1. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team
A Leadership Fable by Patrick Lencioni – REVISITED
Phil Holmes – October 22, 2013
The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

2. When last we met…
In mid-August, we discussed The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, a book by Patrick Lencioni, a prolific business consultant and author
At Todd’s suggestion, we are now reviewing how this leadership team feels about its own health and functionality, based on a quick assessment from the appendix of Lencioni’s book
This assessment consists of 15 items, and results in sub-scores for each of the five dysfunctions (Absence of Trust, Fear of Conflict, Lack of Commitment, Avoidance of Accountability, and Inattention to Results)
Score of 3-5 means “needs to be addressed”
Score of 6-7 means “could be a problem”
Score of 8-9 means “not a problem”
I have collected each team member’s individual sub-scores and have created a bar graph for each dysfunction showing the number of LT members whose scores fell in each of the ranges above (3-5, 6-7, and 8-9)
This presentation will draw from, and adapt, the concepts, graphics, and points that can be found in The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni
28 November 2018
Bank of America: For Internal Use Only

3. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team5
Inattention to Results
Status and Ego 4
Avoidance of Accountability
Low Standards
Evidenced by…
Cumulative… 3
Lack of Commitment
Ambiguity
“Trust is the foundation of real teamwork. And so the first dysfunction is a failure on the part of team members to understand and open up to one another. And if that sounds touchy-feely, let me explain, because there is nothing soft about it. It is an absolutely critical part of building a team. In fact, it’s probably the most critical. Great teams do not hold back with one another. They are unafraid to air their dirty laundry. They admit their mistakes, their weaknesses, and their concerns without fear of reprisal.” -- Lencioni, 2002, pp
NOTE THAT HONESTY IS CRUCIAL NOT JUST FOR ITS OWN ETHICAL SAKE, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF THE ATTAINMENT OF KEY TEAM GOALS.
Signs of trust include FULL THROATED DEBATE – SPIRITED DEBATE – AROUND PRIORITIES, GOALS, PROCESSES, STEPS, ACTION PLANS, ETC., BEFORE DECISIONS ARE MADE AROUND THOSE ITEMS.
When teams trust, they embrace conflict on the road to determining their most important goals. All team members buy into those goals because they have gone through an absolutely honest discussion of which goals to embrace (even if their goals did not “win,” team members know they’ve had their full say, and in theory at least have been “persuaded” by the other team members). When goals are clear, so is commitment to them – there are no other priorities to get in the way. Teams focus on accomplishing the goals, hold each other accountable, and focus on goal-related results above all things. 2
Fear of Conflict
Artificial Harmony 1
Absence of Trust
Invulnerability
It begins with the absence of trust…
A Single, Agreed-upon Goal is Impossible to Achieve

4. Absence of Trust
In the context of building a team, trust is the confidence among team members that their peers’ intentions are good, and that there is no reason to be protective or careful around the group. In essence, teammates must get comfortable being vulnerable with one another. As “soft” as all of this might sound, it is only when team members are truly comfortable being exposed to one another that they begin to act without concern for protecting themselves. As a result, they can focus their energy and attention completely on the job at hand, rather than on being strategically disingenuous or political with one another. Teams that lack trust waste inordinate amounts of time and energy managing their behaviors and interactions within the group. They tend to dread meetings, and are reluctant to take risks in asking for or offering assistance with others. As a result, morale on distrusting teams is usually quite low, and unwanted turnover is high. Lencioni, p. 196

5. Assessment results - Absence of Trust
Humble team members know that they have strengths AND weaknesses. They admit their weaknesses because the team needs to know about these weaknesses so it can take them into account as it manages itself and its workflow, priorities, reactions, etc.
Confident team members can take feedback from each other because they know they are NOT perfect, and the feedback is in service to the attainment of agreed-upon goals.
When humble, confident teams debate priorities honestly and openly, they end up with goals that everyone can agree on. Thus, everyone can OWN those goals.
If everyone owns the goals, then everyone PROTECTS those goals. Thus, everyone on the team expects every other member of the team to work toward those goals. Such teams are self-policing.
When everyone buys into the overall goals of the team, then individual success is subordinated to team success. A baseball player who scores a home run in the first inning does not walk off the team feeling like a success if his or her team lost the game by the end of the ninth inning. The individual baseball player’s goal is to perform well as an individual, of course – to pitch well, to catch well, to hit well, to run well, and to score (or prevent the other side from scoring), but that individual success is subordinated to the success of the team. It has no real meaning if the team loses.
Absence of Trust

6. Discussion In which ways do the results surprise you?
In which ways do the results make sense to you?
What evidence substantiates these results?
What would “full trust” look like in this team?

7. Fear of Conflict
All great relationships, the ones that last over time, require productive conflict in order to grow. This is true in marriage, parenthood, friendship, and certainly business. Unfortunately, conflict is considered taboo in many situations, especially at work. And the higher you up the management chain, the more you find people spending inordinate amounts of time and energy trying to avoid the kind of passionate debates that are essential to any great team. Teams that engage in productive conflict know that the only purpose is to produce the best possible solution in the shortest period of time. They discuss and resolve issues more quickly and completely than others, and they emerge from heated debates with no residual feelings or collateral damage, but with an eagerness and readiness to take on the next important issue. Lencioni, pp

8. Assessment results - Fear of Conflict

9. Discussion In which ways do the results surprise you?
In which ways do the results make sense to you?
What evidence substantiates these results?
What would “embrace of conflict” look like in this team?

10. Lack of Commitment
In the context of a team, commitment is a function of two things: clarity and buy-in. Great teams make clear and timely decisions and move forward with complete buy-in from every member of the team, even those who voted against the decision. They leave meetings confident that no one on the team is quietly harboring doubts about whether to support the actions agreed on. Great teams understand the danger of seeking consensus, and find ways to achieve buy-in even when complete agreement is impossible. They understand that reasonable human beings do not need to get their way in order to support a decision, but only need to k now that their opinions have been heard and considered. Conflict underlies the willingness to commit without perfect information. In many cases, teams have all the information they need, but it resides within the hearts and minds of the team itself and must be extracted through unfiltered debate. Only when everyone has put their opinions on the table can a team commit… Lencioni, pp

11. Assessment results - Lack of Commitment

12. Discussion In which ways do the results surprise you?
In which ways do the results make sense to you?
What evidence substantiates these results?
What would “full commitment” look like in this team?

13. Avoidance of Accountability
The essence of this dysfunction is the unwillingness of team members to tolerate the interpersonal discomfort that accompanies calling a peer on his or her behavior and the more general tendency to avoid difficult conversations. (The fear of jeopardizing a valuable personal relationship) only causes the relationship to deteriorate as team members begin to resent one another for not living up to expectations and for allowing the standards of the group to erode. Members of great teams improve their relationships by holding one another accountable, thus demonstrating that they respect each other and have high expectations for one another’s performance. More than any policy or system, there is nothing like the fear of letting down respected teammates that motivates people to improve their performance. Lencioni, pp

14. Assessment results - Avoidance of Accountability

15. Discussion In which ways do the results surprise you?
In which ways do the results make sense to you?
What evidence substantiates these results?
What would “holding each other accountable” look like in this team?

16. Inattention to Results
The ultimate dysfunction of a team is the tendency of members to care about something other than the collective goals of the group. An unrelenting focus on specific objectives and clearly defined outcomes is a requirement for any team that judges itself on performance. Every good organization specifies what it plans to achieve in a given period, and these goals, more than the financial metrics that they drive, make up the majority of near-term, controllable results. So, while profit may be the ultimate measure of results for a corporation, the goals and objectives that executives set for themselves along the way constitute a more representative example of the results it strives for as a team. Ultimately, these goals drive profit. For members of some teams, merely being part of the group is enough to keep them satisfied. Others focus on enhancing their own positions or career prospects at the expense of the team. But, great teams make the collective results of the group more important to each than their own individual goals. Lencioni, pp

17. Assessment results - Inattention to Results

18. Discussion In which ways do the results surprise you?
In which ways do the results make sense to you?
What evidence substantiates these results?
What would “full focus on the team’s results” look like in this team?

19. Next steps? Priorities?

20. References
Lencioni, P. (2002). The Five Dysfunctions of a Team. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.