The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization
Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith
McKinsey & Company, 1993
ISBN 0-87584-367-0

(p. 241)

...it is useful for management to distinguish among teams that run
things, teams that make or do things, and teams that recommend things.

Teams that run things

A team that runs things could be in charge of tens of thousands of
people or only a handful; but as long as the group oversees some
business, ongoing program, or significant functional activity, it is a
team that runs things.  Unlike teams that recommend things (e.g. task
forces), these groups typically have no clear end dates.  In a sense,
their work is never done.

The relevant challenges most unique to teams that run things include: 1)
the choice between team and working group, 2) the role of the team
leader, and 3) the problem ot transitions.

The toughest challenge for teams that run things often comes in trying
to identify specific team purposes, goals, and collective work-products.

Teams that recommend things

"These teams include task forces, project groups, and audit, quality, or
safety groups asked to study and solve particular problems.  Unlike most
teams that run, make, or do things, teams that recommend things
typically have predetermined completion dates, although a few, like
plant-level safety teams, might be ongoing.  If top management asks such
a group to address issues of performance as opposed to administration
(e.g. organizing the annual conference), then almost by definition the
group 'matters.'

The two critical issues unique to teams that recommend things are
getting off to a fast and constructive start, and dealing with the
inevitable 'handoff' required to get their recommendations implemented.

Teams that make or do things

"These teams include people at or near the front lines who are
responsible for doing the basic research, development, operations,
marketing, sales, service, and other value-adding activities of the
business.  With some exceptions like new product development or process
design teams, such teams tend to have no set completion dates.

If performance at the critical delivery points depends on combining
multiple skills, perspectives, and judgments in real time, the team
option makes sense.  If, on the other hand, an arrangement based on
individual roles and accountabilities is the best way to deliver the
value customers require at the right cost, teams may be unnecessary and
possibly disruptive.

(p. 249)

...top management needs to build structural and support systems that
focus on the performance challenges, measurement, and skills necessary
to broad-based team performance at the front lines.  This may include
organizing work around teams as the primary performance unit, and
emphasizing just-in-time training.  Such training might include team
problem-solving, decision-making, interpersonal, and leadership skills. 
The choice depends on the performance needs of each team.

Top management can also help by instituting processes like 'pay for
knowledge' and 'team performance' pay schemes, and by facilitating
access to expertise beyond the team.  More than anything else, however,
top management must make clear and compelling performance demands on
specific teams themselves, and then pay relentless attention to their
progress with respect to both team basics _and_ performance results.

High-Performance Organization

1.  Balanced performance results.
2.  Clear, challenging aspirations.

Whether it goes under the name of 'vision,' 'mission,' 'strategic
intent,' or 'directional intensity,' the company's purpose must reflect
clear and challenging aspirations that will benefit all of its key
constituencies.  Too many vision statements are just that: a written
attempt by top management to meet the well-accepted 'vision
requirement.'  They may be read by all, and may even be immortalized in
plaques on the wall, but they have no real emotional meaning to people
down the line whose behaviors and values they are supposed to influence.
The purpose, meaning, and performance implications of visions must
communicate, to all who matter, that they will benefit both rationally
and emotionally from the company's success.

3.  Commiteed and focused leadership.
4.  An energized work force dedicated to productivity and learning.
    "...the people of the organization must share an eagerness to ask
questions, to experiment with new approaches, to learn from results, and
to take responsibility for making changes happen."

5.  Skill-based sources of competitive advantage.
6.  Open communications and knowledge management.