What do you think?
Rate this book
Win a free print copy of this book!
0 days and 14:40:08
25 copies available
U.S. only
Superteams: The Science and Secrets of High-Performing Teams
Not yet published
Expected 2 Jun 26Win a free print copy of this book!
0 days and 14:40:08
25 copies available
U.S. only
The ultimate playbook for building high-performing teams, packed with practical, eye-opening insights from the most comprehensive study of elite groups ever conducted.
What do the best teams do differently?
To find out, award-winning social psychologist Ron Friedman launched a landmark study surveying thousands of teams, pinpointing the habits that separate the best from the rest.
In Superteams, he shares their secrets, and explains why the old blueprint is broken. The best teams do more than rally around a goal or build camaraderie. In a world of endless meetings and 24/7 work, what truly sets high-performing groups apart is their relentless commitment to three critical focus, teamwork, and growth.
In this timely book, you’ll learn the exact practices the world’s top teams use to achieve extraordinary results—without the burnout—including a collaboration strategy that enables guilt-free, focused work during regular work hours; a communication method that leads to fewer meetings and smarter decisions; and a treasure trove of surprisingly simple tactics for unlocking your team’s full potential.
Blending eye-opening discoveries with unforgettable stories, Superteams takes you inside the writers’ room of Succession and Bridgerton, the recording studio of ABBA and Fleetwood Mac, the kitchens of fine dining restaurants, the laboratories of Nobel Prize–winning scientists, the locker rooms of NBA and NFL teams, the chambers of Supreme Court justices, the boardrooms of Silicon Valley’s most innovative companies, and the White House Situation Room.
Throughout the journey, you’ll discover a wealth of counterintuitive findings,
-Why feeling like the smartest person in the room is a sign you’re on a weak team
-Why top performers worry less about disappointing their boss than their peers
-Why where you work doesn’t matter nearly as much as how you work
-How an obsession with personal productivity actually undermines teamwork
-The only office amenity that reliably improves team performance ( it’s not coffee)
If you want to lead or join a high-performing team, forget the old playbook—it’s obsolete. What you need is a data-backed roadmap that details a smarter way to work. By applying the lessons in this book, anyone can turn their group into a superteam.
What do the best teams do differently?
To find out, award-winning social psychologist Ron Friedman launched a landmark study surveying thousands of teams, pinpointing the habits that separate the best from the rest.
In Superteams, he shares their secrets, and explains why the old blueprint is broken. The best teams do more than rally around a goal or build camaraderie. In a world of endless meetings and 24/7 work, what truly sets high-performing groups apart is their relentless commitment to three critical focus, teamwork, and growth.
In this timely book, you’ll learn the exact practices the world’s top teams use to achieve extraordinary results—without the burnout—including a collaboration strategy that enables guilt-free, focused work during regular work hours; a communication method that leads to fewer meetings and smarter decisions; and a treasure trove of surprisingly simple tactics for unlocking your team’s full potential.
Blending eye-opening discoveries with unforgettable stories, Superteams takes you inside the writers’ room of Succession and Bridgerton, the recording studio of ABBA and Fleetwood Mac, the kitchens of fine dining restaurants, the laboratories of Nobel Prize–winning scientists, the locker rooms of NBA and NFL teams, the chambers of Supreme Court justices, the boardrooms of Silicon Valley’s most innovative companies, and the White House Situation Room.
Throughout the journey, you’ll discover a wealth of counterintuitive findings,
-Why feeling like the smartest person in the room is a sign you’re on a weak team
-Why top performers worry less about disappointing their boss than their peers
-Why where you work doesn’t matter nearly as much as how you work
-How an obsession with personal productivity actually undermines teamwork
-The only office amenity that reliably improves team performance ( it’s not coffee)
If you want to lead or join a high-performing team, forget the old playbook—it’s obsolete. What you need is a data-backed roadmap that details a smarter way to work. By applying the lessons in this book, anyone can turn their group into a superteam.
352 pages, Hardcover
Expected publication June 2, 2026
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
Review of advance copy received from NetGalley
The Door No One Is Allowed to Close
Ron Friedman’s “Superteams” argues that great collaboration begins not with more togetherness, but with the room to think, recover, disagree, and return
By Demetris Papadimitropoulos | May 17th, 2026
Modern offices are fluent in the pageantry of teamwork. They are less reliable at making room for it.
Calendars clot. Chat windows multiply like spores. Inclusion becomes an invitation list, urgency becomes the expectation of instant reply, and culture becomes a sequence of compulsory cupcakes. The worker is left with a small daily trick: remain constantly available while doing work that requires being left alone.
Ron Friedman’s “Superteams: The Science and Secrets of High-Performing Teams” works best as a correction with teeth. Its useful argument is not that teams matter. True, but hardly news one needs a hardcover to receive. Its sharper claim is that the best teams are not the ones that meet most, socialize hardest, stay online longest, or convert every half-formed thought into a group exercise with snacks. They are the ones that protect the fragile conditions under which collaboration can actually occur: time to think, permission to recover, enough trust to speak plainly, enough structure to prevent chaos, and enough shared obligation that one person’s productivity does not become everyone else’s bottleneck.
Friedman begins with a revealing contrast from his own career. One early workplace, a high-profile political consulting firm, ran on fear. Meetings were tribunals; information was currency; humiliation served as a management system with better tailoring. Another, a marketing agency, seemed at first like the cure: barbecues, birthday lunches, office bands, flavored waters, colleagues dropping off dinners after a baby was born. The easy moral would be that nice offices produce good teams. Friedman refuses it. The agency’s generosity curdled into mandatory togetherness. Doors could not be closed without seeming antisocial. Large meetings existed so no one felt excluded. Social events became loyalty tests. Disagreement was treated as a failure of team spirit.
The firm failed through fear. The agency failed through friendliness with a clipboard.
That contrast carries the book. “Superteams” is not an attack on collaboration; it is an attack on teamwork cosplay. Its three-part design is plain in the useful way of a good workshop handout: how strong teams get more done, how they make one another better, and how they improve over time. The order matters. Before people can challenge, mentor, create, or grow together, they need stretches of time in which their minds are not being shredded into fluorescent confetti.
The first chapters take aim at distraction, meeting sprawl, personal productivity hacks, and the office reflex that makes everyone reachable at the exact moment they most need not to be reached. The best early image is Charles Benoit, a copywriter desperate enough for quiet that he hides in the soundproof booth his agency uses to record radio ads. He crouches below the window, flashlight in hand, scribbling inside a little chamber of stolen silence.
It is funny until it is not.
The scene captures the absurdity of work that requires concentration while the office keeps taking little bites out of it. Friedman builds from there: email, meetings, task-switching, attention residue, and the self-generated itch for stimulation once interruption has trained the brain to ask for more interruption. One of the book’s most useful concepts, “Collaborative Focus,” answers a real dilemma. Individual focus tricks – headphones, batched email, silenced notifications – may help one person, but they can also slow the group. One colleague’s deep work becomes another’s stalled decision.
Friedman’s less theatrical, more durable solution is social: shared focus blocks, meeting-free days, task systems that reduce status-check interruptions, rules for urgent and non-urgent channels, and explicit permission to protect attention without seeming to defect from the group. Here the book stops merely handing out tips and starts treating the office as a system of permissions and penalties. Friedman is not anti-collaboration. He is anti-chaos with a lanyard.
His examples of ABBA, Fleetwood Mac, and Rodgers and Hammerstein are not merely pop-cultural garnish. They clarify a rhythm: strong creative work often depends on moving apart and coming back together. Private work generates material; group work tests and refines it. Constant togetherness, that great office superstition, can flatten the originality it claims to summon.
The meeting chapter extends the critique with calendar-level usefulness. Friedman’s ideal meeting is rare, small, prepared, participatory, and aimed at a decision or a real problem. He is especially good on the costs that do not appear in a meeting-cost calculator: the hour before a call, ruined by anticipation; the fog after, when the mind returns slowly to the work it was forced to abandon; the loss of control that makes workers multitask in quiet rebellion. His rules – no decision, no meeting; no spectators; assign pre-work; rotate leadership; use pre-mortems – overlap with ideas found in Steven G. Rogelberg’s “The Surprising Science of Meetings” and Cass R. Sunstein and Reid Hastie’s “Wiser.” But Friedman folds those ideas into a wider theory of team health. Meetings, in his account, are not just administrative nuisances. They are little X-rays of what a team values: time, rank, candor, optics, or the narcotic sensation that progress is happening because many people are talking.
Part Two moves from focus to the obligation not to leave one another carrying the bag. Who shares credit? Who keeps others informed? Who helps when the task is not glamorous? Who disappears when deadlines become inconvenient? Friedman opens with the contrast between Chevy Chase and Tina Fey, which is not subtle but is effective. Chase becomes the emblem of corrosive individual brilliance: funny, gifted, status-hungry, and ruinous to the ensembles that helped make him famous. Fey becomes the counterexample: ambitious, but oriented toward the work and the group. Friedman’s conclusion is practical rather than syrupy. The best teammates are not simply caring, funny, or likable. They are knowledgeable, dependable, and clear communicators. They share recognition. They reduce status gaps. They put the team’s success ahead of private glory when the two come into conflict.
This material could easily have become a civility poster in hardcover. Friedman mostly avoids that fate by grounding virtue in behavior. Culture is not what people applaud at an offsite; it is who replies, who helps, who interrupts, who shares credit, who takes vacation, who stays calm when something breaks. Chet Holmgren pulling teammates and staff into postgame interviews matters because credit-sharing becomes contagious. Jack Twyman caring for Maurice Stokes matters because help becomes more than sentiment. Rick Allen’s return to Def Leppard after losing an arm matters because the band’s care is not pity. They create a safety net that allows him to remain a musician, not a mascot of resilience.
The trust chapter does more than nod toward trust; it anatomizes it. Using Guns N’ Roses as both autopsy and repair story, Friedman moves from Axl Rose’s volatility and control to the band’s later, calmer reunion. Trust, he argues, rests on competence, caring, and consistency.
The triad is memorable because it refuses softness. Trust is not charisma, kindness, or a well-timed emoji. A beloved flake is still a flake. Nor is skill enough if it arrives with contempt. Nor is good intention enough if follow-through behaves like a weather system. Friedman’s discussion of consistency is especially valuable because it catches conscientious, overbooked people in their least theatrical betrayals: slow replies with no warning, promises made from the narcotic pleasure of saying yes, deadline ghosting, mood swings, selective generosity. Betrayal at work is often less Shakespearean than administrative. The knife is usually an unanswered email.
The friendship chapter is less sentimental than the word friendship threatens to make it, and better for it. Using Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia, Friedman argues that workplace friendship can improve judgment, resilience, candor, and disagreement. The danger here is obvious: friendship can be converted into a productivity tool with snacks, another way for companies to ask for more of the self while calling it belonging. Friedman is careful enough to avoid making friendship compulsory. His sharper point is that real connection makes disagreement more survivable. Great teams do not need artificial harmony. In fact, a lack of conflict may signal fear, complacency, or the quiet burial of information everyone needed. Friendship is not a substitute for rigor. It is one of the conditions that lets rigor do less damage.
The final part asks how teams keep competence from hardening into a museum exhibit. Friedman turns to the writers’ room of “Succession,” the Comedy Cellar, Watson and Crick, Netflix, WD-40, Eleven Madison Park, 3M, and Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show.” By this point, the reader may hear the famous-example conveyor belt humming beneath the floor. Friedman loves a recognizable case, and the book occasionally glides from story to story with the efficiency of a cheerful airport tram. Yet the best examples do more than decorate the research; they show what the research looks like when it has a pulse.
Jesse Armstrong asking his “Succession” writers whether the show should end is perhaps the book’s cleanest illustration of high-trust feedback. The team tells him to stop while the show is strong, even though that advice ends their own jobs. That is loyalty of a rare kind: not loyalty to continuation, but loyalty to the work.
Friedman’s sentences arrive in work clothes: clean, brisk, and designed to be carried into Monday. He favors short-to-medium sentences, accessible metaphors, clean pivots, and a steady rhythm of problem, study, implication, action. He is not a sentence-level stylist in the literary sense, nor is he trying to be. His prose explains, advances, and leaves handles the reader can actually grip. The whiteboard of attention residue, Covey’s rocks in the bucket, mise en place, the football play sheet, the racehorse in the closet – these are not ornamental images. They make the research carryable.
The cost is that the scaffolding begins to show. Most chapters open with an anecdote, move to research, extract a principle, compare Superteams with average teams, and close with action items for managers and teammates. The repetition gives the book handles, though sometimes one can see the screws. After a while, one begins to anticipate the turn before it arrives: famous person in unexpected setting, research question, surprising finding, percentage, practical takeaway. The structure powers the book and occasionally over-domesticates it.
Its evidence is persuasive in direction, less satisfying in transparency. Friedman is drawing on a large original study, and the statistics give the book its brisk authority, though not always its deepest proof. But this is a workplace playbook, not a methods paper. The findings often arrive as polished claims rather than as fully inspectable research objects. To his credit, Friedman is careful about correlation and causation, and the notes show a wide research base. Still, some percentages function less like proof that closes a case than like bright trail markers: useful, suggestive, worth following, but not always sufficient to settle every argument.
Friedman’s achievement is arranging familiar ideas until they begin to move as one. He does not patent every concept he uses; he makes existing research behave like a working system. The book sits naturally beside Cal Newport’s “A World Without Email,” Amy C. Edmondson’s “The Right Kind of Wrong,” Daniel Coyle’s “The Culture Code,” Charles Duhigg’s “Supercommunicators,” and Marisa G. Franco’s “Platonic,” but its value is in the weave. Focus is not separate from trust. Trust is not separate from feedback. Feedback is not separate from growth. Recovery is not separate from ambition. A team is not a productivity machine with feelings attached. It is an arrangement of rules, permissions, rituals, incentives, silences, and consequences.
The reversals are the portable part of the book, the ideas most likely to survive the reader’s next overstuffed calendar. Collaboration is not constant contact. Meetings are not alignment. Friendliness is not trust. Rest is not idleness. Disagreement is not dysfunction. Feedback is not judgment when it is offered in service of future work. Productivity is not the private heroism of the individual who wakes early, buys the perfect notebook, and subdues an inbox before sunrise. Better teamwork is built in the open, through the way a group decides who may close a door, who may say no, who may be wrong, who gets thanked, who is allowed to recover, and who is invited to tell the truth before the truth becomes expensive.
This is why the book speaks directly to the age of the bloated calendar without inflating itself into prophecy. Many workers are now more connected than ever and less able to concentrate, more flexible on paper and less recovered in practice. Hybrid work, meeting overload, burnout, surveillance, disengagement, and always-on messaging all flicker behind Friedman’s chapters. To his credit, he does not turn “Superteams” into a grand sermon about the future of work. His question is smaller and better: what do people do, day by day, that makes shared work more livable or less so?
The book is least persuasive when dysfunction is not a bad habit but a business model. Some organizations do not merely need better agendas, clearer feedback norms, healthier rituals, or managers who model vacation. They are shaped by understaffing, weak incentives, insecure executives, status games, surveillance tools, compensation systems that reward solo wins, and cultures where candor is praised in public and punished by Thursday. Friedman recognizes incentives and power, but he usually prefers the solvable edge of the problem. That preference is part of why “Superteams” is so usable. It is also why it can feel too tidy. A workplace organized around fear or scarcity is not always a Superteam waiting for a better meeting protocol.
My final rating is 86/100, which corresponds to a Goodreads-compatible 4/5 stars: a strong, lucid, humane, highly usable workplace book, not formally daring or searching enough about structural constraint to reach the very top tier, but far better than its playbook packaging might suggest.
The conclusion reveals what Friedman most wants the book to mean. He tells stories of lottery winners who keep working, not because they need the paycheck, but because they love the work and the people beside them. It is a tender ending for a book otherwise stocked with meeting rules, survey findings, and the occasional office putting green. The point is not that work should become family, a phrase that has excused more nonsense than it has healed. The point is that a great team can make work feel less transactional, less lonely, less like a daily exchange of attention for rent. A strong team does not erase labor’s bargains and pressures. It does something more modest and more believable: it makes the bargain feel less hollow.
Its idealism is not scented-candle optimism; it is a demand for better design. It asks for fewer heroic speeches and better calendar hygiene. The book’s best passages understand that output and humanity are not enemies, though many workplaces behave as if they are. The highest-performing team is not the one that asks people to sacrifice themselves most elegantly. It is the one that makes excellence less exhausting to sustain.
In the end, “Superteams” is less about becoming extraordinary than about removing the ordinary obstacles that keep teams mediocre: the meeting that should have been a note, the silence that should have been feedback, the praise kept private, the vacation made guilty, the disagreement softened into nothing, the door no one is allowed to close. Its most resonant image remains that worker crouched in the soundproof booth, trying to think by flashlight. Friedman’s answer is simple, and quietly radical: the best teams do not make people hide in order to do good work. They build the room where good work can happen in the open.
Ron Friedman’s “Superteams” argues that great collaboration begins not with more togetherness, but with the room to think, recover, disagree, and return
By Demetris Papadimitropoulos | May 17th, 2026
Modern offices are fluent in the pageantry of teamwork. They are less reliable at making room for it.
Calendars clot. Chat windows multiply like spores. Inclusion becomes an invitation list, urgency becomes the expectation of instant reply, and culture becomes a sequence of compulsory cupcakes. The worker is left with a small daily trick: remain constantly available while doing work that requires being left alone.
Ron Friedman’s “Superteams: The Science and Secrets of High-Performing Teams” works best as a correction with teeth. Its useful argument is not that teams matter. True, but hardly news one needs a hardcover to receive. Its sharper claim is that the best teams are not the ones that meet most, socialize hardest, stay online longest, or convert every half-formed thought into a group exercise with snacks. They are the ones that protect the fragile conditions under which collaboration can actually occur: time to think, permission to recover, enough trust to speak plainly, enough structure to prevent chaos, and enough shared obligation that one person’s productivity does not become everyone else’s bottleneck.
Friedman begins with a revealing contrast from his own career. One early workplace, a high-profile political consulting firm, ran on fear. Meetings were tribunals; information was currency; humiliation served as a management system with better tailoring. Another, a marketing agency, seemed at first like the cure: barbecues, birthday lunches, office bands, flavored waters, colleagues dropping off dinners after a baby was born. The easy moral would be that nice offices produce good teams. Friedman refuses it. The agency’s generosity curdled into mandatory togetherness. Doors could not be closed without seeming antisocial. Large meetings existed so no one felt excluded. Social events became loyalty tests. Disagreement was treated as a failure of team spirit.
The firm failed through fear. The agency failed through friendliness with a clipboard.
That contrast carries the book. “Superteams” is not an attack on collaboration; it is an attack on teamwork cosplay. Its three-part design is plain in the useful way of a good workshop handout: how strong teams get more done, how they make one another better, and how they improve over time. The order matters. Before people can challenge, mentor, create, or grow together, they need stretches of time in which their minds are not being shredded into fluorescent confetti.
The first chapters take aim at distraction, meeting sprawl, personal productivity hacks, and the office reflex that makes everyone reachable at the exact moment they most need not to be reached. The best early image is Charles Benoit, a copywriter desperate enough for quiet that he hides in the soundproof booth his agency uses to record radio ads. He crouches below the window, flashlight in hand, scribbling inside a little chamber of stolen silence.
It is funny until it is not.
The scene captures the absurdity of work that requires concentration while the office keeps taking little bites out of it. Friedman builds from there: email, meetings, task-switching, attention residue, and the self-generated itch for stimulation once interruption has trained the brain to ask for more interruption. One of the book’s most useful concepts, “Collaborative Focus,” answers a real dilemma. Individual focus tricks – headphones, batched email, silenced notifications – may help one person, but they can also slow the group. One colleague’s deep work becomes another’s stalled decision.
Friedman’s less theatrical, more durable solution is social: shared focus blocks, meeting-free days, task systems that reduce status-check interruptions, rules for urgent and non-urgent channels, and explicit permission to protect attention without seeming to defect from the group. Here the book stops merely handing out tips and starts treating the office as a system of permissions and penalties. Friedman is not anti-collaboration. He is anti-chaos with a lanyard.
His examples of ABBA, Fleetwood Mac, and Rodgers and Hammerstein are not merely pop-cultural garnish. They clarify a rhythm: strong creative work often depends on moving apart and coming back together. Private work generates material; group work tests and refines it. Constant togetherness, that great office superstition, can flatten the originality it claims to summon.
The meeting chapter extends the critique with calendar-level usefulness. Friedman’s ideal meeting is rare, small, prepared, participatory, and aimed at a decision or a real problem. He is especially good on the costs that do not appear in a meeting-cost calculator: the hour before a call, ruined by anticipation; the fog after, when the mind returns slowly to the work it was forced to abandon; the loss of control that makes workers multitask in quiet rebellion. His rules – no decision, no meeting; no spectators; assign pre-work; rotate leadership; use pre-mortems – overlap with ideas found in Steven G. Rogelberg’s “The Surprising Science of Meetings” and Cass R. Sunstein and Reid Hastie’s “Wiser.” But Friedman folds those ideas into a wider theory of team health. Meetings, in his account, are not just administrative nuisances. They are little X-rays of what a team values: time, rank, candor, optics, or the narcotic sensation that progress is happening because many people are talking.
Part Two moves from focus to the obligation not to leave one another carrying the bag. Who shares credit? Who keeps others informed? Who helps when the task is not glamorous? Who disappears when deadlines become inconvenient? Friedman opens with the contrast between Chevy Chase and Tina Fey, which is not subtle but is effective. Chase becomes the emblem of corrosive individual brilliance: funny, gifted, status-hungry, and ruinous to the ensembles that helped make him famous. Fey becomes the counterexample: ambitious, but oriented toward the work and the group. Friedman’s conclusion is practical rather than syrupy. The best teammates are not simply caring, funny, or likable. They are knowledgeable, dependable, and clear communicators. They share recognition. They reduce status gaps. They put the team’s success ahead of private glory when the two come into conflict.
This material could easily have become a civility poster in hardcover. Friedman mostly avoids that fate by grounding virtue in behavior. Culture is not what people applaud at an offsite; it is who replies, who helps, who interrupts, who shares credit, who takes vacation, who stays calm when something breaks. Chet Holmgren pulling teammates and staff into postgame interviews matters because credit-sharing becomes contagious. Jack Twyman caring for Maurice Stokes matters because help becomes more than sentiment. Rick Allen’s return to Def Leppard after losing an arm matters because the band’s care is not pity. They create a safety net that allows him to remain a musician, not a mascot of resilience.
The trust chapter does more than nod toward trust; it anatomizes it. Using Guns N’ Roses as both autopsy and repair story, Friedman moves from Axl Rose’s volatility and control to the band’s later, calmer reunion. Trust, he argues, rests on competence, caring, and consistency.
The triad is memorable because it refuses softness. Trust is not charisma, kindness, or a well-timed emoji. A beloved flake is still a flake. Nor is skill enough if it arrives with contempt. Nor is good intention enough if follow-through behaves like a weather system. Friedman’s discussion of consistency is especially valuable because it catches conscientious, overbooked people in their least theatrical betrayals: slow replies with no warning, promises made from the narcotic pleasure of saying yes, deadline ghosting, mood swings, selective generosity. Betrayal at work is often less Shakespearean than administrative. The knife is usually an unanswered email.
The friendship chapter is less sentimental than the word friendship threatens to make it, and better for it. Using Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia, Friedman argues that workplace friendship can improve judgment, resilience, candor, and disagreement. The danger here is obvious: friendship can be converted into a productivity tool with snacks, another way for companies to ask for more of the self while calling it belonging. Friedman is careful enough to avoid making friendship compulsory. His sharper point is that real connection makes disagreement more survivable. Great teams do not need artificial harmony. In fact, a lack of conflict may signal fear, complacency, or the quiet burial of information everyone needed. Friendship is not a substitute for rigor. It is one of the conditions that lets rigor do less damage.
The final part asks how teams keep competence from hardening into a museum exhibit. Friedman turns to the writers’ room of “Succession,” the Comedy Cellar, Watson and Crick, Netflix, WD-40, Eleven Madison Park, 3M, and Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show.” By this point, the reader may hear the famous-example conveyor belt humming beneath the floor. Friedman loves a recognizable case, and the book occasionally glides from story to story with the efficiency of a cheerful airport tram. Yet the best examples do more than decorate the research; they show what the research looks like when it has a pulse.
Jesse Armstrong asking his “Succession” writers whether the show should end is perhaps the book’s cleanest illustration of high-trust feedback. The team tells him to stop while the show is strong, even though that advice ends their own jobs. That is loyalty of a rare kind: not loyalty to continuation, but loyalty to the work.
Friedman’s sentences arrive in work clothes: clean, brisk, and designed to be carried into Monday. He favors short-to-medium sentences, accessible metaphors, clean pivots, and a steady rhythm of problem, study, implication, action. He is not a sentence-level stylist in the literary sense, nor is he trying to be. His prose explains, advances, and leaves handles the reader can actually grip. The whiteboard of attention residue, Covey’s rocks in the bucket, mise en place, the football play sheet, the racehorse in the closet – these are not ornamental images. They make the research carryable.
The cost is that the scaffolding begins to show. Most chapters open with an anecdote, move to research, extract a principle, compare Superteams with average teams, and close with action items for managers and teammates. The repetition gives the book handles, though sometimes one can see the screws. After a while, one begins to anticipate the turn before it arrives: famous person in unexpected setting, research question, surprising finding, percentage, practical takeaway. The structure powers the book and occasionally over-domesticates it.
Its evidence is persuasive in direction, less satisfying in transparency. Friedman is drawing on a large original study, and the statistics give the book its brisk authority, though not always its deepest proof. But this is a workplace playbook, not a methods paper. The findings often arrive as polished claims rather than as fully inspectable research objects. To his credit, Friedman is careful about correlation and causation, and the notes show a wide research base. Still, some percentages function less like proof that closes a case than like bright trail markers: useful, suggestive, worth following, but not always sufficient to settle every argument.
Friedman’s achievement is arranging familiar ideas until they begin to move as one. He does not patent every concept he uses; he makes existing research behave like a working system. The book sits naturally beside Cal Newport’s “A World Without Email,” Amy C. Edmondson’s “The Right Kind of Wrong,” Daniel Coyle’s “The Culture Code,” Charles Duhigg’s “Supercommunicators,” and Marisa G. Franco’s “Platonic,” but its value is in the weave. Focus is not separate from trust. Trust is not separate from feedback. Feedback is not separate from growth. Recovery is not separate from ambition. A team is not a productivity machine with feelings attached. It is an arrangement of rules, permissions, rituals, incentives, silences, and consequences.
The reversals are the portable part of the book, the ideas most likely to survive the reader’s next overstuffed calendar. Collaboration is not constant contact. Meetings are not alignment. Friendliness is not trust. Rest is not idleness. Disagreement is not dysfunction. Feedback is not judgment when it is offered in service of future work. Productivity is not the private heroism of the individual who wakes early, buys the perfect notebook, and subdues an inbox before sunrise. Better teamwork is built in the open, through the way a group decides who may close a door, who may say no, who may be wrong, who gets thanked, who is allowed to recover, and who is invited to tell the truth before the truth becomes expensive.
This is why the book speaks directly to the age of the bloated calendar without inflating itself into prophecy. Many workers are now more connected than ever and less able to concentrate, more flexible on paper and less recovered in practice. Hybrid work, meeting overload, burnout, surveillance, disengagement, and always-on messaging all flicker behind Friedman’s chapters. To his credit, he does not turn “Superteams” into a grand sermon about the future of work. His question is smaller and better: what do people do, day by day, that makes shared work more livable or less so?
The book is least persuasive when dysfunction is not a bad habit but a business model. Some organizations do not merely need better agendas, clearer feedback norms, healthier rituals, or managers who model vacation. They are shaped by understaffing, weak incentives, insecure executives, status games, surveillance tools, compensation systems that reward solo wins, and cultures where candor is praised in public and punished by Thursday. Friedman recognizes incentives and power, but he usually prefers the solvable edge of the problem. That preference is part of why “Superteams” is so usable. It is also why it can feel too tidy. A workplace organized around fear or scarcity is not always a Superteam waiting for a better meeting protocol.
My final rating is 86/100, which corresponds to a Goodreads-compatible 4/5 stars: a strong, lucid, humane, highly usable workplace book, not formally daring or searching enough about structural constraint to reach the very top tier, but far better than its playbook packaging might suggest.
The conclusion reveals what Friedman most wants the book to mean. He tells stories of lottery winners who keep working, not because they need the paycheck, but because they love the work and the people beside them. It is a tender ending for a book otherwise stocked with meeting rules, survey findings, and the occasional office putting green. The point is not that work should become family, a phrase that has excused more nonsense than it has healed. The point is that a great team can make work feel less transactional, less lonely, less like a daily exchange of attention for rent. A strong team does not erase labor’s bargains and pressures. It does something more modest and more believable: it makes the bargain feel less hollow.
Its idealism is not scented-candle optimism; it is a demand for better design. It asks for fewer heroic speeches and better calendar hygiene. The book’s best passages understand that output and humanity are not enemies, though many workplaces behave as if they are. The highest-performing team is not the one that asks people to sacrifice themselves most elegantly. It is the one that makes excellence less exhausting to sustain.
In the end, “Superteams” is less about becoming extraordinary than about removing the ordinary obstacles that keep teams mediocre: the meeting that should have been a note, the silence that should have been feedback, the praise kept private, the vacation made guilty, the disagreement softened into nothing, the door no one is allowed to close. Its most resonant image remains that worker crouched in the soundproof booth, trying to think by flashlight. Friedman’s answer is simple, and quietly radical: the best teams do not make people hide in order to do good work. They build the room where good work can happen in the open.
Review of advance copy received from NetGalley
We tend to think the biggest breakthroughs come from new inventions, but oftentimes they come from smarter systems. Ford rethought the assembly line, McDonald's simplified how a kitchen functions, and Walmart optimized supply chains. They won by rebuilding the systems their people worked inside, not by some flashy new product.
Ron Friedman highlights these and other case studies in Superteams: The Science and Secrets of High-Performing Teams. He draws on a study of thousands of groups to argue that the teams that consistently outperform aren't the ones logging the most hours or holding the most meetings. They're the ones that have built better systems for protecting focus, managing energy, and holding each other to a standard. The work isn't the variable. The conditions around the work are.
Every claim is backed by data drawn from thousands of teams and tens of thousands of individuals, plus a deep bench of supporting research from other labs. When Friedman tells you something works, he can show you the numbers. He's not just extrapolating from a handful of consulting engagements and calling it science.
A few specific ideas stuck with me. I liked Friedman's case against the mid-afternoon scroll. Social platforms run on emotional intensity, and after a few minutes of high-arousal content, coming back to a full inbox or spreadsheet can feel unbearably flat. The "breaks" I thought I was taking aren't actually restoring my focus. If anything, they make it harder to get back to work.
I also liked what Friedman identifies as the real line between elite teams and merely good ones. On the best teams, accountability doesn't come from a coach or a manager pushing from the top. The players drive accountability between themselves. Peer expectations drive performance harder than anything coming down through the hierarchy. This aligns with my experience, but it was good to see it backed by research.
I'd also call this an easily readable business book. Friedman writes cleanly, the chapters move, and the takeaways are concrete enough that I could put them to use tomorrow. The citations and extended research are included if you want to follow-up, but they don't break up the narrative.
Five stars.
Thanks to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for the advanced copy. Other than a free copy of this book, I was not compensated for this review. All views are mine and mine alone.
Ron Friedman highlights these and other case studies in Superteams: The Science and Secrets of High-Performing Teams. He draws on a study of thousands of groups to argue that the teams that consistently outperform aren't the ones logging the most hours or holding the most meetings. They're the ones that have built better systems for protecting focus, managing energy, and holding each other to a standard. The work isn't the variable. The conditions around the work are.
Every claim is backed by data drawn from thousands of teams and tens of thousands of individuals, plus a deep bench of supporting research from other labs. When Friedman tells you something works, he can show you the numbers. He's not just extrapolating from a handful of consulting engagements and calling it science.
A few specific ideas stuck with me. I liked Friedman's case against the mid-afternoon scroll. Social platforms run on emotional intensity, and after a few minutes of high-arousal content, coming back to a full inbox or spreadsheet can feel unbearably flat. The "breaks" I thought I was taking aren't actually restoring my focus. If anything, they make it harder to get back to work.
I also liked what Friedman identifies as the real line between elite teams and merely good ones. On the best teams, accountability doesn't come from a coach or a manager pushing from the top. The players drive accountability between themselves. Peer expectations drive performance harder than anything coming down through the hierarchy. This aligns with my experience, but it was good to see it backed by research.
I'd also call this an easily readable business book. Friedman writes cleanly, the chapters move, and the takeaways are concrete enough that I could put them to use tomorrow. The citations and extended research are included if you want to follow-up, but they don't break up the narrative.
Five stars.
Thanks to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for the advanced copy. Other than a free copy of this book, I was not compensated for this review. All views are mine and mine alone.
Review of advance copy received from Edelweiss+
In today's workplace, teams represent the instrument of enacting change. Yet anyone who's served on a team realizes that team dynamics are key to maintaining a healthy atmosphere to make those contributions. Many books suggest ways to improve teams, but relatively few of them are based on critical studies to discern if their ideas actually work.
Ron Friedman's book, in contrast, begins as a study. He identifies top-performing teams in terms of output and nicknames them "superteams." Then he compares them with other teams that don't reach that level. He asks them the same questions in the survey about what social traits make their team tick. This book analyzes the results of this evidence-based investigation.
Many of the results are not entirely surprising in my experience, but they do surprise at points. Overall, superteams get more work done that betters each other. They find meaningful work that improve the group over time. Extrinsic rewards are not the key to team performance but rather intrinsic responsibility to each other. The superteams work for each other as much as they work for the manager.
To keep from being a mere academic analysis, Friedman investigates these traits with stories from many industries to illustrate his insights. Guns and Roses, writers of top TV show, Watson and Crick in research, and basketball teams all contribute inspirational success stories filling these pages. The combination makes for an eminently readable book.
The biggest takeaway for me is the courage to speak the truth with each other. It's easy to worry about offending people's sensibilities too much instead of creating a high-trust environment where honesty reigns. Trust enables teams to work together without fearing little missteps. That trust is garnered by a common purpose and a common direction towards a common meaningful purpose.
Overall, I love the evidence-based approach this book offers. It sifts through the many hypotheses in the literature to identify the key insights that actually work. I wish more books would take this studied approach. If you're looking for a book on teamwork filled with ideas tested to work, Friedman's Superteams is for you.
Ron Friedman's book, in contrast, begins as a study. He identifies top-performing teams in terms of output and nicknames them "superteams." Then he compares them with other teams that don't reach that level. He asks them the same questions in the survey about what social traits make their team tick. This book analyzes the results of this evidence-based investigation.
Many of the results are not entirely surprising in my experience, but they do surprise at points. Overall, superteams get more work done that betters each other. They find meaningful work that improve the group over time. Extrinsic rewards are not the key to team performance but rather intrinsic responsibility to each other. The superteams work for each other as much as they work for the manager.
To keep from being a mere academic analysis, Friedman investigates these traits with stories from many industries to illustrate his insights. Guns and Roses, writers of top TV show, Watson and Crick in research, and basketball teams all contribute inspirational success stories filling these pages. The combination makes for an eminently readable book.
The biggest takeaway for me is the courage to speak the truth with each other. It's easy to worry about offending people's sensibilities too much instead of creating a high-trust environment where honesty reigns. Trust enables teams to work together without fearing little missteps. That trust is garnered by a common purpose and a common direction towards a common meaningful purpose.
Overall, I love the evidence-based approach this book offers. It sifts through the many hypotheses in the literature to identify the key insights that actually work. I wish more books would take this studied approach. If you're looking for a book on teamwork filled with ideas tested to work, Friedman's Superteams is for you.
Review of advance copy
This practical guide to managing teams focuses on three topics: "How Superteams Get More Done", "How Superteams Make Each Other Better", and "How Superteams Improve Over Time". Based on primary and secondary research, it covers a variety of tangible actions that leaders can take to build and sustain a team that will be more productive and achieve stronger results than a more average group. To illustrate the recommended best practices, Friedman includes numerous examples from the worlds of popular music, television, sports, and science to round out the many stories from businesses in a variety of industries. There is a bit of an over-reliance on depicting the difference between regular teams and super teams through bar graphs, of which there are probably dozens throughout the text. And the advice can feel a bit generalized at times, so readers should take what applies to their particular work situation and ignore the rest. But overall this is a helpful reminder of ways to improve team and organizational performance.
I received this book as a free advanced reading copy, but this review is my own opinion.
I received this book as a free advanced reading copy, but this review is my own opinion.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews