As a business owner, it's incredibly frustrating when your leadership team doesn’t live up to your expectations, leaving you to put out fires. That’s why you want to lead a high-performing team. Research suggests that high-performing teams have 25% higher productivity (Chamakiotis, Pantelli, & Davison) and generate 30% more innovation (Castellano et al.). Who wouldn’t want that?



I was once in charge of building a team to run a large campaign. I recruited the team, assigned roles, pulled together resources, and gave them autonomy. Just as the campaign was about to launch, I received a call about a family emergency. What happened next solidified my belief in the power of high-performing teams: I could trust my team to complete the campaign even in my absence. I want to create this kind of confidence and peace of mind for leaders.

But is leading a high-performance team repeatable? I believe you can lead a high-performing team, and that’s what this guide is all about. Drawing from my experience in leadership, coaching other leaders, and my research in leadership and motivation—including earning a Ph.D. in Organizational Psychology—I’ve identified key ingredients that can elevate your team to high performance. My superpower is turning high-level theories into diagnosable, understandable, and actionable strategies for your team. These ingredients are laid out in a framework that I call the E5, which I hope you can use and share with others!

Building a high-performing team doesn’t happen by chance and is much easier when you have a structured approach. That’s where the E5 framework comes in. It is unique because it holistically integrates psychological principles and practical strategies. Here are the five components: Execute, Engage, Envision, Explore, and Empower. Each foundation is one of the characteristics of a high-performing team, meaning your leadership team will become a team you can finally trust to take on your vision and bring it further than yourself.

Why the E5 Leadership Framework Works

The E5 framework is grounded in my extensive research in organizational psychology and practical experience in leadership coaching. It’s designed to create a self-sustaining team by focusing on leadership's psychological and operational aspects. Here’s what sets it apart:

1. Holistic Integration: E5 combines high-level theories with actionable strategies, making it versatile and applicable across different industries and company sizes.
   
   
2. Sequential Synergy: Each component builds on the previous one, creating a cascading effect that is essential to the success of overall team performance.
   
   
3. Evidence-based Underpinnings: The framework incorporates elements of positive psychology, goal-setting theory, appreciative inquiry, and servant leadership, meaning we work not with hearsay but principles and actions that make observable differences.
   
   
4. Diagnosable and actionable: The framework includes a diagnosis that quickly tells you what you need to do next to lead high-performing teams.

The Foundations of E5: Characteristics of a High-Performing Team

Execute: The Foundation of High-Performance 



Execute lays the groundwork for a high-performing team. It’s about setting clear, challenging goals and ensuring each team member has defined roles and responsibilities. Regular check-ins are the key to maintaining focus and achieving these goals. Team performance depends on having these elements in place.

Engage: Keeping the Team Motivated and Committed

Engage is about motivating and connecting your team members. This involves personalized engagement strategies, regular one-on-one conversations, and recognizing each individual's contributions. A highly engaged team is more productive and committed to the company’s success. As a good leader, it’s crucial to get to know your team members on a personal and professional level, ensuring they feel valued and motivated.

Envision: Creating a Compelling Strategic Direction



 A clear and compelling vision unites the team and provides direction. Using techniques like Appreciative Inquiry, leaders can build consensus around the company’s mission, values, and strategic goals, ensuring everyone is aligned and moving in the same direction. This helps to create a culture that fosters collaboration and innovation across the team.

Explore: Fostering Innovation and Sustainability



Explore emphasizes the importance of innovation and sustainable practices. By identifying high and low seasons, teams can manage workloads effectively and continuously seek new opportunities for growth and improvement. Teams that prioritize innovation through formal processes tend to see higher employee engagement and team growth.

Empower: Building High Autonomy and Accountable Teams



Empower ties everything together, focusing on giving team members the autonomy and responsibility to take ownership of their roles. This includes developing clear processes and a leadership pipeline to ensure long-term success and independence.

Why the Components are in This Order

The order of the E5 foundations is intentional and strategic:

1. Execute: Execution is the foundation. None of the other components can be effectively implemented without the ability to set and achieve goals.
   
   
2. Engage: Engagement ensures that the team remains motivated and committed to achieving goals once goals are set.
   
   
3. Envision: A clear vision aligns the everyone's efforts and keeps everyone focused on the long-term objectives.
   
   
4. Explore: Innovation and sustainability ensure the team remains dynamic and adaptable, continuously improving.
   
   
5. Empower: Finally, empowerment solidifies the team’s autonomy, enabling them to operate independently and sustain high performance.
   
   

Focusing on these five foundations—Execute, Engage, Envision, Explore, and Empower—can transform your leadership team into a high-performing unit capable of driving your business to new heights.

In the following sections, we will examine each foundation of the E5 leadership framework, providing practical tips and strategies you can implement immediately.

1. Execute
2. Engage
3. Envision
4. Explore
5. Empower
   

Implementing the E5 Leadership Framework: Steps to Get Started

This was called a definitive guide, and it can be overwhelming. So, how do you make E5 a reality for your team? I have a diagnostic that has 25 items, 5 for each of the E foundations. I suggest getting an overall score from the diagnostic and seeing how you scored in each of the foundations. When I work with my clients, we start at the beginning and work our way down until each section can be scored at least 80% or above. So the first step is to diagnose, and you can do that right here.

Need help implementing this framework into your team? We have a program just for that, called the Empowered Leadership Intensive.

Reference:

Castellano, S., Chandavimol, K., Khelladi, I., & Orhan, M. A. (2021). Impact of self-leadership and shared leadership on the performance of virtual R&D teams. Journal of Business Research, 128, 578-586.

Chamakiotis, P., Panteli, N., & Davison, R. M. (2021). Reimagining e-leadership for reconfigured virtual teams due to Covid-19. International Journal of Information Management, 60, 102381.

Chanana, N., & Sangeeta. (2021). Employee engagement practices during COVID‐19 lockdown. Journal of Public Affairs, 21(4), e2508-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2508

Chen, Y. S., Lien, C. M., Lo, W. Y., & Tsay, F. S. (2021). Sustainability of positive psychological status in the workplace: The influence of organizational psychological ownership and psychological capital on police officers’ behavior. Sustainability, 13(5), 2689.

Dai, Y. D., Altinay, L., Zhuang, W. L., & Chen, K. T. (2021). Work engagement and job burnout? Roles of regulatory foci, supervisors’ organizational embodiment and psychological ownership. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 46, 114-122.

Fallman, S. L., Jutengren, G., & Dellve, L. (2019). The impact of restricted decision‐making autonomy on health care managers’ health and work performance. Journal of Nursing Management, 27(4), 706-714. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12741

Gardner, D. G., Pierce, J. L., & Peng, H. (2021). Social exchange and psychological ownership as complementary pathways from psychological contract fulfillment to organizational citizenship behaviors. Personnel Review, 50(6), 1479-1494.

Han, Y., & Hong, S. (2019). The impact of accountability on organizational performance in the U.S. federal government: The moderating role of autonomy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(1), 3-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16682816

He, Y., & Oxendine, S. D. (2019). Leading positive change in higher education through appreciative inquiry: A phenomenological exploration of the strategic planning process. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 41(2), 219-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1558720

Huh, E., & Lee, E. (2022). Can abusive supervision create positive work engagement? the interactive moderating role of positive causal attribution and workplace friendship. Management Decision, 60(3), 531-549. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2020-1356

Kauffeld, S., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Willenbrock, N. (2011). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15(1), 24-37.

Kim, W., Han, S. J., & Park, J. (2019). Is the role of work engagement essential to employee performance or ‘Nice to have’? Sustainability, 11(4), 1050. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041050

Kwon, K., & Kim, T. (2020). An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model. Human Resource Management Review, 30(2), 100704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100704

Lee, M. C. C., Idris, M. A., & Tuckey, M. (2019). Supervisory coaching and performance feedback as mediators of the relationships between leadership styles, work engagement, and turnover intention. Human Resource Development International, 22(3), 257-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2018.1530170

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2019). The development of goal setting theory: A half century retrospective. Motivation Science, 5(2), 93-105. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000127

Mone, E., Eisinger, C., Guggenheim, K., Price, B., & Stine, C. (2011). Performance management at the wheel: Driving employee engagement in organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(2), 205-212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9222-9

Roels, G., & Corbett, C. J. (2024). Too many meetings? Scheduling rules for team coordination. Journal of Operations Management, 74(1), 115-134.

Slåtten, T., Mutonyi, B. R., & Lien, G. (2021). Does organizational vision really matter? an empirical examination of factors related to organizational vision integration among hospital employees. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 483-483. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06503-3

Vafeas, N. (1999). Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 53(1), 113-142.

Waltz, L. A., Muñoz, L., Weber Johnson, H., & Rodriguez, T. (2020). Exploring job satisfaction and workplace engagement in millennial nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 28(3), 673-681. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12981

Wang, N., Zhu, J., Dormann, C., Song, Z., & Bakker, A. B. (2020). The daily motivators: Positive work events, psychological needs satisfaction, and work engagement. Applied Psychology, 69(2), 508-537. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12182

Zhang, Y., Liu, G., Zhang, L., Xu, S., & Cheung, M. W. L. (2021). Psychological ownership: A meta-analysis and comparison of multiple forms of attachment in the workplace. Journal of Management, 47(3), 745-770.