Runs on PeoplePlaybooks / Outcomes · 3 min read
Good vs excellent
Good teams do the work well. Excellent teams make the work, and each other, better without being asked.
The problem
“My team is good, but I want it to be excellent and I can't say what the difference is”
In the model
In 30 seconds
- Good is reliable delivery. Excellent is reliable delivery plus improvement nobody had to ask for.
- The gap is rarely talent. It's ownership, standards held by the team itself, and enough care that people can sustain it.
- You can't push a team to excellent. You can make it possible, and then expect it.
The situation
Your team hits its dates, the work is solid and nobody complains. But it isn't remarkable. You sense there's another level, and you can't quite name it, let alone ask for it.
What's really going on
Good teams are managed to a standard. Excellent teams hold the standard themselves. The difference shows up in small behaviours: who notices the problem first, who fixes the process without being told, who helps the new starter, and whether the bar rises when the manager isn't in the room.
Good vs excellent, layer by layer
| Good | Excellent | |
|---|---|---|
| Trust | Problems get raised when asked | Problems get raised before anyone asks, including about the manager |
| Capability | Everyone does their job well | Everyone makes someone else better, and nobody is irreplaceable |
| Energy | The pace is manageable | The pace is sustainable, and people are proud of the work |
| Clarity | People know the priorities | People can explain why, and push back when priorities are wrong |
| Cadence | Meetings happen and are useful | The team changes its own rhythms when they stop working |
| Agreements | The process is followed | The team improves the process without being asked |
| Outcomes | Delivers what was asked | Delivers what was needed, and says when the ask was wrong |
| Reliability | Incidents are fixed quickly | The same incident never happens twice |
| Measures | Numbers are reported | Numbers change what the team decides to do |
What to do
- Name it with the team. Show them the table. Ask, "Where are we good? Where could we be excellent?"
- Pick one row. Not nine. One dimension, for one quarter.
- Hand over ownership. Excellence that depends on you isn't excellence, it's supervision.
- Raise the bar and the support together. Higher standards without more care is how you make a Driver team that burns out.
- Notice the excellent moments out loud. "You fixed that process without being asked. That's exactly it."
What bad looks like
- Demanding excellence in all nine dimensions at once.
- Calling longer hours "going the extra mile".
- Praising the hero who fixed the incident, never the person who prevented the next one.
How you'll know it's working
- Initiative: at least one improvement this month that nobody asked for.
- Ownership: the team raises a problem with its own way of working before you do.
- Sustainability: the step up happened without more overtime.
- Care check: people say the work is more satisfying, not just harder.
In the frameworks
In other industries
- Healthcare good wards follow the protocol. Excellent wards improve it and share it with the next ward.
- Accountancy good teams file on time. Excellent teams tell clients what they should be worried about next year.
- Manufacturing good lines hit their targets. Excellent lines stop to fix the cause, and the target rises.
- Small business good staff do what they're asked. Excellent staff spot what the customer needed before the customer did.
What to say
To start the conversation:
"I think we're a genuinely good team. I'd like us to be excellent, and I don't mean longer hours. I mean us owning the bar ourselves. Where do you think we're closest?"
Try this week
Show your team the table, and ask them to pick the one row they'd most like to move.
Think about it
If you left for a month, would your team's standards stay where they are, slip, or rise?