I came across this Wharton Education piece from earlier in the year thanks to the World Economic Forum tweeting their republished version over on Twitter.
What caught my eye was the research base of "100 teams forming and competing with each other [over] more than 100 simulated years". That's a usefully significant population and I think it's worth paying attention to any findings based on the data gathered.
There are some interesting gems in here and towards the end you'll probably recognise the common mistakes from other literature...
- Relying on star players
- Not paying enough attention to execution
- Poor role clarity
You'll also probably recognise the team capacity building themes around...
- Pace & Process
- Psychological Safety (trust)
- Empathy (here's something else to consider)
What strikes me about the piece is threefold :-
- Our experience tells us that none of this is new but plenty of teams clearly struggle working with these dynamics.
- Attention to what is needed in teams is paramount and I believe argues for leaders of teams to be skilled in the dynamics of this space.
- The "three things" (goals, roles and norms) that high-performing teams focus on is very familiar to anyone who's undergone preparatory Crisis Management training over the last 20 years!
Together this makes me think organisations are neglecting the development needed possibly in favour of less systemic (and easier?) individual development.
What do you think?
So the 3×3, in sum, is initial conversation about goals, roles and norms, and then checking in from time to time, and then working to close the gap between what you’re actually doing and what you say you want to do, and then doing that again and again and again. That’s an iterative process. The key to doing that well is having a really good conversation or really paying attention to what is happening on the team. It turns out that it’s really hard to pay attention.