The Formula for High-Output Execution
How shared vision, accountability, and psychological safety impact delivery
I’ve worked on teams that shipped quickly, effectively, and with minimal drama, and on teams where getting anything out the door was a fraught exercise.
The difference is sobering and has real business impact. Across my own career, I’d estimate a 10x variation in my own productivity on teams that have this dialed in vs teams that do not.
What Predicts High Velocity Output?
I’ve worked in five tech startups, which has given me a broad perspective on the conditions that support vs. undermine execution. The pace of evolution in these companies means I’ve transitioned to many new teams, experienced consequential leadership changes like founder departures, been part of two acquisitions, and witnessed sharp strategy and culture pivots.
These are the key factors I’ve seen impact delivery:
Shared Vision
Culture of Accountability
Psychological Safety
Factor One: Shared Vision
What it means: everyone from founders to new hires is aligned on what the company is trying to accomplish and what success looks like.
High-level examples:
We aim to save lives by building a medical device that solves x problem which impacts y number of people. Our next steps are to complete product development and safety testing, get FDA approval, and build out robust sales and support teams.
We want to capture n% of the global market for creative collaboration by building an intuitive SaaS tool that embeds into development workflows. Our next steps are to build an MVP, achieve product-market fit, and implement an effective onboarding workflow.
The Gold Standard: Shared Vision
All of the work happening across the company is directly tied to this vision
Every team member knows how their work contributes
Leaders are a united front in support of the vision
Changes are debated thoughtfully and communicated clearly
Middle Ground: Shared Vision
There’s a vision, but it shifts frequently without explanation
Teams work at odds with each other inadvertently due to unclear direction
Failure State: Shared Vision
No one can articulate a clear vision
There are multiple conflicting versions of the vision
There is an “official” vision, but some leaders openly contest it
Teams work at odds with each other intentionally to undermine competition
Factor Two: Culture of Accountability
What it means: commitment to the work needed to deliver on the vision. This applies across the board no matter the role: people managers, project team members, support staff, founders, executives — everyone. This doesn’t mean everything goes as planned, but there’s shared commitment to working through obstacles.
The Gold Standard: Culture of Accountability
Everyone is motivated to deliver on the work they’ve committed to
Lack of accountability is culturally unacceptable
Team members own the impact when they aren’t able to meet commitments
Communicating about progress is a normal activity
Middle Ground: Culture of Accountability
Most people deliver, but there are no consequences for those who don’t
Leadership sets the vision but doesn’t follow up on progress
Some team members are defensive about dropping the ball
Failure State: Culture of Accountability
A minority of team members reliably deliver on commitments
Leadership tolerates this divide, or isn’t aware of it
Status update requests or attempts to resolve risks/issues are seen as hostile
Promotions and performance reviews are not tied to results
Factor Three: Psychological Safety
What it means: the ability to learn, evolve, take risks, and address concerns without fear of reprisal.
Psychological Safety: The Gold Standard
Defaulting to trust is a company norm
Respectful disagreement is seen as a normal part of collaboration
Domain ownership and agreed-upon roles and responsibilities are respected
Performance issues are defined by patterns and addressed from the perspective of curiosity
Psychological Safety: Middle Ground
People are polite, but real concerns stay underground until they blow up
Isolated mistakes trigger leadership scrutiny
The loudest person in the room has outsized influence
Psychological Safety: Failure State
Finger-pointing and blame when something goes wrong
Leaders define all decisions and steps to execution
Backchannel gossip is accepted as truth
Perception is prioritized over facts
Do All Three Factors Matter?
These variables work as a recipe: if any are missing, it completely transforms the output. Here’s a quick snapshot of what having two out of three looks like:
Vision + Accountability: low rates of innovation and creativity; high rates of anxiety. Without institutional safety, people keep themselves small and work under the radar.
Vision + Psychological Safety: lots of ideas but minimal results. Removing accountability optimizes for low performance.
Accountability + Psychological Safety = busy work that goes nowhere. Everyone is committed and feels supported, but the work itself won’t have meaningful impact.
Need to Make Some Changes?
If you’re reading this and recognizing gaps in your own environment, that’s true for most of us. Workplace culture is incredibly difficult to calibrate, because it’s largely about human relationships. What makes sense on paper can be anxiety-inducing to manifest, because it requires deep self-reflection and difficult conversations.
Writing this essay was challenging — I learned many of these lessons the hard way through personal failure. Conversely, I was negatively impacted in other situations where I had limited control.
This is a lifelong learning path for most of us. The best we can do is adapt to new information, stay open to different perspectives, and be intentional about creating the best possible space to deliver results.
Stay Tuned
This post is part of a series. Next up:
How to assess your options when your company culture isn’t working for you
Tactical solutions for your current workplace environment