When is a Team Not Really a Team or just a collection of individuals?

Introduction

I have been considering why Agile Teams have failed over the years.  There are many reasons.  One of my favorite failures have been applying the Agile concepts to a collection of individuals.  Many times, a collection of people are formed just so they can report up to a leader.  In this article I will cover the difference between what a true team is versus a collection.  I want everyone to consider the characteristics described below and ask yourself, do I have a team, or just a collection of people.  If the answer is a collection, then I want you to ask yourself, will implementing Agile help or due harm to their performance.

The concept of a team is ubiquitous in both organizational and social contexts, often perceived as a group of individuals working together towards a common goal. However, the reality is that not all groups labeled as "teams" function as such. There are instances where what is called a "team" is merely a collection of people working in parallel rather than collaboratively. Understanding the difference between a true team and a mere collection of individuals is crucial for effective management, productivity, and achieving desired outcomes.

Defining a Team

According to Richard Hackman, a team is defined by specific criteria: "a team is a group of people who are interdependent in the tasks they perform, who share responsibility for outcomes, and who see themselves and are seen by others as an intact social entity embedded in one or more larger social systems" (Hackman, 2002). This definition emphasizes interdependence, shared responsibility, and a cohesive identity as essential characteristics of a team. Without these elements, a group of people cannot function as a true team.

Characteristics of a True Team

1. Interdependence: Team members rely on each other to achieve their tasks. Their individual work is interconnected, and the success of one member often depends on the contributions of others. For example, in a surgical team, the success of the surgery depends on the coordination between the surgeon, anesthetist, and nurses. If one member fails, the entire operation is at risk.
2. Shared Goals: True teams have a common purpose or goal that unites them. This goal is not just a sum of individual objectives but a collective aim that requires joint effort. A sports team, for instance, aims to win a game, which cannot be achieved by any single player alone but requires coordinated effort from all players.
3. Mutual Accountability: In a true team, members hold each other accountable. They are not only responsible for their own tasks but also support and monitor each other's performance. This mutual accountability fosters a sense of commitment and collective responsibility.
4. Cohesive Identity: A team sees itself as a single unit, not just a collection of individuals. This identity is often reinforced by external recognition, such as when an organization or society views the group as a team. For example, a project team in a company is recognized both internally and externally as the entity responsible for a particular project.

When a Team is Just a Collection of People

1. Lack of Interdependence: In some groups, members work independently on tasks that do not require collaboration. For example, a group of sales representatives may be labeled as a "sales team," but if each representative works on separate accounts without needing to collaborate with others, they function more as individuals than as a true team.
2. Divergent Goals: If members have different objectives and do not work towards a common goal, they are not functioning as a team. For instance, in a committee where each member represents different interests and works on separate agendas, the group may not operate as a cohesive team but rather as individuals with their own priorities.
3. Absence of Mutual Accountability: Without a sense of shared responsibility, members do not feel accountable to each other, leading to a lack of commitment. This is often seen in workgroups where individuals are only responsible for their own output, and there is no mechanism for collective accountability.
4. Fragmented Identity: When members do not see themselves as part of a unified entity, the group cannot function as a team. This can occur in temporary groups formed for a specific task without any sense of continuity or shared identity, such as ad hoc committees that disband after completing their assignment.

Concrete Examples

Example 1: The Apollo 13 Mission

The Apollo 13 mission is often cited as a classic example of a true team in action. When a critical failure occurred during the mission, the astronauts and NASA's ground crew worked together in an interdependent manner, with a shared goal of bringing the crew safely back to Earth. Each member played a crucial role, and their success was a direct result of their collaboration, mutual accountability, and cohesive identity as a team.

Example 2: A Dysfunctional Corporate Team

In contrast, consider a corporate "team" tasked with launching a new product. If each department (e.g., marketing, R&D, finance) works in isolation, focusing solely on its own objectives without coordination or shared goals, the group is merely a collection of people. The absence of interdependence, mutual accountability, and a cohesive identity undermines the ability to function as a true team, often leading to project failure.

The Importance of Team Dynamics

The dynamics within a team are crucial for its success. Teams that fail to establish interdependence, shared goals, and mutual accountability are likely to underperform. Research has shown that teams with strong cohesion and clear, shared objectives are more effective and satisfied with their work (Katzenbach & Smith, 1993).

Leaders play a critical role in fostering a team environment. By encouraging collaboration, setting clear goals, and promoting a sense of shared responsibility, leaders can transform a collection of individuals into a high-performing team. Conversely, neglecting these aspects can result in a dysfunctional group, where members are disengaged and the potential for collective achievement is lost.

Conclusion

A team is not simply a collection of people working in proximity; it is a complex, interdependent system where members share goals, responsibilities, and a sense of identity. When these elements are missing, what may be labeled as a "team" is, in reality, just a group of individuals working separately. Understanding this distinction is vital for leaders and organizations aiming to harness the power of true teamwork. Effective teams are built on interdependence, shared goals, mutual accountability, and a cohesive identity, and it is these characteristics that distinguish them from mere collections of people.

References

• Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a "Big Five" in Teamwork?. Small Group Research, 36(5), 555-599.