Stable teams that stick together develop a microculture, complete with their own working styles, shorthand, and shared mental models that allow for high-bandwidth communication.
They build a collective intuition about the problem space they are tackling. They can draw on past wins and failures. And they’ve established a way of working – a way that works for them! – that increases their chances of successful outcomes.
That’s why stable teams are like compound interest. They create small incremental gains that build on each other over time, creating something extraordinary.
Okay now contrast this with companies or teams that see constant reorgs. These teams are forced to repeatedly shuffle through the stages of forming, norming, storming, and performing 1. They have to rebuild their microcultures and ways of working from scratch. And all with as little effort as possible because, you know, the next reorg is coming soon enough.
Come to think of it – In some ways reorgs create more mercenaries than missionaries…
So what’s the alternative? When you can, preserve stable teams. Change the teams’ goal or mandate, but try real hard to leave the people – and microculture – in place.
Footnote:
1. Tuckman's stages of group development