Team of Teams

The authors draw on military experience to argue that complex organizations need greater adaptability and better connections among teams. The publisher describes a framework combining shared information with more freedom for small groups to act and learn. [1] The useful question is whether your organization coordinates through understanding or merely waits for instructions to travel up and down a hierarchy.

For a small business or nonprofit, the idea can apply at a modest scale. Two capable groups may still fail together if each lacks the information the other needs. Our editorial recommendation is to improve the connection before assuming that either team needs to work harder.

More communication is not automatically better communication. Meetings can consume time, sensitive information needs protection, and decision rights must remain clear. A framework developed through particular operational experiences should be adapted to local responsibilities rather than copied wholesale.

Best for: leaders and team members dealing with handoffs, silos, and changing conditions.

Seven-day value and service blueprint

Choose one task requiring two groups. Ask each group what it needs from the other and what usually arrives late or unclear. Create a shared one-page view of the goal, next steps, owners, and essential updates. Use existing tools and a brief check-in. Track one delay or error that the new arrangement prevents. Ask the people receiving the service whether it became more dependable. Limit updates to useful information and review who is authorized to see them.

Discuss: What shared understanding would let your team act responsibly without waiting for another meeting?

Source-based editorial review with original applications; full text not supplied.