Recognising a good (or great?) team

So much is spoken about team building and high performance teams, yet they seem to be increasingly difficult to build, at least in business. A few recent comments and observations have resonated strongly with me and deserve capture.

The most recent was watching the Ryder Cup. For those unfamiliar with the competition it is played every two years between teams from the USA and Europe. The story goes back almost 80 years and what sets it apart is that the players, some of the most highly paid sports personalities in the world who almost always play for their own success and no one else’s, play for nothing, but pride and being there. This is very refreshing in the modern super professional world. (see http://www.rydercup.com/2010/europe/history/index.cfm ).

Most team places come through qualification on their own tours during the playing season, but three or four on each side are picked by the respective captain. Competition is fierce throughout and the disappointment of not getting on a team is palpable. However, this is nothing compared with the passion and “pumped up behaviour” seen on the course. Occasionally, but rarely, this behaviour has over-stepped enthusiastic into aggressive. The celebrations from Jeff Overton, a rookie, when he pitched in was something to be seen and Graham McDowell’s almost gladiatorial stance having sunk a key putt on the 16^th on the last day, stick in my mind, but these were two of many. All this is without the motivation of money! They played for each other and for pride.

If you look around your organisations check and see how many teams have “waiting lists”? No matter how you might try and assess a team more scientifically I would have thought a healthy waiting list is a pretty good indicator that you have a well performing team.

When Colin Powell addressed a leadership conference in London a few years ago he said that no-one recognises bad performance as well as a peer, and when the spot it they wait to see what the leader does about it. The action taken tells you a lot about what that leader values and will be taken on board by that wider community.

In a similar vein I think that high performance, individual or team, is also spotted best by peers. While they may wait and see how it is rewarded they are much more likely just to act and get associated with or involved in what they see as good.

There is much debate about money as a motivator. If it is a motivator it is a selfish one. One may aspire to the salary of another person, but rarely will the reward given to a peer or fellow team member do a lot to inspire one’s own performance. Instead it is the more intangible rewards of inclusion, recognition, sharing, etc. that make the difference.

If you want to find high performing teams I suggest you look for the waiting lists, formal or informal. See if you cannot use them as a role model or indeed scale them up to include and inspire greater numbers.

Roll on the next Ryder Cup!