HBR On Leadership

Episode: The Risks of Putting People on Too Many Project Teams

Date: August 27, 2025
Host: Sarah Green Carmichael for HBR IdeaCast
Guest: Professor Mark Mortensen, INSEAD

Overview

This episode examines the growing trend of “multi-teaming”—assigning employees to multiple simultaneous project teams—and explores the organizational upsides, the substantial risks (like burnout and hidden interdependencies), and what leaders and teams can do to manage these challenges. Professor Mark Mortensen, co-author of the influential HBR article "The Overcommitted Organization," shares research insights, practical recommendations, and candid observations about the often invisible costs of spreading people too thinly across projects.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Why Multi-Teaming Became the Norm (11:14)

• Global Competition & Pace:
  • Organizations have responded to increased speed and interconnectedness in the business world by moving away from rigid, siloed teams towards placing people across projects.
  • “That environment is forcing the hands of organizations…they can't continue to compete in the same way if they keep themselves in these very traditional, hierarchical, lockstep sorts of structures.” (Mark Mortensen, 11:14)

Upsides for Organizations (03:21)

• Efficient Use of Resources:
  • Staff can have their expertise utilized more fully instead of sitting idle.
• Information Transfer:
  • Cross-staffing helps knowledge flow between different parts of the organization.
• Diversity of Perspectives:
  • Exposure to multiple projects broadens learning.

The Hidden, Aggregated Downsides (01:50, 03:16, 04:34)

• Stress and Burnout:
  • Individuals often bear the unseen burden, leading to unhealthy work overload.
• Invisible Overcommitment:
  • Most managers don’t have a clear picture of employees’ true workload.
  • “They don't always check that the math works. Sometimes they end up with 137% dedication and that's obviously a problem.” (Mark Mortensen, 02:33)
• Human Capital Interdependence:
  • When the same key person works on multiple seemingly separate projects, a crisis in one can stall all others (e.g., because “our two key engineers” were pulled away for a safety recall).
  • “There’s a new type of risk on the block...there’s nothing about the car and the truck that on paper look connected…but because they share people, now they find that they’re actually bound very tightly.” (Mark Mortensen, 04:39)
• Exponential Coordination Costs (“Team Creep”):
  • Adding people incrementally to meetings or teams, for information’s sake or buy-in, can spiral into a web that’s exponentially harder to coordinate (07:40).
• Switch Tasking Inefficiency:
  • Task switching is draining and undermines productivity, but organizations rarely see that cost directly (09:39).

Who’s Most at Risk? (06:05)

• Specialists:
  • Highly specialized experts get endlessly cross-allocated because their skills are in demand—but true deep expertise is rare and expensive.
• Administrators/Relationship Managers:
  • Senior partners or others who hold client relationships, not just technical knowledge, are often on many teams.
  • “It’s two sides of the same coin…deep technical knowledge and deep relationship knowledge. It’s the people who have something unique and they need to be stretched across multiple projects.” (Mark Mortensen, 06:48)

Visibility & Trust Challenges (12:20, 13:35, 15:13)

• Making Work Visible:
  • Billable hours or workload dashboards can help, but rarely show the whole picture. Data is often siloed or not shared.
  • “Having that data is different than having that data be visible.” (Mark Mortensen, 12:47)
• Transparency Trade-offs:
  • Visibility into workload can prompt resentment or gaming the system in low-trust environments.
  • “When you make it more visible…you increase the possibility that people can actually game the system…if we don’t have that sort of clarity, then we’re basically sitting with blinders on.” (Mark Mortensen, 14:07)
• Conversation as a Tool:
  • When data isn’t available, honest team discussions about who’s overloaded lead to practical mutual adjustments.
  • “The main tool is conversation...Let’s have one meeting...where we go around and talk about how many other projects and what other projects you’re on. Even if the team leader doesn’t have all the pieces mapped out...the system can adjust itself more smoothly.” (Mark Mortensen, 15:25)

Team Fluidity & Trust Building (17:18)

• The fuzziness of “team” with people jumping between projects and locations makes it harder to build the trust and psychological safety that good teams need.
• “The team as a construct...is starting to become a whole lot more fuzzy and a whole lot harder to put your finger on...All of this stuff starts coming a little bit more into question when the team itself is this dynamic and overlapping and fluid entity.” (Mark Mortensen, 17:31)

Encouraging “White Flag” Moments (19:05)

• Employees often feel unsafe admitting they’re overcommitted, fearing they’ll seem weak or lazy.
• “What we need is…a recognition and an acceptance that…this is the reality that we’re in. It’s not good or bad, it’s the reality. We need to deal with that.” (Mark Mortensen, 19:34)
• “Slack resources” protocols (not idle staff, but contingency plans for emergencies) can help teams respond when someone is at their limit.

Practical Advice for Managers

Before Launching a Project (20:41)

• Map Project Ebbs and Flows:
  • Know which phases will need more time/effort, and staff intentionally.
• Kickoff Meetings:
  • Set expectations, ground rules, and foster trust for open discussions about conflicting project demands.
  • “The kickoff meeting really serves to do a few things. It sets ground rules…helps people to understand why we’re here…if we really have a good core understanding of what we’re here to do, that helps us to allocate and decide when do I need to really be 100% focused on what we’re doing here in this team versus when I can go back and forth.” (Mark Mortensen, 22:03)

When Multi-Teaming Won’t Work (23:31)

• Highly Interdependent Projects:
  • Projects requiring deep, continuous teamwork and frequent interaction are less suited to sharing team members.

Open Questions for Future Research (24:15)

• Coping Mechanisms:
  • How do individuals and managers really cope with being overcommitted and managing transparency, and what can organizations do to support them?
  • “I think we really don’t understand enough about…the mechanisms people use to deal with it so that we can try to facilitate and support those within an organization overall.” (Mark Mortensen, 24:18)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Sometimes they end up with 137% dedication, and that’s obviously a problem.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 02:33

• “There’s a new type of risk on the block that we haven’t really been thinking of…We may have interdependencies based purely on the fact that we share individuals.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 04:34

• “Team creep...incremental changes along the way end up with a little bit more of a big mess.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 08:28

• “The benefits I get from having my people working on many different projects, those are easy to see...The costs aren’t always as easy to see because that comes down to somebody being stressed, overworked.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 10:30

• “This is a pain that people feel. So to one extent, we just need to make a call as to what do we feel is worth the cost.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 14:07

• “The more bureaucracy, the more structure you put in, the less flexibility you have...this is a tradeoff that managers unfortunately have to make.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 16:37

• “If somebody raises a white flag and says, hey, I need help, we’re ready to help and step in.”
  — Mark Mortensen, 19:53

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [01:48] Risks of multi-teaming—no one has the big picture
• [03:21] Pros and cons for organizations and individuals
• [04:34] Human capital interdependence: a hidden risk
• [06:05] Who’s most likely to be spread too thin
• [07:40] The “team creep” problem and coordination overload
• [09:39] Task switching and why it persists
• [11:14] Why organizations drifted into multi-teaming
• [12:20] Making work visible: data and politics
• [15:13] Conversation and transparency as practical tools
• [17:31] Fluid teams and the challenge of trust
• [19:05] Creating safety for overloaded team members to speak up
• [20:53] Structuring projects and the vital role of kickoff meetings
• [23:31] Projects ill-suited to multi-teaming
• [24:15] Open research questions

Summary Takeaways

• Multi-teaming offers efficiency and learning, but comes with large hidden costs—especially burnout and coordination failures.
• The true scale of overwork is often invisible to leaders; open discussion and transparency are key, but require trust.
• Managers should intentionally map workloads, hold project kickoff meetings to clarify expectations, and create environments where staff can safely signal overload.
• Not all projects or teams are suited to multi-teaming; deep, high-interaction work often requires more stable staffing.
• The challenge is ongoing, and organizations need to keep evolving practices and investing in understanding how people can sustain productivity and well-being in complex environments.