Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team

“Leaders aren't born, they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work. And that's the price we'll have to pay to achieve that goal, or any goal” by the famous National Football coach, Vince Lombardi.

          If the reader has ever been a part of a team, then they know that whether it was on a field or in an organization, if that team does not work together effectively, the outcome is not going to be positive. A team must be cohesive; although that doesn’t mean having disagreements and differences aren’t constructive. The team is the key point of focus for leadership and building strategies for success within the organization. One definition of leadership is the ability to get extraordinary results through people.  Leadership ability is made up partly of what you are born with and partly out of skills you can develop.  Leadership is made up of all types of different skills, traits, and talents.  This reflection paper will not disguise character traits such as honesty and integrity.  Even though several courses as a Ph.D. student have pointed out that these traits may make or break the leader, it goes without saying if a person is not a good person, they are not a great leader.  This reflection paper addresses the question, what if they are a good person, and know they can be a great leader but something is missing?  Well, if the leader is consciously incompetent they have the ability to grow, learn, and develop ways to potential great leadership and develop the leadership team around them. 

            Like it or not, all teams and in retrospect organizations in general are potentially dysfunctional. This is inevitable because they are made up of fallible, imperfect human beings. From the football field to the executive suite in an office building, politics and confusion are more the rule than the exception. However, facing dysfunction and focusing on teamwork is particularly critical at the top of an organization because the executive team sets the tone for how all employees work with one another. Fortunately, there is hope for leaders moving forward with Gods support and guidance. Counter to conventional wisdom, the causes of dysfunction are both identifiable because of sin and curable because of Christ’s forgiveness. However, they do not die easily and can pop-up time after time if a leader does not make a conscience effort to change and develop. Making a team functional and cohesive requires levels of courage and discipline that many groups cannot seem to muster without proper leadership.

           

          Lencioni’s new model aligns itself well with Zaccaro, Rittman, and Marks (2001) in that the leadership process positively affects the team process. The leader’s role in Lencioni’s work is to guide or for comparison to sports “coach” the formation of effective teams by example. The more effective the leader is in making the team aware of the dysfunctions and pushing the team through them, the more effective and successful the team becomes. The author of the book addresses the dysfunctions of a team first.

            The first step toward reducing politics and confusion within your team is to understand that there are five dysfunctions to contend with, and address each that applies, one by one.

With organizations and individuals so fervently focused on the bottom line, it’s easy to ignore “softer” goals, such as the act of listening well.  Some leaders think what few will say, that all that touchy-feeling stuff is a waste of their time.

          On the contrary! A focus on listening can lead to more effective teamwork, higher productivity, and fewer conflicts on enhanced innovation and problem-solving, improved recruiting, retention, superior customer relations and more. As authors on leadership development have noted through the years, listening is not just a nice thing to do, it’s essential!         The writer found that “absence of trust” the first dysfunction pointed out by the author is very specific and directly correlates to God’s word, in Genesis 6:22 where it is written that Noah trusted God and did exactly as he was told (NIV Genesis6:22). As Noah did, people within an organization/team cannot form nor achieve their results without trust.  Often in many situations a team can be skeptical of a leader’s agenda or focus and many of the team may not trust the new leader or the other team members. This situation is reflected in a story pointed out in the book starting on page 43. Lack of trust is caused by invulnerability, the team’s unwillingness to show weakness in front of others, take risks, and be vulnerable about their mistakes. Lencioni uses the real experiences of a leader to explain how to build trust, “the only way to do that is to overcome our need for invulnerability” (p.63). Without this genuine openness and leading by example the teams will not have a strong foundation of trust or trustworthy interactions. Developing the habit of sharing personal examples from the leaders life (or family or business etc.), even if they are weak areas or examples of past mistakes, can give others courage to know that they can share their own experiences as well. Everyone’s experience whether good or bad can be valuable to others in the group and can contribute to develop bonds and common links between co-workers. It is in this way that we can all learn from each other’s past.

            Interestingly studies in Emotional Intelligence (EI) over the past couple of decades have also found that leaders actually “infect” the workplace with their attitudes and energy. To understand and influence these flows of emotions and motivational states, leaders need to be able to practice empathic listening skills. In their book Primal Leadership, authors Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee, describe how varying leadership styles rely on listening skills for their effectiveness.

            The visionary leaders will listen to values held by individuals within the group, enabling them to explain their own goals for the organization in a way that wins support. The second is the coaching leaders listen one-on-one to employees, establish rapport and trust, and help employees help themselves in matters of performance and information gathering. Third, the affinitive leaders listen for employees’ emotional needs and strive to honor and accommodate those needs in the workplace. Finally, the democratic leaders that Lencioni’s points toward is a way of extract ideas and participation by listening to everyone’s opinions and information. It takes time and practice to become adept at listening empathically especially when it may seem trivial and unimportant at the time. Some people are very graphic in the way they relate their experiences, it is a leader’s duty to know when to interject and cut-off any conversation that is not leading the rest of the group in the right direction or that is gendering strife or controversy within the team. Not everyone has the same level of faith therefore not all information is beneficial to all within the team.

            If leaders look retrospectively and sincerely at themselves they can testify to the fact that most teams are still operating very much on the superficial level, and the main cause of this seems to be due to poor or irregular communication, or even a breach of trust. However, until this fundamental issue is dealt with, leaders may not really excel in our various groups as the Lord will want us to. As servant leaders there is a must to prayerfully ask God for direction on how to develop an atmosphere of openness and sincerity in teams, as this may go a long way in help to support each other effectively in our Christian walk. As a Godly leader, a great deal of maturity is required to handle the different kinds of people and issues that develop within the teams, groups, and organizations. They must go that extra mile in order to get to the next level in this ministry. Imagine what life would be like, if they could all be genuine with each other, it will be so powerful that the people in the world will want to have.

            The second dysfunction of a team leader is fear of conflict; Teams that are lacking on trust are incapable of engaging in unfiltered, passionate debate about key issues, causing situations where team conflict can easily turn into veiled discussions and back channel comments. In a work setting where team members do not openly air their opinions, inferior decisions are the result. In the NIV Luke 17:3-4 it is written: “Be on your guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sin’s against you seven times a day, and returns to you seven times, saying, 'I repent,' forgive him".

            Leadership is a full-contact sport, and if the leader cannot address conflict in a healthy, productive fashion then they should not be in a leadership role to begin with. The issues surrounding conflict resolution can be best summed-up in three words, “Deal With It” if not it will pop-up anyway. While a leader can try and avoid conflict, the leader cannot escape conflict. The fact of the matter is that conflict in the workplace is unavoidable every place has it up and down and ins and outs. It will find the leader whether are looking for it or not. The ability to recognize conflict, understand the nature of conflict, and to be able to bring swift and fair resolution to conflict will serve the leader well the inability to do so may well be the leaders downfall. Developing effective conflict resolution skill sets are an essential component of a building a sustainable business model (Harper, 2007).When conflict is mismanaged, it harms the relationship, but when handled in a respectful, positive way, conflict provides an opportunity for growth, ultimately strengthening the bond between two people. On the other hand unresolved conflict often results in a loss of productivity, stifles creativity, and creates barriers to cooperation. Perhaps most importantly for leaders, good conflict resolution ability equals good employee retention. Leaders who don’t deal with conflict will eventually watch their good talent walk out the door in search of a healthier and safer work environment.

            The third dysfunction is the “lack of commitment” which occurs when there is no buy-in from the team members. In the story the author provided, there was evidence of this dysfunction through ambiguity over plans, decisions, and goals. Although the character in the author’s story points out that commitment does not mean consensus. In fact, sometimes a leader, having a culture within the organization that allows people to challenge ideas, suggestions, can accidently create an organization of extraordinary thinking.  These are committed people capable of producing the kind of innovation and productivity required to succeed today. However, if the leader is afraid of developing this culture and they do not allowed dissent, if people who suggest alternatives are castigated for not being "team players", this action produces an environment of fear, stagnation, and antipathy. Not allowing appropriate dissent will kill a team and thus the organization within the company.

            It is more a matter of having a voice and buy-in, rather than always being in agreement. The character of JR refers to this as “disagree and commit” (p. 95), where members can disagree over aspects of a project, but still be committed to the overall goals. So within the context of the story the author is sharing without conflict, it is difficult for team members to commit to decisions, creating an environment where ambiguity prevails. Lack of direction and commitment can make employees, particularly star employees, disgruntled.  Being clear, concise, accurate, and timely in communication of information will help any leader to ease both the number and severity of conflicts within a team.

            Any effort to change an organization needs a visible and intentional commitment from all leaders within an organization. Leaders need to be able to articulate the direction of the change process, the necessity of this process and how it will lead to great organizational relevancy. Great leaders also need to show how individuals will be supported through the process of change, and be willing to answer difficult questions or deal with difficult situations as they arise throughout the process. Great teams are able to achieve commitment by engaging in constructive conflict that focuses on problems and not on personalized agendas. Dealing with objective issues takes precedence over ego conflict. In the process of constructive conflict people are able to express their thoughts and beliefs and that creates buy in and clarity. Once there is alignment and buy-in, leadership teams can continue to drive clarity within their organization. This is often facilitated by the process of cascading communication. Taking key decisions and action items and ensuring that they are rolled out to staff in a way that includes why they are important.

            The fourth dysfunctional team builder is the “avoidance of accountability” within the organization. First and foremost, accountability means that as the leader they accept responsibility for the outcomes expected of them both good and bad. This also generally means they cannot blame others or finger point if things do not go as planned. Even as creative as it might be the leader also cannot blame the external environment. There are always going to be things the leader could have done or still can do to change the outcome. Until that leader takes responsibility, that leader is the victim. And being a victim is the exact opposite of being a leader. Victims are passive, they take no action and because of this they are acted upon by others either verbally or physically. Leaders on the other hand are active; they take initiative to influence the outcome for the team. The “avoidance of accountability” is also caused by team members who do not hold each other responsible for their actions and work even after they have achieved buy-in and commitment (p. 97). When teams set low standards for one another they are less likely to be accountable. However, when teams set high standards, teams are more willing to make sure each member helps to reach those benchmarks.

            When teams do not commit to a clear plan of action, even the most focused and driven individuals hesitate to call their peers on actions and behaviors that may seem counterproductive to the overall good of the team. Leaders need to model accountability in a different way. Many are adept at dealing with performance issues but shy away from dealing with inappropriate behavioral problems because they can be emotionally charged. When leaders confront inappropriate behaviors they are role-modeling accountability in another constructive way that sets the stage for peer-to-peer engagement. Accountability is significant to Lencioni because it builds and strengthens relationships between team members. This allows team members to have high expectations, and be more willing to call out others when they are not operating at that level. Lencioni suggests that teams create a list of standards that each member will adhere, institute progress reviews, and have team rewards. The leader at this stage must help to create a “culture of accountability” to ensure responsibility (p. 216). Teams will have a tendency to focus on their own needs if they are not focusing on what the team should be accomplishing (p. 212-216).

            As leaders in God, they see accountability to others as simply one of the ways God holds his people accountable to Him. Left on their own without guidance, there is the great temptation to do what the devil and the world directs leaders to do rather than what God wants and what is best for others within the team. In accountable relationships within the team it helps believers change by the Spirit of God and the truth of the Word of God through inward spiritual conviction and faith.

            The final dysfunction is the “Inattention to Results” the realization at this point in the book was that avoidance of accountability leads to a state where team members tend to put their individual needs above the team's collective goals. Realistically, team members naturally tend to put their own needs (ego, career development, recognition, etc.) ahead of the collective goals of the team when individuals aren't held accountable. If a team has lost sight of the need for achievement, the business ultimately suffers. Two things that get in the way of achieving results are self-interest and self-preservation. Team members who put their individual needs or the needs of their department above the collective goals make it difficult to achieve better overall results. The overall team performance should come first. This is not to say that we shouldn’t look out for ourselves but there needs to be a connection between self-interest and getting results.

            The author describes the inattention to results and its occurrence when members of the team seek individual recognition and goals at the expensive of the collective goals of the team (p. 72). Ego and status means being greater than others in perspective and can lead to team members focusing on their accomplishments instead of the common purpose. When an individual player in a team only looks out for himself he may do well, but the team still loses because he was not focused on team goals. Goals therefore need to be clear and achievable, so no one member of the team would consider not focusing on them.

            Lencioni is correct in the way he developed the five dysfunctions of a team, the inverse of his hypothesis should also be true. If as leaders consider the glass half full the five well-functioning, healthy teams should be built upon the opposite traits: Trust, Candor, Commitment, Accountability, and Results.

            In summary, when teams build trust and engage in constructive conflict there is the potential for building commitment and accountability. When these are grounded and in place the team can focus on meeting and exceeding the organization’s goals and mission. “Where there is no vision [progressively prophetic unfolding of the purpose of God] the people perish—or cast off restraint. [They disassociate from their collective identity and mission becoming self-absorbed, self-serving, and self-centered]; but blessed is he who continually keeps the word of the Lord” (Proverbs 29:18).

            The second of the writers’ well-functioning, healthy team elements is “candor”. This is considered the openness of mind, honest and frank expressions. Start talking honestly with subordinates about the leaders own biases and preferences, and own them as biases and preferences. Facing up to how the leaders own biases may be counterproductive when applied to someone who does things very differently than the leader does. Most important, understand that as leaders they do not have all the answers. Nobody does. If everybody starts by owning what they think, instead of arguing over the “truth,” they can begin to have a trusting relationship that can tolerate each party hearing some things they do not want to hear. And then as leaders they can have honest improvement in people, in practices, in results.

            When the team organizations have the third and fourth elements of a culture of well-functioning, healthy teams the accountability and commitment are key, anything is possible. Leaders and their teams achieve their key results, customers are happy, and employees are motivated and empowered. Commitment requires a clear understanding of what needs to be done and a willingness to do whatever it takes to succeed. Accountability is just as important as commitment and together the two create an unstoppable formula for success and high level performance in a team environment. Accountability and commitment reduces workplace negativity, improves employee morale, and encourages the leaders’ team members to take personal responsibility for their actions and results. Because they know they are supported by the leader and encouraged to put their personal values and energy into the team commitments. Instead of holding people accountable, all leaders should believe in their team’s capacity to choose accountability. Creating a culture where the choice to be personally accountable in service to the larger whole.

            Finally, the fifth element of well-functioning, healthy team is “results”. The fact Rudy Giuliani discusses in his book, Leadership (2002).  Giuliani points out time and time again that gathering data and developing goals for the team is essential. Whether it was the New York police department (NYPD), or the housing authority, he developed goals with his leadership team gaining their buy-in and thus word got out that he was a man of the people. Results will always be gained when the leader delegates control like in Giuliani’s example to gain commitment to the goal. The best way to get consistent employee results through the goal is to give consistent and timely performance appraisal evaluations. This also seems to indicate to those within the team that the goal is still important and being monitored keeping the goal from being put on the back burner. This process is important and is the difference between goals and results dropping for the team.

            The balancing act for any steward leader is how much we allow the goals and statistics to motivate the moves of the team. How often do people use the cliché of the “bottom line” in discussing the responsibility of leaders? The term comes directly from the “big machine” the corporate world, where leadership is ultimately judged by profits based on earnings and growth. As a steward leader one can be seductive by this same motive. Think about the brag points that a leader employs when they get together with colleagues. As the numbers escalate or grow, the leader who cannot compete will resort to projections of potential gains or blame a downturn on uncontrollable forces. Without retreating behind the statement that “we would rather be pure than big,” our leadership development needs to be defined by our integrity and our faithfulness rather than the numbers on the “bottom line.” But result is not the same thing as the “bottom line.” Allowing the team to help create the results and develop the plan will give them the voice necessary for more than numbers and product. This might be quality, healthy growth, performance, and enjoyable work environment. As a result a team should not only be allowed, but encouraged to develop its own structure and the best method of operation and procedure for that particular team.

            There are all kinds of leaders, a hundred philosophies of leadership, and a billion ways of figuring out how to get a team from here to there. The summary of this reflection is that God will enlighten the path for each individual forging the leader through life experiences of resistance, hardships, struggles, and the occasional encouragement all have a part in making a solid leader required in today’s world.

Reference:

Giuliani, R., (2002). Leadership: New York, NY: Hyperion Publisher.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Boston Massachusetts:          Harvard Business School Publishing.

Harper, G., (2004). The Joy of Conflict Resolution: Transforming Victims, Villains and Heroes      in the Workplace and at the Home. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Hill, S.E.K., (2010). Team leadership. In P. G. North house, Leadership: Theory and practice       (pp. 241-270) (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Lencioni, P., (2005). Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team: For Leaders, Managers, and Facilitators. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Zacarro, S. Rittman, A., & Marks, M., (2001). Team Leadership, The Leadership Quarterly,          Winter, Vol. 12, No. 4, pg.451-483.