Image: Tau Zero
The team in front of me had one person missing, one person talking, one person interrupting and one person actively engaged with... her phone. All in the same meeting, discussing their experience in the highly sought after accelerator programme.
I’m trained to ask penetrative questions, actively listen to what is being said and how, finely attuned to what is not being said. Observe body language, facial expressions, get a feel for the dynamics between people as well as notice potential fracture points. In this team there was an earthquake in the making and a big chance of a startup going nowhere.
What does a team NOT look like?
1. Each member is doing their own thing in a forum where team cohesion is important. You might not agree with what your colleague is saying but clocking out when she speaks is not an option.
2. Rolling your eyes, sighing or throwing your hands in the air when you don’t agree with what is being said by another team member.
Granted, this was an expressive Mediterranean team. Hot Latin blood and even hotter gestures and voices, but any gesture or comment that conveys contempt is a shortcut to destruction.
Although the work of the Gottman Institute focusses on the interaction between couples, the 4 Horsemen of the apocalypse definitely applies to teams as well.
3. Having completely different ideas about what your purpose is, where your product is going and when or whether to pivot or not.
Why are you not talking to each other? Are you working for the same startup? If you have opposing ideas about product, purpose, market and vision you come across as individuals working in silos and pulling in different directions.
4. Different rules for different people.
It is very difficult to build a culture of trust and accountability in a team when it is clear that there is favouritism at play. It is never okay, but easier to hide favouritism in larger organisations, in a small startup team it is virtually impossible and generally leads to resentment and fractured team dynamics.
5. The founder only swoops into the programme once in a while
A founder or founders should not underestimate the impact of their presence on the team. I'm not advocating micro-managing, it refers to knowing what is going on in the team simply by osmoses in the kitchen and corridor.Setting the tone for the culture, creating opportunities for communication and making sure the team members are aligned. You rely on your team to make your vision a reality and do what is best for the business, shouldn’t you also do what is best for your team?
6. The (mostly) absent founder hasn’t abdicated decision making
If you trust your team or want to build a culture of trust , give them a mandate to use their initiative and make decisions without having to check every decision with you beforehand. The Start-up world moves at a lightning pace and in an accelerator programme the pressure is high. It is frustrating and debilitating if your team has to wait on you for answers or instructions before they can move ahead.If you are too scared to abdicate decision making because you don’t trust your team’s ability to execute or make the right decision for the business, that is a completely different conversation…
If it is called a team, it should look like a team and act like a team. Especially, in front of investors! In a time of democratisation of ideas investors and customers bet on team not on idea.
Good teams talk and if they struggle to, they get someone like me to help them. They trust, they support and are supported, they value the same things, they have the same destination in mind and agree on what is in the best interest of the business.
There is an African proverb: “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go with others.” How far is your current team going?