Latest / The Science of Leading / From Gut Feel to Data: Using Teamwork Self‑Assessments to Build Stronger Teams

Transcript

From Gut Feel to Data: Using Teamwork Self‑Assessments to Build Stronger Teams · The Science of Leading

• 0:00
  So, Edwin, I keep hearing managers say,
• 0:02
  "My team has a teamwork problem." But when you and I were prepping,
• 0:05
  you pushed back on that.
• 0:06
  You said it's usually a visibility problem.
• 0:08
  What do you mean by that?
• 0:08
  Most teams aren't falling apart because people
• 0:12
  suddenly forgot how to be adults.
• 0:14
  What's really happening is that different people experience the same
• 0:18
  team completely differently... and nobody can see those differences.
• 0:22
  One person thinks communication is clear,
• 0:25
  another feels totally in the dark.
• 0:27
  One thinks decisions are decisive,
• 0:30
  another experiences them as chaotic.
• 0:32
  Without visibility into those gaps,
• 0:35
  it all gets labeled as "bad teamwork."Right,
• 0:38
  and then it shows up as missed deadlines,
• 0:40
  messy meetings, uneven contributions... but nobody can quite explain why.
• 0:44
  It's just this vague frustration.
• 0:44
  Exactly.
• 0:46
  And that's where a teamwork self‑assessment comes in.
• 0:49
  It's basically a structured set of questions where people rate specific
• 0:54
  behaviors: how communication works,
• 0:56
  how they collaborate, how the team makes decisions.
• 0:59
  It's behavior‑focused and time‑anchored-usually the last four to
• 0:59
  eight
• 1:04
  weeks-so you're not asking, "Are you a good team player?" You're asking,
• 1:08
  "What actually happened recently?"So it's not a personality test,
• 1:12
  and it's not some secret performance scorecard.
• 1:12
  That's an important distinction.
• 1:17
  It's not a verdict on who you are,
• 1:19
  and it shouldn't be a hidden performance rating.
• 1:22
  The goal is to see patterns that either help or quietly block the team's
• 1:26
  progress.
• 1:27
  Things like: Do we clarify next steps?
• 1:30
  Do we listen before we argue?
• 1:32
  Do we surface problems early or wait until the last minute?
• 1:32
  Let me play
• 1:37
  the manager for a second.
• 1:38
  I'm busy, my team's under pressure.
• 1:40
  Why should I spend time on a questionnaire instead of "just fixing the
• 1:44
  problem" in a meeting?
• 1:44
  Because that meeting usually turns into opinions
• 1:48
  competing with other opinions.
• 1:50
  The loudest person wins.
• 1:52
  A short, well‑run self‑assessment gives you structured input from everyone-quiet
• 1:57
  voices included.
• 1:58
  You start to see, for example,
• 2:00
  that communication looks fine to leadership but confusing to the frontline.
• 2:04
  Or that collaboration is strong inside the team but falls apart at handoffs
• 2:08
  with another group.
• 2:08
  So instead of,
• 2:10
  "We're bad at teamwork," you get,
• 2:12
  "Our listening is decent, but our decision‑making process is inconsistent,
• 2:16
  and that's where we're losing time."Exactly.
• 2:19
  And once you can name that, you can coach it.
• 2:22
  Now you can prioritize: "Over the next month,
• 2:26
  we're going to tighten how we make and document decisions," instead of
• 2:29
  trying to fix everything at once.
• 2:31
  Plus, those same dimensions-communication,
• 2:34
  collaboration, flexibility, leadership-map directly to business
• 2:34
  outcomes:
• 2:40
  fewer dropped balls, less rework,
• 2:42
  faster alignment on goals.
• 2:42
  I like that you're tying it back to outcomes.
• 2:47
  This isn't about everyone feeling warm and fuzzy in meetings.
• 2:50
  It's about making teamwork visible enough that you can actually improve
• 2:53
  execution.
• 2:53
  That's the business case.
• 2:56
  Visibility turns vague frustration into specific patterns.
• 3:00
  Once you can see the patterns,
• 3:02
  you can change the behaviors.
• 3:03
  And when behaviors improve, performance usually follows.
• 3:03
  Alright,
• 3:08
  so in this episode we're really talking about that bridge: from invisible
• 3:11
  dynamics to actionable patterns.
• 3:13
  In the next part, we'll get into how to design a self‑assessment that
• 3:17
  people actually trust-and don't roll their eyes at.
• 3:17
  Okay,
• 3:21
  Edwin, let's say I'm sold.
• 3:22
  I want to run a teamwork self‑assessment with my team.
• 3:25
  Where do I start without making it feel like homework... or surveillance?
• 3:25
  Good
• 3:29
  instincts.
• 3:29
  The structure matters a lot.
• 3:31
  A practical design uses five to seven sections: communication,
• 3:36
  listening, collaboration, flexibility or adaptability,
• 3:41
  decision making, leadership or coaching,
• 3:44
  and often a section on problem solving and innovation.
• 3:47
  Each section has a handful of clear,
• 3:49
  behavioral items-so maybe 25 to 40 statements in total.
• 3:49
  And the scale
• 3:55
  is that classic one-to-five agreement scale,
• 3:57
  right?
• 3:57
  Yes, a simple five‑point Likert scale works very well: strongly
• 4:03
  disagree up to strongly agree.
• 4:05
  The key is clarity.
• 4:06
  For example, "In team discussions,
• 4:09
  expectations and next steps are stated clearly," or,
• 4:13
  "Team members ask clarifying questions before disagreeing." Short,
• 4:18
  observable, and anchored in recent behavior.
• 4:18
  You also like adding a few
• 4:23
  scenarios, which I thought was interesting.
• 4:23
  Scenarios help people answer
• 4:27
  based on how the team really behaves under pressure,
• 4:30
  not just how they see themselves.
• 4:32
  So you might ask, "A deadline is at risk because a dependency is late.
• 4:36
  What happens next in your team?" Or,
• 4:39
  "Two team members disagree on approach.
• 4:41
  How does the team reach a decision?" Two to four of those is plenty.
• 4:41
  Let's
• 4:47
  talk rollout, because this is where people get nervous.
• 4:49
  Anonymous or identified?
• 4:49
  For development,
• 4:52
  anonymous is usually better.
• 4:54
  You aggregate results at the team level,
• 4:56
  you don't share individual scores.
• 4:58
  That encourages honesty and reduces defensiveness.
• 5:02
  If you ever decide to use identified responses-for coaching,
• 5:06
  for example-you have to be very explicit: who can see the data,
• 5:10
  what it will be used for, and what it will not be used for.
• 5:10
  So no twelve‑paragraph
• 5:16
  policy nobody reads.
• 5:17
  Just clear, plain language.
• 5:17
  Exactly.
• 5:19
  And a few other design choices matter.
• 5:22
  Give a realistic time estimate-eight to twelve minutes-and put it at
• 5:27
  the top.
• 5:27
  Ask everyone to think about the last four to eight weeks of work.
• 5:31
  And keep conditions consistent: same instructions,
• 5:35
  same time window, same scale for everyone.
• 5:35
  What are the fastest ways to
• 5:40
  screw this up?
• 5:40
  I feel like that's what managers really want to know.
• 5:40
  Three big pitfalls.
• 5:45
  First, making it feel like homework-too long,
• 5:48
  too abstract, or full of jargon.
• 5:50
  People rush through and the data is noise.
• 5:54
  Second, mixing evaluation with development.
• 5:57
  If people suspect it's secretly tied to performance ratings,
• 6:01
  honesty disappears.
• 6:02
  Third, running it once, sharing nothing,
• 6:05
  and never following up.
• 6:07
  That teaches everyone that surveys don't matter.
• 6:07
  Yeah,
• 6:11
  the "black hole survey." People answer,
• 6:13
  nothing happens, trust goes down.
• 6:13
  Right.
• 6:16
  A good self‑assessment is short,
• 6:18
  clear, and followed by action.
• 6:20
  And if, later on, you want to go beyond self‑report,
• 6:23
  you can complement it with structured tools-things like psychometric
• 6:27
  assessments-to reduce bias.
• 6:29
  But the starting point is simple: ask about real behaviors,
• 6:33
  protect psychological safety, and commit to doing something with what
• 6:37
  you learn.
• 6:37
  So design it like you respect people's time and intelligence.
• 6:42
  Then we can focus on the hard part: turning those scores into better
• 6:45
  teamwork.
• 6:45
  Alright, we've run the assessment,
• 6:48
  we've got the data.
• 6:49
  I'm a manager staring at a dashboard: communication 3.
• 6:49
  4,
• 6:53
  collaboration 2.
• 6:53
  8, decision making 3.
• 6:53
  9,
• 6:57
  and some overall teamwork score.
• 6:59
  What do I actually do with this?
• 6:59
  Step one is to read it the right way.
• 7:03
  Don't obsess over the single overall score.
• 7:06
  Start with the subscales-the averages for each dimension.
• 7:10
  Those tell you where the real leverage is.
• 7:13
  Then use a simple rubric.
• 7:15
  For example: scores above 4.
• 7:15
  1 are "strong and consistent," 3.
• 7:15
  1 to 4.
• 7:15
  0
• 7:22
  are "solid with improvement areas," 2.
• 7:22
  1 to 3.
• 7:22
  0 are "inconsistent," and
• 7:28
  below that is "high risk."So in my example,
• 7:30
  collaboration at 2.
• 7:30
  8 is in that "inconsistent,
• 7:33
  probably hurting us" zone.
• 7:33
  Exactly.
• 7:36
  Next, you translate that into what people actually see and feel.
• 7:41
  Low collaboration often shows up as missed handoffs,
• 7:44
  uneven workload, or projects that stall unless someone chases constantly.
• 7:49
  Weak communication looks like people leaving meetings unsure about owners
• 7:54
  and deadlines.
• 7:55
  Weak decision making shows up as rework and revisiting the same decision
• 8:00
  three times.
• 8:00
  I like that because managers can literally look at their week
• 8:04
  and go, "Oh, that's why we keep redoing the same slide deck."That's the
• 8:08
  goal.
• 8:08
  Then you convert those insights into very focused actions.
• 8:12
  At the team level, pick one or two behaviors for the next four to six
• 8:16
  weeks.
• 8:17
  For low collaboration, you might say,
• 8:19
  "In every meeting, we'll end by naming owners,
• 8:22
  due dates, and what 'done' looks like for shared tasks." Or,
• 8:26
  "We'll set simple handoff rules between teams."And at the individual
• 8:30
  level?
• 8:30
  You can give each person a short summary: top two strengths,
• 8:35
  top one or two growth areas, and one "start" and one "stop" behavior
• 8:39
  for this week.
• 8:40
  For example, "Start: summarize next steps in chat after meetings.
• 8:45
  Stop: assuming others know your priorities without saying them." Keep
• 8:49
  it behavioral, not about personality.
• 8:49
  So you're not telling someone,
• 8:54
  "You're not collaborative." You're saying,
• 8:56
  "For the next month, confirm owners and deadlines before you leave the
• 8:59
  room."Precisely.
• 9:00
  Then you wrap this in a simple improvement cycle.
• 9:03
  First, share results in a safe,
• 9:06
  transparent way-team‑level themes,
• 9:08
  not a wall of numbers.
• 9:10
  Second, agree on two or three small experiments tied to those themes.
• 9:15
  Third, run them consistently for four to six weeks.
• 9:18
  Finally, reassess with the same questionnaire and see what shifted.
• 9:18
  And
• 9:24
  if things aren't moving, that might be the moment to add more objective
• 9:27
  data-like a structured assessment-to understand how people's natural styles
• 9:31
  are interacting with the team's habits.
• 9:31
  Yes,
• 9:35
  that can help separate "can't" from "won't" and reduce some of the bias
• 9:39
  in how we interpret behavior.
• 9:40
  But the engine is still the same: make teamwork visible,
• 9:44
  pick specific behaviors, practice them,
• 9:47
  and check back.
• 9:47
  So if I boil it down for anyone listening: your team probably
• 9:52
  doesn't have a mysterious teamwork problem.
• 9:54
  You've got blind spots.
• 9:55
  A short, honest self‑assessment makes those visible,
• 9:58
  you pick a couple of concrete habits to work on,
• 10:01
  you run them for a month or so,
• 10:02
  and then you see what changed.
• 10:02
  And you repeat.
• 10:05
  That rhythm-measure, act, learn-is how culture actually changes,
• 10:11
  one behavior at a time.
• 10:11
  Edwin, this was great.
• 10:14
  Thanks for walking through the practical side,
• 10:15
  not just the theory.
• 10:15
  Always a pleasure,
• 10:18
  Claire.
• 10:19
  These are the conversations I wish more teams were having.
• 10:19
  Alright,
• 10:23
  we'll wrap it there.
• 10:24
  If you're listening and thinking about trying this with your own team,
• 10:27
  start small, be clear about why you're doing it,
• 10:29
  and commit to at least one change afterward.
• 10:32
  Edwin, thanks again-and we'll see all of you in the next episode.