What Moves a School Team That Already Has Good People

Lessons from a fall spent in school buildings, and three habits any team can borrow.

I have spent a good part of this fall in school buildings, sitting with school leadership teams and grade-level teams. Different schools, different problems on the whiteboard. By the end of almost every session, the same thing showed up.

The teams already had good people on them. They already had good ideas. In most rooms, somebody had said the useful thing weeks earlier, in a hallway or at the end of a meeting that ran out of time. What was missing was a way to slow down long enough to hear it, say the harder thing out loud, and agree on what happens next.

That sounds simple. It is also the part that keeps getting skipped, and I think I understand why. A school runs on bells, duty rotations, and whatever walks through the office door next. The same is true of a hospital floor, a plant, or a sales team in the last week of the quarter. There is rarely an hour that belongs to the team itself. So the honest conversation waits, and the plan waits with it.

I want to walk through the three habits I watched make a difference, what the research says about each one, and how you can try them without a coach in the room.

Habit one: slow down on purpose

Researchers have a name for a team stopping to look at how it is working: team reflexivity. Michaéla Schippers, who studies how teams learn, describes it as a deliberate conversation about the team's goals, its process, and its results. The key word is deliberate. Teams rarely drift into reflection. Somebody has to protect the time and ask the question.

The best evidence on this comes from the world of debriefs, the structured look-back that the military calls an after-action review. Scott Tannenbaum and Christopher Cerasoli pooled 46 independent samples and found that properly conducted debriefs improved individual and team performance by about 20 to 25 percent compared with control conditions (Human Factors, 2013). The effect held in training and real-work settings. Schippers and her colleagues add a useful wrinkle: reflection can be especially helpful when a team is struggling, because a struggling team has the most to learn from its own recent history.

Here is what that looked like in one room this fall. A leadership team spent a good stretch of our first session restating a problem they had been circling since the start of the year. Then it became clear the group agreed on mission and purpose and disagreed about how they worked and talked together.

The real conversation started there. The restating was the cost of getting to it. Somebody had to feel safe enough to say the room was out of sync, and that took time.

A debrief does not need to be elaborate. The classic version asks four questions in order: What did we set out to do? What actually happened? Why the difference? What will we do differently next time? Fifteen minutes at the end of a meeting, once a week, is enough to start.

Habit two: have the honest conversation

Slowing down only matters if people use the time to say something true. Amy Edmondson at Harvard Business School has spent her career studying why people stay quiet at work, and her answer is the idea most people now know as psychological safety. Her definition is plain: people believe they can raise a concern, ask a question, or admit a mistake and still be fine afterward.

Two things in her work surprised me when I first read them. The first is that her early hospital research found the best teams reported more errors, not fewer. The distinction was about willingness to report mistakes, rather than evidence that better teams made more of them. Speaking up made those mistakes available for learning. The second is that safety on its own is not the goal. Edmondson describes the sweet spot as the place where psychological safety meets high standards. She calls it the learning zone. Safety without standards is comfortable and slow. Standards without safety is anxious and quiet. Teams learn when they have both.

She also names three things a leader can do to build it. Frame the work as something the team is still figuring out, so speaking up is expected rather than brave. Invite people in with real questions, the kind you do not already know the answer to. Respond well when someone takes the risk, because the first response teaches everyone else whether to try.

Several of the principals I worked with this fall said a version of the same goal: they want their people to speak up more and to hold each other to what they agreed. In one session we treated disagreement as a form of thinking rather than a problem to manage. We ran a pre-mortem, where the team imagines a plan has already failed and works backward to explain why, and then small groups gave each other candid notes on a real plan. What people told me afterward was that the honest conversation sounded less dramatic than they had feared. Someone said they did not understand a decision. Someone said a plan had quietly died. The team was fine, and most of those sentences led somewhere useful.

Habit three: agree on what happens next

This is the step teams skip most often, and the cost shows up weeks later as "didn't we already talk about this?" Gallup's midyear 2026 data puts a number on the wider clarity problem. Only 49 percent of U.S. employees strongly agree they know what is expected of them at work. That is up two points from last year and still well below the 61 percent Gallup measured in 2015. Gallup calls clarity of expectations the most foundational element of an engaged team—a reminder that clarity cannot be assumed.

Part of the problem is that "we talked about it" feels like a decision. It usually is not one.

“

A decision has a verb, an owner, and a date.

So before anyone leaves, I ask the team to say it out loud: what will we do, who will do it, by when, and how will we know. Then someone writes it down where the whole team can see it.

The answers tend to be smaller than people expect. For one group of grade-level teams, the whole agreement was to use the same handful of strategies across rooms and across grades, so every teacher and every student is getting the same thing. That is it. Working together instead of working harder, in the principal's words, and it fit on one page.

Why these three habits belong together for school teams

Each habit makes the next one possible. Slowing down creates the room. Honest conversation fills it with something true. An agreed next step turns the conversation into work, and the next debrief checks whether the work happened. Skip any one of them and the other two lose their value. A team that reflects without deciding feels thoughtful and goes nowhere. A team that decides without honesty builds plans on what people were willing to say in front of the boss.

What you can try this week

Take the last fifteen minutes of your next team meeting and ask three questions.

• ?What did we say we would do last time, and did it happen?
• ?What is the thing nobody has said yet?
• ?What are we agreeing to now, and who owns it?

Write the third answer down where the whole team can see it. Then look at it again next time. That is the whole practice. The teams I watched this fall did not need a new program or a new framework. They needed an hour, a question, and someone willing to go first.

If you lead a school or a team and want a thinking partner for this kind of work, I would be glad to talk. The first conversation is free and takes about 30 minutes.

Names and identifying details have been changed to protect confidentiality.