For those non-golfers out there, the Ryder Cup is a golf event that happens every couple of years that matches the United States (U.S.) against the Europeans. It switches back and forth between Europe and the U.S. in terms of locations. The teams have 12 players each and they play 28 matches of different formats over three days. Each match is worth a point and is played over 18 holes, with ties giving each team a half point.

Each team has a team captain that is responsible for the four captain picks, players who do not earn a spot on the team based upon season long performance. The captain also decides who plays in which matches and with what partners in the paired events. In other words, the captain is seen as the leader responsible for all things team related. If you want more details on the Ryder Cup you can find them here.

For those of you that follow golf, you know that the US has had it’s troubles in this event over the years, especially when the event is held in Europe. The expectations for this year were high as the U.S. had done a great deal of research to try and change the outcome abroad. Once again, the U.S. team was favored coming into the event based upon all the statistics, such as tour player earnings and rankings this year, number of major championships won, etc. Even Tiger Woods has recently returned to form and won a tournament for the first time in five years.

If you hadn’t heard, the U.S. got absolutely trounced. The result 17.5 to 10.5, was the most lopsided result in over 12 years. Immediately fingers started getting pointed, questions were asked, and the second guessing as well as the airing of dirty laundry has begun. Americans hate losing and everyone wants to figure out why and how it keeps happening to the favored U.S. teams in this event.

For me, I love the Ryder Cup because it always brings front and center the complexity of teams. How are they created, how they perform, what makes one better than the other? The list of questions goes on forever. The bottom line I say is that there is no easy answer ever when it comes to teams. The beauty of teams is, just as with snowflakes, they are different every time you encounter one, whether you are on one or working to support one.

One article I came across puts forward an interesting perspective that the difference comes down to culture. The author surmises that the cultures of the American and European players are noticeably different and that drives the results. I agree that culture absolutely has something to do with it, both the individual cultures of the players as well as that of the collective culture that is created by the team, not just it’s leader.

The reality is that everyone on the team, captains included, has a different experience of the team. So there is usually no real way to get a read on what drives a team and its results when there are 13 (12 players and 1 captain) different perspectives on the Ryder Cup teams as an example. The only way to really know what happens on a team is to help the team understand what contributes to their team success. Creating shared understanding through a common framework and language for team effectiveness starts the process. Team Elements is a model and methodology I work with that lays out the 16 most important elements to team effectiveness. This systemic model eloquently captures the complexity of teams and the attributes necessary to fuel their collective success.

The Team Elements methodology asks that all members of the team choose the most important elements to them on that team at that time. The team members then individually rate whether their team is currently doing well or needs improvement on the most important elements they individually selected. The data that results from the questions is powerful and the dialogue amongst the team members about their data is even more impactful. The result is the team can begin to see, name, own and work (S.N.O.W: as Bennett Bratt, Team Elements Founder, likes to say) their issues that they have identified for their team.

Once this process of self-identification and ownership occurs that gives everyone on the team equal votes and voice to help them quickly focus on what matters most to them, the team inevitably begins to shift. Through continual follow up and re-running the survey to find out what has changed and what still needs to be worked on, teams build a maintenance muscle that is often missing when they usually only focus on completing tasks together. The business results are impressive, and people start to talk about their teams the same way the Europeans are talking about their experience together during this weekend’s Ryder Cup.

The Ryder Cup teams are particularly tricky because they come together for such a short period of time and are made up of individuals who aren’t members of teams often. There is not a great deal of permanence for these Ryder Cup teams over time, which makes this type of ongoing methodology challenging for them. That said it sure would be interesting to find out how the 13 Americans would cast their votes to try and improve their team for the next competition.

So for anyone that is out there that spent the weekend like I did wondering about teams and what makes them special you should check the Team Elements methodology out and use it as a lens to analyze the two teams. You might be surprised by what you see. More importantly, if you are currently on a team that feels more like the U.S. team than the European team, there is hope and you can make it different with some help if you are game.