are scientific principles that can be applied to enhance team performance.
This column is part of Globe Careers’ Leadership Lab series, where executives and experts share their views and advice about the world of work. Find all Leadership Lab stories at tgam.ca/leadershiplab and guidelines for how to contribute to the column here.