apply 2 wk 5

161

Flack

adjust her behavior. And it was hurting the team. So I asked

her to leave the company.”

No one spoke. They just looked at one another and

at the brochures still sitting on the table in front of them.

Finally, Carlos spoke. “Wow. I don’t know what to say.

How did she take it? What are we going to do about mar-

keting?”

Nick continued the list of questions. “What are we going

to say to employees? To the press?”

As surprised as Kathryn was by their response, she

quickly summoned an answer. “I don’t want to say a lot

about how Mikey responded. She was a little surprised, a

little angry, neither of which is rare in situations like this.”

The group waited for Kathryn to address the other issues.

She continued. “And as far as what we’re going to do

about marketing, we’ll start looking for a new vice presi-

dent. But we’ve got plenty of strong people in the organi-

zation now who can step up and keep things moving until

then. I have no concerns about that.”

Everyone seemed to digest and agree with Kathryn’s

explanation.

“And we’ll have to simply tell employees and the press

that Mikey is moving on. We don’t have a lot of flexibility

there, in terms of getting into sensitive information. But I

don’t think we should be intimidated by anyone’s initial re-

actions. If we get our act together and make progress, em-

ployees and analysts alike are going to be fine. And I think

42Lencioni/Flack 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 161

162

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

most people, especially employees, won’t be all that sur-

prised.”

As confident as Kathryn was and as logical as her rea-

soning seemed, the mood in the room remained down.

Kathryn knew she would have to push them hard to focus

on real work. She didn’t realize how much more work she

had to do to put the Mikey issue to rest.

42Lencioni/Flack 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 162

HEAVY LIFTING

For the rest of the evening and into the next afternoon, thegroup focused on the details of the business, with special attention on sales. Though they certainly made progress, Kathryn could not deny that Mikey’s departure was contin-

uing to dampen the general atmosphere. She decided to

enter the danger.

When lunch was over, Kathryn addressed the group. “I’d

like to take a few minutes to deal with the elephant that’s

sitting in the corner. I want to know how everyone is feel-

ing about Mikey leaving. Because we need to make sure that

we deal with this as a team before I stand in front of the

company and explain it to them next week.” Though it al-

ways amazed her, Kathryn knew from past experience that

the departure of even the most difficult employees provoked

some degree of mourning and self-doubt among their peers.

Team members looked around at one another to see

who would go first. It was Nick. “I guess I’m just worried

about losing another member of the executive team.”

163

43Lencioni/Lifting 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 163

164

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Kathryn nodded to acknowledge his concern but really

wanted to say, But she was never a member of this team!

Jan added, “I know she was a difficult person, but the

quality of her work was good. And marketing is critical

right now. Maybe we should have just tolerated her.”

Kathryn nodded to indicate that she was listening. “Any-

one else?”

Martin sort of raised his hand, making it clear that he

was about to make a statement that he didn’t want to make.

“I guess I’m just wondering who’s next.”

Kathryn paused before responding. “Let me tell you a

quick story about myself. One that I’m not too proud of.”

That got everyone’s attention.

Kathryn frowned, as if she didn’t really want to do what

she was about to do. “While I was in my last quarter of

graduate school, I took a job as a contractor at a well-

known retail company in San Francisco, where I ran a small

department of financial analysts. It was my first real man-

agement position, and I was hoping to land a permanent

job with the company after graduation.”

In spite of her limitations as a public speaker, Kathryn

had a knack for telling stories. “I inherited a pretty good

group of people. They all worked hard, but one guy in par-

ticular cranked out more reports, and better ones, than any-

one else. I’ll call him Fred. Fred took any assignment I gave

him and became my most reliable employee.”

“Sounds like a problem I’d like to have,” Nick com-

mented.

43Lencioni/Lifting 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 164

165

Heavy Lifting

Kathryn raised her eyebrows. “Well, there’s more to

the story. No one else in the department could stand Fred.

And to be honest, he annoyed the heck out of me too. He

didn’t help anyone with their work, and he made sure

everyone knew how much better he was at his job, which

was undeniable, even to the people who hated the guy.

Anyway, my staff came to me a number of times com-

plaining about Fred. I listened carefully and even spoke

to Fred half-heartedly about adjusting his behavior. But I

mostly ignored them because I could tell that they resented

his skills. More importantly, I was not about to come down

on my top performer.”

The staff seemed to empathize with her.

Kathryn went on. “Eventually, the output of the de-

partment began to slide, and so I gave more work to Fred,

who complained a little but managed to get it all done.

In my mind, he was carrying the department. Pretty soon,

morale in the department began to deteriorate more rapidly

than ever, and our performance slid further. Again, a num-

ber of analysts came to me to complain about Fred, and

it was becoming clear that he was indeed contributing to

the problems of the group more than I had thought. After

a tough night of thinking and losing sleep, I made my first

big decision.”

Jeff guessed, “You fired him.”

Kathryn smiled in a shameful kind of way. “No. I pro-

moted him.”

Jaws around the table dropped.

43Lencioni/Lifting 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 165

166

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Kathryn nodded her head. “That’s right. Fred was my

first promotion as a manager. Two weeks later, three of my

seven analysts quit, and the department fell into chaos. We

dropped way behind in our work, and my manager called

me in to talk about what was going on. I explained the

Fred situation, and why I had lost the other analysts. The

next day, he made a big decision.”

Jeff guessed again. “He fired him.”

Kathryn smiled in a painfully humorous way. “Close.

He fired me.”

The staff seemed surprised. Jan wanted to make her

feel better. “But companies don’t usually fire contractors.”

Kathryn was suddenly a little sarcastic. “Okay. Let’s just

say that the assignment ended abruptly, and they never

bothered to have me back.”

Nick and Martin smiled, trying not to crack up. Kathryn

completed their thoughts. “I definitely got fired.”

Everyone in the room laughed.

“What happened to Fred?” Jeff wanted to know.

“I hear that he quit a few weeks later, and they hired

someone else to run the department. Performance improved

dramatically within a month of his departure, even though

the department now had three fewer analysts than before.”

“Are you saying that Fred’s behavior alone hurt the pro-

duction of the group by 50 percent?”

“No. Not Fred’s behavior.”

People seemed confused.

43Lencioni/Lifting 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 166

167

Heavy Lifting

“My tolerance of his behavior. Listen, they fired the right

person.”

No one spoke. They seemed to be feeling their boss’s

pain, and making the obvious connection between Kathryn’s

story and what had happened the day before.

After a few moments, Kathryn brought her lesson home.

“I don’t plan on losing any of you. And that’s why I did what

I did.”

At that moment, everyone in the room seemed to under-

stand her.

43Lencioni/Lifting 2/10/02 3:47 PM Page 167

RALLY

Back at the office, Kathryn held an all-hands meeting to dis-cuss Mikey’s departure and other company issues. In spiteof her typically tactful and gracious demeanor, the news pro- voked more concern among employees than the executives

had expected. And though they agreed that the reaction had

more to do with its symbolic meaning than with losing

Mikey in particular, it dampened the enthusiasm of the team.

So during the next staff meeting, Kathryn had the group

spend more than an hour discussing how they were going

to replace their head of marketing. After a heated debate

about whether to promote one of Mikey’s direct reports,

Kathryn stepped in to break the tie.

“All right. This has been a good discussion, and I think

I’ve heard everyone. Does anyone have anything else to add?”

No one spoke, so Kathryn continued. “I believe that we

need to find someone who can grow the department and

help us with branding. And as much as I would prefer to

promote someone internally, I don’t see anyone in the de-

partment who is close to being able to do that right now.

168

44Lencioni/Rally 2/10/02 3:48 PM Page 168

169

Rally

And so I think we should begin a search for a new vice

president.”

Every head in the room nodded support, even those

who had argued against an outside hire.

“But I can assure you that we’re going to find the right

person. That means everyone here will be interviewing

candidates and pushing to find someone who can demon-

strate trust, engage in conflict, commit to group decisions,

hold their peers accountable, and focus on the results of

the team, not their own ego.”

Kathryn was certain that her staff had begun to buy in

to her theory. After asking Jeff to organize the search for the

new VP, she shifted the topic to sales.

Nick reported that progress had been made with a few

key prospects, and that some regions of the country were

still struggling. “I think we need more feet on the street.”

Jan knew that Nick was asking for more money and

tried to put a quick halt to his thinking. “I don’t want to

add more expenses because that only means your quotas

will go up. We don’t want to get into a death spiral here.”

Nick breathed hard and shook his head in exasperation

as if to say, There you go again. Before anyone knew what

was going on, Nick and Jan were pounding on the table

trying to convince one another, and the rest of the group,

that their approach was right.

During a brief pause in the action, Jan threw herself back

in her chair in frustration and proclaimed, “Nothing around

here has changed. Maybe the problem wasn’t Mikey after all.”

44Lencioni/Rally 2/10/02 3:48 PM Page 169

170

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

That sobered the group.

Kathryn jumped in, smiling. “Hold on. Hold on. I don’t

see anything wrong here. This is the kind of conflict we’ve

been talking about for the past month. It’s perfect.”

Jan tried to explain herself. “I guess I just don’t see it

that way. It still feels like we’re fighting.”

“You are fighting. But about issues. That’s your job.

Otherwise, you leave it to your people to try to solve prob-

lems that they can’t solve. They want you to hash this stuff

out so they can get clear direction from us.”

Jan seemed tired. “I hope this is worth it.”

Kathryn smiled again. “Trust me. It will be worth it in

more ways than you know.”

Over the next two weeks, Kathryn began to push her

team harder than ever before around their behavior. She

chided Martin for eroding trust by appearing smug during

meetings. She forced Carlos to confront the team about

their lack of responsiveness to customer issues. And she

spent more than one late night with Jan and Nick, working

through budget battles that had to be fought.

More important than what Kathryn did, however, was

the reaction she received. As resistant as they might have

seemed in the moment, no one questioned whether they

should be doing the things that Kathryn made them do.

There seemed to be a genuine sense of collective purpose.

The only question that remained in Kathryn’s mind was

whether she could keep it going long enough for every-

one to see the benefits.

44Lencioni/Rally 2/10/02 3:48 PM Page 170

PART FOUR

❖

Traction

45Lencioni/Part 4 2/10/02 3:48 PM Page 171

45Lencioni/Part 4 2/10/02 3:48 PM Page 172

HARVEST

Although the last of Kathryn’s Napa Valley off-sites had a dif-ferent atmosphere from the others, it began with a famil-iar speech. “We have a more experienced set of executives than any of our competitors. We have more cash than they

do. Thanks to Martin and his team, we have better core

technology. And we have a more connected board of di-

rectors. Yet in spite of all that, we are behind two of our

competitors in terms of both revenue and customer growth.

And I think we all know why that is.”

Nick raised his hand. “Kathryn, I’d like you to stop giv-

ing that speech.”

A month earlier, everyone in the room would have been

shocked by such a blunt statement. But no one seemed to

be alarmed at all.

“Why is that?” Kathryn asked.

Nick frowned, trying to think of the right words. “I guess

it seemed more appropriate a few weeks ago when we were

a lot more . . .” Nick didn’t need to finish the sentence.

173

46Lencioni/Harvest 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 173

174

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Kathryn explained as nicely as she could. “I’ll stop mak-

ing this speech when it’s no longer true. We are still behind

two of our competitors. And we are still not where we need

to be as a team.”

Kathryn continued. “But that’s not to say that we aren’t

on the right track. In fact, the first thing we’re going to do to-

day is take a step back and assess where we are as a team.”

Kathryn went to the white board and drew the triangle

again, filling in the five dysfunctions.

Then she asked, “How are we doing?”

The team considered the question as they re-examined

the model.

46Lencioni/Harvest 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 174

175

Harvest

Finally, Jeff spoke first. “We certainly trust each other

more than we did a month ago.” Heads around the room

nodded, and Jeff completed the thought. “Although I think

that it’s still too early to say that there isn’t more work to

be done.” Heads continued to nod.

Jan added. “And we’re doing better with conflict, al-

though I can’t say I’m used to it yet.”

Kathryn assured her, “I don’t think anyone ever gets

completely used to conflict. If it’s not a little uncomfortable,

then it’s not real. The key is to keep doing it anyway.”

Jan accepted the explanation.

Nick jumped in. “As far as commitment is concerned,

we have definitely started getting better buy-in around ob-

jectives and deliverables. That’s not a problem. But the next

one, accountability, worries me the most.”

“Why?” asked Jeff.

“Because I’m not sure that we’re going to be willing to

get in each other’s faces when someone doesn’t deliver, or

if someone starts acting against the good of the team.”

“I’m certainly going to get in their face.”

To everyone’s surprise, it was Martin who made the

comment. He explained. “I don’t think I could handle going

back to the way things were before. And so if it comes

down to a little interpersonal discomfort versus politics, I’m

opting for the discomfort.”

Nick smiled at his quirky colleague and finished the

model. “Well, I don’t think we’re going to have a results

46Lencioni/Harvest 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 175

176

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

problem. None of us will come out of this smelling rosy if

we can’t make this company work.”

Kathryn had never been so glad to see a room full of

people nod their heads in agreement. But she decided that

she should let some of the air out of the team’s balloon.

“Listen, I agree with most of what you’ve said about the

team. You’re moving in the right direction. But I want to

assure you that there will be many days during the next

few months when you will wonder if you’ve made any

progress at all. It’s going to take more than a few weeks of

behavioral change before we see a tangible impact on the

bottom line.”

The team seemed to be agreeing with her too easily.

She decided she needed to rattle them one more time. “I’m

telling you this because we are not out of the woods yet.

I’ve seen plenty of groups slide backward that were a lot

further along than we are. This is about having the disci-

pline and persistence to keep doing what we’re doing.”

As bad as Kathryn felt about raining on the team’s pa-

rade, she was relieved to have prepared them for the bad

weather every team faces on the way to shedding their dys-

functions. And for the next two days, the team experienced

that weather. At times, working together in a spirit of co-

operation, at other times seemingly at each other’s throats,

the group wrestled with business issues and worked each

one through to resolution. Ironically, they rarely discussed

the notion of teamwork directly, which Kathryn interpreted

as a sign that they were making progress. Two observations

46Lencioni/Harvest 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 176

177

Harvest

that Kathryn made during breaks and meals told her she

was right.

First, the team seemed to stay together, choosing not

to go off on their own as they had at previous off-sites. Sec-

ond, they were noisier than they had ever been, and one

of the most prevalent sounds that could be heard among

them was laughter. By the end of the session, though they

were clearly exhausted, everyone seemed eager to sched-

ule follow-up meetings with one another when they re-

turned to the office.

46Lencioni/Harvest 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 177

GUT CHECK

Three months after the final off-site had ended, Kathryn heldher first quarterly two-day staff meeting at a local hotel.The new vice president of marketing, Joseph Charles, had joined DecisionTech a week earlier and was attending his

first meeting with the group.

Kathryn kicked off the session by making an announce-

ment that no one was prepared for. “Remember Green Ba-

nana? The company that we considered buying last quarter?”

Heads around the table nodded.

“Well, evidently Nick was right about their being a pos-

sible competitor. They want to buy us.”

Everyone except Jeff, who sat on the board and already

knew about the offer, was shocked. No one more so than

Nick. “I thought they were in financial trouble?”

“They were,” explained Kathryn. “I guess they raised a

truckload of money last month and are suddenly hungry to

buy something. They’ve already made us an offer.”

“What’s it look like?” Jan wanted to know.

178

47Lencioni/Gut Check 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 178

179

Gut Check

Kathryn looked at her notes. “Quite a bit more than our

estimated worth today. We would all make decent money.”

Jan pressed on. “What did the board say?”

Jeff answered for Kathryn. “They’re leaving it up to us.”

No one spoke. It was as if they were all calculating their

potential payouts and trying to put the offer into some sort

of context.

Finally, an almost angry voice with a British accent broke

the silence. “No bloody way.”

Everyone turned toward their head of engineering. He

spoke with more passion than anyone had ever heard from

him. “There is no way that I am going to walk away from all

of this and hand it over to a company named after a piece

of unripened fruit.”

The group burst out into laughter.

Jan brought them back down to earth. “I don’t think

we should discard this quite so fast. There is no guarantee

that we’re going to make it. This is real money.”

Jeff added to his CFO’s point. “The board certainly

doesn’t think it’s a bad offer.”

Martin didn’t seem to believe Jeff. “Then why did they

leave it to us to make the decision?”

Jeff paused for a moment before explaining. “Because

they want to know that we have the fire in our bellies.”

Martin frowned. “The what?”

Jeff clarified for his British colleague. “They want to

know if we want to be here. If we’re really committed to the

company. And to each other.”

47Lencioni/Gut Check 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 179

180

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Joseph summarized the situation. “It sounds like this is

a gut check.”

Carlos spoke for the first time during the meeting. “I

vote against it.”

Jeff was next. “So do I. Definitely.”

Nick nodded his head. As did Kathryn and Joseph.

Martin looked at Jan. “What do you say?”

She hesitated for a moment. “Green Banana? Are you

kidding?”

They broke into laughter.

Kathryn quickly refocused the meeting, wanting to cap-

ture the momentum and direct it toward real business.

“Okay, we’ve got plenty of other big topics to take care of

today. So let’s get started.”

For the next several hours, the group took Joseph

through the five dysfunctions. Nick explained the impor-

tance of trust. Jan and Jeff together covered conflict and

commitment. Carlos described accountability within the

context of the team, and Martin finished off results. They

then reviewed Joseph’s Myers-Briggs results and explained

the roles and responsibilities of his new peers, as well as

their collective goals.

Most importantly, for the rest of the day they launched

into some of the most passionate debates Joseph had ever

heard and ended those debates with crystal-clear agree-

ments and no sense of lingering bitterness. They called

each other on the carpet once or twice in ways that made

47Lencioni/Gut Check 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 180

181

Gut Check

Joseph uncomfortable, but in each case they brought the

discussions around to results.

By the end of the session, Joseph decided he had joined

one of the most unusual and intense executive teams he

had ever seen, and he couldn’t wait to become an active

part of it.

47Lencioni/Gut Check 2/10/02 3:49 PM Page 181

THE M ARCH

Over the course of the next year, DecisionTech grew its salesdramatically, and met its revenue goals during three of itsfour quarters. The company moved into a virtual tie for the number one position in the industry, but had yet to sepa-

rate itself from its chief rival.

With the substantial improvement in performance, the

company saw turnover among employees subside and

morale rise steadily, with the exception of a slight and tem-

porary dip when the company missed its numbers.

Interestingly, when that happened, even the Chairman

called to encourage Kathryn not to get too disappointed in

light of the undeniable progress she had made.

With more than 250 employees, Kathryn decided it was

time to trim down the number of executives who reported

directly to her. She believed that the larger the company,

the smaller the team should be at the top. And with the ad-

dition of a new head of sales and a human resources di-

rector, her staff had grown to a barely manageable eight.

It wasn’t that Kathryn couldn’t handle the weekly one-on-

ones, but it was increasingly difficult to have fluid and sub-

182

48Lencioni/March 2/10/02 3:50 PM Page 182

183

The March

stantive discussions during staff meetings with nine people

sitting around the table. Even with the new collective atti-

tude of the members of the team, it would be only a mat-

ter of time before problems began to surface.

So more than a year after the final Napa off-site had

ended, Kathryn decided to make a few organizational

changes, which she delicately but confidently explained to

each of her staff members. Nick would again assume the

role of chief operating officer, a title he finally felt he had

earned. Carlos and the new head of sales would report to

him and would no longer be on the CEO’s staff. Human

resources would report to Jan, leaving Kathryn with five

direct reports: Martin as CTO, Jan as CFO, Nick as COO,

Joseph as VP of marketing, and Jeff as VP of business de-

velopment.

A week later, another of Kathryn’s quarterly two-day

staff meetings took place. Before Kathryn could start the

meeting, Jan wanted to know, “Where’s Jeff?”

Kathryn responded matter-of-factly. “That’s what I

wanted to talk about first today. Jeff won’t be coming to

these meetings any more.”

The room was stunned. Both at what Kathryn had said,

and that she said it with so little emotion.

Finally, Jan asked the question that everyone was

thinking. “Jeff quit?”

Kathryn seemed a little surprised by the question. “No.”

Martin then followed. “You didn’t fire him, did you?”

Suddenly it occurred to Kathryn what everyone was

48Lencioni/March 2/10/02 3:50 PM Page 183

184

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

thinking. “No, of course not. Why would I fire Jeff? It’s just

that he’ll be reporting to Nick from now on. Given his new

role, he and I both agree that it makes a lot of sense.”

As much as everyone was relieved that their worst fears

had been allayed, there was still something bothering them.

Jan couldn’t hold back. “Kathryn, I can certainly see that

it makes sense. And frankly, I’m sure that Nick is glad to

have Jeff on his team.”

Nick nodded to confirm this, and Jan continued. “But

don’t you think he’s disappointed about not reporting di-

rectly to you anymore? I mean, I know we’re not supposed

to be concerned with status and ego and all of that, but he

is a board member, and a founder. Did you really consider

what this means to him?”

Kathryn smiled proudly, delighted that they had forced

her to explain what she had been wanting to tell them all

along. “You guys, this was Jeff’s idea.”

That thought had not occurred to any of them. Kathryn

went on. “He said that as much as he wanted to stay on the

team, it made more sense for him to be part of Nick’s

group. I actually gave him a chance to change his mind,

and he insisted it was the right thing to do for the company,

and for the team.”

Kathryn let her team enjoy a silent moment of admi-

ration for their former CEO.

And then she continued. “I think we owe it to Jeff and

everyone else at this company to make this work. Let’s get

started.”

48Lencioni/March 2/10/02 3:50 PM Page 184

The Model AS DIFFICULT as it is to build a cohesive team, it is not complicated. In fact, keeping it simple is critical, whether you run the executive staff at a multi- national company, a small department within a larger organization, or even if you are merely a member of a team that needs improvement. In that spirit, this section is designed to provide a clear, concise, and practical guide to using the Five Dys- functions Model to improve your team. Good luck.

49Lencioni/Model 2/10/02 3:50 PM Page 185

49Lencioni/Model 2/10/02 3:50 PM Page 186

AN OVERVIEW OF THE MODEL

In the course of my experience working with CEOs and theirteams, two critical truths have become clear to me. First,genuine teamwork in most organizations remains as elusive as it has ever been. Second, organizations fail to achieve

teamwork because they unknowingly fall prey to five nat-

ural but dangerous pitfalls, which I call the five dysfunc-

tions of a team.

These dysfunctions can be mistakenly interpreted as

five distinct issues that can be addressed in isolation of the

others. But in reality they form an interrelated model, mak-

ing susceptibility to even one of them potentially lethal for

the success of a team. A cursory overview of each dys-

function, and the model they comprise, should make this

clearer.

187

50Lencioni/Overview 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 187

188

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

1.The first dysfunction is an absence of trust among team

members. Essentially, this stems from their unwilling-

ness to be vulnerable within the group. Team members

who are not genuinely open with one another about

their mistakes and weaknesses make it impossible to

build a foundation for trust.

2. This failure to build trust is damaging because it sets

the tone for the second dysfunction: fear of conflict.

Teams that lack trust are incapable of engaging in un-

filtered and passionate debate of ideas. Instead, they

resort to veiled discussions and guarded comments.

3. A lack of healthy conflict is a problem because it en-

sures the third dysfunction of a team: lack of com-

Inattention to

Results

Avoidance of Accountability

Lack of Commitment

Fear of Conflict

Absence of Trust

50Lencioni/Overview 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 188

189

An Overview of the Model

mitment. Without having aired their opinions in the

course of passionate and open debate, team members

rarely, if ever, buy in and commit to decisions, though

they may feign agreement during meetings.

4. Because of this lack of real commitment and buy-in,

team members develop an avoidance of account-

ability, the fourth dysfunction. Without committing

to a clear plan of action, even the most focused and

driven people often hesitate to call their peers on ac-

tions and behaviors that seem counterproductive to the

good of the team.

5. Failure to hold one another accountable creates an en-

vironment where the fifth dysfunction can thrive. Inat-

tention to results occurs when team members put

their individual needs (such as ego, career develop-

ment, or recognition) or even the needs of their divi-

sions above the collective goals of the team.

And so, like a chain with just one link broken, team-

work deteriorates if even a single dysfunction is allowed

to flourish.

Another way to understand this model is to take the

opposite approach—a positive one—and imagine how

members of truly cohesive teams behave:

1. They trust one another.

2. They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas.

50Lencioni/Overview 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 189

190

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

3. They commit to decisions and plans of action.

4. They hold one another accountable for delivering

against those plans.

5. They focus on the achievement of collective results.

If this sounds simple, it’s because it is simple, at least

in theory. In practice, however, it is extremely difficult be-

cause it requires levels of discipline and persistence that few

teams can muster.

Before diving into each of the dysfunctions and ex-

ploring ways to overcome them, it might be helpful to as-

sess your team and identify where the opportunities for

improvement lie in your organization.

50Lencioni/Overview 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 190

TEAM ASSESSMENT

The questionnaire on the following pages is a straightforwarddiagnostic tool for helping you evaluate your team’s sus-ceptibility to the five dysfunctions. At the end of the ques- tionnaire, on page 194, there is a simple explanation of how

to tabulate the results and interpret the possible conclu-

sions. If possible, have all members of your team complete

the diagnostic and review the results, discussing discrep-

ancies in the responses and identifying any clear implica-

tions for the team.

191

51Lencioni/Assessment 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 191

192

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Instructions: Use the scale below to indicate how each

statement applies to your team. It is important to evaluate

the statements honestly and without over-thinking your

answers.

3 = Usually

2 = Sometimes

1 = Rarely

____ 1. Team members are passionate and unguarded in

their discussion of issues.

____ 2. Team members call out one another’s deficien-

cies or unproductive behaviors.

____ 3. Team members know what their peers are work-

ing on and how they contribute to the collective

good of the team.

____ 4. Team members quickly and genuinely apologize

to one another when they say or do something

inappropriate or possibly damaging to the team.

____ 5. Team members willingly make sacrifices (such as

budget, turf, head count) in their departments or

areas of expertise for the good of the team.

____ 6. Team members openly admit their weaknesses

and mistakes.

____ 7. Team meetings are compelling, and not boring.

____ 8. Team members leave meetings confident that

their peers are completely committed to the de-

51Lencioni/Assessment 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 192

193

Team Assessment

cisions that were agreed on, even if there was ini-

tial disagreement.

____ 9. Morale is significantly affected by the failure to

achieve team goals.

____ 10. During team meetings, the most important—and

difficult—issues are put on the table to be re-

solved.

____ 11. Team members are deeply concerned about the

prospect of letting down their peers.

____ 12. Team members know about one another’s per-

sonal lives and are comfortable discussing them.

____ 13. Team members end discussions with clear and

specific resolutions and calls to action.

____ 14. Team members challenge one another about their

plans and approaches.

____ 15. Team members are slow to seek credit for their

own contributions, but quick to point out those

of others.

51Lencioni/Assessment 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 193

Sc or

in g

C o m

bi ne

y o ur

s co

re s

fo r

th e

pr ec

ed in

g st

at em

en ts

a s

in di

ca te

d be

lo w

.

D ys

fu nc

ti o n

1: D

ys fu

nc ti o n

2: D

ys fu

nc ti o n

3: D

ys fu

nc ti o n

4: D

ys fu

nc ti o n

5: A

bs en

ce

Fe ar

o f

La ck

o f

A vo

id an

ce o

f In

at te

nt io

n o f T

ru st

C o nfl

ic t

C o m

m it m

en t

A cc

o un

ta bi

lit y

to R

es ul

ts

St at

em en

t 4:

__ __

_ St

at em

en t

1: __

__ _

St at

em en

t 3:

__ __

_ St

at em

en t

2: __

__ _

St at

em en

t 5:

__ __

_

St at

em en

t 6:

__ __

_ St

at em

en t

7: __

__ _

St at

em en

t 8:

__ __

_ St

at em

en t

11 :_

__ _

St at

em en

t 9:

__ __

_

St at

em en

t 12

:_ __

_ St

at em

en t

10 :_

__ _

St at

em en

t 13

:_ __

_ St

at em

en t

14 :_

__ _

St at

em en

t 15

:_ __

_

To ta

l: __

__ _

To ta

l: __

__ _

To ta

l: __

__ _

To ta

l: __

__ _

To ta

l: __

__ _

A s

co re

o f 8

o r

9 is a

p ro

ba bl

e in

di ca

tio n

th at

t he

d ys

fu nc

tio n

is n

o t

a pr

o bl

em fo

r yo

ur t

ea m

. A

s co

re o

f 6

o r

7 in

di ca

te s

th at

t he

d ys

fu nc

tio n

co ul

d be

a p

ro bl

em .

A s

co re

o f 3

to 5

is p

ro ba

bl y

an in

di ca

tio n

th at

t he

d ys

fu nc

tio n

ne ed

s to

b e

ad dr

es se

d.

R eg

ar dl

es s

o f yo

ur s

co re

s, it

is im

po rt

an t

to k

ee p

in m

in d

th at

e ve

ry t

ea m

n ee

ds c

o ns

ta nt

w o rk

,b ec

au se

w ith

o ut

it ,e

ve n

th e

be st

o ne

s de

vi at

e to

w ar

d dy

sf un

ct io

n.

51Lencioni/Assessment 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 194

UNDERSTANDING AND OVERCOMING

THE FIVE DYSFUNCTIONS

DYSFUNCTION 1: ABSENCE OF TRUST

Trust lies at the heart of a functioning, cohesive team. With-

out it, teamwork is all but impossible.

Unfortunately, the word trust is used—and misused—

so often that it has lost some of its impact and begins to

sound like motherhood and apple pie. That is why it is im-

portant to be very specific about what is meant by trust.

In the context of building a team, trust is the confi-

dence among team members that their peers’ intentions are

good, and that there is no reason to be protective or care-

ful around the group. In essence, teammates must get com-

fortable being vulnerable with one another.

This description stands in contrast to a more standard

definition of trust, one that centers around the ability to

predict a person’s behavior based on past experience.

For instance, one might “trust” that a given teammate will

195

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 195

196

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

produce high-quality work because he has always done

so in the past.

As desirable as this may be, it is not enough to represent

the kind of trust that is characteristic of a great team. It re-

quires team members to make themselves vulnerable to one

another, and be confident that their respective vulnerabilities

will not be used against them. The vulnerabilities I’m refer-

ring to include weaknesses, skill deficiencies, interpersonal

shortcomings, mistakes, and requests for help.

As “soft” as all of this might sound, it is only when team

members are truly comfortable being exposed to one an-

other that they begin to act without concern for protecting

themselves. As a result, they can focus their energy and at-

tention completely on the job at hand, rather than on being

strategically disingenuous or political with one another.

Achieving vulnerability-based trust is difficult because in

the course of career advancement and education, most suc-

cessful people learn to be competitive with their peers,

and protective of their reputations. It is a challenge for them

to turn those instincts off for the good of a team, but that

is exactly what is required.

The costs of failing to do this are great. Teams that lack

trust waste inordinate amounts of time and energy manag-

ing their behaviors and interactions within the group. They

tend to dread team meetings, and are reluctant to take risks

in asking for or offering assistance to others. As a result,

morale on distrusting teams is usually quite low, and un-

wanted turnover is high.

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 196

197

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

Suggestions for Overcoming Dysfunction 1

How does a team go about building trust? Unfortunately,

vulnerability-based trust cannot be achieved overnight. It

requires shared experiences over time, multiple instances

of follow-through and credibility, and an in-depth under-

standing of the unique attributes of team members. How-

ever, by taking a focused approach, a team can dramatically

accelerate the process and achieve trust in relatively short

order. Here are a few tools that can bring this about.

Members of teams with an absence of trust . . . • Conceal their weaknesses and mistakes from one another • Hesitate to ask for help or provide constructive feedback • Hesitate to offer help outside their own areas of responsibility • Jump to conclusions about the intentions and aptitudes of others

without attempting to clarify them • Fail to recognize and tap into one another’s skills and experiences • Waste time and energy managing their behaviors for effect • Hold grudges • Dread meetings and find reasons to avoid spending time together

Members of trusting teams . . . • Admit weaknesses and mistakes • Ask for help • Accept questions and input about their areas of responsibility • Give one another the benefit of the doubt before arriving at a negative

conclusion • Take risks in offering feedback and assistance • Appreciate and tap into one another’s skills and experiences • Focus time and energy on important issues, not politics • Offer and accept apologies without hesitation • Look forward to meetings and other opportunities to work as a group

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 197

198

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Personal Histories Exercise In less than an hour, a team

can take the first steps toward developing trust. This low-

risk exercise requires nothing more than going around the

table during a meeting and having team members answer

a short list of questions about themselves. Questions need

not be overly sensitive in nature and might include the fol-

lowing: number of siblings, hometown, unique challenges

of childhood, favorite hobbies, first job, and worst job. Sim-

ply by describing these relatively innocuous attributes or

experiences, team members begin to relate to one another

on a more personal basis, and see one another as human

beings with life stories and interesting backgrounds. This

encourages greater empathy and understanding, and dis-

courages unfair and inaccurate behavioral attributions. It is

amazing how little some team members know about one

another, and how just a small amount of information be-

gins to break down barriers. (Minimum time required: 30

minutes.)

Team Effectiveness Exercise This exercise is more rigor-

ous and relevant than the previous one, but may involve

more risk. It requires team members to identify the single

most important contribution that each of their peers makes

to the team, as well as the one area that they must either

improve upon or eliminate for the good of the team. All

members then report their responses, focusing on one per-

son at a time, usually beginning with the team leader.

While this exercise may seem somewhat intrusive and

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 198

199

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

dangerous at first glance, it is remarkable how manageable

it can be and how much useful information, both construc-

tive and positive, can be extracted in about an hour. And

though the Team Effectiveness Exercise certainly requires

some degree of trust in order to be useful, even a relatively

dysfunctional team can often make it work with surprisingly

little tension. (Minimum time required: 60 minutes.)

Personality and Behavioral Preference Profiles Some of

the most effective and lasting tools for building trust on a

team are profiles of team members’ behavioral preferences

and personality styles. These help break down barriers by

allowing people to better understand and empathize with

one another.

The best profiling tool, in my opinion, is the Myers-

Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). However, a number of oth-

ers are popular among different audiences. The purpose

of most of these tools is to provide practical and scientifi-

cally valid behavioral descriptions of various team mem-

bers according to the diverse ways that they think, speak,

and act. Some of the best characteristics of tools like the

MBTI are their nonjudgmental nature (no type is better

than another, although they differ substantially), their basis

in research (they are not founded upon astrology or new

age science), and the extent to which participants take an

active role in identifying their own types (they don’t sim-

ply receive a computer printout or test score that alone dic-

tates their type). Many of these tools do require the

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 199

200

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

participation of a licensed consultant, which is important

to avoid the misuse of their powerful implications and ap-

plications. (Minimum time required: 4 hours.)

360-Degree Feedback These tools have become popular

over the past twenty years and can produce powerful re-

sults for a team. They are riskier than any of the tools or ex-

ercises described so far because they call for peers to make

specific judgments and provide one another with construc-

tive criticism. The key to making a 360-degree program

work, in my opinion, is divorcing it entirely from compen-

sation and formal performance evaluation. Rather, it should

be used as a developmental tool, one that allows employ-

ees to identify strengths and weaknesses without any re-

percussions. By being even slightly connected to formal

performance evaluation or compensation, 360-degree pro-

grams can take on dangerous political undertones.

Experiential Team Exercises Ropes courses and other ex-

periential team activities seem to have lost some of their

luster over the course of the past ten years, and deservedly

so. Still, many teams do them with the hope of building

trust. And while there are certainly some benefits derived

from rigorous and creative outdoor activities involving col-

lective support and cooperation, those benefits do not al-

ways translate directly to the working world. That being

said, experiential team exercises can be valuable tools for

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 200

201

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

enhancing teamwork as long as they are layered upon

more fundamental and relevant processes.

❖

While each of these tools and exercises can have a signif-

icant short-term impact on a team’s ability to build trust,

they must be accompanied by regular follow-up in the

course of daily work. Individual developmental areas must

be revisited to ensure that progress does not lose momen-

tum. Even on a strong team—and perhaps especially so—

atrophy can lead to the erosion of trust.

The Role of the Leader

The most important action that a leader must take to en-

courage the building of trust on a team is to demonstrate

vulnerability first. This requires that a leader risk losing

face in front of the team, so that subordinates will take the

same risk themselves. What is more, team leaders must cre-

ate an environment that does not punish vulnerability.

Even well-intentioned teams can subtly discourage trust by

chastising one another for admissions of weakness or fail-

ure. Finally, displays of vulnerability on the part of a team

leader must be genuine; they cannot be staged. One of the

best ways to lose the trust of a team is to feign vulnerabil-

ity in order to manipulate the emotions of others.

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 201

202

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Connection to Dysfunction 2

How does all of this relate to the next dysfunction, the fear

of conflict? By building trust, a team makes conflict possi-

ble because team members do not hesitate to engage in

passionate and sometimes emotional debate, knowing that

they will not be punished for saying something that might

otherwise be interpreted as destructive or critical.

DYSFUNCTION 2: FEAR OF CONFLICT

All great relationships, the ones that last over time, require

productive conflict in order to grow. This is true in mar-

riage, parenthood, friendship, and certainly business.

Unfortunately, conflict is considered taboo in many sit-

uations, especially at work. And the higher you go up the

management chain, the more you find people spending in-

ordinate amounts of time and energy trying to avoid the kind

of passionate debates that are essential to any great team.

It is important to distinguish productive ideological

conflict from destructive fighting and interpersonal politics.

Ideological conflict is limited to concepts and ideas, and

avoids personality-focused, mean-spirited attacks. How-

ever, it can have many of the same external qualities of in-

terpersonal conflict—passion, emotion, and frustration—so

much so that an outside observer might easily mistake it

for unproductive discord.

But teams that engage in productive conflict know that

the only purpose is to produce the best possible solution

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 202

203

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

in the shortest period of time. They discuss and resolve is-

sues 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.

Ironically, teams that avoid ideological conflict often

do so in order to avoid hurting team members’ feelings,

and then end up encouraging dangerous tension. When

team members do not openly debate and disagree about

important ideas, they often turn to back-channel personal

attacks, which are far nastier and more harmful than any

heated argument over issues.

It is also ironic that so many people avoid conflict in the

name of efficiency, because healthy conflict is actually a

time saver. Contrary to the notion that teams waste time and

energy arguing, those that avoid conflict actually doom

themselves to revisiting issues again and again without res-

olution. They often ask team members to take their issues

“off-line,” which seems to be a euphemism for avoiding

dealing with an important topic, only to have it raised again

at the next meeting.

Suggestions for Overcoming Dysfunction 2

How does a team go about developing the ability and will-

ingness to engage in healthy conflict? The first step is ac-

knowledging that conflict is productive, and that many

teams have a tendency to avoid it. As long as some team

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 203

204

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

members believe that conflict is unnecessary, there is lit-

tle chance that it will occur. But beyond mere recognition,

there are a few simple methods for making conflict more

common and productive.

Mining Members of teams that tend to avoid conflict must

occasionally assume the role of a “miner of conflict”—

someone who extracts buried disagreements within the

team and sheds the light of day on them. They must have

the courage and confidence to call out sensitive issues and

force team members to work through them. This requires

Teams that fear conflict . . . • Have boring meetings • Create environments where back-channel politics and personal attacks

thrive • Ignore controversial topics that are critical to team success • Fail to tap into all the opinions and perspectives of team members • Waste time and energy with posturing and interpersonal risk

management

Teams that engage in conflict . . . • Have lively, interesting meetings • Extract and exploit the ideas of all team members • Solve real problems quickly • Minimize politics • Put critical topics on the table for discussion

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 204

205

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

a degree of objectivity during meetings and a commitment

to staying with the conflict until it is resolved. Some teams

may want to assign a member of the team to take on this

responsibility during a given meeting or discussion.

Real-Time Permission In the process of mining for con-

flict, team members need to coach one another not to re-

treat from healthy debate. One simple but effective way to

do this is to recognize when the people engaged in con-

flict are becoming uncomfortable with the level of discord,

and then interrupt to remind them that what they are doing

is necessary. As simple and paternal as this may sound, it

is a remarkably effective tool for draining tension from a

productive but difficult interchange, giving the participants

the confidence to continue. And once the discussion or

meeting has ended, it is helpful to remind participants that

the conflict they just engaged in is good for the team and

not something to avoid in the future.

Other Tools As mentioned earlier in this section, there are

a variety of personality style and behavioral preference tools

that allow team members to better understand one another.

Because most of these include descriptions of how differ-

ent types deal with conflict, they can be useful for helping

people anticipate their approach or resistance to it. Another

tool that specifically relates to conflict is the Thomas-Kilmann

Conflict Mode Instrument, commonly referred to as the TKI.

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 205

206

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

It allows team members to understand natural inclinations

around conflict so they can make more strategic choices

about which approaches are most appropriate in different

situations.

The Role of the Leader

One of the most difficult challenges that a leader faces in

promoting healthy conflict is the desire to protect members

from harm. This leads to premature interruption of dis-

agreements, and prevents team members from developing

coping skills for dealing with conflict themselves. This is not

unlike parents who overprotect their children from quarrels

or altercations with siblings. In many cases, it serves only

to strain the relationships by depriving the participants of

an opportunity to develop conflict management skills. It

also leaves them hungry for resolution that never occurs.

Therefore, it is key that leaders demonstrate restraint

when their people engage in conflict, and allow resolution

to occur naturally, as messy as it can sometimes be. This

can be a challenge because many leaders feel that they are

somehow failing in their jobs by losing control of their

teams during conflict.

Finally, as trite as it may sound, a leader’s ability to per-

sonally model appropriate conflict behavior is essential. By

avoiding conflict when it is necessary and productive—

something many executives do—a team leader will encour-

age this dysfunction to thrive.

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 206

207

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

Connection to Dysfunction 3

How does all of this relate to the next dysfunction, the lack

of commitment? By engaging in productive conflict and

tapping into team members’ perspectives and opinions, a

team can confidently commit and buy in to a decision

knowing that they have benefited from everyone’s ideas.

DYSFUNCTION 3: 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.

The two greatest causes of the lack of commitment are

the desire for consensus and the need for certainty:

• Consensus. 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 know that

their opinions have been heard and considered. Great teams

ensure that everyone’s ideas are genuinely considered,

which then creates a willingness to rally around whatever

decision is ultimately made by the group. And when that

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 207

208

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

is not possible due to an impasse, the leader of the team

is allowed to make the call.

• Certainty. Great teams also pride themselves on

being able to unite behind decisions and commit to clear

courses of action even when there is little assurance about

whether the decision is correct. That’s because they under-

stand the old military axiom that a decision is better than no

decision. They also realize that it is better to make a deci-

sion boldly and be wrong—and then change direction with

equal boldness—than it is to waffle.

Contrast this with the behavior of dysfunctional teams

that try to hedge their bets and delay important decisions

until they have enough data to feel certain that they are

making the right decision. As prudent as this might seem,

it is dangerous because of the paralysis and lack of confi-

dence it breeds within a team.

It is important to remember that conflict underlies the

willingness to commit without perfect information. In many

cases, teams have all the information they need, but it re-

sides within the hearts and minds of the team itself and must

be extracted through unfiltered debate. Only when every-

one has put their opinions and perspectives on the table can

the team confidently commit to a decision knowing that it

has tapped into the collective wisdom of the entire group.

Regardless of whether it is caused by the need for con-

sensus or certainty, it is important to understand that one

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 208

209

Understanding and Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions

of the greatest consequences for an executive team that does

not commit to clear decisions is unresolvable discord deeper

in the organization. More than any of the dysfunctions, this

one creates dangerous ripple effects for subordinates. When

an executive team fails to achieve buy-in from all team mem-

bers, even if the disparities that exist seem relatively small,

employees who report to those executives will inevitably

clash when they try to interpret marching orders that are not

clearly aligned with those of colleagues in other depart-

ments. Like a vortex, small gaps between executives high

up in an organization become major discrepancies by the

time they reach employees below.

A team that fails to commit . . . • Creates ambiguity among the team about direction and priorities • Watches windows of opportunity close due to excessive analysis and

unnecessary delay • Breeds lack of confidence and fear of failure • Revisits discussions and decisions again and again • Encourages second-guessing among team members

A team that commits . . . • Creates clarity around direction and priorities • Aligns the entire team around common objectives • Develops an ability to learn from mistakes • Takes advantage of opportunities before competitors do • Moves forward without hesitation • Changes direction without hesitation or guilt

52Lencioni/Understanding 2/10/02 3:51 PM Page 209