FROM HBR:

What kind of workplace helps teams perform at their best?

It’s a question organizations have grappled with for decades, sparking one workplace reinvention after another: private offices, cubicles, open floor plans, Silicon Valley–style campuses, and, more recently, hybrid-work arrangements.

Despite these efforts, surprisingly little is known about which workplace features foster high-performing teams.

To better understand what distinguishes exceptional teams from average ones, my team and I surveyed more than 6,000 knowledge workers across a wide range of industries and identified a small group of exceptionally effective teams. We then examined a variety of factors that explain their success, including leadership practices, team habits, work arrangements, and workplace amenities.

Within our study, participants indicated which of more than 20 workplace amenities were available where they work, from collaborative workspaces and private meeting rooms to office gyms, ping pong tables, and complimentary food and coffee.

Theoretically, any of these perks could elevate performance, either by creating opportunities for group bonding, improving workers’ wellbeing, or simply making it easier for people to do their best work.

But in our survey, only one consistently distinguished high-performing team: a quiet place to do focused work. Members of superteams were 52% more likely than average teams to report having access to a place where they could concentrate without interruption.

What does access to a quiet workspace have to do with teamwork?

The answer lies in recognizing that effective collaboration requires more than constant togetherness. Teams need opportunities to discuss ideas, coordinate their efforts, and make decisions. But they need individual members to think critically, solve problems, and execute those decisions. That work requires uninterrupted concentration, and a quiet workspace makes it possible.

The Remote-Work Debate Misses the Point

The desire for more focus is a major reason remote work is so appealing, especially for those whose offices leave little room for sustained concentration. Working from home eliminates many of the distractions that plague office life: background chatter, surprise drop-ins, the feeling of always being “on.”

Previous studies on remote work have produced mixed results when it comes to individual productivity, with some showing a boost of over 20% and others showing modest declines. In our study, therefore, we decided to focus on team rather than individual productivity: Where are high-performing teams more likely to emerge? Does collaborating in person give teams an advantage? Does working from home lead to better results? Or is the best option a hybrid arrangement that combines the structure of the office with the flexibility of home?

The answer is actually none of the above. We found superteams to be just as likely to be remote as they were to be hybrid or fully in-person.

That finding seems counterintuitive until you consider that every work arrangement creates its own obstacles to focused work. In-person teams struggle with interruptions, overheard conversations, and the expectation of constant availability. But remote and hybrid teams face a different set of challenges. Research suggests that employees working in hybrid environments increase their use of messaging and video calls, even on days when they are physically in the office. The result can be the worst of both worlds: Employees commute into the office only to spend much of the day in virtual meetings and responding to messages that leave little time for focused work.

How Matters More Than Where

We found that superteams intentionally carve out opportunities for focused work, regardless of where their members do their jobs.They schedule dedicated focus blocks during which people were not expected to monitor messages or respond immediately to requests, and to establish meeting-free days, creating larger stretches of uninterrupted time for meaningful work.

Just as important, they reduce the need for interruption in the first place. They document how routine tasks should be completed and use task-management systems that allow team members to check the status of projects without interrupting a colleague.

The bottom line: Instead of relying on a steady stream of meetings and messages to stay aligned, superteams build systems that make information easier to find and progress easy to track. Where a team works matters less than how it works.

A Better Way Forward

No one work arrangement has a monopoly on high performance. Superteams distinguish themselves by protecting focused work, no matter where it happens.

Together, our findings suggest three ways leaders can create better conditions for teamwork.

Treat focused work as an essential part of collaboration.

The best collaborations rarely emerge from constant interaction. Teams need opportunities to think independently, refine ideas, solve problems, and execute decisions.

Research on brainstorming illustrates this point. Groups that brainstorm together often generate fewer and less original ideas than groups in which people are encouraged to generate ideas on their own before bringing them to the group for discussion and refinement—a practice called “brainwriting.”

Brainwriting illustrates an important principle: Effective collaboration isn’t just about bringing people together. It’s also about creating opportunities for people to think independently before contributing to the group. The best leaders recognize that effective teamwork depends on both individual contribution and collective improvement.

Experiment with practices that protect time for sustained concentration.

Superteams are significantly more likely to establish focus blocks and meeting-free days that allow employees to work without the expectation of immediate responses. Those practices acknowledge an important reality: Every meeting and message imposes a cost. A single interruption may seem insignificant, but dozens of small interruptions throughout the day can fragment attention and make meaningful progress on complex work nearly impossible.

Rather than attempting a sweeping overhaul of how your team works, start small. Designate a 60-minute focus block once or twice each week during which team members are not expected to respond to messages or attend meetings. Then discuss the experience as a team. Did people make progress on important work? Did any problems emerge? Use those insights to refine the approach over time.

The highest-performing teams don’t stumble upon better ways of working; they continuously experiment, learn, and adapt.

Give employees greater control over where they do different kinds of work.

Many organizations assume that everyone should work in the same environment throughout the day. But different tasks require different conditions. Writing, analyzing complex information, and strategic thinking often benefit from uninterrupted concentration. Aligning priorities, gathering input, and refining decisions frequently benefit from discussion with others.

Leaders don’t need to redesign entire offices to support this flexibility. They can reserve conference rooms for quiet work during certain hours, establish low-distraction zones, or explicitly encourage employees to choose workspaces that match the demands of the task at hand.

For years, organizations have debated workplace design and return-to-office policies. Our findings suggest that leaders may benefit from asking a different question: Have we created conditions that allow people to do their best thinking?

The most effective leaders recognize that teamwork is not just about increasing interaction. It is about creating conditions that help people contribute their best thinking to the group.

Lightbulb © 2026

Privacy Policy