Summary: Google is data-obsessed, so it should come as no surprise that the company sought to apply its analytical expertise inside the organization.<br> In an endeavor dubbed “Project Aristotle,” Google sought to answer a vexing question: <a href="https://rework.withgoogle.com/guides/understanding-team-effectiveness/steps/introduction/">What factors are important for a successful, productive team?</a><br> Their findings may have profound impacts not just at Google, but in a lab near you…<br> <br> Hi, My Name is Norm<br> Google’s HR department <a href="https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/">approached the problem</a> with an eye toward data:<br> Over two years we conducted 200+ interviews with Googlers (our employees) and looked at more than 250 attributes of 180+ active Google teams. We were pretty confident that we’d find the perfect mix of individual traits and skills necessary for a stellar team — take one Rhodes Scholar, two extroverts, one engineer who rocks at AngularJS, and a PhD. Voila. Dream team assembled, right?<br> What they found surprised them. It wasn’t the backgrounds or individual talents of team members that made the difference. They found that teams with a similar mix of individuals could perform in vastly different ways.<br> Instead, it was the team’s culture and accepted norms that helped to predict their success.<br> The five key features are revealed in five questions you can ask about your team:<br> <br> Can we count on each other to do high quality work on time?<br> Are goals, roles, and execution plans on our team clear?<br> Are we working on something that is personally important for each of us?<br> Do we fundamentally believe that the work we’re doing matters?<br> Can we take risks on this team without feeling insecure or embarrassed?<br> <br> This week on the show, we unpack these critical features of a high-performing team, and relate them to the research lab environment.<br> We tell you how to assess a new lab before you join, and how to make improvements if you’re already committed to a lab that is underperforming.<br> Sunshine and Sarcasm<br> This week, Science in the News brings us three stories in rapid succession.<br> First, it’s almost time for the solar eclipse to pass over North America. You still have time to get (the right) goggles and find a spot to watch the show. As usual, <a href="https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov">NASA has you covered.</a><br> Next, we hear about how some researchers are trying to <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.05579">teach computers about sarcasm</a>. Hey. Great idea guys. That’s going to be SOOOOO useful. Said no one ever. </sarcasm><br> And a <a href="http://www.npr.org/2017/04/07/522968575/the-coal-museum-switches-to-solar">Coal Museum in Kentucky finds that solar panels</a> might actually be a useful and affordable energy source. Who would’ve guessed? </sarcasm><br> We sample a special ethanol that is bargain priced for the inner grad-student in all of us. It’s the <a href="https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/27642/88082/">Boatswain Double IPA (Twin Screw Steamer)</a> from Rhinelander Brewing Company and sold by Trader Joe’s for just $4.99 for a six-pack!<br> Is this the best beer ever? No. But is this the best tasting beer you can get at this price? Almost certainly, yes.<br> Last, but not least: concrete. <a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/why-modern-mortar-crumbles-roman-concrete-lasts-millennia"> They just don’t make it like they used to.</a><br>
