Build a Great Team on a Relationship-Based Culture, Not the Myth of "Family"

Years ago, I worked with an elite action sports athlete whose mother managed other world-class talent. I asked him, “How come you never used your mom as your manager?” And he reflexively said, “Because I don’t want to fire my mom.” That exchange stuck with me, and often pops into my head when I hear coaches refer to high-performing teams as a family.?

?

Family is not an accurate metaphor for team. It was a thought that I didn’t often voice out-loud because the family analogy has become so accepted and familiar in sports. Then, legendary rugby coach Jack Clark was a guest on the Finding Mastery podcast and echoed a similar thought.?

?

“I do believe that if we genuinely care about one another, it's going to help the team perform, but I roll my eyes at the notion that we describe ourselves so frequently as a family,” Clark said. “Family is unconditional while high-performance teams are highly, highly conditional. On a team, there's a requirement to contribute, to do your job, to perform, to put your guts into it. You can't research a high-performance organization of any type and not conclude that there are a lot of conditions and that those conditions help the organization operate and succeed. That doesn't mean high-performance teams don't care about one another. It just means you don’t have to accept me for who I am. If you can't trust me or if I'm not punctual or if I break rules or if I don't give full effort, you don't accept that in high-performance athletics. People get fired. People get cut.”

?

The use of "family" as a metaphor in sports or work environments aims to foster a sense of belonging, mutual care, and commitment among its members, similar to what one would expect in a familial relationship. The idea of calling a team a “family” points to the aspirational bond between the people on the team, with the logic being the stronger the bond, the better the team will perform. But for so many people, family can be challenging, even dysfunctional, and the idea of it may conjure the exact opposite feelings than the ones you are trying to create. Conversely, those who have traumatic family backgrounds might be looking for a more stable and supportive environment—an idealized sense of family—on their team. And they may get that, for a while, until the time comes that the bomb is dropped and they are cut or traded or fired. And to me, that feels manipulative. Period, full stop.?

Additionally, families are not asked to perform. The nature of the bond is different. It's an end in and of itself, where on a high-performance team, it's a means to an end. I call it “the invisible handshake” between teammates that signifies, “I'm going to love you and you’re a part of this team as long as you perform well and do your job correctly.”?

?

I was meeting with some players on a team where the “family” metaphor occasionally surfaced. We were having a great conversation, and in the middle of it, a player says, “Let me ask you something. Do you think any of these coaches are coming to my family funerals? My dad's funeral, or my wife's funeral?” I paused before answering, and he interjected, “No. No one’s coming, whether I’m playing or not playing.” The other players nodded in agreement. And then one asked, “Do you think they're coming to your funeral?” The player thought for a second and said, “Maybe, if I'm playing, but afterwards? No.”? And if that doesn’t blow up the family analogy, I don’t know what does.?

A Healthier, More Productive Framework??

I worked with Pete Carroll for 10 years at the Seattle Seahawks in the NFL where we built a "relationship-based culture." The concept of a relationship-based culture is about creating a supportive, open, and respectful environment where players feel valued not just as athletes, but as individuals. The commitment is not just helping a teammate being the best coach or the best player they can be, but the best person they can be. This includes focusing on their mental and emotional well-being, personal growth, as well as a deep commitment to developing the psychological, technical and physical skills to consistently perform toward their best.

?

This concept revolves around a few key principles.

?

1. Know Thyself and Know Each Other

The focus is on building strong, personal relationships with each member of the team. This involved understanding their individual motivations, backgrounds, and personalities, and using this knowledge to help them achieve their best both on and off the field.

Defining one’s personal philosophy was part of the culture in Seattle.? At the beginning of every year, coaches were asked to come in and share their personal philosophy. The practice helped deepen the relationship by allowing a better understanding of that person’s worldview and their personal journey. There’s a radical vulnerability to it.

?

2. Celebrate Uniqueness

A relationship-based culture is not rigid but adaptable to the needs and personalities of different players. It rests on the recognition that each player may require a different approach to reach their full potential, rather than one-size fits all. Rather than checking oneself at the door, the players were encouraged to reveal themselves when they walked through the door.

The aim was to get? coaches to understand the players at a deeper level, by getting to know their philosophies, goals, visions, limitations, and family structures. An important concept that’s extremely important for the corporate world if leaders want to get the most out of their employees. A workplace that recognizes the humanity of the individual rather than seeing someone as a replaceable cog in a machine inspires a workforce.

Play it out if. If a salesperson is nervous or fearful they won’t make their numbers, their mind can take over and quickly catastrophize that experience. “I’ll lose my job. I won’t be able to support my kids.”.

Flip the script and decouple who they are from what they do. The anxiety that pulls them out of the present moment dissipates. They are not hustling for their self-worth so they are more present. They can better attune to the needs of the customer. They are aware of the thoughts that are getting in the way and how they might be imposing their needs onto the customer, rather than understanding that person’s needs.

?

3. Honest Communication

Encourage open and honest communication between coaches and players. This means that players are encouraged to voice their opinions, share their concerns, and participate in decision-making processes. This was evident in Pete’s “Tell the Truth Mondays.” The day after the game day the players reviewed? tape with the coaching staff and assessed their performance with input from the coaching staff. It wasn’t about assigning blame or finger pointing. The truth wasn’t weaponized; rather, it was viewed as a growth opportunity.

Jack Clark employs a similar approach. “Everything I've learned I almost learned from my players… It used to be you'd get players one-on-one and you hear what they had to say and it really would influence me…Their perspectives were so pointed and so accurate…that we started doing it together as a group…This isn't ‘I play a sport and the game's over and hey, I'm going to give it a lash next week as well.’ This is wanting to know. This is being curious. This is really creating that performance audit where you want to know what you're doing well and how you can continue to do it well and use it better in more situations. And what are the things you got to work on? It's my favorite session of the week, bar none.”

?

4. Acknowledge the Elephant in the Room

It's crucial for leaders to acknowledge openly that the relationship-based culture may be time-bound and subject to change based on performance, strategy, or business needs. At the same time, emphasize that the skills, personal growth, and insights will, hopefully, benefit individuals throughout their careers and into personal lives. This honesty helps manage expectations, builds trust and reduces the sense of betrayal when changes occur.

With fire,

MG