If your team doesn’t have clear, measurable ground rules, I suggest you hold a session to develop them. What follows is a process I have successfully facilitated with many diverse teams from executives, to front-line workers, to politicians, to Boards of Directors. The process uses personal values as basis for developing team ground rules. The ground rules can then be used as a basis for defining team norms and expectations.

STEP ONE: Have each individual submit five values that are most important to them in workplace. Examples would be “honesty,” “accuracy,” “teamwork,” “risk-taking.”

STEP TWO: As a group, prioritize values and choose 3-5 everyone can agree to.

STEP THREE: Discuss each value: why it’s important,

STEP FOUR: Identify which behaviors and actions reinforce this value, and which behaviors can undermine it or are non-reinforcing.

Setting Ground Rules: 1. Individually list values. 2. Gain consensus on 3-5 values. 3. Discuss why each value is important. 4. List how we can reinforce value and what we should avoid.

Example: “Respect” Respect is important on any team. It is needed to build loyalty and mutual trust. We can reinforce respect by seeking others’ input regarding decisions that may affect them. We undermine respect when we change direction without giving others an explanation.

I highly recommend taking your team through this exercise on values and ground rules. I have used this process to build teamwork, to resolve interpersonal conflicts, and to get teams refocused. It is not a discussion to be rushed, or taken lightly.

I suggest you consider using an outside facilitator when defining value-based expectations. As a leader, being a participant in this process will be most enlightening. You will learn a lot about your team members. And, they will set norms. When a team fully participates in defining and enforcing norms, a new level of ownership happens.

It is more manageable to set only a few ground rules at a time. When team keeps its focus on one or two areas, chance for success are greater. Ask your team: “What are behaviors our team needs to focus on for next quarter?”

I recently worked with two divisions within same company - research and development vs. sales and marketing. They had a history of conflict. They both felt undermined by each other. They assumed that other team never listened. There was plenty of finger pointing, blaming and passing buck.

After a lively discussion of values and expectations, they agreed on just one ground rule. “I will meet my deadlines.” “If, on rare occasion, I must extend deadline, I will negotiate with all affected parties to reach a mutual agreement on new deadline. I will notify all parties of any change at least 24 hours ahead.”

The two teams found that when everyone followed this one practice, it completely changed way they worked together. A new level of respect and consideration happened. I also challenged them to have a strong consequence if someone slipped and broke ground rule. They all agreed that anyone slipping would have to bring delicious food for everyone at next meeting and would have to offer to help other team members with their tasks.

The team reported that only two people “slipped” in next month. The two who slipped did buy food for next meeting and helped out with others’ tasks. The purpose of setting ground rules is to establish new improved behaviors as norm. When team levies consequences, it reinforces desired changes. The idea of ground rules is to institutionalize improved interactions. Ground rules can change way we work together. It can help us make a positive cultural change in organization.

Team ground rules can be used for setting expectations on daily interactions, for running better meetings, and for project management.

If your team is experiencing interpersonal conflict or a lack of productivity, chances are that ineffective leadership is playing a big role in problem. Don’t give up trying to turn your group into a real team. Ask for help and team coaching.

Company cultures change and may demand that we adjust and even change our styles or quit. One executive I was coaching was told flat out that if he didn’t change from a Driver style to a more collaborative style, he would lose his job. By using “Style Tune-up,” we were able to identify areas to improve and accelerate his behavioral changes. He was successful in not only modifying his style, but also got a promotion. He confessed to me later, “If I can modify my behaviors, anyone can. But, you have to know that in my heart, I still prefer to be bossy, dominating and right. I just learned how to act differently and more appropriately.”

As effective leaders, we not only have to take stock of our own styles and how to improve, but we have to coach others to do same. To get most out of our staff, we need to learn to motivate them according to their style needs. Have your team go through a style tune-up on a regular basis. Use goals they set as part of their performance evaluations. Successful change demands lots of positive reinforcement.

Are we born with our style or do we learn it? Does nationality impact styles? Does gender? Does your job alter your style? I believe all of above play into picture. Obviously, none or us fits neatly into just one of four categories. We do, however, have predominant styles that influence our choices and values. The more we know about styles, more we can capitalize on diversity.

After assessing and coaching thousands of managers in United States my research shows that majority of American workforce has “Diplomat” style (more than 60 percent), with approximately 13-15 percent equally divided among other three orientations. My research in South Africa, Europe and Malaysia yielded different results. Through profiling close to 2,000 managers in those three locations, I found that majority of managers have “Analyzer” style (more than 50 percent), with other three equally divided.

Research in a wide variety of industries shows that certain industries and professions attract distinct styles. For example, engineers (often Analyticals) vs. counselors (usually Diplomats) vs. police officers (the Drivers) vs. sales people (the Expressives). Of course, there are exceptions, but you will see job related trends. There are definitely style similarities within different cultures, be they organizational or geographical.

So, can we be everything to everybody? No, but we can learn to know our styles intimately. Knowing and modifying our weaknesses helps remover our blind spots. Self-awareness leads to greater personal power. Learning to lead as a facilitator and situational manager will build better teams. Balancing personalities of people who have to work together is a key step in team success. From my experience in organizational development work, most productive and cohesive teams are composed of members representing all four styles. Each brings richness to table. When any style is missing from a team, creativity and critical thinking can be limited. As leaders, we need to learn to appreciate and work with all of styles, reward them appropriately, and coach them to continually strive for their fullest potential.