Executive summary
Pop culture and major tournaments—like the World Cup kicking—are obsessed with the “underdog narrative.” But in the corporate world, relying on sheer grit is a failing strategy. High performance under pressure isn’t accidental; it is a measurable, engineered cultural state.
Deconstructing Hive’s new Underdog Survey Question Bank, Jen Southern, Head of Professional Services, outlines how to move past generic HRIS metrics to isolate the seven psychological pillars that allow resource-constrained teams to outperform outfunded competitors. This helps bridge the gap between executive strategy and line-manager enablement, proving that team health on the pitch is entirely predictable.
Key takeaways
- High-performing teams are defined by more than talent alone
Â
- Collective efficacy, a team’s shared belief in its ability to succeed, can be a stronger predictor of performance than individual confidence
Â
- Traditional engagement measures often miss the team-level conditions that drive resilience, trust, and sustained performance
Â
- Psychological safety, shared purpose, autonomy, and perseverance are cultural conditions that can be measured rather than assumed
Â
- An organisation’s relationship with adversity may act as a ceiling on performance; if teams struggle to learn from setbacks, other interventions are less likely to stick
- The Underdog Survey provides a practical way to assess whether the conditions behind extraordinary performance exist inside your organisation
Why some teams thrive under pressure
“We all love Cool Runnings, Ted Lasso, Moneyball, Gareth Southgate’s Dear England culture reset, and the underdog teams battling it out on the world’s biggest stages in the World Cup right now. These stories resonate because they show us what is possible when a group of people collectively refuse to let their lack of resources define their outcome.
The stories that stay with us aren’t the ones where the favourites win. They’re the ones where a team with no right to succeed somehow does.
A Jamaican bobsleigh team competing at the Winter Olympics. A baseball club taking on richer rivals with data instead of money. A national football team rebuilding belief after decades of disappointment. A fictional coach transforming performance through trust rather than tactics.
Different stories. Different contexts.
The same psychology.
And increasingly, the same challenge facing organisations.
Because most organisations today feel a little bit like underdogs.
They’re being asked to do more with less. Deliver growth with constrained resources. Navigate constant change. Retain talent in competitive markets. Improve customer outcomes whilst balancing financial pressures.
Yet some teams thrive under those conditions whilst others struggle. Why?
What makes a high-performing team when resources are limited? What drives employee engagement? How do you measure organisational culture? What creates psychological safety? Why do some teams remain resilient through change while others struggle?
What separates organisations that consistently outperform expectations from those that simply endure them?
The answer isn’t usually talent. It’s culture.
Not culture as a set of values on a wall. Culture is the conditions that shape how people think, behave, collaborate, and respond when things get difficult.
As an HR Director, you know the harsh reality. Relying on your people to simply “tough it out” and hoping sheer grit will carry them through Q4 isn’t a strategy. Left unmanaged, that approach is a fast track to plummeting retention and burnt-out talent.
The truth is incredibly empowering: Underdog teams aren’t born out of thin air—they are architected.
When a team with no right to succeed outclasses heavily funded competitors, it isn’t magic. It is the result of specific, measurable psychological conditions that unlock discretionary effort.Â
And those conditions are measurable.
While the Hive HERO Model measures individual psychological capital (the player), the Underdog Survey evaluates the collective health of the team on the pitch.”
The pop culture lens (And what it actually teaches HR)
“Before we get to the data, it’s worth being precise about what each of these stories is actually illustrating. They aren’t all the same type of underdog story, and the differences are instructive.
One of the reasons underdog stories resonate so strongly is that they’re not really about sport, film, or television. They’re about human behaviour. Strip away the bobsleds, football pitches and basketball courts, and what remains are the same psychological conditions that show up in organisations every day.
The difference is that in organisations, we don’t usually see them as stories. We see them as engagement scores, retention figures, employee voice data, wellbeing indicators, and team performance outcomes.”
Here’s what those classic underdog narratives actually look like through an organisational lens:
| Underdog story | What it's really about | Core psychological construct | What it looks like at work | Cool Runnings | Refusing to let external doubt define potential | Collective efficacy & grit | Teams remain resilient during change, maintain momentum through setbacks, and sustain effort when success feels uncertain. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moneyball | Challenging conventional wisdom in pursuit of better outcomes | Autonomy, Trust & Data-Informed Decision Making | People feel trusted to solve problems differently, innovation increases, and organisations make better use of limited resources. |
| Dear England | Replacing fear with belief | Psychological Safety & Shared Purpose | People speak up earlier, learn faster from mistakes, and are more willing to contribute ideas and challenge assumptions. |
| Ted Lasso | Building performance through trust, belonging and belief | Purpose, Psychological Safety & Value Congruence | Stronger employee engagement, higher discretionary effort, and teams that remain connected during periods of pressure. |
| Legends | Ordinary people doing extraordinary things because the mission matters | Mission Alignment & Trust Under Pressure | Greater commitment, stronger retention, and higher resilience in demanding or resource-constrained environments. |
| GOAT | Using adversity as fuel rather than evidence of failure | Growth Mindset & Psychological Capital | Teams recover faster from setbacks, adapt more effectively to change, and remain focused on long-term goals. |
“Whilst the stories are different, the pattern is remarkably consistent. The organisations we remember aren’t usually the ones with the most resources. They’re the ones that built the right conditions.
High-performing underdog teams tend to share the same underlying psychological conditions. They trust each other. They believe in what they’re trying to achieve. They feel safe enough to contribute honestly. They maintain effort when things become difficult. And they interpret adversity as information rather than evidence that success isn’t possible.
The question for leaders isn’t whether those conditions matter. Decades of research suggest they do.
The question is whether those conditions exist inside your organisation.
And more importantly, whether you have a way of measuring them.”
What research says about high-performing teams
“Angela Duckworth called it grit.
Albert Bandura called it collective efficacy.
Amy Edmondson identified it in teams where people felt safe enough to speak up, challenge ideas, ask for help, and admit mistakes.
Carol Dweck found it in people who treated setbacks as information rather than evidence of failure.
Simon Sinek built a career explaining why some organisations inspire and others merely instruct.
What they were all pointing towards, in different ways, was the same fundamental idea: the conditions inside a team matter as much as the talent within it.
The challenge is that whilst most leaders understand concepts such as psychological safety, resilience, trust, purpose, and engagement, very few have a practical way of measuring them together.
That’s where the Underdog Survey comes in.
Rather than measuring engagement in isolation, it measures seven evidence-based conditions that research consistently associates with resilient, high-performing teams.
The same conditions that sit behind the stories we’ve just explored.”
The 7 conditions behind extraordinary team performance
“If underdog organisations consistently outperform expectations, the obvious question isn’t whether culture matters. It’s which aspects of culture matter most.
The Underdog Survey measures seven evidence-based conditions that research consistently links to resilience, engagement, trust, performance, and collective success. Together they provide a picture of whether the conditions for extraordinary performance exist inside an organisation.”
1: Shared purpose and mission
Why it matters
“Every organisation has a strategy. Not every organisation has a mission that people genuinely connect with.
Purpose becomes particularly important when resources are constrained because people can’t rely on budgets, headcount, or systems to carry them through difficult periods. Meaning becomes the fuel.
Research consistently shows that when employees understand why an organisation exists and believe their work contributes to that purpose, engagement, discretionary effort, and resilience tend to increase.”
A high score suggests
“People aren’t simply aware of the mission; they feel connected to it. They understand why the organisation exists and can see how their own contribution fits into the bigger picture.”
A low score suggests
“The mission may exist on paper, but it hasn’t translated into everyday experience. When pressure increases, people are more likely to focus solely on tasks rather than the broader purpose behind them.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“If scores are consistently low across the organisation, the issue is rarely communication alone. More often, it’s a sign that strategy, purpose, and day-to-day experience have become disconnected.”
2: Personal alignment to mission
Why it matters
“Understanding the mission and believing in it are different things.
People are most motivated when their personal values align with what the organisation stands for. This is where discretionary effort comes from. Not because people have to care, but because they want to.
For underdog organisations, this alignment often becomes a competitive advantage. When people believe in the work itself, commitment becomes more sustainable.”
A high score suggests
“Employees see a clear connection between their own values and the organisation’s purpose.”
A low score suggests
“People may understand what the organisation is trying to achieve but feel emotionally disconnected from it.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“High purpose scores combined with low alignment scores often indicate that employees understand the mission intellectually but haven’t made it personally meaningful.”
3: Collective belief
Why it matters
“This is where many organisations get performance wrong. They focus on individual capability and overlook collective belief. A team of talented individuals is not automatically a high-performing team. In many cases, the team’s belief in itself becomes the deciding factor.
Albert Bandura described collective efficacy as a group’s shared belief in its ability to achieve desired outcomes.
In simple terms, it’s whether the team believes it can succeed together.
This is one of the defining characteristics of almost every underdog story. The external odds may be poor, but internally the team believes it can find a way forward.
Research suggests this shared belief is often a stronger predictor of performance than individual confidence alone.”
A high score suggests
“People trust the capability of the team and believe challenges can be overcome collectively.”
A low score suggests
“There may be talented individuals present, but the team lacks confidence in its ability to succeed together.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“Low collective efficacy is often linked to previous setbacks, organisational change, or leadership behaviours that have unintentionally eroded confidence.”
4: Psychological safety
Why it matters
“Few concepts have influenced modern organisational psychology more than psychological safety.
Amy Edmondson’s research demonstrated that teams perform better when people feel safe enough to speak up, challenge assumptions, ask for help, and admit mistakes.
Without psychological safety, organisations lose access to their collective intelligence.
People know things but don’t say them.
They have ideas but don’t share them.
They see risks but stay silent.”
A high score suggests
“People feel comfortable contributing honestly, even when their views differ from the majority.”
A low score suggests
“Energy is being spent on self-protection rather than performance.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“Psychological safety often varies significantly between teams, making it one of the clearest indicators of management impact.”
5: Autonomy and trust
Why it matters
“Underdog organisations rarely win because they have more resources. They often win because they can move faster, adapt more quickly, and trust people to make decisions.
Autonomy without support creates chaos. Structure without trust creates bureaucracy.
The goal is finding the balance between the two.”
A high score suggests
“People feel trusted to exercise judgement within clear boundaries.”
A low score suggests
“Employees may feel either over-managed or under-supported.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“The issue isn’t whether autonomy is high or low. It’s whether people feel they have the appropriate level of autonomy for their role.”
6: Commitment
Why it matters
“Angela Duckworth’s research challenged the assumption that talent is the primary driver of success.
Grit is the ability to sustain commitment and effort over time, particularly when progress is difficult or uncertain.
Most organisations are good at sprinting.
Far fewer are good at enduring.”
A high score suggests
“People maintain focus, energy, and commitment even during challenging periods.”
A low score suggests
“The organisation may struggle to sustain momentum beyond short-term initiatives.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“Passion and perseverance don’t always move together. People can care deeply about the mission but feel exhausted by the environment around them.”
7: Adversity as Fuel
Why it matters
“This is the construct that sits above all the others. Every organisation faces setbacks. The difference is how those setbacks are interpreted.
Some organisations see difficulty as evidence that success is unlikely. Others see it as information, feedback, and an opportunity to improve.Â
This is why we describe the underdog mindset as a ceiling construct. If teams struggle to learn from adversity, other interventions become harder to sustain. Purpose weakens. Confidence drops. Trust erodes.
The latter tend to be more resilient, more innovative, and better equipped to navigate uncertainty.”
A high score suggests
“People view challenges as something to learn from rather than something to fear.”
A low score suggests
“Adversity tends to reduce confidence, energy, and commitment.”
What leaders should pay attention to
“This construct is heavily influenced by leadership behaviour. How leaders respond to setbacks often determines how the rest of the organisation responds too.”
The Underdog Survey
“If these conditions are what allow teams to outperform expectations, what does measuring them actually look like?
The 26 questions below form the Underdog Survey. Together they assess the cultural and psychological conditions that research consistently associates with resilient, high-performing teams.
Rate each statement on a scale of 0 (Strongly Disagree) to 10 (Strongly Agree).”
1: Shared purpose and mission
Q1. I find our organisation’s mission genuinely inspiring, not just something I am aware of.
Q2. I could explain why this organisation exists and why it matters in my own words.
Q3. When things get difficult here, our shared purpose helps me stay committed.
Q4. The people around me seem genuinely motivated by what we are trying to achieve together.
2: Personal alignment to mission
Q5. My personal values feel genuinely aligned with what this organisation stands for.
Q6. The work I do here feels personally meaningful, not just professionally relevant.
Q7. I am motivated by what we are trying to achieve here in a way that goes beyond my job or my team.
3: Collective belief
Q8. As a team, we believe we can achieve things that others might think are beyond us.
Q9. When we face a tough challenge as a team, I feel confident that we will find a way through it together.
Q10. We tend to raise our game when the stakes are highest, rather than shrink from the pressure.
Q11. People in my team genuinely believe in each other’s ability to deliver, even when things are hard.
4: Psychological safety
Q12. In my team, it feels safe to speak up with a different view, even when it goes against the majority.
Q13. If I made a mistake here, I would feel comfortable being honest about it rather than covering it up.
Q14. People in my team are genuinely willing to ask for help when they need it, without feeling judged.
Q15. New or unconventional ideas are taken seriously here, even if they challenge the way we have always done things.
5: Autonomy and trust
Q16. I am trusted to make decisions in my area without having to seek permission for everything.
Q17. There is enough structure here to feel supported, but enough freedom to find my own way of doing things well.
Q18. The people leading this organisation trust their teams to do the right thing, even when no one is watching.
6: Commitment
Q19. People here stay focused on long-term goals rather than being pulled away by short-term pressures or distractions.
Q20. When we hit an obstacle as a team, we find a way to keep going rather than giving up or changing direction.
Q21. The commitment people show here doesn’t fade when things get hard. If anything, it tends to strengthen.
Q22. There is a sustained energy and drive in this team that goes beyond individual tasks or short-term wins.
7: Adversity as fuel
Q23. When things don’t go to plan here, we treat it as something to learn from rather than something to blame people for.
Q24. Being underestimated or facing tough odds tends to bring the best out of us rather than hold us back.
Q25. This organisation has come through difficult periods in a way that has made us stronger and more connected.
Q26. I feel like the challenges we face here are making us better, not wearing us down.
Survey scale
0 = Strongly Disagree
10 = Strongly Agree
Completion time: 3–4 minutes
The Underdog Survey measures seven evidence-based conditions associated with resilient, high-performing teams:
- Shared Purpose and Mission
- Personal Alignment to Mission
- Collective Efficacy
- Psychological Safety
- Autonomy and Trust Within Structure
- Grit: Passion and Perseverance
- Underdog Mindset: Adversity as Fuel
Each construct should first be viewed independently and then considered alongside the others. High scores might indicate conditions that are likely supporting performance. Lower scores may highlight barriers to resilience, trust, engagement, or effectiveness. The most valuable insights often emerge from the relationship between constructs rather than any single score in isolation.
Reading your results
“Before drawing any conclusions, ask one question first:
Is this pattern consistent across the organisation, or does it vary significantly between teams?
Consistent scores across the organisation usually point towards a cultural, structural, or leadership signal. No amount of team-level intervention will solve an organisation-wide problem.
Significant variation between teams tells a different story. It suggests local leadership, management behaviours, team dynamics, or recent experiences are shaping the employee experience.
Low scores concentrated within one team often point towards a specific event, relationship, or challenge. The data tells you where to look. The conversation tells you why.
It’s also important to look at the constructs together rather than in isolation.
A team may have high purpose but low psychological safety. People care deeply about the mission but don’t feel comfortable challenging decisions.
Another team may have strong autonomy but weak collective efficacy. People have freedom but lack confidence in their ability to succeed together.
The most useful insights often emerge from the relationships between the scores rather than the scores themselves.”
So, does your organisation have what it takes to be an underdog?
“The honest answer is that most organisations won’t know until they ask. Not whether people are engaged. Not whether they like their benefits. Not whether they would recommend the organisation as a place to work.
Those things matter, but they don’t answer the deeper question.
If your organisation faced a challenge tomorrow that felt bigger than its resources, bigger than its budget, and bigger than its reputation, would your people believe they could overcome it together?
Would they trust each other enough to have difficult conversations? Would they feel safe enough to admit mistakes and learn from them? Would they remain committed when progress slowed and obstacles appeared? Would they see adversity as a reason to stop, or as a reason to adapt?
Because that’s what every underdog story is really about. Not winning. Not talent. Not luck.
The conditions that make extraordinary performance possible.
The organisations that consistently outperform expectations aren’t always the biggest, the wealthiest, or the best resourced.
More often, they’re the organisations that have built trust, purpose, belief, autonomy, perseverance, and resilience into the fabric of how they work.
The good news is that those conditions aren’t accidental.
They can be understood. They can be measured. And once they’re visible, they can be strengthened. That’s ultimately what the Underdog Survey is designed to do. Not identify whether your organisation is currently winning.
But understand whether it has built the conditions that make winning possible.”
Â
If you’d like to understand what your results are telling you, the Hive Professional Services team works alongside HR leaders and senior teams to interpret survey data, identify the stories behind the scores, and turn insight into meaningful action.
Because collecting data is only the beginning.
The real value comes from understanding what it’s trying to tell you.
About the author: Jen Southern FCIPD
Jen Southern FCIPD is Head of Professional Services at Hive HR and a Fellow of the CIPD. With more than twenty years’ experience across housing, public services and professional services, she works with organisations to turn employee voice into meaningful action.Â
Through consultancy, coaching and the Employee Voice Academy, Jen helps leaders build healthier, more resilient and higher-performing workplace cultures.
