Shared Mental Models: Why Elite Rugby Teams Win Together
- Dr Paul McCarthy
- 49 minutes ago
- 18 min read
Shared mental models separate winning rugby teams from those that play well individually. Collective coordination and cohesion have been recognized as prominent characteristics of successful teams within elite sport, with empirical data from multiple domains pointing to its advantages . The SMM construct has received wide support in group and team execution settings . In this piece, we'll explore the influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. This includes the benefits of shared mental models for teams and how coaches develop them through training.
Shared mental models definition and core concepts
A scrum-half fires a pass behind his flanker without looking and trusts the forward will be exactly where he needs to be. That's not luck. A team's common understanding of their task, interpretation of their environment, and required collaboration forms what we call a shared mental model [1]. Sport psychologists define this state as team members being "on the same page" about their actions on the field [2].
What are shared mental models in rugby
Shared representations and coordinated action have the most important effect on performance outcomes in sporting domains [3]. Perceptual and decision-making issues become critical within rugby. Players must see situations the same way and make mutually compatible decisions for appropriate action and optimized performance [3].
An athlete must interpret perceptual information well to achieve this coordination. They apply an implicit weighting scale to determine the pertinence of key factors [3]. This commonality of perception lets the team form a shared mental model through both time-pressured and careful thinking and action, coupled with appropriate feedback [3].
Team coordination requires arranging members' actions so they relate correctly on three dimensions: type, timing, and location [2]. The play gets disrupted if a fly-half decides to grubber kick and his winger expects a skip pass. The mismatch in action type breaks down coordination. The chance vanishes if the timing of a support runner arriving at a breakdown is off by even a second. Position matters just as much. A player hitting a ruck from the wrong angle can negate the entire pod's effectiveness.
How SMMs differ from individual mental models
SMMs do not arise on their own [1]. Team members bring their own mental models of team purpose and process to the pitch. The group arrives at a shared mental model through co-construction of the team's work and how it will be done [1].
This co-construction has constructive conflict. Team members confront and jointly work through differences in understanding [1]. These discussions allow teams to blend their individual viewpoints into a unified framework. Individual mental models represent one player's internalized understanding, but shared mental models require making these individually owned models available to the whole team [4].
Individual members may work hard and stay committed without a shared mental model, but they operate in different ways that lead to uncoordinated and discrepant efforts [1]. Research on elite ice hockey showed that SMMs reduce social loafing through improved role clarity and team identification [5]. A shared understanding within a team guides members to know what to communicate and when. It allows them to rely on mental models to predict what others need [1].
The science behind team cognition
Team cognition represents how a team's knowledge is organized, represented, and distributed within the group [1]. SMMs serve as a powerful form of this collective cognition. They facilitate team effectiveness by providing shared knowledge of tasks, roles, and interaction patterns [6].
This shared knowledge makes implicit coordination possible when time constraints prohibit explicit communication [6]. Research on multi-person rowing shows that strokes must be synchronized and require careful coordination of actions during races [2]. The same principle applies when a rugby pack generates coordinated power in a scrum or maul.
Team cognition develops through the interplay between careful practice and structured communication [6]. These operate through task-related and team-related pathways that improve coordination, anticipatory capabilities, and team cohesion. Strong shared mental models allow team members to anticipate and predict the needs of other teammates [1].
Studies reveal that many players share only very few elements of knowledge. Most knowledge is shared by only a few team members [4]. This suggests sharedness within teams is patterned through "local zones of sharedness" rather than one complete zone. Existing shared knowledge evolves during the game due to changes at the individual scale and maintains accuracy in dynamic match situations [4].
Why elite rugby teams need shared mental models
Rugby matches unfold at speeds that leave no room for lengthy discussions. Collective decision-making and coordination between teammates are critical within high performing team invasion sports [1]. The difference between success and failure often comes down to whether fifteen players operate as disconnected individuals or as one synchronized unit.
Coordinating complex team movements
Modern rugby demands that players think and react fast, adjusting positioning to counter evolving threats on the field [7]. A defensive line must move as one organism, with each player reading the same attacking cues and responding in compatible ways. Performance is likely to improve when team members have a shared and coherent understanding of the task to be performed and the teamwork required to succeed [1].
Teams can now analyze opponent patterns to craft specific game plans and allow for quick adaptations mid-match [7]. GPS trackers and video analysis give detailed insights into positioning and performance. But data alone doesn't create coordination. The real advantage emerges when players internalize this information into a collective framework that guides their movements without constant verbal instruction.
Think about what happens in a lineout. The jumper, lifters, thrower, and receivers must execute a complex sequence in roughly two seconds. Timing matters down to fractions of a second. Position precision determines whether the ball lands in hands or gets stolen. Each player must anticipate what others will do based on shared understanding rather than explicit communication to achieve this synchronized execution.
Making split-second decisions under pressure
Players must respond in a split second while recognizing options and dangers on the field [6]. A player has about 150 milliseconds to make a go or no-go decision in high-pressure situations during competitive matches [4]. That's faster than conscious thought allows.
Participants must use sensory information, mostly from the eyes, to make a decision and then coordinate a motor action to succeed in sports [4]. There is only a brief period in which a decision can be made and executed on many occasions [4]. Most of these decisions occur at an unconscious level, given the slow speed of human conscious thought [4].
This explains why shared mental models matter so much. Players bypass the need for conscious deliberation when they share common frameworks. A fullback under a high ball doesn't need to think through whether his winger will cover the blind side. He knows because they've built that understanding together. Players must remember large quantities of information while scanning the rugby field to decide when, where, and to whom the ball must be passed [6].
Research confirms that shared mental models improve collective decision-making in volleyball teams and shared regulation of behavior in motor skill tasks. They also serve to build team cohesion, collective efficacy, and belief in tactical approaches in football [1]. These benefits translate to rugby's high-pressure moments.
Adapting to opponent strategies in real-time
Players must adjust their actions to game situations to succeed in rugby union games [6]. Opponents don't follow predictable patterns. They probe for weaknesses, shift tactics mid-game, and exploit any hesitation or confusion.
Defensive systems can shift based on real-time data, while attack structures can be altered to exploit weaknesses identified in previous games [7]. But this adaptability only works when players read situations the same way and make compatible adjustments. Research shows that players' decisions are substantially influenced by their understanding of available spaces, especially in complex situations [6].
Professional athletes scan their environment to gain advantages over opponents [4]. They look at the big picture to determine recognizable patterns of play or tactical structures that influence whether to pass or find space [4]. This scanning proves worthless if teammates interpret the same visual information differently.
Shared mental models provide the foundation for adaptive performance. Teams that share coherent tactical frameworks can shift between defensive systems, alter attacking shapes, and respond to momentum changes without breaking rhythm. The cognitive demands of agility can be quite complex in competitive matches [4], but shared understanding reduces that complexity by giving players common reference points for interpretation and action.
Key components of effective shared mental models
Shared mental models need specific structural elements that function as the framework's load-bearing walls. Teams must construct and manage these components with intention.
Technical and tactical knowledge structures
Coaches implement specific game plans and tactical approaches based on offensive and defensive principles, along with strategies within attack, defense, and transition moments [8]. Player roles and positioning within attack, line speed and organization in defense, and kick pressure with kick placement during transition are all part of this structured knowledge [8].
Strategic actions such as player positioning and running patterns are planned within training drills with care [8]. Coaches may modify their tactical approach based on perceived player strengths and capabilities. However, players must conform to the desired tactical approach to create an organized system [8]. Team performance in rugby relies on the collective interplay of physical, technical and tactical abilities that team members bring [8].
This technical-tactical foundation provides the blueprint from which all other components emerge. Players must internalize their own assignments and understand how these fit within the broader strategic framework.
Role clarity and responsibilities
Each member in successful sports teams appears to 'just know' what their job is [9]. The team as a whole understands what each player's responsibilities are and how all these responsibilities fit together into a team performance [9]. This understanding of individual role responsibilities has been identified as one of the most significant team variables in sport [9].
Athletes need clarity across four specific dimensions [6]. They must know the scope of their responsibilities, the behaviors associated with their role, how their role performance is being assessed, and the consequences associated with a failure to fulfill the role's responsibilities [6].
Athletes within a team will often have both formal and informal roles [6]. Formal roles are those which are prescribed by a coach, whereas informal roles occur over time and develop on their own [6]. Without this clarity, athletes can lack a sense of purpose, which has a detrimental effect on their confidence [6]. Research demonstrates that athletes who did not fully understand their responsibilities within the team were more likely to experience low levels of belief in knowing how to execute their skills [6].
Common language and communication patterns
The best communicators break their messages into three key components: name, action and need [8]. These components enable effective communication that's both clear and inspiring in high-stakes moments [8]. Non-verbal cues such as eye contact, gestures, body language and touches all play a significant role in fostering connection and trust between teammates [8].
Teams that establish clear signals, keywords and phrases ensure that everyone stays in sync [8]. The work done away from the field strengthens team communication as well [8]. Strong teams build relationships in their downtime. The more games they've played together, the better their understanding of each other's communication on the field [8].
Situational awareness across the team
Situational awareness pertains to an athlete's knowledge of the dynamic environment [4]. It includes knowing how to notice the components in the environment, comprehend the meaning of the perceived information and predict future actions based on that comprehension [4].
Attention allows individuals to direct their focus and dictate what aspects of the environment are vital and relevant [4]. Attention has a limited capacity, so in complex environments where many events are happening at once, the increased attentional demand takes away from situational awareness [4]. Each individual's perception of the environment will influence expectations and the projection of the future [4].
Working memory proves significant for successful execution and allows players to remember and adapt the play to present circumstances [4]. Plans may go awry. When this happens, individuals may revert to what they have practiced many times with little thought or planning [4].
How coaches develop shared mental models in rugby
Coaches build shared mental models through purposeful teaching that pervades every aspect of team preparation. One coach expressed this focus: "When we practice in the national team, then it's all about co-acting—constantly" [7]. The development process requires structured approaches that blend vision creation, learning environments, practical training and continuous review cycles.
Creating the original performance vision
Values and behaviors coupled with a vision for the team form the foundation of culture development [10]. This framework gives players a reference point for all subsequent tactical and technical learning. Positive relationships between players and coaches serve as a hallmark of high performing teams [10].
Coaches who involve players in creating this vision generate stronger ownership and cohesion. One national team coach described this approach: "I have used the players a great deal to create the game we are playing by retrieving suggestions from the players' experiences in their clubs" [7]. This shared process ensures the mental model reflects both coaching expertise and player realities.
Using slow off-field learning environments
Player huddles emerged as the most frequent learning activity and accounted for 46.88% of all coaching activities across five elite coaches [1]. Coaches rationalized that huddles create opportunities for players to think over what decisions they're making, how they made them, and why they may or may not be appropriate [1]. These gatherings promote communication, feedback, sense making, peer-coaching and co-construction of relevant tactical ideas [1].
Video analysis combined with instruction functions as a teaching strategy that helps shared understanding during subsequent on-field practice [7]. Performance analysis serves as the primary knowledge base that determines pedagogical measurements for developing shared mental models [7]. Coaches work through main ideas in training after video review and create part practices to boost performance [7].
The blending of task constraints and intentional development of a player's understanding within the context of the shared mental model proves necessary [1]. Coaches increase player autonomy to co-construct or create tactical plays. One coach noted: "Make them take ownership and see what they come up with. It's co-constructing the new launch rather than creating it myself" [1].
Implementing fast on-field training methods
Coaches reference the importance of designing learning activities that represent the random nature of the competitive environment [1]. Tasks that exaggerate specific game information couple perception with action. Manipulated constraints increase opportunities to make goal-directed decisions [1].
One coach described the approach to pre-match preparation: "I could use different approaches to make the movements and repeat co-acting patterns. They should know it so well that they can do it in their sleep" [7]. This practice with the goal of promoting coordination through repetition of coordinative patterns in critical game situations receives particular emphasis [7].
Game-based practices allow players to learn while having fun. Players find solutions for themselves and from each other rather than from coaches. They become enabled to make decisions and self-reliant as a team [11].
Building through briefings and debriefings
Briefings and debriefings raise awareness on getting team members on the same page [12]. Arranging briefings, debriefings and field practice gets emphasized to boost shared mental models and help pattern recognition with primed decisions [7].
The debriefing must provide time to establish a shared mental model of events that transpired during scenarios [13]. Coaches identified both single-loop learning (refining existing patterns) and double-loop learning (questioning underlying assumptions) as initiatives to promote shared mental model development [7].
Coaches record training sessions and watch game sequences that present problems during small refreshment breaks. They instruct players or ask them about what they should adjust in these situations [7]. This continuous cycle of action, reflection and adjustment builds the shared understanding that makes implicit coordination possible during matches.
The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance
Research confirms what elite rugby teams experience firsthand: shared mental models improve coordination between team members' actions by a lot [14]. The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance extends beyond theoretical frameworks into measurable outcomes that separate championship squads from the rest.
Improved coordination without verbal communication
Team member familiarity predicts team effectiveness, and shared mental models arbitrate this relationship [15]. Players who develop accurate understanding of each other can use non-verbal methods of communication, which increases the speed of communication between team members [16]. This can decrease the time required to perform a specific action as a team, such as executing an offside trap or responding to a lineout call.
Shared mental models aid team effectiveness by providing shared knowledge of tasks, roles and interaction patterns. They enable implicit coordination when time constraints prohibit explicit communication [17]. A loosehead prop doesn't need verbal instruction to know his angle of engagement in a scrum. He reads the tighthead's positioning and the opposition's setup and adjusts his body position. The entire front row coordinates through shared understanding rather than spoken words.
Team members who have experience performing together develop familiarity with what certain instructions mean. This helps them perform their own roles more effectively [16]. To cite an instance, when a defensive captain calls "push up," every player knows exactly how many meters to advance and at what speed based on their shared framework.
Faster collective decision-making
Both shared-team and task-based mental models relate positively to subsequent team process and performance [18]. Team processes fully arbitrated the relationship between mental model convergence and team effectiveness [18]. This means the pathway from shared understanding to winning runs directly through improved team processes, particularly decision-making speed.
Shared mental models improve collective decision making in volleyball teams and shared regulation of behavior in motor skill tasks. They serve to build team cohesion, collective efficacy, belief and buy-in to tactical approaches in football [8]. So rugby teams with strong shared mental models make faster collective choices about defensive line speed, attacking options and transition plays.
Boosted adaptability during matches
Shared mental models are knowledge structures that influence the team's resilience via collective sense making during adverse situations [19]. They allow team members to anticipate each other's actions and coordinate their behaviors under taxing circumstances [19]. One performance analysis department raised an issue that collective decision making was worse when things weren't going well in game [8]. Teams that conceded a penalty tended to follow this up by conceding another, showing how specific match outcomes had an immediate adverse effect on player behaviors.
Teams with strong shared mental models break this pattern. Collective, positive evaluations of setbacks by all team members, accompanied by a desire to move forward to achieve team goals, breeds success [19].
Stronger team cohesion and trust
Greater team member familiarity predicts greater team effectiveness through shared mental models [15]. Experience performing together combined with effective methods of communication aids the development of shared understanding [16]. The common understanding and mutual predictability that comes from having shared mental models help teams cooperate smoothly.
Research tracked shared mental model development over the duration of a season in football. It found improved cohesion and creativity in collective decision making throughout competitive situations [8]. This progress takes time but produces teams where trust becomes automatic rather than questioned.
Which type of training leads to shared mental models for the team
Different training methods produce varying levels of shared understanding within teams. Effective performers select appropriate actions in response to different game scenarios regularly, making tactical awareness a key discriminator of success within rugby [20]. The solving of tactical problems and the acquisition of tactical abilities must be at the core of all training activities.
Team coordination and adaptation training
Collective coordination has been acknowledged as a key characteristic of successful teams within elite sport [8]. Team coordination develops best through the planning and strategizing of players' collective behavior to outwit and defeat opponents. Deeper knowledge of the game supports this largely. The game model allows coaches to communicate a system or way of playing to the playing group [20]. Responsibility for its further development becomes shared between players and coaches after the creation of this performance vision. This gives players the ability to identify key cues and developmental factors. The shared mental model provides a common framework and principles within which players and coaches have a shared tactical understanding.
Video analysis and tactical reviews
Video analysis allows for dynamic and complex situations in sports to be quantified in an objective, reliable and valid manner [9]. Research in rugby union frequently has studies that identify key events and studies that describe key events in relation to performance outcomes. Eighty-one percent of studies identified gave practical applications for their findings [9]. Differentiating between 'what' and 'how' studies showed that 76% of 'what' studies gave practical applications compared to 86% of 'how' studies [9]. The context in which key performance indicators occur must be part of the analysis rather than analyzing frequency in isolation, according to researchers.
Scenario-based practice sessions
Match scenarios place learners at the heart of the decision making process through engaging and interactive situations with problems to solve [6]. Scenarios give players the chance to experience a variety of game situations. These situations have chasing a goal, holding out for a win, and playing with different tactics. Match scenarios help players develop their techniques in pressurized situations where they need to rely and trust their technique [6]. Players experience realistic pressure and develop better understanding of their role in the context and state of the game. Findings show the most important effect on team performance when comparing experiential learning versus didactic-only training [21]. Virtual simulation training gave chances for different team members to apply and practice cognitive tools in scenarios at the same time, thus deepening the formation of shared mental models.
Player-led leadership group discussions
Player-led programs have been implemented with leadership groups taking lead roles in supporting coaches to deliver programs and keep standards high [22]. Teams end sessions with captain's run, where coaches hand over team run to captains and leadership groups for 15 minutes. This allows them to go through their plans to attack and defend for weekend games [22]. Players delivered strike moves and lineout work, learning to lead and make decisions. This approach gives players the ability rather than constraining behavior. It allows freedom to be creative and make decisions within a framework of play [20].
Real-world examples from elite rugby unions
Case studies from professional rugby environments reveal how shared mental models translate from concept to competitive advantage. These implementations show the practical pathways teams follow when building collective understanding.
Defensive system implementation case study
One elite rugby club confronted a fractured understanding within their coaching and playing group regarding defensive objectives [8]. Honest reflection revealed that the coach possessed clear understanding of the defensive approach. Only some players shared that clarity [8].
The coaching staff developed a performance vision using the club's lion badge to generate shared language [8]. This vision produced an analogy of the lion's bite and behavior: position the block (best collective position), jaws (dictate where attackers go and trap them), and bite (maximum effect given game situation) [8]. The approach required adjusting shared understanding of mental approach and developing a "fighter's mindset" where players get back in the game after making tackles until they win the ball back repeatedly [8].
After creating this framework, coaches selected a leadership group of 12-14 defensive players who showed desired technical, tactical, physical, psychological, and social features [8]. The defensive group undertook weekly refinement. Game day minus five (GD-5) was used to debrief the previous week, review adjustments, and identify intentions for the coming week [8]. The defensive group planned session content collectively on GD-4, while GD-2 involved developing the game preview meeting [8].
Managing momentum shifts during games
The coaching team created momentum charts capturing positive, negative, and neutral outcomes throughout competitive games with performance analysts [8]. Periods of positive momentum appeared visually as tall blocks termed "mountains" and supported an analogy of taking opponents to the mountain's top [8]. Captain Aneurin Owen confirmed that managing momentum shifts proves significant during matches [23].
Position-specific SMM applications
Position dictates different decision-making requirements within shared mental models [24]. Middle forwards focus more on carrying into contact. Adjustables create space for edge players [24]. Field position matters equally, as carrying in the middle allows better anticipation of contact compared to edge carries with more blind-side contacts [24].
Common challenges and solutions in building SMMs
Building shared mental models presents obstacles that test even experienced coaching staffs. A principle challenge with mental models is the need to do the work and define them among team members in each instance, rather than make a cursory assumption about their existence [4].
Overcoming fractured understanding in the team
Different perspectives on a team are insufficient to produce a shared and complete understanding of the target problem [25]. Team members may rely too much on assumptions and remain unaware of their knowledge gaps. They risk marginalizing the perspectives of non-dominant team members [25]. Project leaders must surface tacit assumptions and get into them, as unspoken beliefs about roles or paradigms can shape how individuals interpret and share information silently [25].
Balancing coach direction with player input
Psychological safety serves as the bedrock of unobstructed communication. Team members must feel secure when they share knowledge, perspectives, uncertainties and questions without fear of judgment [25]. Teams should implement structured conversation formats like turn-taking to ensure all members share information. This prevents dominant voices from obstructing communication [25].
Managing cognitive load and information volume
The size of the group or the number of learners the team must assess adds complexity [4]. Shared beliefs, understanding and experiences on which shared mental models are based become harder to achieve as groups grow in size [4].
Maintaining flexibility while staying consistent
The most reliable frameworks balance structure with flexibility. They provide enough guidance to arrange thinking without restricting innovation [26].
Conclusion
Shared mental models separate championship teams from talented squads that never quite sync. These frameworks enable split-second coordination, faster collective decisions and smooth adaptation during matches, as we've seen. Building them requires conscious effort through video analysis, scenario-based training and player-led discussions.
The evidence is clear: teams that invest in developing shared understanding gain measurable advantages in coordination and performance. Start by creating your performance vision with player input. Then reinforce it through structured practice and continuous review. When your fifteen players operate on the same page, you'll notice the difference where it matters most on match day.
Key Takeaways
Elite rugby teams don't just play well individually—they win through synchronized collective understanding that enables split-second coordination without verbal communication.
• Shared mental models enable implicit coordination: Teams with aligned understanding coordinate complex movements and make faster decisions under pressure without needing constant verbal instruction.
• Build SMMs through structured training methods: Combine video analysis, scenario-based practice sessions, and player-led discussions to develop collective understanding across the team.
• Role clarity and common language are essential: Players must understand their responsibilities, how roles interconnect, and share tactical vocabulary for effective coordination during matches.
• Develop through collaborative vision creation: Involve players in creating the team's performance framework to generate stronger ownership and ensure the model reflects both coaching expertise and player realities.
• SMMs improve adaptability during matches: Teams with robust shared understanding can shift between defensive systems, alter attacking shapes, and respond to momentum changes without breaking rhythm.
The pathway from individual talent to championship performance runs through collective cognition—when fifteen players truly operate on the same page, coordination becomes automatic and winning becomes systematic.
References
[1] - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17408989.2022.2153822[2] - https://sk.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/encyclopedia-of-sport-and-exercise-psychology/chpt/shared-mental-models[3] - https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/shared-representations/shared-mental-models-in-sport-and-refereeing/40F28A11A73859D72A1D5F5814126B02[4] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8078083/[5] - https://explore.bps.org.uk/content/bpssepr/13/2/2[6] - https://www.thefa.com/bootroom/resources/coaching/how-to-use-match-scenarios-in-your-session[7] - https://www.journalofexpertise.org/articles/volume5_issue1/JoE_5_1_Giske_etal.pdf[8] - https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1057143/full[9] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6006008/[10] - https://www.sport-excellence.co.uk/high-performance-rugby/[11] - https://www.rugbycoachweekly.net/rugby-coaching/4-keys-to-games-for-learning?srsltid=AfmBOorCMMsLfmIKYCEoOZ2dnEgAZLYCAEIe4hS8y1PKqkieDG9MBzEc[12] - https://asmepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tct.13600[13] - https://case.edu/nursing/sites/default/files/2018-05/More-Than-1-Way-2-Debrief-A-Critical-Review.pdf[14] - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00187267241247962[15] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39025689/[16] - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14660970.2022.2161527[17] - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1469029225001268[18] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10783543/[19] - https://members.believeperform.com/influence-of-team-resilience-on-professional-rugby-union-teams-performance/[20] - https://scispace.com/pdf/a-tactical-periodization-approach-for-rugby-union-1u60opm3g9.pdf[21] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6854192/[22] - https://www.rugbycoachweekly.net/rugby-coaching/how-to-empower-players?srsltid=AfmBOoq7xTBp5Axst2CP8FJyCc-I39Nwy1odeAhHXw7J_gh0cp2uDph_[23] - https://dragonsrfc.wales/news/2025/february/owen-looks-to-manage-momentum-shifts.html[24] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11829702/[25] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12613607/[26] - https://ahead-app.com/blog/mindfulness/building-a-mind-nation-collective-how-teams-create-shared-mental-models
