Why The Health Of Your Lead Team Matters (And A Tool To Help Improve It)

September 12, 2022

Why does the health of your leadership team matter?

Healthy teams build reliable systems. Period. I have never observed an unhealthy team that was not stealing the trust, time, and focus of those it was employed to serve.

We have all worked in unhealthy systems and have a few stories to tell, right?

Healthy systems build healthy culture. Healthy culture attracts (and keeps) your best talent.

This is a universal truth seen in our everyday off-campus engagements as well.

At Zappos or Southwest: Healthy teams deliver better service
At Costco or Trader Joe’s: Healthy teams yield strong customer loyalty

What is team health?

We often think of ‘healthy’ as being a human characteristic. We consider those healthy behaviors if we take care of ourselves, eat well, and exercise regularly. So how do we translate “healthy” to a team?

Like humans, teams are living organisms.

Teams carry emotions, encounter conflicts, and seek a sense of purpose. Since we spend so much effort on measuring our human health (e.g., weight, blood pressure, body fat, etc.), it makes sense that we should also invest time in measuring team health.

How to measure team health?

For decades, campus systems have conducted employee opinion surveys around organizational climate and culture. They are delivered to your inbox under many names: employee engagement, employee satisfaction, employee commitment, or employee attitudes.

It’s probably safe to say nearly zero people get excited when it comes time to take the annual employee satisfaction survey.

Am I right, or am I right?

Employee engagement is the byproduct of team health, and it matters—a lot. In fact, according to a recent Gallup report, organizations with the highest employee engagement outperformed their competitors by 2.5 times. That same Gallup report found that 70% of the U.S. workforce was disengaged, and 20% are actively working to sabotage your system’s strategic objectives.

What was the number one influencer of team health? The leader’s and the Lead Team’s performance.

Change is inevitable. Irrelevance isn’t.

But the reality is that far too many campuses aren’t shifting quickly enough.

That’s why I’m on tour with the RECLAIM MOMENTUM {LIVE} Keynote. It’s a value-packed event where we’ll dissect the 6 Lead Measures of Building Irresistible Campus Culture and get equipped with a framework to lead successful change with less resistance.

Here are three reactions that I regularly hear from average leaders:

“Team health doesn’t really matter. People will do the job I need because I pay them well.”

You could be correct, but only if they do simple and repetitive work. For teams who lead people or whose job requires creativity or judgment, the evidence is overwhelming that engagement makes a HUGE difference in their ability to contribute to the institution's goals.

“My team’s health seems ok. I don’t think it is a problem.”

You may be right, but considering the high disengagement rates, the odds are against you. How would you know for sure?

“My team is beyond hope. Improving their engagement is a lost cause, so I will put my energies elsewhere.”

That's also problematic. Giving up on your Lead Team is giving up on your culture and community. Where your top team goes, so goes the culture. Healthy leaders create healthy culture.

This is also true if you flip it around.

The thing that is so powerful about disengagement is that there are so many ways to improve it with such little investment.

The first (and most potent) step is to start measuring the health of your team and lovingly confront your reality.

Here is the best news of all. Measuring team health does not need to be a mystery. The narrative can actually pivot from:

“I think our team communicates well”
To - Our team COMMUNICATION score was 3.7 out of 5.

“I think our team connects well with each other”
To – Our team CONNECTION score was 3.1 out of 5.

“I think our team is aligned with our goals and strategies”
To – Our team ALIGNMENT score was 4.2 out of 5.

“I think our team is ready to take on a few more new initiatives”
To – Our team CAPACITY score was 2.9 out of 5.

“I think our team’s performance is out of this world”
To – Our team EXECUTION score was 3.8 out of 5.

“I think our team operates within a highly reliable system”
To – Our SYSTEMS score was 4.0 out of 5.

Like a fine gemstone, your team culture has facets that, when healthy, become vividly brilliant and attractive to your world.

These facets are the Lead Measures of your system’s culture:

Communication: The quality of the exchange of internal and external information between leaders and teams.
Connection: The quality of leader-to-leader relationships and team collaboration.
Alignment: The aspiration to achieve the same vision through common values, strategies, and goals.
Capacity: The quality of the conditions allowing for the team to produce at high levels of performance.
Execution: The quality of the team’s ability to take action upon its highest priorities.
System: The quality of reliable principles and procedures that work as an interconnected network to maximize mission delivery.

Remember: Measuring team health is just one step toward better employee engagement, but this alone is often enough to trigger surprising improvements in team performance.

Your “Game On” Switch

The Lead Team 360™ Survey is a highly reliable instrument used across hundreds of campus and district sites in the U.S.

As your organization faces increasing internal and external challenges, the effectiveness of teams in delivering on performance goals will become a key source of difference between those systems that are successful and those that fall behind their competition.

The Higher Performance Lead Team 360™ is a proven and effective tool to promote social awareness and create transparency in communication through trust, sharing, and increased clarity towards your organization’s expected goals and behaviors. The overall purpose of this feedback process is to optimize Higher team Performance in the Lead Measures of Culture (mentioned above).

If you are a campus or district leader struggling with average team performance, you will want to access this FREE assessment tool.

This semester, HPG is offering the Lead Team 360™ FREE to qualified leaders committed to administering the diagnostic across their executive and leadership team(s) of 10 or more.

Schedule your pre-qualifying call with us with two simple clicks.

Schedule a Call

Change is inevitable. Irrelevance Isn't.

What’s your strategy to RECLAIM YOUR MOMENTUM?

I’m hosting virtual coffee sessions with campus, district, and building leaders this fall to discuss the challenges of leading beyond crisis, where I will share the tips and tools to Reclaim Your Advantage.

It’s time to build (not rebuild) capacity to lead the uncharted territory ahead.

You get pushback, opposition, confusion, and anger without a proven strategy.

With better practice, you’ll be equipped to lead something more significant and more impactful than you might ask or imagine.

Claim your Virtual Coffee here.

Remember, average performance is a choice.

Trade up for Higher Performance here.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

More Blog Articles

Higher Performance Insights | THE PARALYSIS TAX

By HPG Info • August 5, 2025

Why Standing Still Costs More Than Moving Forward - Leader Insights for Campus and District Leaders Last Tuesday at 9:30 AM, you gathered your most trusted leadership team to discuss AI policy implementation. The stakes felt enormous—student futures, academic integrity, competitive positioning, all hanging in the balance. Two hours later, you'd facilitated an excellent discussion. Thoughtful questions raised. Valid concerns explored. Multiple perspectives honored. And made zero decisions. While your team debated implementation frameworks, six-year-olds in Beijing finished their mandatory AI literacy class—not as a pilot program, but as core curriculum required by the Chinese government starting this fall. Here's the research finding that stopped me cold: 89% of students already use ChatGPT for homework, yet only 35% of education leaders have concrete implementation plans —despite 97% recognizing AI's transformational benefits.¹ The uncomfortable truth? This article isn't really about AI. It's about the decision-making paralysis that's quietly bleeding your institution's competitive advantage while you perfect your process. B - The Hidden Crisis Behind Brilliant Teams I call it the Paralysis Tax —the compounding cost of choosing certainty over progress, perfection over momentum. Recent MIT research reveals something that challenges everything we believe about high-performing leadership teams: The institutions paying the highest Paralysis Tax aren't those with incompetent leaders. They're the ones with brilliant leaders who can't decide together. ² Dr. Sarah Chen's groundbreaking study of 847 educational leadership teams found that cognitive diversity—typically an asset—becomes a liability when teams lack protocols for leveraging different thinking styles. The result? Paralysis disguised as thoroughness. The Analytics Pattern : Data-driven leaders research comprehensive AI statistics but miss critical human adoption dynamics unfolding in real-time. The Harmony Pattern : Relationship-focused leaders prioritize stakeholder comfort over necessary change, inadvertently protecting the status quo. The Systems Pattern : Process-oriented leaders create policies that are perfectly efficient but systematically exclude innovation opportunities. The Innovation Pattern : Visionary leaders pursue cutting-edge solutions while overlooking essential infrastructure and change management needs. The Results Pattern : Performance-focused leaders push for immediate wins without establishing sustainable frameworks, resulting in implementation chaos. Each pattern brings essential value. But teams trapped in pattern dominance pay the Paralysis Tax while competitors methodically pull ahead. R - What Research Reveals About Decision Velocity Harvard Business School's three-year study tracking 500 educational institutions exposes the compound cost of decision paralysis with startling clarity:³ Strategy Paralysis : Teams spending 40% more time in planning phases without measurably increasing implementation success rates Innovation Stagnation : Institutions falling 18 months behind early adopters in student preparedness metrics that matter to employers Talent Exodus : 23% higher turnover among innovative educators in institutions with chronically slow decision-making processes Student Disadvantage : Graduates entering a workforce where AI literacy has shifted from a bonus skill to a baseline expectation Stanford's Leadership Institute research adds another dimension: Teams with time-bounded decision-making processes demonstrate 64% higher implementation success rates and 27% greater team satisfaction.⁴ The most expensive cost? Watching peer institutions systematically pull ahead while you're still forming exploratory committees. E - The Chinese Advantage: Cognitive Balance in Action China's remarkable AI education momentum isn't about superior resources or governmental mandate—it's about cognitive balance in collective decision-making . Their national AI education guidelines integrate technical training with ethical reasoning, individual skill development with collaborative applications, and innovation acceleration with systematic implementation protocols.⁵ While Western institutions agonize over academic integrity policies, Chinese universities teach responsible AI use as core competency. The measurable result? Nearly 60% of faculty and students use AI tools multiple times daily within clear ethical frameworks. ⁶ They're not smarter than us. They're not better funded than us. They're thinking differently TOGETHER. This is what breakthrough looks like when teams develop what MIT's Center for Collective Intelligence calls "Team Intelligence"—the capacity to leverage all cognitive perspectives in service of collective action rather than collective analysis. A - HOW TO: Transform Analysis Paralysis Into Strategic Action Step 1: Diagnose Your Team's Cognitive Imbalance (10 minutes) - Before your next strategic meeting, ask each team member to complete this rapid assessment: "What's your primary concern about [current challenge] implementation?" (Listen for pattern dominance) "What would need to be true for you to confidently support moving forward?" (Identify activation conditions) "What's the measurable cost of waiting another semester to act?" (Create urgency alignment) Pattern recognition is everything. Analytics leaders will cite research gaps. Harmony leaders will mention stakeholder resistance. Systems leaders will identify process deficiencies. Innovation leaders will point to infrastructure limitations. Results leaders will emphasize timeline pressures. Step 2: Practice "Loving Your Opposites" (Structured Integration) - Harvard research demonstrates that teams with cognitive diversity outperform homogeneous teams by 87% on complex decisions—but only when they have explicit protocols for leveraging these differences.⁷ Use this exact language sequence in your next decision-making session: "I need to understand how [opposite perspective] would strengthen our approach to this challenge." "What specific evidence would you need to see to feel confident about this direction?" "How can we honor both [innovation/stability, speed/thoroughness, individual/collective needs] in our implementation strategy?" Step 3: Implement the 72-Hour Decision Protocol - Transform endless discussion into bounded decision-making: Hour 1-24 : Individual preparation using each member's cognitive strengths Hour 25-48 : Collective decision-making session with structured perspective integration Hour 49-72 : Implementation planning with type-specific accountability measures Warning: Teams resist time boundaries initially. Stay firm. Parkinson's Law applies to decision-making: Work expands to fill available time, including decision-making work. K - The Collective Intelligence Multiplier Effect Here's what breakthrough teams understand that struggling teams often miss: Individual expertise becomes exponentially more powerful when combined through collective intelligence protocols. MIT's Center for Collective Intelligence research tracking 1,000 educational leadership teams reveals that high-Team Intelligence (TQ) teams demonstrate:⁸ 40% faster problem resolution in complex, multi-stakeholder situations 27% higher team member satisfaction and retention rates 35% more strategic objectives achieved within original timelines 52% better stakeholder confidence in leadership decisions These teams don't avoid difficult challenges—they approach them systematically through cognitive balance rather than cognitive dominance. Phase 1: Cognitive Balance Integration - Ensure analytical rigor AND relational wisdom, systematic planning AND innovative exploration, immediate results AND long-term sustainability thinking are represented in every major decision. Phase 2: Collective Decision-Making Protocols - Transform natural tension into creative energy through structured processes that capture diverse perspectives and build trust through differences, not despite them. Phase 3: Synchronized Execution - Leverage each thinking style's implementation strengths by utilizing accountability systems designed for diverse approaches, rather than relying on one-size-fits-all monitoring. T - From Individual Brilliance to Collective Transformation Last week, a superintendent shared this with me: "We spent eight months developing our AI policy framework while our students taught themselves to use it and our competitor district launched their implementation." That's the Paralysis Tax extracted with compound interest. But here's the deeper pattern I see everywhere: How many institutions have spent the last four years—eight semesters—refining shared governance models while the world fundamentally transformed around them? Committee after committee. Framework after framework. Policy about how to make policies about policies. All while enrollment shifts, technology advances, workforce demands evolve, and students graduate into a reality we're still debating how to prepare them for. The institutions that consistently thrive don't wait for perfect processes. They start with imperfect action, guided by collective intelligence protocols. They leverage early adopters while systematically addressing implementation concerns. They teach ethical AI use through comprehensive practice rather than prohibition. They iterate their way to competitive advantage instead of waiting for competitors to prove viability. Your students deserve leaders who can think together as powerfully as they think individually. Your community deserves decision-making velocity that matches the pace of change they're navigating. The question isn't whether AI will transform education—that transformation is happening with or without your participation. The question is whether your leadership team will guide that transformation or be managed by it. H - Your Strategic Choice Point Every day you spend perfecting your decision-making process is a day your students fall further behind global peers who are learning to work WITH emerging realities, not around them. Will you pay the Paralysis Tax another semester? Or will you invest in the collective intelligence that transforms uncertainty into your system's strategic advantage? The Paralysis Tax compounds daily. But so does the competitive advantage of teams that learn to decide together as brilliantly as they analyze individually. Your choice. Your students' futures. Your legacy as leaders who could think together when it mattered most. READY TO TRANSFORM? Stop hoping individual experts will eventually coordinate better. Start building the collective intelligence that creates breakthrough results for students. The first step is understanding your team's current intelligence quotient. In just 5 minutes per team member, you can discover: Where your team defaults to individual rather than collective thinking Which cognitive perspectives naturally enhance group intelligence How to transform your most challenging dynamics into breakthrough collaboration Discover Your Team Intelligence → Take the 5-Minute Educational Leadership Team Assessment https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/the-group

Higher Performance Insights | LEADER INSIGHTS: SUMMER SEMESTER "HOW TO" SPECIAL EDITION

By HPG Info • July 29, 2025

Real HOW TO solutions from real educational leaders---and the research-backed answers that can transform how you navigate the complexities of modern leadership When 62% of senior leadership teams report significant gaps in psychological safety---the very foundation they're supposed to create for others---we have a leadership crisis hiding in plain sight. Every semester, I receive hundreds of questions from district and campus leaders through our executive coaching exchanges. These conversations occur in confidence — during leadership intensives, one-on-one coaching sessions, and late-night calls when the weight of responsibility feels overwhelming. This summer semester, I decided to pull some of the most compelling questions and share my thoughts publicly, restructuring them using the innovative "HOW TO" approach pioneered by Bradley Fuster and San Francisco Bay University . Their brilliant transformation of traditional course titles—eliminating the yawn-inducing "English 101" or "Intro to Marketing" in favor of practical "HOW TO" titles—has revolutionized how students engage with learning. We're applying that same energy to leadership challenges. These aren't hypothetical scenarios — they're real challenges from real leaders in districts and on campuses across the country. Names have been changed for confidentiality, but the struggles are authentic. If you find this format helpful, let me know. We plan to make this a special semester edition going forward. HOW TO: Maintain Psychological Safety for Your Team When You Feel Like You're Drowning Original question: "How do you maintain psychological safety for your team when you yourself feel like you're drowning? I'm supposed to be the calm, confident leader, but inside I'm struggling with imposter syndrome and the constant pressure to have all the answers." - Maria, University Vice President for Academic Affairs Maria, you've hit on the central paradox of every modern leader of people and systems: You can't give what you don't have, yet your role systematically strips away the very conditions you need to create for others. Recent research, tracking 769 K-12 staff members over four years, revealed predictable patterns in educational psychological safety. While 51% maintained stable-high levels and 44.8% remained at stable-medium, 4.2% experienced dynamic-low psychological safety. But here's what the research doesn't capture: Leaders often exist in a separate category entirely, experiencing what I call " psychological safety deficit disorder ." The stakes become even higher when we examine senior leadership dynamics specifically. Studies of nearly 300 leaders over 2.5 years found that teams with high degrees of psychological safety reported higher levels of performance and lower levels of interpersonal conflict. For senior leadership teams, where research found members reported the greatest differences in their perceived levels of psychological safety, 62% of senior teams demonstrated significant variability. The Calibrated Vulnerability Solution Maria, here's what you need to understand: Your imposter syndrome isn't a personal failing---it's an occupational hazard. When you're constantly in "performance mode," authentic connection becomes impossible. But psychological safety isn't built through perfection; it's built through what I call "calibrated vulnerability." Start with one person — your most trusted team member — and practice transparent leadership. "I'm working through this challenge and here's my thinking..." This isn't weakness; it's modeling the very behavior you want to see in your organization. The psychological safety you create for others begins with the psychological safety you create for yourself. When you demonstrate that uncertainty is acceptable, that thinking out loud is valuable, and that perfection isn't the standard, you give your team permission to do the same. Understanding psychological safety challenges leads us naturally to the next critical area: recognizing when those challenges are pushing leaders and teams toward burnout. HOW TO: Recognize Early Warning Signs of Burnout (That 90% of Leaders Miss) in Yourself and Your Team Original question: "What early warning signs should I watch for in myself and my team to prevent burnout before it becomes a crisis? I've seen too many good people leave education because they reach their breaking point." - Robert, Superintendent of Schools Robert, you're asking the right question at exactly the right time. A comprehensive meta-analysis of 348 studies involving over 3.6 million participants found that educational leadership impact on student achievement diminished significantly during exceptional circumstances like the COVID-19 pandemic---and burnout is often the culprit. The early warning signs aren't what most leaders think. It's not the obvious exhaustion or irritability. It's the subtle shifts that happen weeks before the crash: Individual Level Warning Signs: Decision fatigue masquerading as perfectionism Emotional numbing disguised as "professional boundaries" Innovation paralysis---when everything feels like a risk Team Level Warning Signs: Decreased psychological safety, which research shows is consistently associated with greater perceived supports and lower burnout Communication becoming transactional rather than relational Loss of collective problem-solving capacity System Level Warning Signs: Increased reliance on formal authority instead of influence Policy creation as a substitute for leadership presence Meeting multiplication- when committee work becomes the primary communication strategy The Sustainability Audit Framework The intervention framework I use with leaders: Implement what I call " sustainability audits " monthly. Ask your team: "What's one thing that's energizing you right now? What's one thing that's draining you?" Track patterns, not just individual responses. When you catch burnout in its early stages — before the obvious symptoms appear — you can address the root causes rather than managing crisis symptoms. Preventing burnout requires honest assessment, but it also demands the courage to have difficult conversations when performance issues arise. This brings us to one of leadership's most delicate challenges. HOW TO: Have Tough Conversations with Star Faculty Who Aren't Performing Without Losing Their Institutional Knowledge Original question: "How do you have tough conversations with long-term faculty members who aren't performing but have institutional knowledge you can't afford to lose? I feel stuck between accountability and preservation of relationships." - Jennifer, College President Jennifer, you've identified what researchers call "the competence-commitment paradox "-when emotional investment in people conflicts with organizational performance needs. Recent research on school leadership during crises has found that democratic, humanistic, and participatory leadership styles are most effective in maintaining mental health and performance; however, these approaches require skilled navigation of exactly this tension. The mistake most leaders make is treating this as an either/or choice: accountability OR relationship preservation. High-performing institutions understand it's a both/and challenge that requires what I've developed as the "fierce compassion framework" — a both/and approach that honors relationships while driving results. The Fierce Compassion Framework: Step 1 - Separate the person from the performance. Start the conversation with: "I value you and your contributions to this institution. That's exactly why we need to address this performance gap." Step 2 - Make the institutional knowledge visible. "Your understanding of our campus culture and history is invaluable. I want to find ways to leverage that while also ensuring you're set up for success in your current role." Step 3 - Create a growth pathway, not a correction plan. Research indicates that individuals respond more positively to development opportunities than to performance improvement plans. Focus on building capacity, not just addressing deficits. Step 4 - Set clear timelines with support systems. "Here's what success looks like, here's how I'll support you, and here's our timeline for seeing progress." Having the conversation IS preserving the relationship, not destroying it. Avoiding it destroys both the relationship and the performance. Even when we master difficult one-on-one conversations, we still face the broader challenge of leading change across diverse groups with varying levels of experience and buy-in. HOW TO: Lead Change When Your Most Experienced Faculty Resist While Your Newer Leaders Lack Credibility Original question: "How do you lead change when your most experienced faculty resist new initiatives, but your newer department chairs lack the credibility to drive implementation? I feel caught between generational divides." - David, University Vice President for Strategic Initiatives David, you're dealing with what recent leadership research identifies as the distributed leadership challenge — how to harness collective intelligence while managing natural resistance to change. This isn't actually about generational divides; it's about recognizing expertise and changing ownership. Studies on distributed leadership show that transformative change happens when leadership becomes "a collective endeavor involving multiple stakeholders" rather than top-down mandate implementation. The key is creating what I call "expertise bridges." The Expertise Bridge Strategy: Phase 1 - Map the real expertise. Your experienced staff have implementation wisdom; your newer staff have innovation energy. Neither group has complete expertise — and that's your advantage. Phase 2 - Create mixed-expertise teams. Pair your most experienced faculty with your most innovative department leaders. Give them shared ownership of both the problem definition and solution design. Phase 3 - Use resistance as data. When experienced faculty resist, they're often identifying implementation challenges that enthusiastic newcomers miss. Reframe resistance: "What implementation challenges is this concern highlighting?" Phase 4 - Build credibility through collaboration. Let your newer department chairs gain credibility by successfully partnering with respected faculty veterans, not by challenging them. The breakthrough happens when both groups realize they need each other to succeed. Your job isn't to choose sides — it's to orchestrate that realization.