That was the question Bain & Company consultants asked a client in 2022. The client had been successful, growing in both size and ambition. However, with success came a new set of management challenges. Specifically, the senior team did not promote cross-functional collaboration, lacked clarity on direction, was slow at making decisions, held ineffective meetings and was poor at communication. “We were a team in name only”, said one of its members. (1)
Perhaps some of these issues sound familiar? The problem of ineffective senior leadership teams is widespread: a 2020 survey of senior executives by the Centre for Creative Leadership revealed that two-thirds of those questioned felt that their top team was ineffective. (2)
The business benefits of effective senior leadership are significant. Bain & Company’s research of 1,250 companies revealed that those with highly effective executive teams enjoyed revenue growth, profitability and total shareholder returns that were 3 times higher than the study average. (3) There were also positive impacts on employee retention, productivity and morale.
In short, investing in your top team has a massive impact on organisational performance.
At a personal level too, the benefits are tangible. I (Ian) have worked with many senior coaching clients for over a decade. Almost all have requested help with time, energy and stress management. Leading, or being a member of a highly effective senior team, will still be time-consuming, but those doing so will be busy doing the right things, and will enjoy doing them more!
Effectiveness cascades from the top, but so does ineffectiveness. If your top team is not performing, you can be sure that there are negative impacts being felt at all levels.
So, whilst it is essential that individual leadership skills are developed, it is also vital that leadership teams receive the investment and attention they need to thrive as a whole. This never just happens; successful teams are intentionally built.
Traits of Highly Effective Teams
The HBR article which analysed the Bain & Company findings above can be seen here: Teamwork at the Top
It goes on to list the 5 traits of effective top teams. I have added my observations to what follows to amplify the identified traits which are:
1. Direction.
The top team sets a clear organisational direction – the mission, vision, strategy and values that provide a cornerstone for effectiveness. A long-term vision is not enough: immediate and short-term strategic priorities must also be articulated and communicated.
Note: These items should comprise the bulk of the agendas for top team meetings.
2. Discipline.
Team members must know their own and others' roles. This enables them to identify interdependencies, boost collaboration and avoid unnecessary conflict and resource wastage. They must also understand the role of the top team and what they must become to succeed.
3. Drive.
Teams with drive prepare well, debate constructively, commit to decisions and are industrious and resilient over the long term. This quality is particularly important in a crisis or time of deep change.
4. Dynamism.
Dynamic teams approach change as constant and look for the positive opportunities that can be realised. They actively look for change and have a bias for action with speed and flexibility. Note: this should not be confused with rashness, will is an ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction.
5. Collaboration.
True teams collaborate by combining their efforts to achieve direction, discipline, drive and dynamism. Trust and communication are at the heart of every effective, collaborative team.
Trust is built on knowledge of the other party: how they are motivated, their conflict triggers, preferred types of communication style, etc. It is necessary to create the psychological safety needed for open, healthy conflict (about the issues) when assumptions and options need to be rigorously debated.
Sound personal relationships are highly advantageous when developing trust since they facilitate a deeper understanding of others. To that end, in-person meetings, including socials, can be valuable.
Questions
If you scored your team on the above, how would it fare?
What difference would it make to you personally, and to your organisation, if those scores improved?
Initial Steps
As noted above, developing an effective team never just happens; it is always the result of intelligent application. Here are a few steps based on the HBR article that will assist:
1. Commit and invest.
Make it a stated aim to develop teams at all levels in your organisation, and ensure the top team is visibly modelling the collective behaviours desired. Invest the time and money necessary to develop and reinforce the above (and other) behaviours that will help you succeed. Simply decreeing ‘This is how we will work from now on’, or relegating consideration to a couple of hours during an annual away day, will not work! Effective team development requires regular work, over time, on the desired capabilities.
2. Be honest.
Where are you now? What needs to change to move your team in the right direction? What could stop it? How will you deal with obstacles? In considering these and similar questions, it is important that all team members are free to contribute honestly. Only then will the true picture emerge. Many clients opt to execute this step by commissioning confidential, one-to-one coaching sessions with an external coach before the first team development activity. The findings are then collated into a summary report. Over time, team members should be more willing to share their thoughts and ask challenging questions of each other openly.
3. Plan your journey.
Scoring your team on the 5 traits above, along with any others that may be pertinent for your team in its unique situation, will provide a useful benchmark. This analysis should be allied to a clear identification of your organisation’s goals and strategy to ensure alignment.
4. Keep going.
Some teams start well and achieve noticeable results, but then fail to follow through - the so-called ‘boom-splat’ phenomenon. In his excellent book on change (4), Kotter identifies this as one of the 8 key reasons why many change initiatives fail. There are several causes including:
a. Battle weariness – when there is resistance the temptation is to compromise and pull back.
b. Distraction – a crisis or particularly busy time pushes team development down the priority list until it is largely forgotten.
c. Setback – development is a process. Whilst there are often dramatic, quick wins, there will also be setbacks, perhaps when a new member joins the team and needs assistance in adopting the new behavioural norms.
d. Etc.
Summary
Over many years I have had the pleasure of helping numerous senior leaders and teams to find better ways of working together. Even modest changes often yield significant improvements, but it is those teams which invest the most which realise a sustainable competitive advantage. They achieve more, lead better and attract top talent. Their meetings are enjoyable and productive, and the professional satisfaction members gain from belonging to a high-performance team enthuses them to reach even higher.
Consider this result from the development program at the aforementioned Bain & Company client: “The top team at XXXX has become more purposeful. Members have more constructive debates, delegate more of the right decisions, and are more collaborative and transparent. Communication is clearer. The company’s performance has been excellent.” (5)
Do you want this to be truer for your organisation? Get in touch today for a no-obligation consultation to discuss your unique requirements and take the first step to realise your potential for success.
My full profile can be viewed on LinkedIn: (7) Ian Kirkby | LinkedIn
I have many qualifications and, as evidenced by the recommendations in my profile, an excellent track record of developing effective leaders and teams in businesses.
(1 )HBR Magazine, September-October 2024, p.56
(2) Ibid. p.57
(3) Ibid. p.57
(4) Kotter, John P., Leading Change, 2012, pp.153-169
(5) HBR Magazine, September-October 2024, p.62
Kommentare