Designing High-Performance Teams: Lessons from Coach K Masterclass (1 of 2)

Building truly high-performing software teams can feel (and sound) like trying to catch lightning in a bottle, can’t it? 

It required a salad of things to come into place at one time. Discipline, Trust, and commitment are among other elements in this mix. 

Yet, despite the inherent complexities, high-performing software teams can be designed.  And when you get it right, the sustainable increases in productivity can be truly game-changing. The literature has several of these models to choose from.

Among them, I have always liked Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development for diagnosing team dynamics and establishing a performance baseline through which these teams can reflect and improve. This model also merges nicely with the “5 Dysfunctions of a Team” by Patrick Lencioni. The dysfunctions identified by Lencioni can be observed within Tuckman’s stages to help a team understand the causes of their performance challenges

Enter 2025, last Christmas, I got a MasterClass subscription, which I am enjoying thoroughly.   I have just finished Coach K masterclass. Coach K’s approach to leadership places significant energy on the people within the team and the organisation. I found myself drawing from the previous models and challenging my previous understanding of them.

He emphasises the culture, reminding team members why they are there, what their principles are, and the non-negotiables every day. Key aspects of his philosophy include taking communication seriously, fostering empathy, and empowering individuals rather than simply delegating tasks. He advocates for seeking respect by building trust, leading with integrity, and telling the truth, viewing wins as a by-product of setting clear standards

This value-based approach offers insights into addressing the challenges described by Lencioni within the developmental context of Tuckman’s stages.

This article is a reflection on ways to apply these models more effectively. It will begin with a summary of the background models, followed by a summary of insights drawn from Coach K’s Masterclass and conclude (in the next instalment) by integrating these concepts, with a link to their application in software development teams

Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development

Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development is a model used for diagnosing team dynamics and establishing a performance baseline to help teams reflect and improve. The model suggests that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships are established, and the leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership. The real value in using the model is in recognising where a team is in the developmental process and assisting it to enter a stage consistent with collaborative work. Teams can move to a different stage each time they form or change, and a team can fall back into an earlier stage if, for example, a new member joins or a member misses meetings. Project guides or leaders should be ready for this and help the team return to later stages as quickly as possible

The stages are commonly known as:

1. Forming (Awareness):
   • At this stage, team members come together and learn about the project, their roles, and each other. It’s crucial to establish clear goals, project scope, and expectations.
2. Storming (Conflict):
   • As the team starts working together, conflicts may arise due to differences in opinions, approaches, or personalities. This stage is essential for addressing these conflicts constructively.
3. Norming (Cooperation):
   • During this stage, the team begins to resolve conflicts and establish norms and procedures for collaboration.
4. Performing (Productivity):
   • In this stage, the team reaches its full potential, working together smoothly to achieve project goals.
5. Adjourning (Closure):
   • As the project nears completion, it’s essential to celebrate achievements and reflect on lessons learned.

Note that the model is not necessarily sequential; team members leaving can trigger closure stages, or unresolved conflict can trigger forming stages. The value of the model is in interpreting the behaviour of the team and finding ways to guide them to higher stages of performance.

The five dysfunctions of a team

The first half of the book is presented as a fictional novel centred around a CEO facing the challenge of uniting a dysfunctional executive team. The model reveals five natural but dangerous pitfalls that prevent organisations from achieving genuine teamwork. These dysfunctions are not isolated issues but form an interrelated model, where being susceptible to even one can hinder a team’s success.

The five dysfunctions are described as follows:

1. Absence of Trust

This is the foundation of real teamwork. The absence of trust stems from an unwillingness among team members to be vulnerable within the group. It is a failure to understand and open up to one another. Members of great teams are unafraid to admit their mistakes, weaknesses, and concerns without fear. If a team does not trust one another, they cannot be the kind of team that ultimately achieves results. Overcoming this requires overcoming the need for invulnerability. Trust requires shared experiences, instances of follow-through, credibility, and an in-depth understanding of team members. The leader must demonstrate vulnerability first to encourage trust.

2. Fear of Conflict

This dysfunction sets in because of the failure to build trust. Teams that lack trust are incapable of engaging in unfiltered and passionate debate of ideas. Instead, they resort to veiled discussions and guarded comments. Lack of healthy conflict is a problem. Teams that engage in productive conflict aim to produce the best solution quickly. They discuss and resolve issues faster and emerge from debates without residual negative feelings. This dysfunction leads to the preservation of a sense of artificial harmony. A leader must demonstrate restraint and allow resolution to occur naturally, modelling appropriate conflict behaviour

3. Lack of Commitment

This is a problem because of the lack of healthy conflict. Without having aired their opinions in open debate, team members rarely buy in and commit to decisions, though they might feign agreement. In the context of a team, commitment is a function of clarity and buy-in. The evidence of this dysfunction is ambiguity. Great teams make clear and timely decisions with complete buy-in, even from those who disagreed. The two greatest causes are the desire for consensus and the need for certainty. Reasonable people do not need to get their way to support a decision; they just need to be heard and know their input was considered. Leaders must push for closure on issues and adherence to schedules, avoiding placing too high a premium on certainty or consensus

4. Avoidance of Accountability

This dysfunction occurs because of the lack of real commitment and buy-in. Accountability refers to the willingness of team members to call their peers on performance or behaviours that might hurt the team. The essence is an unwillingness to tolerate the interpersonal discomfort that comes with confronting a peer. It relates to low standards. Members of great teams overcome this, opting to “enter the danger” with one another. Peer pressure is the most effective means of maintaining high standards. Leaders should encourage the team to be the primary accountability mechanism, stepping in only when the team fails

5. Inattention to Results

This is the ultimate dysfunction and thrives when accountability is avoided. It occurs when team members put their individual needs (like ego, career development, or recognition) or even the needs of their divisions, above the collective goals of the team. A relentless focus on specific objectives and clearly defined outcomes is required for high-performing teams. Results are related to outcome-based performance and specific goals set by the team. Leaders must set the tone by valuing results above all else and reserving rewards for contributions to group goals

In short, teamwork deteriorates if even a single dysfunction is allowed to flourish. Cohesive teams, conversely, trust one another, engage in unfiltered conflict, commit to decisions, hold each other accountable, and focus on achieving collective results 

My summary of Coach K Masterclass

Mike Krzyzewski, Coach K – see wikipedia – is an American basketball coach. As a Basketball fan, I have grown up with more than a few stories of Coach K (I was 11 years old when the Shot happened).  Spanning a 40+-year career as a head basketball coach, in his Masterclass he shares the traits that he feels have been constant in his coaching, regardless of the evolution of the Basketball game in itself. 

What struck me is how these traits and guidance were – sort of -mentioned in the models I shared before, but I had failed to pick-up on their importance.

In short, my coaching takeaways from Coach K’s masterclass are.

1. Focus on your values

Establishing your guiding values and principles sets the overall stage in which your teams will perform. Coach K’s values were: Communication, Trust, Care, Collective responsibility and Pride.

A key thing about values is that they will guide you when conflicts arise.

2. Constantly Consider Your People And Your Team: Invest time in observing behaviour and trying to identify what the different team members (and team roles) need in order to perform at their best.
3. Emphasise Culture As Much As You Can: It is crucial to constantly remind people of the culture, why they are there, the principles, and the non-negotiables.
4. Take Communication Seriously: Communication is the lifeblood of an organisation

It should be encouraged daily, whether verbally or physically connecting. Becoming an effective communicator requires being a superb listener, developing empathy, and knowing your audience to tailor communication styles.

This resonates A lot with AGILE. Communication, Collaboration, among others.

5.  Focus On The Next Play: The most important play is the one right in front of you

Success or failure in previous moments is irrelevant; the focus should be on being present and doing what is needed for the team in that single moment. (Note: I loved this one, I wonder if Ted Lassos “Be a Goldfish” is inspired by the next play.

6. Set Clear Standards: Wins were seen as a by-product of the standards set

Standards define how values are lived and should be simple. 

This was a key point for me. I am BIASED to think of documentation (And maybe ISO) when thinking about standards. The word in this context is much more. It include behaviour standards, how do we react when a teammate is not performing? How do we react when a teammate has to be absent? When they need help?

7. Don’t play defence with yourself. Being worried about a bad outcome prevents team members from taking action. Foster an environment where calculated risk can be taken and not penalised.

I am linking here to the professional management of Technical Debt. 

8. Recruit for your values (I left this one for the end, though it appears before in the Masterclass, yet is loops back to #1). Not all individuals will fit your organisation. And, likewise, you won’t fit all organisations.  

Thank you for reading this. Please leave a comment and tell me what you thought. Stay tuned for the second instalment, where I will link these concepts to software development teams.