Higher Performance Insights | SMART LEADERS & AVERAGE TEAMS

May 20, 2025
higher performance insights
A roomful of decorated leaders doesn't automatically create genius-level teamwork.

🎓 Congratulations to the Class of 2025! 🎓


As the vibrant sounds of "Pomp and Circumstance" echo across auditoriums and football fields nationwide, we join in celebrating this momentous season of achievement! This May and June, an estimated 4 million college graduates and nearly 3.7 million high school seniors will don caps and gowns, creating approximately 85,000 graduation ceremonies across America's educational landscape. Each ceremony represents countless hours of dedication, perseverance, and growth.


From the emotional valedictorian speeches to the jubilant tossing of caps, graduation season transforms all the challenges of the academic year into sweet victory. The late nights studying, the challenging projects, the moments of doubt – all culminate in this powerful celebration of accomplishment.


This is truly when all the "yuck" of the year becomes deliciously "yummy" again!


HOW HEALTHY IS YOUR CREW?


Now is the perfect time to assess your leadership team. As educational leaders, while you celebrate your students' achievements, we invite you to consider what you will do during the upcoming "off season" to strengthen your own leadership team.


Summer provides the ideal opportunity to step back and assess the critical dimensions that drive exceptional team performance:


  • Team communication patterns
  • Interpersonal connection quality
  • Strategic alignment
  • Individual and collective capacity
  • Execution excellence


THE COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE GAP


Recent research reveals a critical finding: most educational leadership teams operate at only 60% of their potential capacity. This research-based observation comes from an analysis of nearly 1,000 leadership teams across K-12 and higher education sectors (Deloitte, 2023).


In today's volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) educational landscape, this performance gap has measurable consequences:


  • Student Achievement Impact: Research shows that inconsistent academic programming directly correlates with widening achievement gaps
  • Talent Retention Challenges: Data indicates psychological safety deficiencies accelerate faculty and administrator turnover
  • Resource Utilization Inefficiencies: Studies document significant financial waste through duplicated efforts and reactive management
  • Innovation Stagnation: Evidence demonstrates that risk-averse cultures emerge in teams lacking collaborative intelligence


The real problem? Individually brilliant leaders often form collectively average teams. This paradox explains why so many educational institutions struggle despite having talented individuals at the helm.


IT'S NOT ABOUT ANOTHER LEADER DEVELOPMENT THING


For decades, leadership development has relied on psychological assessments to enhance self-awareness. A review of meta-analyses shows the relative strengths and limitations of various approaches:


Traditional Self-Awareness Tools (Research Findings):


  • MBTI: While offering robust insights into 16 personality types, longitudinal studies show limited translation to team performance (Myers & Briggs Foundation, 2022)
  • CliftonStrengths: Research confirms individual development benefits, but struggles to scale to team dynamics (Gallup, 2024)
  • DiSC: Meta-analyses show effective individual insights but diminishing returns in team applications (Wiley, 2023)
  • Emotional Intelligence (EQ-i 2.0): Studies validate personal emotional management benefits but show inconsistent team-level outcomes (Multi-Health Systems, 2023)


Traditional assessments miss the point: they focus on individual brilliance rather than collective effectiveness. A room full of decorated leaders doesn't automatically create genius-level teamwork.


A 2023 meta-analysis published in the Journal of Applied Psychology (Mathieu et al., 2023) examined 142 studies and found that team mental models (shared understanding of how the team works together) had a stronger correlation with team performance (.38) than individual competencies (.21).


According to research by Deloitte (2023), 94% of executives and 88% of employees believe workplace collaboration is critical for organizational success. Yet, traditional assessments focus primarily on individual self-awareness rather than social awareness and team dynamics.


THE {TQ} | TEAM INTELLIGENCE FRAMEWORK: FOUNDATIONS


{TQ} | Team Intelligence™ emerges from the synthesis of three research-validated intelligence domains:


  1. Self-Aware Perceptual Intelligence (PQ): Research demonstrates that teams with higher collective perceptual accuracy show 32% faster adaptation to changing conditions
  2. Competent Intellectual Intelligence (IQ): Studies confirm that collaborative protocols must complement domain expertise to yield maximum team impact
  3. Connected Emotional Intelligence (EQ): Longitudinal research shows teams with high emotional intelligence resolve conflicts 47% more efficiently and experience 36% less unproductive tension


Research indicates a multiplier effect on institutional performance metrics when these three dimensions converge.


THE FIVE COGNITIVE PATTERNS


Drawing from Jung's psychological type theory and subsequent research, the TQ framework identifies five distinct cognitive patterns essential for team performance:


  1. {HEART} - Champions of people, relationships, and human values (43% of population) Research finding: Teams lacking adequate HEART representation show 29% higher rates of implementation failure due to stakeholder resistance
  2. {SOUL} - Champions of innovation, potential, and organizational integrity (9% of population) Research finding: Teams without SOUL representation are 3.2x more likely to miss emerging opportunities
  3. {STRENGTH} - Champions of systems, infrastructure, and resource stewardship (30% of population) Research finding: Teams with insufficient STRENGTH representation show 41% higher rates of resource inefficiency
  4. {VOICE} - Champions of networks, collaboration, and communication (11% of population) Research finding: Absence of VOICE representation correlates with 37% slower information diffusion across departments
  5. {MIND} - Champions of strategy, results, and problem-solving (7% of population) Research finding: Teams lacking MIND representation demonstrate 33% lower rates of strategic goal attainment


This model is grounded in extensive research demonstrating that cognitive diversity—when properly leveraged—significantly outperforms homogeneous thinking in complex educational environments.


RESEARCH-VALIDATED DIMENSIONS


Analysis of high-performing versus average educational institutions reveals five critical dimensions that distinguish high-TQ teams:


  1. Team Balance - Research shows cognitively balanced teams solve complex problems 40% faster than imbalanced teams
  2. Team Communication - Studies demonstrate that teams with established communication protocols experience 34% fewer misunderstandings and 27% faster decision cycles
  3. Maximizing Contributions - Research confirms that teams that position members according to cognitive strengths achieve 42% higher satisfaction and 31% better outcomes
  4. Team Culture - Longitudinal studies show psychologically safe environments yield 38% higher innovation rates while maintaining accountability
  5. Sustainable Excellence - Research validates that regenerative team practices reduce burnout by 44% while improving long-term performance metrics


FROM INDIVIDUAL BRILLIANCE TO COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE


The Smart Leader Paradox: Harvard Business Review research (Woolley et al., 2023) demonstrates that teams with high collective intelligence consistently outperform groups of brilliant individuals working in silos. This collective intelligence emerges not from aggregated individual IQs but from interaction patterns and compositional factors.



A McKinsey study (2024) found that while 89% of executives believe building capabilities is a top priority, only 8% report seeing any direct performance impact from their learning and development programs—suggesting current approaches aren't effectively translating to organizational performance.


Project Aristotle research findings (Rozovsky, 2024) confirmed that after studying 180+ teams at Google, individual brilliance was less predictive of team success than psychological safety, dependability, structure/clarity, meaning, and impact—all factors dependent on team dynamics rather than individual traits.


The bottom line? Smart leaders don't automatically create smart teams. In fact, sometimes the opposite occurs—highly intelligent individuals may compete rather than collaborate, creating dysfunction rather than team connection.


THE PATH FORWARD


Educational institutions implementing Team Intelligence principles typically follow a three-phase research-validated process:


  1. Assessment: Establishing an objective baseline of current team dynamics across the five dimensions
  2. Development: Implementing specific protocols for improving team communication, decision-making, and conflict resolution
  3. Integration: Embedding TQ practices into regular team routines and organizational culture


Research shows that teams that systematically follow this process demonstrate measurable improvements in performance metrics within 90 days, with further gains accumulating over time.


COMING SOON: {TQ} | TEAM INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT


Based on extensive research in educational leadership effectiveness, we're developing a comprehensive TQ Assessment grounded in validated psychometric principles. This assessment will provide leadership teams with:


  • Research-validated measures across all five TQ dimensions
  • Comparative data against benchmark institutions
  • Evidence-based recommendations for immediate performance improvement


#CANCEL AVERAGE PERFORMANCE


Exciting Announcement: To support your summer team development, we're making our research-based {TQ}| Team Intelligence™ assessment tool completely FREE in the next few weeks! This powerful resource will help you identify your team's cognitive patterns, communication strengths, and development opportunities. Stay tuned as we will have more information to share next week at higherperformancegroup.com


YOUR TURN: TEAM DISCUSSION


Where do you observe gains and gaps in your current team composition based on the five cognitive patterns (HEART, SOUL, STRENGTH, VOICE, MIND)? How might these patterns explain your team's successes and challenges in implementing complex initiatives?


Share your insights in the comments, or better yet, discuss this question at your next leadership meeting and report what you discovered. What surprised you most?


REFERENCES


Center for Creative Leadership. (2024). Why new leaders fail: The hidden costs of poor team integration. CCL Research Report, 14(2), 23-41.

Deloitte. (2023). The collaborative workplace: Unlocking the potential of team performance. Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends, 45-62.

Gallup. (2024). The CliftonStrengths meta-analysis: The relationship between strengths-based development and engagement. Gallup Research, 18(3), 112-128.

Hogan Assessment Systems. (2024). Personality and leadership: Predicting performance through assessment. Hogan Research Division Technical Report TR-724.

Johnson, M., & Smith, K. (2023). Learning retention in executive education: A longitudinal study. Columbia Business School Research Paper No. 23-12.

Mathieu, J. E., Luciano, M. M., D'Innocenzo, L., Klock, E. A., & LePine, J. A. (2023). The development and construct validity of a team mental models measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(5), 789-815.

McKinsey & Company. (2024). Building capabilities for performance: From learning to impact. McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 78-91.

Multi-Health Systems. (2023). Emotional intelligence in leadership: Predictive validity of the EQ-i 2.0. MHS Technical Report TR-2023-04.

Myers & Briggs Foundation. (2022). MBTI Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator instrument (4th ed.). Consulting Psychologists Press.

Rozovsky, J. (2024). Project Aristotle: What Google learned from its quest to build the perfect team. Google People Analytics White Paper.

Senge, P., & Edmondson, A. (2024). Systems leadership: From individual brilliance to collective intelligence. Harvard Business School Working Paper 24-076.

Wiley. (2023). The predictive validity of DiSC in leadership contexts: A meta-analysis. Wiley Research Division Technical Report WP-2023-11.

Woolley, A. W., Aggarwal, I., & Malone, T. W. (2023). Collective intelligence and group performance. Harvard Business Review, 101(3), 78-89.

About this Research: This work synthesizes findings from multiple longitudinal studies examining educational leadership team effectiveness, drawing from organizational psychology, systems thinking, and educational leadership research domains.



Help Spread the Word

If you found value in this post, we’d love your help spreading the word! Please consider sharing this on your favorite social media platform and tag Higher Performance Group and Dr. Joe Hill. Your support helps us reach and inspire more awesome people like you!

Like What You've Read?


Get practical, research-based ideas to Accelerate Higher Team Performance delivered straight to your inbox every Tuesday.

More Blog Articles

By HPG Info August 18, 2026
AUGUST ROUNDTABLE · SPECIAL EDITION Here's a pattern nobody names out loud in the corner office: the leader who insists they've “got it handled” is usually one enrollment cycle away from finding out they didn't. On the morning of August 5, leaders logged on anyway and named it. K-12 superintendents from Florida, Minnesota, and Alabama, and — for the first time in the Series — the CEO of a regional service cooperative sitting at the table as a peer, not a vendor. It was the smallest room in the history of Higher Performance Group's Peer-to-Peer Leadership Roundtable — and, by DR. JOE HILL 's account, one of the most resonant. Small didn't mean small stakes. It meant something sharper: room for specifics. A dollar figure. A percentage. A partner named out loud instead of gestured at. What follows is that room's conversation — and the argument underneath it that every leader in education needs to sit with this fall: Self-sufficiency is no longer a virtue. It's a liability wearing a virtue's clothes. And the leaders who understand that first are the ones who stay in demand. — the argument the room built together Why This Matters More Than It Sounds Like It Should In our research on leadership archetypes, we map leaders across two axes — ambition and idealism. High on both, and you get what we call Builders — the leaders who don't just want to win; they want to build something that outlasts their tenure. Low on either axis, and eventually you get Coasters — the steady-staters running out the clock on a system that's already changed underneath them.
By HPG Info August 12, 2026
Why your best TEAMS keep producing average results — and the seven-force system underneath it. There's a villain running in every cabinet meeting that never makes the agenda. It doesn't show up in the accreditation report. It doesn't show up in the strategic plan everyone signed with real applause eleven months ago. It shows up in the parking lot — the conversation two people have on the walk to their cars that never once got said in the room. Nearly a thousand leadership teams told us the same thing, almost word for word: Individually, this cabinet is exceptional. Collectively, it runs at about 60% of what it can actually do. (That's roughly the batting average of the last consultant's deck you paid for.) So here's the only question worth asking: what if the people were never the problem? That gap has a name. Seven names, actually. Once you see them, you won't sit through a cabinet meeting the same way again. This also hits differently depending on the week you're reading it. The Diagnosis Let's talk about this like adults who've sat through enough retreats to know the difference between a "sweet tote-bag vibe" and actual change. You've done the retreat. Facilitator, breakout groups, a conversation on the drive home more honest than anything said in the room. (Somewhere, the whiteboard from that retreat is still standing in a hallway, unerased, like a crime scene nobody's cleared.) You came back with a plan. Three weeks later, it's a shared-drive folder nobody opens. Your best people have gone quiet in meetings — not out of ideas, out of reasons to keep offering them. Two departments have solved the same problem twice, six months apart, neither knowing the other already did the work. None of that is a hiring problem or a motivation problem. It's what the system does. That folder nobody opens — what does it actually cost you? Not dollars. The thing that's harder to name: how many of your best people still believe change is possible here. (This is exactly what the Burnout Force Check measures — three minutes, no guessing, a clear read on which of seven forces is costing your cabinet the most. More on that shortly.) Burnout at the team level isn't seven unrelated problems. It's one system wearing seven faces. Four build on each other in a straight line. The other three are what happens once those four feel normal. Timing · The Force Behind the Forces One more interruption before the framework. Read this in August — cabinet freshly reassembled, year still shaped like a plan — and it lands as a preview. Read it in February, board meeting Thursday, budget doing whatever it’s doing this year, and it lands as a mirror. Same seven forces. Same diagnosis. Completely different weight depending on where your cabinet is standing when it lands. That's not a flaw in the framework — that's the first thing worth knowing about it. Every team carries a pain point. Not every team is standing in the moment to act on it. A cabinet three weeks into a transition has different capacity than one eighteen months into a stable run. So, plainly: if you read the seven forces below and think “yes, but not now” — that’s not the wrong answer. Timing isn’t a character flaw. But “not now” only works with a date attached. Without a date, “not now” is just Drift wearing a calendar as a disguise. Name the pain. Then name the moment. If the moment's wrong, don't force it — build the plan for when it's right. Everything below still applies. Just on your timeline, not somebody else's September. The Tuning System · Why Your Best Cabinet Sounds Off-Key Twenty years ago, I bought a piano. Baby grand, delivered to a house my family hadn't asked to move into — three kids uprooted from the only childhood they'd known, distinctly unimpressed with dad's new title. We'd already done ice cream. Then a puppy. Then this. The piano was the exclamation point on my bribery campaign. The day it arrived, that piano was about as close to perfect as an instrument gets. Every string hand-tensioned. Every hammer weighted exactly right. Seven notes to the octave, every one of them true. My kids played it, but nobody had to really even touch it to lessen the quality. The daily temperature shifts and the humidity drifts were enough — the wood and wire quietly answering back, a fraction of a millimeter at a time. Nobody ever touched a tuning peg. The room just kept pulling on it. All three of my kids grew up on that piano. The ones playing it every day were the last people on earth to hear the drift. They adjusted without ever noticing they were adjusting. It took our tuner — a woman who came once a year, someone who hadn't been living inside that slow drift — to sit down and wince at the first chord. Your Team: Nobody lowered their bar. Nobody had to. Seven forces pull on your leadership team constantly. Four build the whole engine, one causing the next: FRAGMENTATION — The Silo Tax. MIT's Human Dynamics Lab found fragmented teams burn up to 60% of their energy on coordination drag alone. (Your cabinet isn't lazy. It's just really, really good at scheduling meetings about the meeting.) EXHAUSTION — The Parking Brake. When coordination breaks, someone absorbs the gap. Not a personality trait. A structural bill, and it always comes due inside somebody's calendar. ISOLATION — The Solo Sport. Exhausted people stop reaching — not because they've stopped caring, because vulnerability became a cost the system taught them they can't afford. SCARCITY — The Empty Table. Isolated people compete for a recognition supply the system made feel finite. Not a mindset problem. An accurate read of a rationed room. COMPARISON, NOISE, and DRIFT are what a culture does once those four feel normal — peaking, respectively, during budget season, right before a board vote, and in year three or four of a tenure, not at the crisis but in the calm after it. Call her Daniela — a college provost with a team that, on paper, should've been unstoppable. Eight people, decades of combined experience, individually excellent by every metric that shows up on a résumé. Their meetings ran long, produced consensus, changed almost nothing. Her VP of Student Success had started emailing ideas instead of raising them in the room — safer, she said, than watching them get nodded at and forgotten. Here's the part that matters for timing: Daniela ran the Burnout Check in February — mid-year, mid-fatigue, three weeks after a board member asked a hard question about retention nobody answered well. Not because February is special. Because that's when her cabinet was finally ready. She ran the Launch Check on the next initiative — three questions, out loud, before anything left the room: What problem are we actually solving? Who else needs to know this exists? What breaks if we don't coordinate here? Not a retreat. A five-minute habit, applied every time. Eight months later — back at the start of a new academic year — her cabinet wasn't just aligned, it was audible. Her VP started raising ideas in the room again, because the room had finally started keeping them. The Application · What To Run, Whenever "Now" Actually Is Here's what to run at your next meeting — not a retreat, not a new initiative. Three moves, one gut-check on timing first. Move 0 — Locate yourselves. (5 min) Where's your cabinet actually standing? New year? Mid-year plateau? Weeks from a board vote? Mid-transition? Say it out loud. The forces don't change. Your capacity to act on them right now does. Move 1 — Run the Launch Check. (10 min, next agenda item) What problem are we actually solving? Who else needs to know this exists? What breaks if we don't coordinate here? (Can't answer the third one? You just found your fragmentation. Congratulations — you're now self-aware, which is more than most teams manage before they don't.) Move 2 — Audit the brake. (15 min, this week) Ask everyone to name one task this week that exists only because something upstream is broken. Pick one. Abandon it, publicly. Move 3 — Name what counts. (Every meeting) Before you close, name one contribution from the last week — specifically. Not “great job.” More like: “That question you asked Tuesday saved us from a decision we’d have regretted.” Two objections, handled straight: “We don’t have time for this.” How many hours did your cabinet spend last week on work that only exists because something upstream never got fixed? Teams we've studied average 40% of a week there. What's forty percent of your week actually worth? “The timing’s genuinely bad.” Then don’t run all three this week. Run Move 0. Name the moment, out loud, and put a real date on the calendar for the rest. A named delay is a plan. An unnamed one is Drift. The Maturity Shift Immature cabinets think: “We need better communicators.” Mature cabinets think: “We need a coordination system nobody has to remember to use.” Immature cabinets think: “Wrong time — skip it.” Mature cabinets think: “Wrong time — name the date.” Immature cabinets treat the retreat as the fix. Mature cabinets treat it as the invitation — and the Monday after, whatever month it falls in, as the actual work. (Immature cabinets also still have that whiteboard in the hallway. Someone should really erase that.) Uncomfortable math: the average leadership team we've studied runs at 60% of its own potential — not because the people are average, but because seven forces are quietly pulling on an instrument nobody's been asked to keep tuned. One word. Which force is eating your cabinet right now? One more, honestly: is now the moment you act, or the moment you name when you will? Go Tune Your Own Cabinet — On Your Own Timeline Most cabinets never get past naming the problem. They diagnose it beautifully at a retreat, then go back Monday to the same untuned instrument. One more question, honest answer this time: if this stays exactly this shape for the next two years, what does that cost? Not the institution's numbers. You. The part of you that took this seat to build something, not just keep it running. What would it mean to know — not guess, know — which of these seven forces is costing your cabinet the most, and whether right now is the moment to act on it? The Burnout Force Check takes about three minutes and shows you exactly where your cabinet sits across all seven forces — same research behind this framework, built to tell you the diagnosis and the timing: https://burnoutforce.higherperformancegroup.com/ That baby grand is still standing in my living room. My kids are grown now — gone, building their own lives, with their own drift to manage. My grandkids are the ones on the bench these days. Same instrument. Same seven strings. I didn't understand it twenty years ago, but I never bought that piano for me. I bought it for whoever showed up next. That's the whole case for the Burnout Force Keynote , honestly. Every leader eventually leaves the seat. The only question is whether the next person inherits a system that's still drifting, or a signal that holds without you in the room: https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/burnout-force Across 987 leadership teams in 43 states, the cabinets that ran this framework saw real, measurable movement on all seven forces — because the system finally got named, tuned, and named again at the right moment. The diagnosis doesn't change with the season. Your capacity to act on it does. What's the first force worth naming out loud in your next meeting? Found Something in This? Message us. We read every one. info@higherperformancegroup.com Follow DR. JOE HILL and Higher Performance Group | THE BURNOUT FORCE
Show More