The teams in your business will actually perform better if they do NOT get on terribly well.  This is what scientific research says...

There is a book called Pop Finance by Brooke Harrington which every business owner and director needs to read.

Brooke is a sociologist and she is analyzes the performance of different investment clubs in the US in order to understand why and how some perform better than others. 

Just in case you do not know; in an investment club people meet up and invest their money into stocks and shares in a group effort to achieve stock market gains.

This book is important because investment clubs are one of the few ways in which you can directly compare performance between groups of people looking to achieve results in business. Although BP and Shell are "oil companies" you cannot directly compare their results because the way they do business and the specific areas of business they are in are different. But with investment clubs we have an indisputable record of their performance which can be directly compared.

To cut a long story short Brooke makes three major findings which are relevant to any business:

1. Mixed gender groups do better than single sex. As a male I naturally think I have a greater affinity for business decisions than most females but the facts do not bear out my illusions. 

2. In addition the more generally diverse your group the more effective their decision-making. We're talking class, race, age, life experience, etc.

3. The more friendly the group are with each other and the better they know each other the worse their decision-making.

So basically any group or team needs to have as much diversity as possible and not go out for drinks after work - if you want it to outperform other groups.

The first two of these are fairly obvious when you think about it because the more diversity you have, the more points of view are coming into any discussion. But take a look around your workplace - how many of your colleagues are PLU -- "People Like Us"?

The friendliness thing takes a little more explanation. On the face of it corporate team-building sounds like a great idea. A weekend in the wilderness doing strange tasks with an ex-military type shouting at you is a great way to experience the strengths and weaknesses of your co-workers...and get to know them better. And this is where the problem starts.

I generally find the more time I spend with someone the more I get to know and like them. Consequently, when it comes to making a decision with them, not only do I have to think about the actual issue being decided upon I also have to factor in a relationship which I value and do not want to lose.

That is why sometimes Harrington would observe "John" disagreeing with "David's" choice of stock but still voting in support of it because "John likes David".

I know some people say that sometimes, when you know someone better, you can disagree with them more and be more open. And in rare instances this may be true but basically, in general, the facts do not support this idea.

So, if you want to improve the performance of your teams and your business. Cut the team building budget and make sure your staff are a veritable riot of diversity.