What are BEST PRACTICES for Commander and CSM teams?

This relationship begins at the platoon level. That is the first time the officer and NCO will be a "command team". It will determine how both the officer and NCO will perform in the command team at every level. If you cannot maintain a command relationship at the platoon level you will struggle at the company and above level. You will not always get along with your counterpart, the key is to try.

Officer - you must counsel your NCO counterpart and make your expectations crystal clear on what you want that NCO to do, i.e duties and responsibilities. It is not a very good idea to say something like "when the PSG/1SG/CSM speaks he is speaking for me". You are giving too much power to that NCO and some will abuse it. You must listen to your NCO when he/she makes recommendations or gives advice, chances are they have done it before.

NCO - Your function in life is to support your officer. If it isn't illegal, against Army Values, or harmful to Soldiers (minus combat) you will execute. Do not speak ill of your officer to the enlisted/NCOs, disagreements are handled behind closed doors between the two of you. Teach and mentor your officer, he/she is responsible for everything the unit does or fails to do, if they fail you have failed.

The above is obviously not all inclusive just some things I have learned over the years. The biggest thing is a unity of effort, the biggest problems in units is poor command climate and it usually stems from the top two not getting along. When it is evident that the commander and senior enlisted advisor are not working together the unit crumbles quickly.

Spend time together outside of work. Go out to dinner with the family, go camping, go to a ballgame. The more you get to know each other the more you may actually like each other. If you like each other the relationship is easy but, it can still work if you don't. Another good TTP is to be familiar with each others job, clearly delineate responsibilities, and over communicate.

I personally think it is dependent on the NCO to "bend to the will" of the commander. I am not saying you need to be a yes man but, you need to support the commanders vision and philosophy which works really well if you develop it together.

I'm looking forward to this discussion!

I'll throw this out: close, open and frequent communication

AF opinion, they should have a consistent vision for the unit, the commander establish it and the CSM work to ensure the enlisted buy-in.

I will add very little to what CSM (Join to see) said, because I believe that he is exactly on point.
The formative time as a PL/PSG is not as important for senior command time as the Battery/Company/Troop Command/1SG time. This will be the foundation that is solidified for the remainder of each individuals career.
For the Commander when he is done with this time he/she will go on to staff positions and broadening assignments for roughly the next 10+ years where he/she will not have the full authority that they had as a Commander. They will be working to further someone else's ideas. If they are given the opportunity to Command at the Battalion level the Command experience that they had at the B/C/T level is generally the last command experience. Yes, the right ones are changed and continue to form their leadership perspective with any position, but they have not been the 6 since the B/C/T time.
For the 1SG they have many experiences more than their command team counterpart. Normally when he/she is done with 1SG time they will be preparing for possible promotion to SGM or finalizing their last few years in service. The time in between 1SG and CSM is not nearly as drastic and so therefore the foundation is more solid in my opinion for how each CSM counterpart will approach their position as part of the BN (or higher) Command Team.

I don't know if any of that made sense but I think it did in my head and it is a relevant addition to CSM (Join to see)'s great points.

I think mutual respect is the a huge best of it. You have to respect another. Not only for their role in leadership but them as a person. If you have a NCO that doesn't like officers he is not going to make a good CSM. It is the same way with Officers. If you are an officer that doesn't let the CSM perform his duties as he sees fit then you are going to have issues.

I have seen so much officer bashing lately it is killing me. A quick way for me to lose respect for an NCO is for them to insult me merely for being an LT. A LTC is not a better person than a CSM, nor is the CSM a better person than the LTC. They each have their responsibilities. The first thing that should happen is the LTC and CSM should come together and discuss were they see the battalion going in a year or what they want to achieve. Once they figure that out then they can develop how they are going to get there together. They are there for another. They need to be a team. The worst thing possible is letting discontent be seen in the command team by other soldiers.

There cannot be any day light in policy between the Commander and the NCOIC. In other words, you cannot have the Commander saying one thing, and the NCOIC/CSM saying something that even sounds like it's a bit off. Regular and frequent internal communication is the best practice to avoid this.

This separation often happens not because of mal-intent, but because the team didn't discuss it internally first, and assumed the other person was on the same page but is actually not. The NCOIC should be extra careful to make sure what he is putting out is consistent with the commander's intent, since if the commander thinks differently, the commander has the final say, and if he decides to reverse it, both look bad. Along the same lines, the commander has the responsibility to make sure his intent is adequately communicated internally, so that this gap cannot happen. I've never seen a commander over-communicate his intent. I know I have felt that what was going through my head was obvious to everyone, but often I find out that it's not. Therefore if a commander is going to err, over-communicate and not under-communicate internally (and externally for that matter). The rest of the command team needs to make sure they are tracking, and a uniform policy and intent gets put out to everyone. I'm not just talking during speeches, but even during casual exchanges at a chow line... which if something odd is put out, it will spread quickly. Bottom line... frequent and regular communication on planning, policy, and personnel.

I think is a very hard point in our careers. However I would like to see the Commander Suggest changes but allowing the CSM to lead and do what he or she does best with a lot of swagger and authority. Now days I feel like the commander decides, implements, and the CSM is just their to capture the eyes of the enlisted rank kinda like the mom and pop behavior or a co-signer.

Two of the biggest things that make or break any team in any setting:

1) Respect
2) Communication

You have those two things....you have a "team".

Respectful give and take and a willingness to listen to each others' opinions.

Random comment: I noticed the the image included Gen. Cone and just wanted to say that he was a great man. Had the opportunity to visit with him for a little while during one of our post depolyment regimental balls and he was very personable and, given the fact that I was just a lowly E5, extremely respectful; I think that it says a lot about a leader when they show just as much respectto their subordinates as you are supposed to show them due to their superiority (I guess that part kind of goes to your question).