High-Performing or Just Getting It Done?
On a complex residential build not long ago, the landscape architect and project architect each assumed the other had covered site drainage. The plans looked polished, bids were locked in, and construction was well underway before anyone realized that the patio’s grade didn’t account for water runoff. Correcting it meant re‑grading, redesigning, and renegotiating—expensive work after the contractor was already deep into construction and tied to a fixed price and timeline. It wasn’t negligence; it was a classic example of experts working in parallel. No single scope was “wrong,” but the group dynamics made it hard to catch a gap that mattered. Moments like that make me ask: are we functioning as a working group, or are we acting like a high‑performing team?
Working groups are collections of capable people who share information but don’t rely on each other to complete the job. Communication tends to happen at hand‑off points, and success is defined by hitting individual deliverables. This setup works well when tasks are modular and interdependence is low. No shame in it; sometimes that’s exactly what the project needs.
High‑performing teams, by contrast, are interdependent and united by a shared purpose. Members feel responsible for the whole outcome, not just their own contract. They start by aligning on goals and norms—what Erickson coaching calls “contracting”—so everyone is clear on how they’ll work together. If you label a working group a “team” without establishing that contract, frustration and confusion can follow.
What turns a group into a team? Research points to a few essentials. Amy Edmondson’s work at Harvard shows that psychological safety—the shared belief that it’s safe to speak up and take risks—is the single biggest predictor of team effectiveness. Vanessa Druskat’s studies on Team Emotional Intelligence (Team EI) found that teams outperform working groups when they cultivate norms for helping one another succeed, learning and growing together, and engaging. Belonging—feeling known, valued and influential—is the glue that holds these norms. In one manufacturing study, high‑performing teams generated nearly $10 million more per year because they listened to each other, acknowledged contributions and addressed issues.
The practical takeaway isn’t just about preventing costly surprises; it’s about unlocking the next level of performance. Top experts—the designers, engineers and builders we partner with—don’t show up just for a paycheck. They want to create something remarkable together. Research shows that when teams invest in shared norms and trust, they don’t just avoid problems; they deliver significantly higher. Edmondson’s work reminds us that psychological safety fuels, and Druskat’s Team EI studies show that belonging and shared learning unlock collective.
Before you decide how to organize your group, consider these questions:
Are our tasks truly interdependent, or can we work in parallel with minimal coordination?
Does this project deserve more than “good enough”—are the stakes and ambitions high enough that we want to create something exceptional together?
Are we willing to invest in the trust, feedback and shared norms that allow us to challenge each other and raise the bar?
If your answer to the second and third questions is yes, you’re likely ready for a high‑performing team. That’s where professionals get to do their best work, tap into their intrinsic motivation and deliver outcomes that feel like a career highlight. When the stakes are high and the work is messy, committing to team relationships and norms isn’t just nice—it’s the difference between a project that meets expectations and one that sets a new standard.