The Hare and Tortoise in Teams

New research, from professors Kyle J. Emich, Sean Martin, Randall Peterson, and colleagues, suggests that having too many proactive people on a team is likely to result in a lack of coordination. And, unless aligned with conscientiousness, high proactivity is not necessarily the wholly positive trait it is generally assumed to be. The researchers find that including conscientiousness in the team is key to unlocking the full potential of member proactivity, and that a balanced hare and tortoise combo offers the best results.

In a complex, fast-changing business environment it is important to create teams that are proactive in anticipating and solving problems, rather than simply being reactive or responsive only when directed; teams that are self-initiated, future-focused, and agile in the face of a changing world of work. Teams need people high in proactivity who are tuned to scanning for opportunities, show initiative, and can drive change and innovation. Such people can also be good at seeking feedback, building social networks, exchanging information, gaining political knowledge, taking career initiative, and championing issues.  

However, teams must not only initiate change-focused activity, but also coordinate that activity and follow the processes necessary to see projects through to implementation. Proactivity works best when aligned with conscientiousness—sustained meticulousness and the propensity for planning and coordinating with others. Having high amounts of proactivity within a group does not help team performance unless the team’s more proactive people are also more conscientious—detail-oriented, persistent, and competent—or they are balanced with conscientious team members.

In an ideal team proactivity and conscientiousness complement one another such that the emphasis on change and foreseeing future opportunities gained from proactivity provides a compelling focus for the planning and preparation inherent in conscientiousness.

The configuration of these attributes matter. Teams perform better when their more proactive members are also more conscientious, while their less conscientious members are also less proactive, and this alignment matters more than the amount of proactivity or conscientiousness present in a team. The antithesis of the ideal team is one dominated by highly proactive members who lack conscientiousness and dictate strategy without consulting with more conscientious but quieter members of the team. Or alternatively, one overly staffed by conscientious members who limit their teams’ performance in dynamic environments, through being inflexible or narrow-minded when it comes to adopting new team strategies.

Lessons for team leaders:

Support the conscientious. Conscientious people can be quieter and less demonstrative than the proactive and should be helped to contribute to the best of their ability. Be aware of this when recruiting. Encourage them to speak up and seek their input in developing strategies for execution.

Manage the proactive. Ensure the highly proactive, with their bias toward instant action over thought, do not dominate meetings and waste group time. Set clear objectives and vary how input is collected so that more conscientious members have an equal opportunity to contribute.

Don’t ignore the mediocre. Some team members are likely to be low in both proactivity and conscientiousness. So long as these members are flexible and easy going in accepting direction from others, they can have a valuable role to play in getting daily work done.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Access the research paper: ‘Better Together: Member Proactivity Is Better for Team Performance When Aligned with Conscientiousness,’ Kyle J. Emich, Li Lu, Amanda Ferguson, Randall Peterson, Michael McCourt, Sean Martin, Elizabeth McClean and Col. Todd Woodruff. Published by Academy of Management, 2024.