My research into biological teams has revealed that they make extensive use of short messages as their primary means of communications. For example, Ants use chemical messages, Bees use visual messages conveyed through dance and Dolphins use sonar: unlike human teams they all exhibit strong Messaging Instincts.

In a previous article, Seven 'model behaviours' for bioteam members, I discussed the work of Craig Reynolds and the three critical autonomous behaviours which enable birds to flock. Here I propose that human bioteam members need just seven autonomous behaviours to enable them to swarm.

Bioteams pay as much attention to their weak ties: the collective external networks of relationships and their connections to the wider organisation and environment as their strong ties: their internal team structures.

A key principle of bioteams is team member self-management. Nature's teams achieve this through a surprisingly small number of simple rules which operate at the individual member level and result in sophisticated team behaviour. For example, complex 'bird flocking' behaviour can be simulated on a computer using just three rules. I propose that human bioteams can be effectively self-managed in a sophisticated way by adopting a small set of "model behaviours" at the individual team member level.

When a new enterprise enters its market it must quickly find a viable niche in its business ecosystem or it will not survive. Similarly for cross-functional teams in major organisations : if the team does not find a value niche in that organisation's overall ecosystem then it will not deliver its potential. Amazingly certain key concepts in biological ecosystems transfer immediately into the business world.

Almost all of us have been part of some team in our workforce or organisation or even a sports club. Usually this is a mixed experience - we have some victories but lots of failures too. A lot of people from the technology world, myself included, hoped that all the communication technologies like email, the Internet, broadband, instant messaging and mobile phones would make things better for teams. The reality is in many cases it's made things worse. So how is it that nature's teams seem to work much better than ours and what have we forgotten?

We have completed a short research project into the beliefs of three High Performing Teams (HPTs) in a large software organisation. Our research indicated that four beliefs were universally held: clear and public accountability, trusted competency, give and take and outcome optimism. Five other beliefs were largely or partially held suggesting that an HPT may have between 4 and 9 key beliefs.

One of the aspects of bioteams in nature is that they seem to have just the right amount of structure to handle their environments. Too much and they would be slow and cumbersome. Too little and they would lack the sophisticated responses to move them up the food chain. In either case the consequences are extinction!

Much has been written about why people collaborate and the pay-offs. Key concepts include Tit for Tat and The Prisoners Dilemma discussed in Dysfunctional teams: bioteam them.

Instead of issuing orders, nature's teams such as ants, geese, dophins, jellyfish and microscopic life forms, function by providing timely information to the team members and then allowing and expecting them to take the appropriate action. Curiously, this information is not provided by the Queen nor a leadership group but by the 'rank and file' members. Team Intelligence provides a team with a much more sensitive and long-range early warning 'radar' than the conventional approach which enables them to spot problems and opportunities sooner and to react to them more effectively.