Small teams often outperform larger ones, despite the common belief that more hands mean lighter work. The reasons for this are manifold. Firstly, smaller teams tend to be more agile, with less bureaucracy and red tape slowing down decision-making processes. Secondly, they usually have a clearer focus, with each team member understanding their role and responsibilities.
In contrast, larger teams often suffer from communication breakdowns, with information getting lost or distorted as it passes through multiple people. This can lead to confusion and mistakes. Furthermore, larger teams can suffer from a lack of personal accountability, with individuals feeling less responsible for the team’s overall performance.
Interestingly, some larger companies are now adopting a ‘small team’ approach, breaking down their workforce into smaller, more manageable groups. This can help to foster a sense of unity and purpose, improving overall productivity and efficiency.
Nonetheless, the size of a team is not the only factor that determines its success. Other critical elements include the team’s culture, leadership style, and the individual skills and personalities of its members. Therefore, while smaller teams may have certain advantages, it is the combination of these factors that truly drives performance.
Go to source article: https://tedbauer.medium.com/small-teams-big-teams-cfe3a41daa6e