The military get this (usually) and place a lot of emphasis on training a team as a whole. In a tank, for example, the individual crew members train in their specific functional areas (e.g. commander, gunner, driver, loader) and when they have qualified in these, then go on to conduct team training as an integrated crew, which must be passed before the individuals can progress in their careers. In some armies, the individuals get a qualification that shows that they can work in a team context, and then can be flexed into actual operational crews as required. In others, the team is considered to be trained as a unit, and must be retrained when someone leaves / joins.

The military often go beyond team training in a way that very few other organizations do, and conduct 'collective training' that involves multiple teams. Collective training itself has multiple levels - e.g. at the lowest level, two or more tank crews working together in a tactical task (e.g. when four tanks encounter an enemy, which one should engage it?), gradually adding other functions (e.g. infantry, artillery, etc) so that all of the different tactical 'trades' have formal training in how to work together. At these higher levels, the feedback and qualifications are aimed at the units rather than the individual soldiers.

The military are also conscious of group dynamics, for example the 'storming, norming, forming' that occurs when team membership changes, and the effect of 'churn' on a team, as individuals join and leave.