Team Chemistry

Interesting look at team chemistry from Admired Leaders. Chemistry is a buzzword for a lot of coaches that remains undefined. I really like the idea of chemistry as a "quality of the interaction" between people. I've never been a huge believer in chemistry because I don't think we look at it the right way. We think of it as teams that go out to the movies together and enjoy meals with one another.

Chemistry on the basketball court is about the "quality of the interaction", and not much else. Are we helping each other on defense? Are we keeping the right spacing on offense? Do we sprint back all of time? Do we make the right pass on time? Teams that are fully connected interact the right way on the court, and that has nothing to do with whether they like each other or hang out at night. I've had plenty of great teams with starters who didn't really get along away from basketball, but were locked in on the basketball court.

"We can experience chemistry with someone very unlike us or who doesn’t share our views because it is first and foremost a quality of the interaction between people, not the tasks or content they discuss or work on."

Admired Leaders

When it comes to social connection, chemistry is a metaphor for things that go together seamlessly. 

Teams and relationships enjoy chemistry when the parties complement each other in such a way as to create an unusual connection. Because it can’t be easily measured or quantified, chemistry is scoffed at in some leadership circles. 

Yet, the metaphor and its impact are described by so many leaders and team members, there must be something there worth considering. Just because something is hard to measure doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

The outcomes of chemistry are well-documented. Teams and relationships that experience chemistry work more collaboratively and offer the support that feeds performance. Chemistry ignites engagement and curiosity between people. It’s a hidden differentiator. 

The recipe for chemistry, however, remains somewhat mysterious. It can’t always be created on purpose. A myriad of factors helps to promote it, but no one ingredient creates the unusual affinity chemistry affords. 

In making sense of how chemistry comes about, it may be more useful to understand that it is always grounded in the conversation shared by the parties. That is to say, chemistry is located in the conversation between people, not in the feelings or beliefs people have of each other. At least not initially. 

We can experience chemistry with someone very unlike us or who doesn’t share our views because it is first and foremost a quality of the interaction between people, not the tasks or content they discuss or work on. If the recipe for chemistry always required trust, respect, and like-mindedness, we wouldn’t experience it with people and teams that are new to us. 

The ability for the parties to engage and expand the dialogue and conversation feels less like work when chemistry begins to materialize. Later, once the parties recognize the ease by which they can converse and exchange ideas, they come to realize the conversation is markedly different from others they experience. It is this conversational ease that both reflects and creates chemistry between people, in relationships, and in teams. 

The next time you experience or observe chemistry between people, watch how different the interaction is. It flows, as if it is lubricated by some unknown spirit. The underlying accent of the conversation is chemistry in action. Or perhaps it is chemistry itself.