Teams
Less Time Wasted. More Progress.
When teams talk a lot, align a lot and still get little done, the problem is rarely a lack of engagement. What's missing is a shared standard:
clear roles, clear handovers, clear meeting structure.
I help teams structure how they work together so that decisions actually get made and work doesn't constantly get restarted.
Meeting time ↓ · Rework ↓ · Conflict energy ↓
Jump to:
Problem + Outcome
Problem + Outcome
Where teams struggle in practice
→ Tasks drift between people and nobody owns the decision
→ Meetings serve coordination, not decision-making
→ Follow-up questions replace standards ("What did we actually mean by that?")
→ Handovers are unclear, work gets done twice or incorrectly
→ Conflicts play out indirectly (chat threads, side conversations, quiet resistance)
In short: What's missing isn't engagement. It's structure.
What team standards change
→ Clearer ownership (who decides, who delivers, who provides input)
→ Shorter meetings (agenda, decision point, close, next steps)
→ Clearer handovers (accountable person, completion criteria, checkpoints)
→ Less rework (questions clarified earlier, decisions documented)
→ More psychological safety (problems raised sooner, less blame)
Measured via selected KPIs such as meeting time, rework rate, decision cycle time, open loops per week and escalation rate.
Consulting Process
The Team Sprint clarifies three things:
Where friction builds up in practice (meetings, handovers, responsibilities)
Why work ends in follow-up questions and rework (unclear standards, open loops, weak closes)
Which 2–3 team rules will create accountability straight away (decisions, handovers, meeting close)
The Starting Point: Team Friction Sprint
Where is your team losing time, energy and accountability?
What you get (Core):
→ Friction Overview: top bottlenecks in meetings, handovers and responsibilities (prioritised)
→ Meeting & Handover Diagnosis: 2–3 recurring formats that are eating time
→ Team Agreements (draft): role logic, "how we decide", "how we hand over"
→ 30–60–90 Day Plan: quick wins vs. structural standards
→ Debrief (60–90 min): clear recommendation + next steps
→ 1 Pilot Standard: ready to use straight away (e.g. decision protocol or meeting standard)
Optional Add-ons:
→ Facilitation of a critical team session (Decision Meeting)
→ Role Clarity Workshop (responsibilities, decision rights, interfaces)
→ Pilot accompaniment (2–4 weeks)
→ Standards for 2–4 meeting types (e.g. Weekly, Planning, Retro, Leadership Sync)
Outcome: You know exactly where to focus in the team, what will work first and how it gets implemented in practice.
A good fit when coordination, follow-up questions and handovers are visibly draining capacity and decisions within the team lack clarity.
Measurement: Progress made visible via selected KPIs such as decision cycle time, escalation rate, rework and meeting time per decision.
Process: 3–6 interviews (45 min) + analysis + executive briefing
Duration: 1–2 weeks
Investment: from €2,900 (depending on scope, team size and decision types)
Scope: This offering covers one team (up to 12 people), including directly relevant interfaces. Expanding to further teams or organisation-wide standards is handled as a separate rollout.
Why I don't offer a money-back guarantee
The Team Friction Sprint is not an off-the-shelf product. I invest time, analysis and judgement upfront. What you receive is a concrete diagnosis of your team's real bottlenecks, not a generic framework.
That's why we use the discovery call to assess together whether a sprint is the right lever for you. If the fit isn't there, I'll say so beforehand, not after.
That's my guarantee: you only pay when I'm confident the sprint will deliver concrete value for you.
(You'll hear back within 48 hours with 2–3 suggested time slots.)
After the Sprint:
Two Paths
Implementation & Long-Term Support
1) Team Operating System (4–8 weeks)
We implement the standards so that they hold up in practice, not just on slides.
Typical building blocks
→ Team agreements (deciding, communicating, handing over)
→ Meeting standards + facilitation logic
→ Decision protocol + open loops tracking
→ Handover standard (ownership, next steps, deadlines, completion criteria)
→ Pilot + stabilisation (feedback loops, refinement, integration)
Duration: 4–8 weeks
Investment: from €9,000 (depending on scope)
2) Team Advisory (Retainer)
For teams that need to deliver reliably over time, even as pressure, priorities and stakeholders shift.
Typical services
→ 2× sessions/month (90 min) for team lead + key roles
→ Review of decisions, handovers and meetings (async)
→ Quarterly review (what's eating time, what keeps slipping)
→ Conflict and communication checks (before escalations)
→ Fast access (48h response time)
Duration: 6–12 months
Investment: from €3,000/month (depending on scope)
Scientific Foundation
Dieser Ansatz ist wissenschaftlich fundiert:
This approach is grounded in research.
Structured communication and reflection routines improve information sharing and enhance the quality of team decisions. Higher team performance correlates with better information exchange, and the group dynamics distortions that systematically undermine team decisions can be addressed through clear routines. Psychological safety further encourages the open surfacing of errors and problems before they become costly (u. a. Jones & Roelofsma, 2000, Mesmer-Magnus & DeChurch, 2009, Edmondson, 1999 , Rutka et al., 2023).
The full evidence base with sources is available on the Expertise page.
Numbers & Indicative Calculations – Teams
The figures shown are intended to give a sense of the potential scale of effects and have been calculated conservatively. They are not a guarantee of specific results. Actual figures will vary depending on role structure, compensation levels, actual meeting load and degree of implementation.
Reference Example
9 employees | 46 working weeks/year | avg. fully loaded cost ≈ €60/h | avg. meeting load 3h/person/week
Capital locked in meetings alone: approx. €74,520 per year (p.a.)
Conservatively realisable through clearer standards: approx. €20,000–34,000 p.a.
The real lever at team level isn't cost savings. It's the capacity that gets freed up.
Time that isn't tied up in follow-up questions, rework and clarification loops flows directly into execution.
(Details in the examples below.)
Note: fully loaded costs per working hour are in practice often closer to €60–100, depending on role mix and compensation levels. The following calculations deliberately use a conservative baseline. No guarantee, just orientation. Details per lever.
-
When decisions don't get closed in the meeting, follow-up meetings, clarification questions and parallel side conversations follow.
Conservative estimate:
30 minutes of rework per meeting × 1 meeting/week
→ ≈ €12,420 per year
-
When responsibilities and completion criteria aren't explicit, work gets done twice or incorrectly.
Conservative estimate:
30 minutes of rework per person/week
→ ≈ €12,420 per year
-
Questions that don't get asked the first time come back as escalations.
Conservative estimate:
20 minutes of clarification effort per person/week
→ ≈ €8,200 per year
Combined conservative estimate: approx. €21,000–32,000 per year in a team of 9.
Capital Locked in Inefficient Structures (Context)
Time that is regularly tied up in meetings, decision loops, rework or clarification conflicts is not available for value-creating work. It functions as permanently locked productive capital.
The scale of this is visible in the reference example above. This capital is not lost. It's there, but structurally blocked.
That's exactly what the Team Sprint is designed to address.
We make visible where time and quality are being lost, quantify the bottlenecks and derive a concrete development strategy from the findings.
Quick FAQ
-
Primarily to one team (typically up to 12 people), including directly relevant interfaces. This keeps implementation fast and practical.
Expanding to further teams or organisation-wide standards is handled as a separate rollout.
-
Typically: 3–6 conversations of 45 minutes plus a debrief session (60–90 min.).
Preparation is minimal. Context and examples from day-to-day work are usually enough (meetings, handovers, typical decisions). The process is deliberately kept light enough that normal operations continue uninterrupted.
-
You know exactly where friction is building up and which 2–3 standards will have the greatest impact.
You also leave with a pilot-ready standard that can be put to use straight away (e.g. a meeting close protocol, decision note or handover standard), plus a 30–60–90 day plan for implementation.