The idea of a team at the top is a seductive notion for Leaders. There are very few who do not refer often- both privately and publicly – to their ‘top team’. Why is it then that employees often see less team performance at the top of the organization than elsewhere in the company. Can or better yet do you really need the ‘top’ people in your company to function as a ‘team’ or are you just trying to fit the proverbial ‘round peg into a square hole’ because it sounds nice?
Here is my broad working definition of a senior leadership group a.k.a. ‘team at the top’; they are the individuals who work with the company Leader to develop the company’s strategy and goals (or carry out the Board of Directors), ensure they are implemented effectively and manage the people in their respective functional areas to accomplish those goals while coordinating efforts within and outside the company.
Leadership groups are comprised of human beings who have all the flaws and biases of any group of people. Membership to any team comes with certain skills and written and unwritten rules on how to attain and retain membership on the team. Membership on athlete teams requires a certain level of performance skills and few social dynamic skills. Membership to a leadership group (team) requires a certain level of technical knowledge along with a social skill set. Certain organizational behavioral skill sets that are learned along the way to membership aren’t necessarily conducive to effective team functioning. Successful individuals whether in athletics or in business share one common characteristic; they are very competitive.
As I stated before, can you or better yet, do you really need the senior leadership people in your organization to function as a team? The biggest mistake I see Leaders make is flippantly using the term ‘Team’ for their group without first asking the question: “do I need them to function as a team”? (I haven’t been in a company where there isn’t some level of teamwork necessary at the top). If the answer is yes it requires you to evaluate what inside the company or leadership group is will impede the teamwork required. Just using the word Team in respect to this group of people is a recipe for problems. A ‘teambuilding’ workshop isn’t going to do it. Leadership groups at the top of a company are the most complex working group in any organization. This complexity is a combination of membership requirements, organizational responsibilities of the members of this group and the question of promotion.
So, is a Team at the Top necessary? Like a lot of things in life it’s not a simple yes or no. I think the researcher Jon Katzenbach had it pegged in his book The Wisdom of Teams. Katzenbach discovered there are special dynamics that characterize leadership groups at the top. He said that many times so-called teams are really working groups with a single leader and often, these non-team groups at the top work pretty well. He found that effectiveness doesn’t lie in mandating teams or in changing the top leaders styles, or even in designing a better top team structure; rather the key is in clearly differentiating between team and non-team requirements for a given task and developing the teams capability to shift into different leadership group modes, different leadership roles, and appropriate team membership composition depending upon the desired results. In other words, a balanced approach that exploits non-team as well a team approaches based on the need. I don’t disagree with his findings I just question if Leaders and their leadership group see or are willing to put in the time to make it work beyond the classic ‘teambuilding’ workshop or golf outing. Here is a simple example how I have seen Leaders and their leadership group get in trouble. The Leader presents a situation that needs to be examined and a decision to be made. After a lot of discussion, the group seems to come to a ‘consensus’ on what the best solution for going forward. Later, the Leader does just the opposite of the groups consensus. Bad move by the Leader? Didn’t the Leader value the group? Here’s the mistake, the Leader didn’t clarify beforehand that the ultimate decision wasn’t there’s to make it was the Leaders. This was not a Team decision when the group thought it was. They weren’t functioning as a Team, just a working group with no decision-making authority. Afterwards the Leader gets bent out of shape because the Leader doesn’t see ‘The Team’ implementing his decision. The individuals in the group are complaining amongst themselves about how the leader is ‘dictatorial’ and doesn’t value them.
The question for the Leader and their leadership group is not is ‘Team’ necessary the key is in clearly differentiating between team and non-team requirements for a given task and developing the teams capability to shift into different leadership modes, different leadership roles, and appropriate team membership composition depending upon the desired results. In other words, a balanced approach that exploits non-team as well a team approaches based on the need. Operating at this level requires learning by the group different from traditional ‘teambuilding’ exercises.
The effectiveness of the leadership group or ‘Team at the Top’ begins and ends with the Leader period end of discussion. If the Leader doesn’t like the way this group is working, they first have to look in the mirror. You are responsible for selection of members and setting the behavioral norms for the group. If you want open and honest dialogue in group conversation you have to model the behavior first.
Recently I read the results of a leadership group survey of over a thousand people who were members of a leadership group. Here are some highlights that didn’t necessarily surprise me. 14% of members strongly agree that members of their group are COMFORTABLE disagreeing with each other. Only 18% strongly agree that their group DOESN’T sugarcoat the truth. 19% strongly agree that when a decision is made by the group everyone is fully committed with no backstabbing or passive-aggressiveness.
How well the Leader(s) of these people thought about what was necessary to overcome these obstacles is difficult to say from these results. However, I would say these results are very common from my experience with leadership groups. As a Leader you will be better served in the long run by not referring to your leadership group as a Team if you are not willing to put in place what is necessary for it to truly perform as one.