How to Improve Teamwork at Work: Better Collaboration, Less Conflict, and Stronger Team Chemistry

By Dr. Janice Perkins, PhD, PCC | Executive Coach and Leadership Communication Researcher

We spend a lot of time trying to get people to work better together. We invest in team-building activities, communication software, leadership training, and organizational restructuring.

Yet we still have teams that don't communicate, departments that operate in silos, and leaders who struggle to trust one another.

Why?

Because teamwork isn't simply about getting people to work together. It's about what happens between them when they do.

In my work as an executive coach and through my doctoral research on interpersonal chemistry, I've studied what makes relationships click and what causes them to break down.

One of the most important distinctions I've discovered is that connection and chemistry are not the same thing.

Connection can feel good. Chemistry moves something.

A team can genuinely like each other and still struggle to make decisions, navigate conflict, or accomplish meaningful work together.

Let's explore six common questions about improving teamwork and what leaders can do to create the conditions for real collaboration.

Best apps for improving teamwork in remote work

There are some excellent tools available for remote teams, but before investing in another app, I want leaders to ask themselves a question:

What problem are we actually trying to solve?

Are people struggling to communicate? Are responsibilities unclear? Are projects getting stuck because nobody knows who makes the decisions? Or are employees avoiding difficult conversations?

Those are very different problems.

Some widely used tools worth considering include:

• Microsoft Teams: Video meetings, messaging, and shared document collaboration.

• Slack: Team communication, project channels, and quick conversations.

• Asana: Project tracking, accountability, and task ownership.

• Miro: Virtual brainstorming, planning, and visual collaboration.

• Trello: Visual workflows, assignments, and project progress.

Each can support a different aspect of teamwork. But none can replace trust, accountability, or clear decision-making.

I've worked with leadership teams that have plenty of systems for tracking work but struggle with the relational dynamics necessary to accomplish it.

People aren't always confused about what needs to happen. Sometimes they're confused about who has the authority to make it happen.

Technology can organize the work. Leadership has to create the conditions for people to actually do it together.

Best practices for effective virtual team meetings

If you've ever sat through a virtual meeting where everyone nods, nobody challenges anything, and the real conversations happen afterward, you know that attendance doesn't equal engagement.

One of the biggest mistakes leaders make is measuring meeting success by participation rather than contribution.

People can be present without being meaningfully involved.

For more effective virtual meetings, I recommend five practices:

1. Be clear about the purpose. Is this meeting for information, discussion, problem-solving, or decision-making?

2. Invite perspectives, not just updates. Ask what people are seeing that others may be missing.

3. Create room for disagreement. Don't mistake silence for agreement.

4. Clarify decision rights. Who makes the final decision, and who needs to be consulted?

5. End with accountability. What was decided, who owns it, and what happens next?

But I would add something that often gets overlooked: pay attention to the chemistry in the room.

Who speaks freely? Who holds back? Whose ideas get traction? Who gets interrupted? Who seems to have to prove their expertise before being heard?

These interactions tell you a lot about the team.

In my research, I identified relational conditions such as dignity, legitimacy, and agency that influence how chemistry develops.

When people feel their contributions are recognized and they have appropriate ownership, more meaningful participation becomes possible.

A productive meeting isn't one where everyone agrees. It's one where people can contribute honestly and leave knowing how to move forward.

Strategies to resolve conflicts within a work group

Conflict isn't necessarily a sign that a team is dysfunctional.

In fact, disagreement can be incredibly productive.

The problem isn't always the conflict. It's how people manage themselves and one another when things get uncomfortable.

I often encourage leaders to begin with two things: assumptions and expectations.

What story are you telling yourself about the other person's behavior? What are you assuming about their intentions? And what expectations have you placed on them that they may not even know exist?

I also encourage leaders to understand their tolerance for emotional heat.

Some people shut down when conflict becomes uncomfortable. Others become defensive, controlling, or combative.

Knowing your own response is critical.

Sometimes the most productive thing you can say is, "I'm feeling defensive right now, and I want to make sure I'm actually hearing you."

That's not weakness. That's awareness. That's healthy, professional vulnerability.

My research identified behaviors that can interfere with chemistry, including judgment, agenda control, avoidance, and power dynamics that diminish another person's agency.

Resolving conflict requires more than getting people to agree.

It requires creating enough relational capacity for people to stay engaged when they don't.

Providers of corporate team building workshops

There are plenty of corporate team-building providers offering retreats, personality assessments, outdoor activities, games, and leadership workshops.

Some are designed primarily for entertainment and connection. Others focus on communication, collaboration, conflict resolution, or leadership effectiveness.

Both can have value, but they don't accomplish the same thing.

When selecting a corporate team-building provider, I would ask:

• Will this experience help our team understand how we work together?

• Will we address real communication challenges or simply enjoy an activity?

• Will people leave with practical tools they can use immediately?

• Does the facilitator understand leadership dynamics and organizational culture?

• How will we carry the learning back into everyday work?

• Do we "click" with the vendor?

I've facilitated leadership development experiences where the most meaningful moments weren't the activities themselves.

They were the conversations the activities made possible.

Sometimes a team needs an opportunity to laugh together. Sometimes it needs to confront the fact that people don't trust one another. And sometimes it needs to clarify expectations, decision rights, and accountability.

A good facilitator knows the difference.

Through my work at Capacity, I design leadership workshops and team experiences that combine interactive learning with practical application.

My goal isn't simply to create an enjoyable experience.

It's to help teams understand what's happening between them and what they can do differently when they return to work.

Because a team-building event should create more than a good memory. It should create momentum.

How to foster psychological safety in a diverse team

Psychological safety is one of those phrases that gets used frequently in leadership conversations, but I'm not convinced everyone means the same thing.

Some people interpret psychological safety as making everyone comfortable.

That's not the goal.

Psychological safety doesn't mean eliminating discomfort. It means creating conditions where people can participate honestly, even when things are uncomfortable.

This becomes especially important on diverse teams.

People bring different experiences, communication preferences, perspectives, cultural backgrounds, and expectations into the workplace.

Those differences can create enormous value. They can also create misunderstanding when we assume everyone thinks, communicates, or responds the way we do.

I encourage leaders to focus on several behaviors.

First, stop requiring people to be like you. Acceptance of differences is paramount for building the right relational container for teamwork.

Someone who processes information differently isn't necessarily disengaged. Someone who challenges your thinking isn't necessarily disrespectful. And someone who needs time before responding isn't necessarily avoiding accountability.

Second, make room for disagreement without humiliation.

People should be able to ask questions, acknowledge mistakes, and offer different perspectives without fearing retaliation.

Third, clarify accountability.

Psychological safety doesn't mean people are exempt from expectations. In fact, clarity can help people understand how to contribute successfully.

Finally, pay attention to dignity.

In my research on chemistry, dignity emerged as an important relational condition. When people experience judgment, dismissal, or unnecessary power plays, the relationship can become less generative.

Leaders need to recognize that being included in a room is not the same as having the legitimacy and agency to contribute in that room.

That's where the real work begins.

Training programs for improving cross-functional teamwork

One of the most common challenges I see in organizations is that departments operate as if they're separate businesses.

Operations blames support services. Leadership thinks managers aren't communicating. Managers believe decisions are being made without their input.

Everyone is working hard, but they're not necessarily working together.

I call the energy wasted navigating these dynamics relational drag.

And organizations can't sustainably scale by simply asking everyone to work harder.

Cross-functional teamwork requires clarity around how people, departments, and decisions connect.

When evaluating training programs, look for those that address communication, collaboration, decision-making, conflict resolution, accountability, and organizational understanding.

I also encourage organizations to examine three questions:

1. Do people understand the larger organization?

Employees need to understand how their department contributes to the overall mission and how their decisions affect other teams.

2. Are decision rights clear?

Collaboration becomes frustrating when people are asked to take responsibility without having the authority to make decisions.

3. Can departments have difficult conversations?

Cross-functional teams need the ability to challenge assumptions, negotiate priorities, and resolve disagreements without creating unnecessary relational damage.

In my leadership development work, I often help teams move from simply managing their individual responsibilities to understanding their contribution to the larger system.

That shift requires both organizational clarity and interpersonal chemistry.

The goal isn't to eliminate departmental differences.

It's to create the conditions where those differences become useful rather than divisive.

You Don't Need More Team Building. You Need Better Chemistry.

Here's what I want leaders to consider.

What if your team's biggest problem isn't motivation, communication software, or even a lack of trust?

What if the real issue is the chemistry between people?

In my research, chemistry emerged as a co-created, generative interactional system. It isn't simply about personalities clicking or people enjoying one another.

It's about the relational conditions that make meaningful work possible.

When people have dignity, legitimacy, agency, and the ability to navigate disagreement productively, they have a stronger foundation for collaboration.

When those conditions are missing, teams can become stuck in patterns of avoidance, defensiveness, power struggles, and misunderstandings.

That's relational drag.

And no amount of software, meetings, or team-building games will automatically fix it.

Before scheduling another retreat or purchasing another collaboration platform, ask yourself:

Are our interactions generating momentum, or are they consuming energy?

Because connection can feel good. But chemistry moves something.

And that's what great teamwork should do.

Dr. Janice Perkins, PhD, PCC, is an executive coach, leadership communication researcher, and founder of Capacity. Her work focuses on leadership chemistry, executive team development, organizational culture, and helping leaders create the conditions for stronger communication, collaboration, and meaningful change.

Learn more at janice-perkins.com.