Winning Behaviors Charter
Codify the conduct that sustains performance before success fragments the team
- Difficulty
- Advanced
- Time to result
- ~months to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 99%
Team Sky created its Winning Behaviors work after rapid success changed the expectations of new joiners and internal loyalties began to divide around leading riders. The charter turns culture into observable conduct. Begin by identifying what enabled the team to succeed and what now threatens it. Organise expectations into practical areas; Millar recalls self-management, team impact, communication, and continuous improvement among them, while noting that she could not remember the fifth area during the interview. Define both desired conduct and losing behaviours, such as unmanaged aggression, backstabbing, or agreeing in a meeting and undermining the decision afterward. Involve the team in forming the standards, allow counsel before a decision, and require collective commitment once the leader makes the call. Keep the charter active through coaching, feedback, and compassionate action when someone cannot meet the standard.
Origin
Team Sky developed Winning Behaviors after winning the Tour de France earlier than planned. Rapid success attracted people with different expectations and exposed factional conduct, prompting Fran Millar and colleagues to codify how team members were expected to behave.
Core principles
- 01Success changes who joins and what they expect
- 02Culture must describe observable behaviour rather than slogans
- 03Losing behaviours deserve explicit boundaries
- 04Team dynamics change whenever people enter or leave
- 05Debate ends with visible commitment to the final decision
How to run it
- 1
Recover the Success Conditions
Identify the behaviours that helped the team achieve its strongest results before those habits become folklore. Ask what people repeatedly did when the mission was still uncertain.
Pro tip Use concrete incidents rather than adjectives such as excellent or committed.
- 2
Map the Behaviour Areas
Group expectations into a small set of practical areas such as self-management, team impact, communication, and continuous improvement. Use only categories the organization can observe and coach.
Watch out Millar remembered four of Team Sky's five areas in the interview, so the framework should not invent the missing fifth.
- 3
Define Winning and Losing Conduct
For each area, describe what acceptable behaviour looks like and what crosses the line. Include subtle conduct such as private undermining, not only obvious misconduct.
Pro tip Phrase each item so a colleague could recognise it in a meeting.
- 4
Build Collective Ownership
Seek views from across the team before finalising the charter. Make clear that consultation is real even though the accountable leader may need to make the final call.
Pro tip Ask for examples of behaviour that helps or blocks other people from performing.
- 5
Commit After Debate
Let people challenge the direction before the decision. Once the decision is made, require team members to support it rather than agree publicly and undermine it privately.
Pro tip End the meeting by confirming both the decision and each person's commitment.
Watch out Commitment does not remove legitimate whistleblowing, safety, or ethical obligations.
- 6
Keep the Charter Alive
Use the behaviours in feedback, recognition, hiring, and role decisions. Coach recoverable breaches and address persistent inability to meet the standard with honesty and compassion.
Pro tip Review one behaviour in regular team retrospectives.
Watch out High standards should not be used to normalise harmful or unlimited workloads.
In the wild
After Team Sky won the Tour de France twice, later recruits joined an established winner rather than an uncertain mission. Internal loyalties also divided around Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome. Millar says the organization codified expected behaviour so the jersey represented collective standards rather than rider factions or status.
→ The team gained a shared language for conduct that supported high performance and exposed behaviour that undermined it.
Illustrative example: a growing software company notices managers agreeing to priorities in leadership meetings and then telling their teams the plan is misguided. Its charter protects open debate before the decision and labels post-decision undermining as a losing behaviour, while preserving routes for ethical or safety concerns.
→ Disagreement becomes visible and useful instead of spreading privately through the organization.
Common mistakes
Writing Values Without Behaviours
Abstract words cannot guide action unless the team can recognise what they look like in ordinary work.
Confusing Consultation With Veto Power
The leader can seek broad counsel and still make a final decision when the group does not reach agreement.
Allowing Private Non-Commitment
Millar describes public agreement followed by private criticism as especially damaging because it spreads through the organization.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for ambitious teams moving from an early mission-driven phase into a larger or more successful organization.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal as a poster exercise, a substitute for fair employment processes, or a licence for leaders to demand unlimited work.
From the transcript
“codifying what got us where we were was going to be crucial”
“creating a set of behaviors for the organization”
“you've all got to be on the bus non-negotiable”
From the episode
How To Chase Your Dreams Without Fear Holding You Back with Fran Millar