The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable

by Patrick Lencioni

“If you could get all the people in an organization rowing in the same direction, you could dominate any industry, in any market, against any competition, at any time.”

Kathryn knew that Jack Welch didn't have to be an expert on toaster manufacturing to make General Electric a success and that Herb Kelleher didn't have to spend a lifetime flying airplanes to build Southwest Airlines.

“Right now I'd like to start with the first dysfunction: absence of trust.”

“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,” she said. “They are unafraid to air their dirty laundry. They admit their mistakes, their weaknesses, and their concerns without fear of reprisal.”

I'd have to say that more than anything I've been told by others, I see a trust problem here in the lack of debate that exists during staff meetings and other interactions among this team.

every effective team I've ever observed had a substantial level of debate. Even the most trusting teams mixed it up a lot.” Now she directed a question to the rest of the room. “Why do you suppose there is so little passionate discussion or debate among this group?”

“Kathryn, with all due respect, you haven't worked within the high-tech culture, and this is pretty common in software companies. I mean, maybe not in the automotive world, but . . .” Kathryn interrupted politely. “Actually, this is very common in the automotive world. I had the same issue there. It's more of a behavioral issue than a technological one.”

“Before we get into any heavy lifting, let's start with something that I call personal histories.” Kathryn explained that everyone would answer five nonintrusive personal questions having to do with their backgrounds, and she ended her instructions with a humorous caveat that even Martin seemed to appreciate. “Remember, I want to hear about your life as a child, but I'm not interested in your inner child.”

It was really quite amazing. After just forty-five minutes of extremely mild personal disclosure, the team seemed tighter and more at ease with each other than at any time during the past year. But Kathryn had been through this enough to know that the euphoria would diminish as soon as the conversation shifted to work.

“Remember, teamwork begins by building trust. And the only way to do that is to overcome our need for invulnerability.” She wrote the word invulnerability next to trust on the white board.

“We are going to the top of the chart now to talk about the ultimate dysfunction: the tendency of team members to seek out individual recognition and attention at the expense of results. And I’m referring to collective results—the goals of the entire team.”

Nick asked, “Is this about ego?” “Well, I suppose that’s part of it,” agreed Kathryn. “But I’m not saying that there’s no place for ego on a team. The key is to make the collective ego greater than the individual ones.”

Jan was still curious. “Do you think most people like that can change?” Kathryn didn’t hesitate. “No. For every kid like that one, there are ten who never made it.” The group seemed sobered by the definitive response, and more than one of them were thinking about Mikey at that moment. “And as harsh as that may sound, Ken always says that his job is to create the best team possible, not to shepherd the careers of individual athletes. And that’s how I look at my job.”

“Well, in most sports, there is a clear score at the end of the game that determines whether you succeeded or failed. There is little room for ambiguity, which means there is little room for . . .” He paused to find the right words. “. . . for subjective, interpretive, ego-driven success, if you know what I mean.”

Our job is to make the results that we need to achieve so clear to everyone in this room that no one would even consider doing something purely to enhance his or her individual status or ego. Because that would diminish our ability to achieve our collective goals. We would all lose.”

As soon as the reality of business problems is reintroduced to a situation like this one, she thought, people revert back to the behaviors that put them in the difficult situation in the first place.

when I talk about focusing on results instead of individual recognition, I’m talking about everyone adopting a set of common goals and measurements, and then actually using them to make collective decisions on a daily basis.”

“How often did you all talk about moving resources from one department to another in the middle of the quarter in order to make sure that you could achieve a goal that was in jeopardy?” The looks on their faces said Never. “And how disciplined were you during meetings about reviewing the goals in detail and drilling down on why they were or weren’t being met?”

“Okay, imagine a basketball coach in the locker room at half-time. He calls the team’s center into his office to talk with him one-on-one about the first half, and then he does the same with the point guard, the shooting guard, the small forward, and the power forward, without any of them knowing what everyone else was talking about. That’s not a team. It’s a collection of individuals.”

“All of you, every one of you, are responsible for sales. Not just JR. All of you are responsible for marketing. Not just Mikey. All of you are responsible for product development, customer service, and finance. Does that make sense?”

it does seem like we don’t really have the same goals in mind when we’re at staff meetings. It almost feels like we’re all lobbying for more resources for our departments, or trying to avoid getting involved in anything outside our own areas.”

“At the same time, I don’t want to downplay the very dangerous situation that we’re all in. We have big problems, and I’ve observed enough of this group to know that politics are alive and well here.” As graciously as she acknowledged the concerns of her people, Kathryn was certainly not backing down. “And frankly, I would rather overstate the problem than understate it. But only for the good of the team, not for my own satisfaction. I can assure you of that.”

“Maybe you should tell us exactly what you mean by politics.” Kathryn thought for just a moment and then answered as though she were reciting from a book she had memorized. “Politics is when people choose their words and actions based on how they want others to react rather than based on what they really think.”

absence of trust she wrote fear of conflict. “If we don’t trust one another, then we aren’t going to engage in open, constructive, ideological conflict. And we’ll just continue to preserve a sense of artificial harmony.”

I can say with a degree of confidence that you don’t argue very well. Your frustration sometimes surfaces in the form of subtle comments, but more often than not, it is bottled up and carried around.

“The next dysfunction of a team is the lack of commitment and the failure to buy in to decisions.” She wrote the dysfunction above the previous one. “And the evidence of this one is ambiguity,” which she wrote next to it.

“It’s as simple as this. When people don’t unload their opinions and feel like they’ve been listened to, they won’t really get on board.”

“No, he doesn’t. But he’d let them make a case why they think they shouldn’t. And if he disagreed with them, which in that situation I’m sure he would, he’d tell them why and then send them off running.”

“So this isn’t a consensus thing.” Jan’s statement was really a question. “Heavens no,” insisted Kathryn, sounding like a school teacher again. “Consensus is horrible. I mean, if everyone really agrees on something and consensus comes about quickly and naturally, well that’s terrific. But that isn’t how it usually works, and so consensus becomes an attempt to please everyone.” “Which usually turns into displeasing everyone equally.”

The point here is that most reasonable people don’t have to get their way in a discussion. They just need to be heard, and to know that their input was considered and responded to.”

“Well, some teams get paralyzed by their need for complete agreement, and their inability to move beyond debate.” JR spoke up. “Disagree and commit.” “Excuse me?” Kathryn wanted him to explain. “Yeah, in my last company we called it ‘disagree and commit.’ You can argue about something and disagree, but still commit to it as though everyone originally bought into the decision completely.”

“Okay, I see where conflict fits in. Even if people are generally willing to commit, they aren’t going to do so because . . .” Carlos interrupted. “ . . . because they need to weigh in before they can really buy in.”

She went to the board for the last time and wrote avoidance of accountability.

“Once we achieve clarity and buy-in, it is then that we have to hold each other accountable for what we sign up to do, for high standards of performance and behavior. And as simple as that sounds, most executives hate to do it, especially when it comes to a peer’s behavior, because they want to avoid interpersonal discomfort.”

“I’m talking about that moment when you know you have to call one of your peers on something that matters, and you decide to let it go because you just don’t want to experience that feeling when . . .” She paused, and Martin finished the sentence for her: “ . . . when you have to tell someone to shut down their e-mail during meetings.”

“No buy-in. People aren’t going to hold each other accountable if they haven’t clearly bought in to the same plan. Otherwise, it seems pointless because they’re just going to say, ‘I never agreed to that anyway.’”

“Someone tell me what the single most important arena or setting for conflict is.” After a pause, Nick took a stab. “Meetings?” “Yes. Meetings. If we cannot learn to engage in productive, ideological conflict during meetings, we are through.”

“Whether it is an action movie, a drama, a comedy, or an artsy French film, every movie worth watching must have one key ingredient. What is that ingredient?” Martin answered dryly. “Well, since we’re talking about conflict, I’m guessing that’s it.” “Yes, I suppose that I telegraphed that one, didn’t I? Every great movie has conflict. Without it, we just don’t care what happens to the characters.”

“Let me assure you that from now on, every staff meeting we have will be loaded with conflict. And they won’t be boring. And if there is nothing worth debating, then we won’t have a meeting.”

“Can’t we have more than one overarching goal?” Kathryn shook her head. “If everything is important, then nothing is.” She resisted any further explanation, wanting the group to work through it.

“During the next two weeks I am going to be pretty intolerant of behavior that demonstrates an absence of trust, or a focus on individual ego. I will be encouraging conflict, driving for clear commitments, and expecting all of you to hold each other accountable. I will be calling out bad behavior when I see it, and I’d like to see you doing the same. We don’t have time to waste.”

“Okay, first of all, don’t ever slam one of your teammates when that person isn’t in the room. I don’t care what you think of Mikey. She is part of this team, and you have to take your issues to her directly, or to me. You’re going to have to make that right.”

“Look, I’ve got nothing to do around here. We were supposed to be growing much faster by now and getting involved in a lot more M&A activity. I can’t just sit around and watch this place . . .” Kathryn interrupted. “So this is about you?” Nick didn’t seem to hear her question. “What?” “This acquisition. It’s about you wanting to have something to do?”

“I’m talking about the bigger picture, Nick. Are you making this team better, or are you contributing to the dysfunction?” “What do you think?” “I don’t think you’re making it better.” She paused. “You clearly have a lot to offer, whether or not you ever run this place.” Nick tried to explain. “I wasn’t trying to say that I want your job. I was just venting and . . .” Kathryn held up her hand. “Don’t worry about it. You’re allowed to vent from time to time. But I have to tell you that I don’t see you stepping up and helping people. If anything, you’re tearing them down.”

“Maybe what? Maybe you should quit?” Nick was hot now. “Is that what you want? If that’s what you want, then maybe I will.” Kathryn just sat there, letting the situation sink in for Nick. Then she said, “It’s not about what I want. It’s about you. You have to decide what is more important: helping the team win or advancing your career.”

“And there is no way that you could figure that out on your own. I don’t think anyone here is smart enough, and has the breadth and depth of knowledge, to know the right answer without hearing from everyone else and benefiting from their perspective.”

He went to the white board and mapped out his entire organization, explaining what everyone was working on and how it fit together. His peers were genuinely amazed, both by how much they didn’t know about everything going on in engineering and how it all fit together. After Martin had finished, Kathryn gave the group two hours to discuss the relative merits of expanding or reducing the resources allocated to engineering and how to use them in other areas. During that time, the team argued vehemently at times, changed their minds, retrenched on their original opinions, and then decided that the right answer was not so apparent after all. Perhaps most important of all, every member of the team, including Kathryn, at one time picked up the marker and went to the white board to explain a point. If anyone yawned, it was because they were exhausted, not bored.

Some people are hard to hold accountable because they are so helpful. Others because they get defensive. Others because they are intimidating. I don’t think it’s easy to hold anyone accountable, not even your own kids.”