top of page

Is your team high-performing?

What would a 20% improvement in team performance mean to you?

Leading today is tough. It can feel like an uphill battle. Never before have leaders, like you, faced so many unknowns.  Seemingly overnight, business results have become dependent on the output of newly formed remote and hybrid teams. Without intervention and support, many leaders are discovering that team performance and engagement suffers.  At present, less than 2 of every 10 teams consider themselves to be high-performing.  Ouch. The best leaders know how to tap into their team’s greater potential. They know that a great team rarely happens by chance. To achieve great results, their teams are actively engaged in learning how to work effectively with each other and with other teams - especially when the stakes are high. With this new reality, there is an even greater imperative for leaders to optimize team dynamics. Whether it's retaining critical talent, prioritizing areas of strategic focus or managing evolving work environments, teams are the foundation and the multiplier of business results - for better or for worse.  What if I told you coaching could improve team performance by 20%? When supported by a coach, teams better their performance. Coaches help teams to develop more effective decision-making processes, learn how to manage conflict productively, ensure the best ideas are heard and align on priorities. A coach is especially effective on leadership teams, new account teams or on a project or committee where the stakes are high. If you or anyone in your network is looking to improve team dynamics, ask me about the Team Leader View. It's an opportunity for you, the leader, to see how your team ranks against 14 team performance indicators.

PS. Most teams rate “constructive interaction” as the lowest of the 14 team performance indicators. These teams avoid criticizing, defensiveness and finger-pointing and see conflict as an opportunity for discovery, growth and creativity. Most importantly, these teams have team agreements to address conflict early and have developed skills for giving and receiving feedback in a manner that is specific and timely. Conversely, teams who rate themselves low in constructive interaction amass conflict debt; a term coined by Liane Davey to represent the sum of all undiscussed and unresolved issues that stand in the way of progress. In these teams, conflict is avoided at all costs. If any of this sounds familiar, check out the following resources: 


Recent Posts

See All



bottom of page