Background
The leadership of a specialised division within a company providing IT-related products and services recognised that their team had the potential to perform at a much higher level. Despite having skilled individuals, collaboration felt disjointed, roles were unclear, and tensions were surfacing in day-to-day work.
Previous attempts to improve team dynamics had not led to lasting change, and it became clear that a deeper approach was needed. Beyond improving teamwork, the organisation aimed to build the team’s capabilities, strengthen competencies, and create a structure that would increase effectiveness and revenue.
To achieve this, the company engaged Leanseed to assess team dynamics, identify root causes, and develop a strategy that would create lasting improvements in cohesion and performance.
Framework and approach
We chose the Individual-Group-Organisational (IGO) framework (Cummins, 2009) as the foundation for the project, using it to assess the organisation as a system of interdependent parts. By focusing on the group level, we evaluated how well the team functioned within its broader organisational context.
As always, we used the Design Thinking process to direct how we gathered and analysed information. We spent time listening to the team, uncovering their challenges, and defining their core needs before moving into solutions. This approach ensured that our interventions reflected real and broad experiences rather than assumptions, creating a foundation for meaningful change.
Phase 1 - empathise: understanding the team’s experience
For gathering insights, we used a mixed-method research approach, combining qualitative perspectives with measurable data to inform the analysis. This phase focused on understanding the team’s lived experiences, ensuring a comprehensive view of their challenges and dynamics.
Research methods used
- Interviews and organisational analysis
Leanseed engaged leadership to understand the unit’s history, goals, and structure. A review of job descriptions and performance agreements helped identify gaps in clarity, alignment, and collaboration. - Group workshops and observation
Workshops, facilitated by Vicka and Tshifhiwa, encouraged open discussions on ways of working. Through team exercises and real-time observation, we identified collaboration patterns, communication challenges, and role perceptions. - Surveys and assessments
To quantify insights, Leza designed custom surveys, including a team health survey based on The Five Dysfunctions of a Team (Lencioni, 2022), a pulse survey on engagement and leadership support, and a company values assessment to evaluate cultural alignment. - One-on-one conversations
Tshifhiwa conducted online semi-structured interviews with team members, providing deeper perspectives on strengths, challenges, and alignment within the team.
By integrating these methods, we developed a comprehensive understanding of the team’s experience, ensuring that recommendations would be grounded in real insights. Engaging with the team in depth and maintaining anonymity where needed fostered trust and openness.
Phase 2 - define: clarifying the team’s challenges
We took a multi-perspective approach to evaluating team effectiveness, integrating insights from multiple frameworks to explore key dimensions of performance, accountability, commitment, conflict resolution, and trust. We presented our findings through the following lenses:
- Individual-Group-Organisational (IGO) framework, which allowed us to assess how different levels of the organisation interacted and influenced team effectiveness.
- The Five Dysfunctions of a Team framework (Lencioni, 2002), which helped us identify barriers related to trust, conflict resolution, commitment, accountability, and results orientation.
- Organisational-level insights, gathered through a pulse survey that captured employee sentiment on engagement, workload balance, and leadership support.
- Culture-level insights, which examined how individuals and teams aligned with and applied company values in daily operations.
The analysis covered the following topics
Challenges and opportunities for improvement were related to the following themes:
- Alignment with collective goals, evaluating how well teams worked towards shared objectives and whether defined processes supported efficiency.
- Accountability and ownership, assessing structures that reinforced shared responsibility, performance expectations, and peer-driven accountability.
- Commitment to decisions and follow-through, examining how defined roles, individual aspirations, and team-wide agreements contributed to engagement and goal achievement.
- Constructive conflict management, exploring how the team navigated challenges, engaged in open discussions, and maintained psychological safety.
- Trust and team cohesion, investigating how transparency, vulnerability, and mutual respect supported long-term collaboration.
By examining these aspects from multiple perspectives, we developed a comprehensive understanding of team effectiveness and identified key areas for strategic intervention to strengthen performance and cohesion.
Phase 3 - ideation: a systemic approach to team performance
As part of our recommendations, we outlined a structured approach to enhance team cohesion and performance by addressing both systemic and operational challenges.
Foundational structures
We emphasised the need to strengthen foundational structures by improving onboarding, resource allocation, and communication systems, while ensuring stakeholder roles and expectations were clearly defined. Establishing success metrics would provide a means to track progress and sustain improvements.
Individual and team development
To support individual and team development, we recommended targeted training and leadership initiatives to build expertise, improve decision-making, and strengthen engagement. Aligning roles with skills and career growth opportunities would help maximise both performance and job satisfaction.
Team dynamics
To improve team dynamics, we proposed initiatives to enhance integration and communication while clarifying roles to reduce duplication and inefficiencies. Encouraging a knowledge-sharing culture would foster collaboration and strengthen long-term team resilience.
Performance management and accountability
For performance management and accountability, we advised establishing clear goals aligned with business priorities, along with structured feedback and evaluation processes to drive continuous improvement. Recognising and rewarding contributions would reinforce motivation and engagement.
Long-term impact
To ensure long-term impact, we highlighted the importance of refining role clarity and workflows, strengthening transparency through improved communication strategies, and fostering trust through open conflict resolution. Reinforcing commitment and accountability would encourage shared responsibility, while embedding a results-driven culture would prioritise collective success over individual achievements.
These recommendations provided a clear roadmap for strengthening the team’s effectiveness within its broader organisational context, ensuring long-term success through a structured and sustainable approach.
Conclusion
Many organisations try to improve team performance by focusing on outputs, such as productivity, deadlines, or revenue. While this may yield short-term gains, it fails to address the underlying system that shapes team dynamics. A team is not an isolated unit but part of a larger organisational structure influenced by leadership, culture, communication, and individual motivations.
Team-building activities are often used to strengthen relationships, but while they may be fun, they are ineffective as a standalone intervention. Trust, cohesion, and motivation cannot be built through one-off exercises but require deliberate and ongoing efforts that address structural and behavioural factors within the team’s environment.
By applying a systemic approach, we help companies and teams move beyond surface-level solutions to focus on core drivers of team effectiveness. Real change happens when clarity, trust, and accountability are embedded in the organisation, making high performance a natural outcome rather than a forced effort.
References
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2009). Organization development & change. South-Western/Cengage Learning.
Lencioni, P. M. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team. Jossey-Bass.