In many tech companies, there’s often talk about the so-called “cursed” teams. These are the teams where nothing seems to go right: they struggle to meet deadlines, team members constantly clash, and before you know it, people are quitting or burning out on long-term sick leave. It’s tempting for leaders to assume that the problem is simply the people. “Let’s replace them,” they think. But what happens when new hires join the team, only to fall prey to the same problems? The answer, which many CTOs and leaders are slowly realizing, is that it’s not the people—it’s the system.
When teams start failing, it’s common for leadership to look at individuals and think the problem lies there. This is why CEOs and CTOs ask their tech leaders often, “Which team member should we fire?” And while removing toxic individuals can sometimes help, the core issue is rarely solved by changing out people. People quit, new members joined, and yet the dysfunction persisted. The reality? It’s the system that’s cursed, not the people.
Dysfunctional teams often suffer from more systemic issues than individual inadequacies. Teams are a reflection of the environment they operate in—their workflows, their management structures, and the culture set by the company. When deadlines are missed, burnout rates are high, and conflicts are rampant, it’s usually because these deeper aspects are misaligned. Yet, many companies are slow to acknowledge this. CTOs and leadership teams continue to believe that people are interchangeable, thinking replacing them will fix everything. However, replacing people in a broken system is like changing the tires on a car with a faulty engine—it won’t fix the root cause.
Let me explain:
The good news? It is possible to revive even the most “cursed” of teams. While it’s a challenging process, companies can—and have—turned dysfunctional teams into highly productive ones. It’s not about firing people; it’s about addressing the environment in which they work.
Many companies have started solving this problem by rethinking how they measure productivity and team health. The common mistake is to focus on the wrong metrics—lines of code, or velocity. But these metrics don’t tell the full story, and focusing on them can lead to false positives. For instance, some teams might be producing a high quantity of code, but if that code is leading to constant technical debt, missed deadlines, and frustrated team members, then it’s clearly not a sign of success.
Surprisingly, 59% of companies don’t measure team productivity at all. Of those who do, many fail to understand what the numbers mean or how to improve based on them. Measuring the right things—team satisfaction, effectiveness in problem-solving, or how decisions are made—is crucial to diagnosing deeper issues. Never focus on one metric alone. It's not a north star. It merely indicates a symptom, but doesn't uncover a cause.
To fix systemic issues, it’s important to measure the right things, and equally important to understand those measurements in a broader context. Teams need a holistic awareness of what’s going wrong, backed by data that goes beyond simplistic measures of output. One common strategy is to have bug bashes or dedicated days where teams tackle technical debt. But if these events happen once a year, or aren’t tied to continuous improvement efforts, they won’t fix systemic issues.
Another mistake companies make is hoping technology like AI will solve their people problems. AI can automate repetitive tasks and streamline processes, but it cannot address the underlying toxic work environments or improve poor communication between team members. Developers spend the majority of their time not writing code, but in meetings or fixing organizational inefficiencies—problems AI is ill-equipped to solve. If you'd do a survey and your developers point out in a high number that they spend too much time in meetings, it is a clear qualitative indicator that the meeting culture needs some investigation.
Some teams are faster than others, but speed doesn’t necessarily correlate with success or harmony. Fast teams aren’t always the ones who love each other or work without friction. Instead, these teams often benefit from better systems, communication, and leadership. This is where frameworks like DORA (DevOps Research and Assessment) and SPACE (Satisfaction, Performance, Activity, Communication, and Efficiency) come into play. They provide a more comprehensive way to assess and improve team health and productivity, focusing on what really matters in a team’s day-to-day functioning.
One key insight shared by companies is that the best teams balance their work between building new features and improving existing systems. We recommend a ratio of 60% feature development to 20% improvement work, leaving the rest for administrative tasks, learning, and technical debt management. If a team spends 90% of its time pushing out new features, it’s a red flag that long-term sustainability is being sacrificed for short-term gains. Developers can easily get lost in the constant push for new features, which leads to technical debt piling up, poor onboarding experiences, and frustrated end-users.
One of the simplest, yet most powerful metrics for assessing team health is developer satisfaction. The perception of ease and clarity within the team can often highlight underlying issues. Developers should be able to say, “It’s easy to make decisions in my team,” or “It’s easy to work with my team.” If not, then even the most productive-looking teams may be struggling beneath the surface.
Perception questions about ease of decision-making, collaboration, and clarity of roles can help uncover whether a team is truly functioning well or if there’s hidden dysfunction. If developers feel that decision-making is opaque or that their team is hard to work with, it’s a sign that there’s work to be done on communication, structure, or leadership.
The myth that “cursed” teams can be fixed by replacing people is one of the biggest misconceptions in tech. Dysfunctional teams are almost always the result of a broken system, poor communication, or leadership issues. It’s time to stop blaming individuals and start focusing on the systems in which they operate.
By measuring the right things, fostering a healthy team culture, and ensuring a balance between new development and improvements, companies can break the cycle of dysfunctional teams. It’s not an easy process, but with the right mindset and strategies, even the most cursed of teams can be revived.
