This module is designed to help you improve how your RSSP team accomplishes work. Throughout the session, you will both identify limitations in your team's culture and be directed to resources intended to help you overcome those limitations. 

The list below is not all-inclusive of the attributes that make up effective teams. Instead, they are a series of characteristics that have been shown to increase the engagement, passion, and capacity of team members to collaboratively achieve ambitious goals. 

As you explore the resources presented in this module, we encourage to openly reflect on how the ideas conveyed by their authors can be embedded within your RSSP team to unlock its next level of progression and growth.

Rate Your Team

Using your note-catcher, rate the degree to which your team exemplifies the listed characteristics of an effective team.

Simon Sinek and Liz Ryan each make the case for a simple idea: a culture of fear will destroy a team. When people are constantly afraid of losing their jobs or being reprimanded because of mistakes they made or competencies they do not have, they will come to work guarded, less creative, and less transparent about how their work tasks are going. Sinek and Ryan both cogently argue that building trust is the foundational practice that precedes teams working at their highest capacities. When trust is present and team members feel safe, they show up to work every day ready to invest all of their talents and energy in doing their jobs at the highest level. 

Chris Mcchesney and Tony Pante describe that focus and clarity are the lifeblood of effective work. Too often the day-to-day chaos of our jobs dilutes our effort to execute on the highest-priority objectives. When we attempt to do too much, we often end up accomplishing too little. The charge to identify and prioritize what matters most can produce a renewed sense of vigor and dedication among team members. When everyone has clarity regarding the what, how, and why of the team's 2-3 most important goals, they have a strong understanding of how they can each uniquely contribute to accomplishing the goals on time with the most impact. 

*Note: when reading through Discipline 1: Focus on the Wildly Important, please watch the video toward the bottom of the page. 

In this practical guide to building team consensus, James Madden describes that, "The advantage of consensus-based decisions as compared with majority rule voting is that it avoids a fundamental problem often associated with voting. Voting may unintentionally result in a split or division in a group, a satisfied majority and disgruntled minority, a sense of winners and losers." Using decision-making processes that consistently create "winners" and "losers" runs the risk of alienating team members and undermining the culture of trust within the team. If we instead work to build consensus, we dig deeper into the reasons why team members have different perspectives on how to address tough issues. These deeper dives often produce holistic solutions that are more representative of the students, teachers, and leaders we are attempting to help. 

The authors at Deloitte do not mince words when they say, "If your workgroup just acts and acts without pausing to understand what you’ve learned and how to apply it, you won’t likely achieve a higher level of performance. Action without reflection is a waste of time." 

While it is essential to schedule time within meetings to reflect on the team's progress towards its goals, it is equally important to schedule time for the team to reflect on how it operates. By examining the team's structure, processes, and culture, members can identify what is and is not working, leading to on-going cycles of continuous improvement.  

Team members freely expressing their authentic thoughts and feelings without fear of retribution is the lifeblood of effective team culture and decision making. This phenomenon, known as psychological safety, has been the focus of Amy Edmondson's life's work. Her research reveals that fear and humiliation in the workplace lead to more mistakes, less transparency, and worse performance. In both of the interviews featured below, she conveys that instilling a culture of candor, curiosity, and compassion will create a safe environment. And when people feel safe, they will transparently describe the mistakes they have made, the mistakes others have made, and how they can all make the changes required for continious improvement. 

We all understand the value of productive disagreement. It leads to better decisions and stronger relationships. The trick is ensuring that disagreements are productive rather than destructive. In the articles below, Amy Gallo and Francesca Gino give pointed advice on how to maximize the occurrence of productive disagreements and, by doing so, create a team culture where frequent disagreement is seen as a sign of positive team dynamics. 

Rebecca Knight makes a subtle yet important point in her article on giving team members feedback: most of us are unaware of how we impact others. This happens because the thoughts and emotions we cause in others happen internally. And unless people choose to express those thoughts and feelings openly, we are unable to see the effects of our actions. 

Feedback, in its highest form, is an opportunity to help us all see the effect of our actions. When given well, it fosters intrinsic motivation and continuous improvement. When given poorly, it creates resentment and disengagement. 

In the resources below, Adam Grant, Amy Gallo, and Rebecca Knight share strategies for how to give feedback that enhances our team's performance without straining our work relationships. 

*The characteristics of effective teams presented in this module is an adaptation of Stanford University's Characteristics of Effective Teams course syllabus.