After more than 20 years in corporate communications, I’ve used the word “team” countless times. Yet somehow, I had never encountered an academic definition of a team.
I recently read The Wisdom of Teams (Katzenbach & Smith) and was introduced to The Team Performance Curve—a framework that defines different types of groups working together. Here’s a simplified version of what the authors had to say:
🔹 Working Group
Members share information, best practices, and perspectives to help individuals perform better, but there’s no meaningful increase in their collective performance. (Think: round-robin meetings where everyone provides updates and moves on, taking what they learned and using it to enhance their own work.)
🔹 Pseudo-Team
The weakest group. Members aren’t focused on collective performance and aren’t genuinely trying to achieve it. They may call themselves a “team”, but these groups consume time, energy, and effort without creating any shared work. (Think: the meetings where everyone is multitasking and wishing they had their time back.)
🔹 Potential Team
These groups sincerely want to improve collective performance and impact, but they lack clarity, discipline, accountability, or alignment around goals and deliverables. (These folks are making progress, but it’s often messy, and when things go wrong, “blame and shame” can quickly show up.)
🔹 Real Team
People with complementary skills who are equally committed to a common purpose, shared goals, and a defined way of working. They hold themselves and each other accountable. (Trust is strong, conflict is productive, and success is a joint result versus driven by the heroics of a few.)
What surprised me most was their distinction between a real team and a high-performing team.
The authors say high-performing teams achieve exceptional results together, AND are also deeply committed to every member’s personal growth, development, and success.
I’ve heard the phrase “high-performing team” used in almost every organization I’ve worked in and partnered with, but these experts suggest that truly high-performing teams are rare. Based on their definition and my personal experience within and supporting organizations, I’d have to agree.
My takeaways:
👉 If you’re leading a working group, call yourself a working group, not a “team.”
👉 If you’re leading a pseudo-team or potential team, focus on taking your group to the next level.
👉 And if you’re fortunate enough to be leading a real or high-performing team, look to export your magic within your organization. Because these are the groups that feel great to be on, get work done, and retain talent.
For me, this was a great reminder that words matter and teams are nuanced. As leaders, coaches, and communicators, we should be precise about the language we use, honest about where we are on the curve, and intentional about what we’re building together.
If you’re interested in learning more, definitely pick up the book!
