Team Coaching Workspace

Session brief — Alpha Product Team (6 members)

Collective strengths: The team scores highly on Growth (avg 74) and The Work Itself (avg 70), indicating shared intrinsic motivation around learning and craft quality. This creates natural alignment on innovation and quality standards.

Key tension point: Recognition scores vary significantly (range: 28–78). Two members score very high — they need visible acknowledgement for contribution. Three score very low — they may actively resist public recognition. Managing this gap carefully will prevent friction in team settings.

Focus for this session: The team’s recent project delay may be linked to low Ownership scores (avg 48) — individual accountability structures may be unclear. Explore who feels genuinely responsible for outcomes vs. executing tasks.

Alignment (high across team): Growth, The Work Itself — the team naturally bonds around learning and quality. Use this as a foundation in all team conversations.

Divergence (high variance): Recognition, Advancement — individual needs here are so different that one-size-fits-all acknowledgement will frustrate half the team. Manager should tailor recognition individually.

Low collective score: Relatedness (avg 38) — this team is not primarily motivated by relationships and togetherness. Don’t over-invest in social cohesion activities; invest in shared intellectual challenges instead.

Watch for: Marcus (Advancement: 82) may be pushing for pace and visibility that the rest of the team doesn’t share. This is a potential source of friction worth surfacing carefully.

1. “When our work as a team feels most energising, what conditions are present? What’s usually missing when it doesn’t?”

2. “Where does each of you feel genuinely accountable for an outcome — not just a task? Where might that be unclear?”

3. “How does the team define success together? Is that definition shared, or do we each have a different version?”

4. “What would it look like if we each had more of what motivates us built into how we work as a team?”

For Priya (Purpose: 88, Recognition: 28): Frame work in terms of impact and meaning. Skip public praise — she finds it uncomfortable. Give her complex, meaningful problems to solve.

For Marcus (Advancement: 82, Achievement: 79): Give him a clear progression path and stretch goals. Without forward momentum he will disengage or exit. Challenge him openly — he responds to high standards.

For the team overall: Prioritise intellectual quality and learning over social events. Create shared ownership of outcomes rather than task lists. Acknowledge contribution individually and privately where possible.