How to build a high-performing team (without the BS)

Your leadership team thinks they are doing a good job. They are wrong. And here is the bit nobody tells you: you do not build a high-performing team. You design the conditions where one becomes inevitable, then you stop blocking it. Scorecards. No triangulation. A-player density. Believer mass. Get those right and the team builds itself. Get them wrong and no amount of away days, motivational posters, or culture decks will save you. I scaled two businesses from zero to £30m in five years, turned a third around from losing £65,000 a month to breakeven in 90 days, and have coached more than 200 founder-CEOs through the same wall you are hitting now. What follows is what actually works.

Why are most teams not as good as they think they are?

McKinsey studied drug development teams across the pharmaceutical industry. 85% believed they were above average. The top 1% got their drugs to market 500 days faster than the mean. The next 2-5% were five times better than average. Everyone else was kidding themselves.

This is not just a pharma problem. Gallup’s research consistently shows that C and D players self-rate as above average. Nobody goes to work thinking they are doing a poor job. The brain tricks you. You look around, see everyone else doing more or less what you do, and conclude you must be okay.

Andrew McAfee calls this the Liars Club. In The Geek Way, McAfee describes how leadership teams say they want to be high-performing, may even believe they already are, but the reality is something else entirely. Consciously or subconsciously, most members of most leadership teams are in a Liars Club: telling each other a story about performance that the data does not support. The McKinsey overrating finding is the same phenomenon at industry scale.

I coach founder-CEOs of scaling businesses, typically 30 to 250 people. When I sit with a new leadership team and ask them to rate themselves honestly, the gap between perception and reality is always wider than they expect. The comfortable middle ground they have settled into is not high performance. It is sleepwalking. And every quarter they sleepwalk is a quarter their best competitors pull further ahead.

The brutal truth? Unless you are deliberately building for the top 5%, you are probably in the 85% who think they are doing fine. That delusion costs you everything: the A players who quietly leave because they are surrounded by mediocrity, the market share you hand to hungrier competitors, the compound growth you will never get back.

Learn more about scaling your business

What does Ruth Wageman’s research say about leadership teams?

Ruth Wageman studied hundreds of senior leadership teams over a 20-year research programme and distilled her findings into Senior Leadership Teams: What It Takes to Make Them Great. Her framework is called the Six Conditions of a High-Performing Team, and the headline numbers should reframe how every founder-CEO thinks about team building.

Wageman’s methodology explains 80% of the difference between a good leadership team and a great one. The split she found is the bit that stops most founders in their tracks. Ongoing management and coaching accounts for only 10% of team performance. 60% of performance comes from constructing and launching the team correctly. The founding conditions. The bits most founders rush through because they want to get on with the real work.

I use Wageman’s instrument with clients when we’re building a leadership team from scratch, or rebuilding a dysfunctional one. The founding conditions matter more than anything that happens after. Pick the wrong people, set the wrong purpose, mis-design the structure, and no amount of clever coaching will rescue it. Get the founding conditions right and ordinary management gets extraordinary results.

The implication for founders is uncomfortable. If your leadership team is underperforming, the answer is rarely “more coaching” or “another offsite.” The answer is usually that the team was built wrong at the start and you are paying compound interest on that decision every quarter.

Recent research from organisational psychologist Merete Wedell-Wedellsborg (Harvard Business Review, 2024), who has spent 20 years inside executive teams, adds a daily-behaviour layer to Wageman’s structural one. She calls the rare ones “genius teams” and finds they share three traits: every member brings an outstanding capability with no exceptions, the team holds ambitious goals, and they run on what she calls generative tension. The sweet spot between tepid and toxic.

Tepid meetings are the ones where, as one executive told her, “the oxygen has left the room.” People ramble about their separate domains, the contentious issue gets postponed, and nothing ships. Toxic meetings burn people out. Genius teams sit in the middle. They fight constructively. They disagree in the room rather than agreeing in the room and disagreeing in the corridor. That is what makes the magic happen.

What does a high-performing team actually look like?

McKinsey’s 10-year study of executives found that those whose work put them in a flow state 60% or more of the time were 500% more productive. They got more done on Monday than the grinders managed by Friday. Not slightly more. Five times more.

I think about people as A, B, and C players. An A player is the top 10% of available talent for a given job, in a given location, at a given salary. They take a vague brief and bring back something better than you thought possible. They do not complain you were not specific enough. They get it done. A B player is a seven out of ten. Inconsistent. Some days brilliant, some days you wonder what happened. A C player is below the bar and needs to go.

Jim Collins gave Netflix the language for this and they ran with it. They call it the Keeper Test. Once a month, every manager asks two questions about every direct report. Knowing what I know about this person today, would I enthusiastically rehire them? If they walked in tomorrow and resigned, would I fight to keep them? The version I use with my clients is sharper. Score them out of ten. Everyone scoring 7, 8, 9, or 10 is an A-plus. A B-plus is someone who can be coached to an A within a couple of quarters. Below that, you have a problem. Get rid of all the Cs and all the Bs. The Bs need to go too, or be coached up fast. The comfortable middle is the trap. There is no acceptable long-term home for a B player on a high-performing team.

The A player is the baseline. Bs and Cs are deviations from that baseline that cost you compound performance. (TODO: replace with productivity-quadrants visual from the Masterclass People slide on G Drive once exported.)

Blackpool beach donkeys are fantastic at taking children up and down the sand. It does not matter what you spend on them or what aspirations you have. They are never going to win the Grand National. You need racehorses. If you have told me you want to win the Grand National but your stable is full of donkeys, we have a problem.

An A player is five to ten times more productive than a B player. They do not cost you any more money. They are just harder to find.

Explore executive leadership team coaching

Do your people know what is expected of them?

Gallup’s Q12 employee engagement survey starts with question one: “I know what is expected of me every day at work.” Jim Harter, Gallup’s chief scientist, told me you must get 75% of your people scoring five out of five on Q1 before you bother with question two. Only 30-35% of companies worldwide have job scorecards in place. The rest send people home at 5pm with no idea whether they had a good day or not.

Think of it like working in a mine. Hot, sweaty, dark, miserable. You dig all day. Nobody tells you whether you dug coal or a pile of rubbish. So you assume you did fine and go home.

I use a dead simple tool. Get a Post-it note. Split it into four quadrants: Day, Week, Month, Quarter. Ask the person to write down whether their last day was an A, B, or C. Then the last week. The last month. The last quarter. Now you have their self-assessment sitting next to yours. If you agree, brilliant. If you disagree, you have a conversation about expectations, not about blame.

Gallup also found that 85% of employee engagement is driven by the relationship with the direct supervisor. And the 80/20 of that 85%? A weekly 10-minute check-in. Not an annual appraisal. Not a formal review process. Ten minutes a week where the manager praises something specific. That requires knowing what good looks like. Which takes us back to scorecards.

Explore coaching and mentoring

Is your culture process-heavy or culture-heavy?

A high-performing culture prioritises trust and autonomy over procedures and sign-offs. At Rackspace, we were process light and culture heavy. We hired A players, often from a hospitality background, and put them in a team of people who had a common desire to solve customer problems. Then we kept changing the structure to make that easier.

Our mission was to be the Ritz Carlton of IT services. We borrowed directly from the Ritz Carlton playbook. At Ritz Carlton, every employee has $2,000 they can spend to fix a customer problem without asking permission. We adapted it. Our account managers could give a customer up to two months’ fees as a goodwill gesture. No management approval needed.

The finance team nearly had a cardiac arrest. Here is what actually happened. We gave away less money. When people on the front line feel trusted, they fix problems sensibly. They do not inflate claims. They do not play the system. They say sorry, ask the customer what would make it right, and sort it out.

The executive team also introduced a no-triangulation rule. No negative conversations about anyone when they are not in the room. Some people could not handle it. A new global head of channel from Dell came to me and started talking behind a colleague’s back. I told him he had 72 hours to have that conversation directly. He could not do it. He went back to Texas and quit. That is what happens when you actually live your values. Some people leave. Good.

We applied the same principle to maternity pay. The team came to me and said our statutory-only policy did not feel very “fanatical.” I told them to research what best-in-class companies offered, come up with a proposal, and implement it. They did not need my approval. They went away, did the analysis, came back with a sensible plan, and I said approved, done. Pre-approval. It works because A players do not need babysitting.

Learn about Dominic’s coaching approach

Made for founder CEOs. Free.

Hiring the wrong people keeps you in the weeds.

This toolkit helps you spot it earlier. Bad hires look convincing in the interview. You only see the damage later. This gives you the hiring system to separate real operators from good performers before they cost you months.

Used with clients across hundreds of hires, from SDRs to CFOs and Chief People Officers.

Used by founder CEOs at UP3, Spuce and Ask Bosco.

Get the toolkit

Free. Instant access. Includes the Job Scorecard GPT, Job Advert GPT, CV Analyser GPT and Interview Question GPT.

Send me the toolkit

Yes, send me the weekly framework.Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy

What is the right staff turnover target?

HR teams tell me they want turnover at 10%. I tell them they want 30%. They look horrified.

Here is the logic. You want zero A-player churn. Mortified if a single one leaves. But you should not care at all about C-player churn. You should be engineering it. If you adopt something like Topgrading as a hiring methodology, you will still only hire A players correctly about 85% of the time. That means 15% churn in the first 12 months is normal and healthy.

The metric that matters is not total turnover. It is who is leaving and who is staying.

I sat with a client recently and reviewed their hires from the previous year. 25% were A players. 50% were Bs. 25% were Cs and had already left. The Cs leaving was not the problem. The Bs blocking seats where A players could be sitting was the problem.

Professor Moira Clark of Henley Business School studied a UK financial services company. They took the manager from the best-performing branch and moved him to the worst. Nothing happened. The manager alone could not shift the culture. The full finding comes in the next section.

Learn about scaling your business

How do you build enough believers to tip the culture?

Moira Clark’s full finding was this. Nothing changed until they moved a third of the manager’s original team with him. That was the tipping point. Her conclusion: every organisation has three groups. Believers. Fence-sitters. Non-believers. Negativity is always stronger than positivity, so you need significantly more believers than the maths might suggest. Get to a third and the fence-sitters get off the fence and join them. The non-believers leave on their own once they realise their poor performance is no longer being tolerated. You do not need to fire them. The culture does it for you.

This maps directly to the concept in the book Employees First, Customers Second. Once you hit critical mass in believers, the culture carries people. They start to care. They start to give a damn. Or they self-select out.

Malcolm Gladwell revisits this idea in Revenge of the Tipping Point. His updated research shows that tipping points work in reverse too. Lose enough believers and a high-performing culture unravels just as quickly as it formed. What took you two years to build can collapse in two months. The implication for CEOs is clear: maintaining A-player density is not a one-off project. It is a permanent discipline.

You do not need to replace everyone at once. You need to get to that one-third threshold. Then the culture does the heavy lifting.

What does the commercial impact actually look like?

At IT Lab, I walked into a business with a net promoter score of minus seven. It was losing £65,000 a month. We had three months to get to breakeven or the business was finished. We did it. The business was later acquired and is now part of Advania UK.

That turnaround was not magic. It was the direct result of hiring A players, removing C players, building a culture of trust and accountability, and getting people into flow. Apply the McKinsey 500% productivity finding across 50 to 150 people and the numbers are staggering. One A player finishing on Monday morning what a grinder has not managed by Friday afternoon. Multiply that across your whole organisation. That is how you go from losing money to a business that attracts acquirers.

The commercial case for high-performing teams is not theoretical. It is arithmetic.

Explore executive leadership team coaching

Where should a CEO start building a high-performing team?

You do not need to transform everything overnight. Pick one of these five and do it this week. The rest get easier once you start.

1. Run Gallup Q1. Ask every person in your business: do you know what is expected of you every day at work? If fewer than 75% score five out of five, stop everything else and fix this first.
2. Write scorecards. Three to five measurable outcomes per role. Every person should know by 5pm whether they had an A day or not.
3. Start weekly 10-minute check-ins. Every manager, every direct report, every week. Praise something specific. This single habit drives 80% of employee engagement.
4. Audit your top five retention risks. Who are your A players? What would it take for them to leave? Fix whatever that is before they do.
5. Track turnover by category. Not just the number. How many A players left? How many C players left? If your A-player churn is above zero, you have an emergency. If your C-player churn is low, you have a different emergency.

None of this requires a consultant. It requires honesty, discipline, and the nerve to have uncomfortable conversations. It also requires accepting that agreement in a leadership meeting is not the same as changed behaviour. You can duck those conversations for another quarter. You have done it before. The founders who build something that actually scales have the conversation this week.

Frequently asked questions

What are the characteristics of a high-performing team?

High-performing teams share five measurable traits. Crystal-clear expectations where at least 75% of people score five out of five on Gallup’s Q1. A-player density where every seat is filled by someone in the top 10% of available talent for that role and salary. A culture-heavy rather than process-heavy operating model that trusts people to make decisions. Peer accountability with no tolerance for triangulation or back-channel politics. Flow-state alignment where people spend 60% or more of their time on work that matches their natural strengths. McKinsey found that teams operating in flow were 500% more productive. These characteristics are measurable. They start with whether people know what good looks like by 5pm on any given day.

How do you build a high-performance team from scratch?

Start with Gallup’s question one: do your people know what is expected of them every day? If they do not, nothing else matters. Write job scorecards with three to five measurable outcomes per role so every person knows whether they had an A day by the time they leave. Institute weekly 10-minute check-ins between every manager and direct report, focused on praising something specific. Hire for the top 10% of available talent at a given salary in a given location. Remove C players quickly and humanely. Use Ruth Wageman’s Six Conditions to get the founding design right. 60% of team performance comes from how you construct and launch the team. Get that bit wrong and ongoing coaching cannot rescue it.

What is a good staff turnover rate?

Forget the single number. Target 30% overall, but break it down by player category. Zero A-player churn is the goal. You should be mortified if a single A player leaves. C-player churn should be engineered and welcomed. B players should be coached up to A within a couple of quarters or transitioned out. Even with excellent hiring using a methodology like Topgrading, you will only get A-player hires right about 85% of the time. That means healthy first-year churn of 15% is normal. The metric that matters is not total turnover. It is who is leaving and who is staying.

How long does it take to build a high-performing team?

Expect 18 to 24 months to shift a team from average to genuinely high-performing, assuming you start with scorecards and weekly check-ins on day one. The first six months are about setting expectations, identifying your A, B, and C players, and beginning the turnover cycle. Months six to twelve focus on engineering C-player exits and hiring replacements at A-player standard using methodologies like Topgrading. The final phase is reaching Moira Clark’s one-third tipping point, where enough believers are in the room that the culture sustains itself. There are no shortcuts. Companies that try to rush the process by replacing everyone at once destroy institutional knowledge and create chaos rather than performance.

What is the biggest mistake CEOs make when building teams?

Tolerating B and C players for too long. You already know who your underperformers are. You have known for months. Some founders sit on it for years. Every month a B or C player stays, they cost you in three ways: their own underperformance, the drag on A players around them who pick up the slack, and the opportunity cost of the A player who could be sitting in that seat. That is not a slow leak. It is compound damage. The second most common mistake is assuming that hiring great people is enough without setting clear expectations through scorecards and regular check-ins. The third is skipping Wageman’s founding conditions: getting the team’s purpose, composition, and structure right at the start, where 60% of performance is decided.

Three ways I can help (ranked by impact, and by how much effort it requires from you)

1. Book a call. If your leadership team thinks they are a seven out of ten but your best people keep leaving, we should talk. I will tell you in 30 minutes whether the problem is expectations, talent density, or culture.
2. Grab the book. Mind Your F**king Business covers everything in this post and more. The frameworks I used to scale two companies and what I have learned coaching 200 founders through the same journey.
3. Subscribe to the newsletter. Free tool every week. Practical frameworks for building high-performing teams without the management consultant fluff.

Your move. Write down the names of your five best people. Ask yourself what it would take for each of them to leave. If you do not know the answer, that is your first conversation this week. You are not building a team. You are designing the conditions one needs to grow. Every week you delay, the gap between where you are and where you could be gets wider, and the A players you do have are deciding whether to stay.