The pressure placed on the teams by the demands of the markets all too often leads to replacing the "weak links" rather than developing the collective potential of the teams. But according to this Harvard study, when we know each other better, we work more efficiently ...
Before replacing the "players", we must consider the potential synergy and complicity of a team in place, in relation to the impact of the arrival of new members, who have no experience in common with the rest of the group.
A recent Harvard study on the subject shows that when the degree of familiarity among team members increases by 50%, errors decrease by 19% and budget overruns by 30%.
Another study shows that a team that is heterogeneous in terms of the experience of its members, can compensate for its handicap and progress when with seniority, its members know each other well. The Harvard study reveals a 10% performance increase, assessed by customers.
Thus a team in place, even if it is not the best has considerable potential: when people know each other better, they work more efficiently.
Source: Harvard business review dec 2013, study by Robert Huckman and Bradley Staats At a time when market demands are exerting an hard to bear pressure on incumbent teams, the solution is too often to replace the "weak links" rather than develop the collective potential of the teams
