Team coaching: a group into a great team

The first function of a leader is to lead the team, beyond the individuals within it. However brilliant your people are, they won’t reach their full potential, or be greater than the sum of the parts, unless they work effectively together toward the organisation’s purpose.

“It’s better to have a great team than a team of greats.” — Simon Sinek

The first function of a leadership team (including the CEO) is to enable the conditions for the organisation to flourish, including removing barriers to success. Team coaching is a practical way to create those conditions.

Why invest in team coaching (based on what’s actually going wrong)?

From what I’m seeing inside organisations:

• Over-investment in operational management: Senior teams spend hours in meetings, fighting for air space, doing work that doesn’t need the whole team, while feeling productive because they’re busy.
• Under-investment in strategic leadership: Rarely making time for big-picture thinking and co-creation - collaborative problem-solving and system improvement.
• Individualised accountability that breeds silos: KPI/target structures incentivise turf protection, resource fights, and blame for anything “outside my department.”
• Lack of purpose, focus and structure: Teams without a clear shared purpose struggle to prioritise, make decisions and communicate with one voice.
• An “absent team” where a team is needed: Without a true team, cross-functional alignment and efficient systems don’t happen, and performance suffers.
• Low psychological safety: People don’t feel safe to challenge, admit mistakes or raise concerns. It’s too risky, too likely to backfire.

Team coaching targets these failure modes in the room, with the real team, while they’re doing their real work.

What does good look like (and how can coaching help you get there)?

Research and evidence point to three foundations of highly effective teams (Lencioni, 2002; Clutterbuck, 2007; Wageman et al., 2005). More recent studies reinforce these fundamentals, showing that clear purpose, effective structures, and psychological safety remain the bedrock of team effectiveness across industries (Patil, 2023; Jin et al., 2024; McKinsey, 2024).

Clear, shared purpose

Teams can articulate why they exist, who they serve and what only they can achieve together (distinct from, but aligned to, organisational purpose). Purpose can and should evolve with stakeholder needs.

In coaching: we map stakeholders, test assumptions and get to a crisp, shared “north star” that guides focus, timing and effort.

Questions to consider:

• What do our stakeholders need us, as a team, to achieve together?
• What can only be achieved in this team?
• What is our contribution to enabling the success of the whole organisation?

Translating purpose into what we do

Purpose is necessary but not sufficient. High-functioning teams co-create roles, responsibilities, expectations and simple systems to achieve their purpose collaboratively (not in silos).

In coaching: we make the invisible visible - who owns what (team vs. individuals), how decisions get made, and how work flows across boundaries.

Questions to consider:

• What do stakeholders need us to do to achieve our purpose?
• What can’t be done anywhere else?
• What do we need to do here to enable the organisation to thrive?

“The session on detailing the JD for being part of the team was particularly useful.” — Team feedback

Agreeing on how we work together

This is often skipped in favour of “doing,” and the cost shows up later in rework, muddled decisions and strained relationships. High-performing teams make and keep explicit agreements about meetings, behaviour, norms and culture. They embody and represent the spirit of the team even when apart.

In coaching: we co-create a simple team charter, practice challenge and support, and learn to call each other back to what we agreed.

Recent studies confirm why this matters: psychological safety is strongly linked to team learning, efficacy and productivity (Patil, 2023), and open communication behaviours mediate the link between psychological safety and innovation (Jin et al., 2024). Recent studies of software and research teams show that inclusive norms and leadership behaviours directly enhance safety and collaboration (Jones et al., 2024; Santana et al., 2025).

Questions to consider:

• What do we need from each other to do our best work?
• What might get in the way?
• How do we want to support and challenge each other?
• How do we need to be with stakeholders to amplify the team’s value?

What’s the leader’s role (and how does coaching support it)?

None of this happens by accident. The team leader is critical.

Own the process

Hold the contract on behalf of the team, bring conversations back to purpose, invite what’s “really going on,” and hold the team (and yourself) accountable for change.

Know yourself and show up authentically

Notice triggers and armoured responses; choose to step into being calm, clear, curious, courageous and compassionate.

Model the behaviours you expect, especially vulnerability

Think and act strategically, share dilemmas, problem-solve collaboratively, give and receive feedback with positive intent, and be willing to have courageous conversations. Trust is the fuel of high-performing teams, and vulnerability is the spark (Brown, 2018).

Recent large-scale studies support this: McKinsey (2024) found that teams high in trust, communication and decision-making were significantly more efficient and effective than their peers. Leaders who demonstrate vulnerability and consistency create conditions for these dynamics to flourish.

“Noticing how my approach can be perceived has increased my awareness—and I continue to work with the team to adapt.” — Team feedback

What does team coaching look like in practice?

There isn’t a single blueprint for team coaching. Coaches bring different approaches and foci depending on their training, philosophy and the context of the team. What matters is transparency, fit, and alignment with the team’s needs.

Some common features include:

Working with real teams on live work

Coaches may join meetings and support real-time decisions, helping teams shift dynamics in practice (Hawkins, 2017).

Exploring systemic perspectives

Systemic team coaching highlights stakeholders, interdependencies and the wider organisational context (Hawkins, 2011).

Building psychological safety and relational capacity

Coaches often work directly on trust, vulnerability and communication. Recent studies show these factors are directly linked to innovation and team success (Jin et al., 2024; Jones et al., 2024).

Developing shared norms and structures

Clarifying roles, responsibilities, and behavioural agreements helps reduce ambiguity and strengthen accountability (Clutterbuck, 2007).

Equipping the leader to sustain progress

Some approaches focus more on leader development, ensuring the conditions last beyond the intervention (Hackman & Wageman, 2005).

Each of these elements can be valuable. The key is to ask:

• Do we need more focus on strategy or relationships?
• Do we need clarity of purpose or better collaboration in practice?
• How much should the coach work directly with the leader vs. the whole team?

Recent reviews confirm that team coaching is not a one-size-fits-all process. A 2025 systematic literature review concluded that team coaching effectiveness depends on multiple boundary conditions, including team type, leader involvement and context (Ratiu et al., 2025).

For me personally, what is most important is to hold dual attention on (1) the process and (2) the team dynamics - in other words, to not lose one in favour of the other.

The best coaching is not about drama, but about disciplined attention to the things that make teams effective. If you want your leadership time together to become a catalyst for organisational performance (rather than a drain), team coaching is a practical, human way to get there. 

References

• Brown, B. (2018). Dare to Lead. Random House.
• Clutterbuck, D. (2007). Coaching the Team at Work. Nicholas Brealey.
• Edmondson, A. (2019). The Fearless Organization. Wiley.
• 5jhHawkins, P. (2011/2017). Leadership Team Coaching. Kogan Page.
• Jin, H., et al. (2024). The impact of team psychological safety on innovative performance. Frontiers in Psychology.
• Jones, M. S., et al. (2024). Facilitating psychological safety in science and research teams. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, Nature.
• Lencioni, P. (2002). The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable. Jossey-Bass.
• McKinsey (2024). Go Teams: When teams get healthier, the whole organisation benefits.
• Patil, R. (2023). Investigating the impact of psychological safety on team learning and efficacy. The Open Psychology Journal, 16.
• Ratiu, L. et al. (2025). Team coaching: Three questions and a look ahead — systematic literature review. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice.
• Santana, B. et al. (2025). Psychological safety in software workplaces: A systematic literature review. arXiv preprint.
• Wageman, R., Hackman, J. R., & Lehman, E. (2005). Team Diagnostic Survey.