Let me begin by suggesting that any leader who, on his or her own accord picks up Patrick Lencioni’s
book, Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team should be applauded. The reason for applause is that many leaders are reluctant to admit that their team is dysfunctional in any way. Lencioni holds no punches as he states from the onset, “The true measure of a team is that it accomplishes the results that it sets out to achieve.” Lencioni’s title alone assumes the reader will agree on at least two suppositions. The first is that the leader’s team or at least a team he or she is working with is dysfunctional. The second presupposition is that such team dysfunctions can be overcome. Using a pyramid to illustrate five dysfunctions, Lencioni lists them in order of importance, beginning with “trust.”
“No quality or characteristic”, says Lencioni “is more important than trust.” The
author follows up this statement with a plethora of useful tools and tips for building trust. For
Lencioni, trusting relationships have to be formed between all members of the team. Team leaders
are not exempt from the need to build trusting relationships. Neither are introverts. “Everyone on a team has
to participate”, warns Lencioni adding, “If even one member of a team is unwilling to be open about weaknesses, mistakes, and issues, it will have a profound impact on everyone else.”
After building trust, teams are more successful at handling; or as Lencioni put it, “mastering
conflict”. He explains, “When a team recovers from an incident of destructive conflict, it builds
confidence that it can survive such an event, which in turn builds trust.” As with the previous topic, Lencioni shares practical tools and tips to overcome this dysfunction.
The next dysfunction addressed in Lencioni’s work is “commitment”. He wisely advises, “Commitment is not consensus.” Lencioni makes it clear that anticipating total agreement on decisions can have disastrous effects on a team. Of course commitment to any team requires a great level of clarity. The author purports, “Commitment cannot occur if people are unclear about exactly what is being committed to.”
Lencioni builds upon the pyramid further citing “accountability” as the next dysfunction a team needs to
overcome. Lencioni defines accountability as “the willingness of team members to remind one
another when they are not living up to the performance standards of the group.” This type of accountability is usually initiated and reinforced by what team members observe their leaders do in cases where individuals
are subpar.
Lastly, Lencioni addresses the need for teams to focus on results. He argues, “Results-oriented teams establish their own measurements for success. They don’t allow themselves the wiggle room of subjectivity.” This final team dysfunction brings the reader back full circle to the argument the author began with when he said, “The true measure of a team is that it accomplishes the results that it sets out to achieve.” The
following paragraphs will disclose my personal experience as a member of a great team in light of Lencioni’s five
dysfunctions. A few days ago, I learned that one of my coworker’s good friends went to the same high school I
attended. At my request, she brought in a yearbook to see if we had any mutual friends. While flipping through the book, I stopped at a picture of the football team. Above the picture were the team schedule and the scores. Next to that was a picture of one of the key players who boasted about how the senior leadership played a key role in the school’s first undefeated season and regional championship. I smiled when I thought about the years I spent at that school as I asked myself, “What made that team so successful.” It was evident that the teammates trusted each other. The backfield trusted that the line would block and the defense trusted that their teammates would make the tackles when it counted. Praise for others was a
cultural norm with this team. As far as conflict is concerned, the biggest argument I ever witnessed was
about who could cut the best hair in the locker room. These guys were passionate about a fresh edge up. Commitment was evident in that the players could be found studying the playbook faithfully during lunch and even while hanging out at each other’s homes. Whenever players were slacking in the weight room, teammates were not afraid to address it with the guilty parties, referring to them as “loafers”. Finally, the undefeated
season proved that the team was highly functional and had overcome the five dysfunctions of a team.
Thinking back on my teammates comments in the interview that was recorded in the year book, I believe it
is safe to say that the team was focused. It is with tongue-in-cheek that I point to the scoreboard. After all, says Lencioni, “There is one simple method for ensuring that a team doesn’t lose sight of results: the scoreboard.”
Lencioni clearly put a great deal of effort into making this work practical and entertaining. Still, there is at least one or two areas that could use some improvement. Lencioni explains how to achieve commitment by “cascading communication” and suggests leaders demand “that the team go back and communicated the
decisions to their staff members within twenty-four hours of the meeting. And not by e-mail or voice
mail,” says Lencioni, “but either live in person or on the phone, thus giving employees a chance to ask questions for clarification.”
Such advice seems dated in today’s global market where business and ministry is worldwide and teams are less likely to be able to meet in person. Even telephone calls can be difficult to arrange depending on the time
zones of each individual participant. A modern remedy would be a great place to start. I realize this is a minor
issue as the majority of business is still conducted on a less global scale, but the dilemma is worth
considering. More concerning to me would be the seemingly endless assessments the author recommends for
participants.
I can imagine team members mumbling under their breath, “Another assessment?” as they reluctantly answer a list of questions – once again. From Myers-Briggs to the DISC assessment, and then to team assessments;
eventually there will be assessment overload. Additionally, many people today are already familiar
with such assessments and are very aware of their personality types. I am concerned that some of
the exercises may lead to boredom. Of course, the author stresses the fact that these are recommendations and the facilitator should be skilled enough to know what to include and what to leave out.
Blessings Indeed,
Corey D. Sturdivant
Corey D. Sturdivant 