Matt Sakaguchi on the Key to High Performing Teams at Google

0m:57s Introductions

1m:27s Key outcomes from the research by Julia Rozovsky into what separated effective teams from not so effective teams at Google

1m:50s Five attributes that separated effective teams from the rest:

1m:55s Psychological safety – people feel comfortable taking a risk or asking a question and know they will be supported by their team mates, they feel safe to share personal and “crazy” ideas

2m:45s Dependability – the knowledge that team mates will deliver quality outputs and meet their commitments

3m:05s Structure & clarity – the team has well defined roles and responsibilities, everyone knows what they are supposed to do and they do it

3m:25s Meaning – the work has personal meaning to the individual team members

4m:11s Impact – the team members can see the value they bring to the greater good through their work

4m:58s Highly dependable teams don’t need a lot of structure.   If a team is already dependable then adding structure can be detrimental, however if they are not yet a highly dependable team then structure improves effectiveness

5m:50s The difference between psychologically safe and unsafe teams – safe teams beat targets by 17%, unsafe teams missed their targets by 19%

6m:20s The link to psych safety is definitely causal – psych safety caused teams to be more effective

6m:54s Individual accountability matters and team outcomes are supported by high performing individuals

7m:54s Balancing individual goals with team goals – find the project which helps achieve both, and follow through on commitments when asking individuals to make tradeoffs

9m:13s The team will take care of you as long as you are giving your best effort to the team

9m:24s You must follow through on promises in order to have credibility

9m:47s How Google used to hire which resulted in “all-star” teams that are less effective than “championship teams” who understand the roles and support one another

11m:15s The San Francisco Giants as an example of a team who do well by being a cohesive unit rather than a group of all-stars

11m:44s What Google does to build psych safety on a team and overcome the “must look good” factor that supresses innovation and ongoing learning

12m:32s Creating a learning environment where you can ask each other lots of questions and collaborate to solve problems together

13m:05s Treat problems as learning problems not execution problems results in collaboration and learning increasing in a team

13m:17s Learning environments are exciting and people stay, in performance environments people burn out and leave

13m:38s Diversity does make a difference – diversity in many aspects, not just gender and ethnicity but also diversity of thought, creating an environment where everyone feels they can bring their whole self into work

14m:10s Example of how respect for different points of view changed the way some social activities were organized

14m:55s Being intentional about supporting diverse viewpoints and being inclusive is incumbent on leadership

14m:15s If people feel included and respected they will do better work

15m:35s Applying these ideas beyond Google.  See the Five Dysfunctions of a Team as an example of publicly available content.  The Google research confirmed a lot of the results from different studies done elsewhere.  

16m:20s Contrasting Matt’s experiences in the police department in a Patrol Team vs a SWAT team. (See his talk here)

Mentioned:

• Ocado Technology
• Google
• Five Dysfunctions of a Team