We are no less than idolaters of the rich and famous. Our preoccupation with Hollywood is evidence. We speak to authority, seek out those with celebrity, and otherwise dramatize the achievements of individuals. Individual effort, it is clear, is responsible for much good. There are few, if any, statues of committees to further anoint the individual as necessary to accomplishment. In fact, personal achievement is one of the most studied areas of business and organizations in general.

Organizations are, by definition, the forming of many to accomplish the ideas of one or a few. Organizations work, when they work. And that requires leadership from top to bottom, the single skill most deficient in new hires, according to surveys of business leaders. That notwithstanding, few great accomplishments are ever the work of a single individual. The evidence clearly demonstrates that behind every successful individual there are many in support. Yet, in spite of this, we still think of achievement in terms of “great” individuals, and not “great” groups.

What makes a great group, you ask? It’s not so difficult to imagine, but most don’t know how to assemble one, they just know when they’ve come across it. It’s kinda’ like good art – you know it when you see it. A great group is made of diverse high achievers. Why this complexion and not another? It’s simple: diversity encourages creativity and friendly competition; and high achievers deliver extraordinary results.

Can anyone imbued of such qualities (not already in a great group) become a “great group” member? Yes! That’s because individuals are generally more gifted than circumstances allow. That is, they seldom find themselves in the crucible that squeezes the best from them. Good people are not as apparent as they are abundant. It is impossible to underestimate the value of a person. A great group individual may only need to find the opportunity in a great group, then work to form it. Waiting for others disqualifies them for greatness.

Partnerships are the real substance of great groups. They form of a selfless devotion to task and to each other. It is when we care more about others and the joint result that we achieve great things. It is, perhaps, what we witnessed as the U.S. Olympics swim team accomplished the extraordinary by overcoming the odds to win the 400 Relay by a finger. What did they say afterward: “We came together in an extraordinary way" … that did not include the magniloquence of the competition.

Great Groups teach us something about effective leadership, about dedication to purpose, and about the “journey” in winning. We are servant leaders when best, clear minded in purpose, and focused on the means in winning, when we form effective partnerships. Pure competition shares nothing with enmity; instead, it measures every moment for its contribution. The result may fall short of the goal, but the effort never looks back.

In his study of “great groups,” Warren Bennis, widely known as a pioneer of the contemporary field of leadership studies, looked for what is common to most great groups. Though he concluded that most are extraordinary in their own way, he suggests that they share several principles that also apply to their organizations. Keep this in mind as you review them; great organizations are where great groups come together.

• A shared dream at their heart. They believe they are on a mission, that they could change the world, make a difference. They are seized with their work. It’s not a job but a quest. That belief is what brings the necessary cohesion and energy to their work.

• They operate independent of individual style. They see the mission as above all else, and the route to it through group members. Conflict resolution is tied to the mission.

• They are protected from the “suits.” The group is allowed to flourish by a protective leader who is committed to the process and can negotiate the terms of operation.

• They have a real or invented enemy. An onerous opponent aids even the most sublime missions. It brings the group together in friendly competition. Apple Computer's implicit mission was to bury IBM. (The famous 1984 Macintosh TV commercial included the line, “Don't buy a computer you can't lift.”) The decline of Apple follows the subsequent softening of their mission.

• They view themselves as winning underdogs. World-changing groups are usually made up of mavericks, people at the periphery of their disciplines. It is so for many great sports teams—the 1981 San Francisco 49ers, this year’s Celtics. These groups do not regard the odds-on favorites as the sacred Ganges.

• Members pay a personal price. Membership requires fully invested people, often willing to suffer the slings of others to pursue their appointed mission.

• Great Groups make strong leaders. They were all nonhierarchical, open, and very egalitarian, with strong leaders. That's the paradox of group leadership. You cannot have a great leader without a Great Group and vice versa. In an important way, these groups made the leaders great. The leaders Bennis studied were seldom the brightest or best in the group, but they weren’t passive players either. They were connoisseurs of talent, more like curators than creators.

• Great Groups have youthful energy. It provides the physical stamina demanded of these groups. They are also young in spirit, ethos, and culture. Most important, they don’t know the impossible, as any youth will tell you.

Frank J. Rich is founder and CEO of Encore Prist International, an organizational development company that helps individuals and organizations reach their full potential through the practice of effective business fundamentals. You may reach him at fjr@encoreprist.com or by phone at 866-858-4EPI.