United We Transform | Facilitator run sheet

Helping Behavior

Participants silently read a research summary on intelligence teams, discuss help-seeking barriers in small groups of 2 to 5, and post concrete agreements for giving and accepting assistance.

20 minutes | 4 to 24 people

Choose this exercise

Purpose: Identify barriers to asking for assistance and define concrete team agreements for requesting and offering help.

Use it when: Use during a team kickoff, retrospective, or project reset when members hesitate to ask for help or work in isolated silos.

Skip it when: Skip when members work entirely independently with no shared dependencies, or during acute interpersonal disputes that require formal mediation.

Group arrangement: Small groups of 2 to 5 participants, followed by whole-group review

Timing: Source suggested 15 to 30 minutes; UWT plan sets 20 minutes.

Materials and tools

Before participants arrive

  1. Print or link the Briefing Sheet for all participants.
  2. Set out index cards and pens at group tables.
  3. Designate a wall section or digital board to post cards.

Say this to open

Take the next three minutes to read this brief case study on team effectiveness silently. Note what separated the highest-performing teams from the rest. Afterward, we will break into small groups to decide what that means for how we collaborate.

How to run it

  1. Introduce and distribute 2 minutes

    Hand out the Briefing Sheet to each participant. Read the opening script aloud. Answer any procedural questions before starting the reading timer.

  2. Read in silence 3 minutes

    Ask everyone to read the text silently. Keep the room quiet until the timer finishes.

  3. Discuss in small groups 9 minutes

    Group participants into teams of 2 to 5 (pairs or trios for 4 to 6 people; groups of 3 to 5 for larger rosters). Have each group discuss the three prompts on the sheet. Instruct each group to choose one writer to record a single practical team norm on an index card. For example: 'If you are blocked for more than 30 minutes, post a request for a 5-minute check-in on the team channel.' At the five-minute mark, prompt groups to draft their final card.

  4. Post and debrief 6 minutes

    Have each group tape their card to the wall or post it to the shared board simultaneously. Give everyone one minute to read all posted norms. Facilitate a brief discussion using the debrief questions, taking observations from two or three volunteers.

Debrief questions

Finished output: Every small group produces a written team agreement card posted to a shared board.

Remote

Distribute the briefing text via chat or shared document link. Send participants into breakout rooms of 2 to 5 people for 9 minutes. Groups type their norm into a shared digital whiteboard or chat. Review the entries together in the main room during the debrief.

Hybrid

Keep remote participants together in dedicated video breakout rooms and have in-person participants form table groups in the room. Both remote and in-person groups write their norms onto the same digital board or shared slide deck so all participants see the full list during the debrief.

Access and participation choices

If the session gets stuck

Groups spend the entire small-group time debating the intelligence study rather than their own team.
Provide a time check at minute five: 'Shift now to prompt 3 and draft your team norm card.'
Participants equate asking for help with weakness or lack of skill.
Point out the study finding: top-performing units asked for help more frequently than lower-performing units, treating help-seeking as an indicator of competence.

Briefing Sheet: Helping Behavior in High-Stakes Teams

Following a major national crisis, a research team led by psychologist Richard Hackman studied what made intelligence units effective. They surveyed, interviewed, and observed hundreds of analysts across 64 different intelligence groups. The researchers expected that factors like individual intelligence, team resources, or clear organizational hierarchy would be the primary drivers of success. Instead, the single strongest predictor of group effectiveness was the presence of helping behavior: team members actively giving and seeking help, sharing expertise freely, and stepping in to review work without formal mandates. Discussion Prompts:1. What helps or hinders people from asking for help on our projects?2. What can directly be applied from this study to our immediate team or project this week?3. What is one concrete agreement we should make about how we offer and accept help?

Sources and adaptation

Observed in Relationship Makers Handbook, pages 196-197, citing research by Richard Hackman on intelligence units.

Retained the silent reading, the Richard Hackman intelligence team case study, the 2-5 group format, and the small-group reflection from Relationship Makers Handbook. UWT packaged the reading into a standardized Briefing Sheet, set time boundaries totaling 20 minutes, provided an example team norm, and removed secondary references to external exercises not used in this run sheet.

See our editorial policy for AI use, sourcing and corrections.