I love to use Patrick Lencioni’s 5 Dysfunctions of a Team model with my clients. Why? It is simple and makes more sense than most models put together!
The second dysfunction focuses on conflict, or more accurately the absence of conflict. I’ve heard dozens of times “We don’t have conflict; we’re fine.” Yet, curiously, I’m often brought in because teams are misaligned, not collaborating, unable to provide constructive feedback, not getting along or just “stuck.”
Those who say they don’t have conflict are speaking about overt, obvious, often emotional clashes, but the absence of visible conflict does not mean it doesn’t exist.
As a coach, my role is to listen, ask questions and help the individual see another’s perspectives, identify personal blind spots and generally develop as a leader. Often, in those confidential coaching conversations, I am told about frustrations with colleagues—their inadequacies, why they’re difficult to work with, how they contribute to team unease, and a myriad of other foibles…
When I ask whether they’ve shared these feelings with the person in question, the answer is usually, “No, I’m not telling them that.” And that’s where the simmering, dysfunctional conflict lies. It starts at the 1st step of the 5 Dysfunctions of a Team model: trust, or more accurately the absence of trust. Without trusting, authentic, vulnerable relationships within a team, conflict is way too unsafe to tackle.
In many organisations I’ve worked with, similar patterns emerge. Teams or departments become siloed, each firmly believing it’s “the other group’s fault.” This blame culture leads to personal attacks, formal and informal complaints, rumour-mongering, hurtful gossip, and, of course, appallingly low productivity.
Looking objectively at the departments and more specifically the people involved, it starts from a lack of self-awareness and a penchant for blame. The combination of these two factors has resulted in deep-seated dysfunctional relationships.
When working with the individuals, my focus is on them, not their version of the story where the other is always the villain, rather, what is their role, how did they get here, how have they consciously or unconsciously fuelled the fire, how have they excused or denied their own behaviour and most importantly, how are they going to resolve the issue.
Quite simply, if the individuals in this conflict spent even 10% of the time they allocate to blaming the other people, on personal reflection regarding their role in the conflict, I believe it would be swiftly resolved.
My learnings:
- Conflict always involves more than one more person, if you are in it, you have played a role in getting there and you have a role in resolving it
- Blame is corrosive and entirely unhelpful, perpetuating a story without fact checking is lazy and unprofessional
- Minor conflict left to simmer can very rapidly turn into conflict, which is boiling over, it must be addressed as early as possible
- It takes courage to respectfully call out when something does not feel right; someone must take the first step, don’t assume it is the job of another
Lencioni’s model encourages active, robust, and challenging debates where conflicting ideas, opinions, and decisions are tabled. To move from destructive, relationship-related conflict to constructive, task-related conflict, teams need to take deliberate steps.
My final learning – address relationship-related conflict immediately to ensure space is left for constructive, task-related conflict. After all, among many other factors, we’re ultimately remunerated for delivering outcomes. If you cannot get over a personal conflict to have a healthy, task-related debate, it’s worth questioning whether you’re the right person for the role.
