Improving team performance is one of those phrases that gets thrown around in boardrooms, but in practice it’s far more complex than scheduling a “team building day.” Real improvement comes from understanding how teams are formed, how they function, and how leadership either enables or obstructs their growth. Sometimes interventions help teams reach productivity faster, and sometimes they’re about repairing damage caused by dysfunction or toxic leadership.
A Case Study: When “Team Building” Isn’t the Answer
An Organizational Effectiveness & Development (OED) director at a film and television media company was asked by the EVP of advertising sales to “do some team building” with a department led by a senior vice president (SVP). The EVP’s request was simple: morale was low, stress was high, and he wanted the OED director to fix it.
But after one‑on‑one interviews, the truth emerged. The team itself was highly functional—collaborative, productive, and bonded. What held them together wasn’t dysfunction among themselves, but survival under the abusive management style of their boss.
Employees described:
Excessive hours – 12‑ to 14‑hour days were the norm, with pressure to skip family events.
Personal violations – One employee was called back to work during his mother’s funeral.
Public humiliation – Belittling comments about appearance and protected classes were made openly.
Culture of fear – Team members worried about retaliation for even discussing their experiences.
The EVP’s initial response was chilling: “Don’t demotivate the SVP. We can’t risk losing that revenue stream.”
The OED director faced a dilemma: protect the company’s short‑term revenue or uphold ethical responsibility. He chose the latter. By escalating to HR and legal counsel, he built both a legal case (highlighting harassment risks and liability) and a business case (showing the danger of mass resignations and reputational damage). Only then did leadership act.
👉 Lesson: Team performance isn’t about productivity hacks. It’s about protecting people, holding leaders accountable, and ensuring values aren’t sacrificed for revenue.
Ethical Practice in Action
The OED director demonstrated what ethical leadership looks like in practice:
Acting with personal and professional integrity, even under pressure.
Responding immediately to reports of unethical behavior.
Empowering employees to speak up without fear of reprisal.
Showing consistency between values and actions.
Establishing credibility as a trustworthy resource.
Challenging executives when conflicts of interest arise.
Withstanding politically motivated pressure.
Balancing organizational success with employee advocacy.
This case illustrates that ethics isn’t a side note—it’s the foundation of sustainable performance.
Team Interventions: When and Why They Matter
OED interventions often begin when performance dips. Causes can include unresolved conflict, poor leadership, or weak communication. These issues block effective team formation and productivity.
Interventions focus on processes and interactions, targeting:
New groups – Helping them build identity and trust.
Dysfunctional groups – Resolving conflicts that hurt productivity.
Existing groups – Redefining processes to align with new strategies.
Virtual teams – Building trust and collaboration across distance and cultures.
For example, a cross‑functional team working on a high‑stakes project may struggle with conflict. An OED intervention might coach the leader on conflict resolution, guide the team through Tuckman’s stages, and improve group dynamics.
The Team Formation Journey
Conflict is inevitable in team formation. Bruce Tuckman’s model outlines four stages:
Forming – Polite beginnings, shared goals, but little trust.
Storming – Clashes of style and perspective. Painful, but necessary.
Norming – Trust builds, rules form, identity strengthens. Beware of groupthink.
Performing – Collaboration flows, productivity peaks, support is mutual.
Leaders play a critical role in guiding teams through these stages. They must encourage communication, enforce ground rules, and help the group adapt to change.
Team Structures That Shape Dynamics
Teams vary in structure, and this shapes their dynamics:
Skill Diversity – Low in homogeneous teams (like merchandisers), high in cross‑functional teams (like product launches).
Authority Dispersion – Centralized under one leader (like marketing departments) or shared across members (like design teams).
Permanence – Long‑term (like HR) or temporary (like task forces).
These factors influence resilience, adaptability, and decision‑making.
Group Dynamics: Roles That Help or Harm
Kenneth Benne and Paul Sheats identified three role types:
Task Roles – Driving work forward, solving problems, sharing information.
Social Roles – Building harmony, resolving conflict, engaging members.
Dysfunctional Roles – Attacking, dominating, resisting, or draining energy.
Leaders must balance these roles, encouraging both task and social contributions while quickly addressing dysfunction.
Practical Takeaways for Leaders
Improving team performance requires more than strategy—it requires humanity. Leaders can:
Listen deeply – One‑on‑one conversations reveal hidden truths.
Spot dysfunction early – Address toxic behaviors before they normalize.
Build trust – Protect confidentiality and follow through on promises.
Balance pressure with empathy – High performance doesn’t require sacrificing humanity.
Model values – Actions set the tone more than any policy document.
No comments:
Post a Comment