The article discusses the need for a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative to improve outcomes and identify best practices in managing cardiogenic shock (CS). Despite advances in pharmacologic and mechanical circulatory support, CS remains a high-mortality condition requiring multidisciplinary expertise. The concept of a "shock team" has been advocated by professional societies and implemented at some high-volume centers, with emerging evidence suggesting it may improve patient outcomes. However, there is currently no established framework for the composition, assembly, or employment of such teams. The authors propose a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative, similar to the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) Consortium, to promote sharing of care protocols, education, and process improvement. The PERT Consortium has successfully improved outcomes and informed care through standardized protocols, education, and research. The authors suggest that a similar collaborative could enhance CS care by fostering teamwork, education, and research. The article highlights the challenges of implementing CS teams, including communication, workload, and reimbursement issues, and emphasizes the need for a structured, multidisciplinary approach. The PERT model is presented as a successful example of a collaborative approach that could be adapted for CS. The article concludes that a CS Team Collaborative is needed to improve outcomes, standardize care, and promote research in CS management.The article discusses the need for a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative to improve outcomes and identify best practices in managing cardiogenic shock (CS). Despite advances in pharmacologic and mechanical circulatory support, CS remains a high-mortality condition requiring multidisciplinary expertise. The concept of a "shock team" has been advocated by professional societies and implemented at some high-volume centers, with emerging evidence suggesting it may improve patient outcomes. However, there is currently no established framework for the composition, assembly, or employment of such teams. The authors propose a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative, similar to the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) Consortium, to promote sharing of care protocols, education, and process improvement. The PERT Consortium has successfully improved outcomes and informed care through standardized protocols, education, and research. The authors suggest that a similar collaborative could enhance CS care by fostering teamwork, education, and research. The article highlights the challenges of implementing CS teams, including communication, workload, and reimbursement issues, and emphasizes the need for a structured, multidisciplinary approach. The PERT model is presented as a successful example of a collaborative approach that could be adapted for CS. The article concludes that a CS Team Collaborative is needed to improve outcomes, standardize care, and promote research in CS management.