The Five Dysfunctions of a Team - Dysfunction #4 "Avoidance of Accountability"

I recently finished reading "The Five Dysfunctions of a Team" by Patrick Lencioni. If you haven't read it, I recommend it for its simplicity and relatable scenarios.

Dysfunction #4 - "Avoidance of Accountability"

Connection to Dysfunction #3: The link between dysfunctions #3 and #4 is likely the most logical - when people don't buy into the strategy, they don't care to hold other team members accountable for underdelivering. Getting buy-in is key to setting goals and ensuring people are on track to achieve them.

More on the "Avoidance of Accountability":

For the purposes of our analysis, Lencioni defines accountability as the willingness of team members to call their peers on performance or behaviors that might hurt the team. The unwillingness to have these difficult discussions is the true source of dysfunction #4, and great teams avoid it by adopting a "Once more unto the Breach" mentality and braving the discomfort as a team.

Teams with solid friendships often suffer from dysfunction #4 because they fear jeopardizing a valuable relationship. Ironically, this behavior often leads to deterioration of the friendship, as resentment builds, due to negative impacts on performance.

As crazy and politically incorrect as it sounds, peer pressure is one of the most effective mechanisms for maintaining high standards. Lencioni reports that peer pressure is more effective than the bureaucracy of performance management because nothing motivates people more than the fear of letting down their respected teammates.

So what are the big takeaways?

• Not holding friends accountable breeds resentment and deteriorates the relationship
• Buy-in and commitment enable accountability
• Peer pressure trumps performance management in terms of efficiency and impact on morale

Here are some of Lencioni's suggestions for resolving Dysfunction #4:

1. Publication of Goals and Standards: A public clarification of the team's goals is a highly effective way to eliminate ambiguity and ensure alignment. This public declaration of expectations reinforces internal/external pressures to stick to the agreed-upon strategy.

1. Simple and Regular Progress Reviews: A little structure can go a long way to ensure healthy accountability within the team. When teams are allowed to share feedback on each other's performance through regular progress reviews/meetings, it helps to normalize the act of giving and receiving criticism.

Ahh, the age-old question, "how do you tell a team member or friend that they are dropping the ball?" I don't think there's a clear answer, but in my opinion, it all ties back to the first two dysfunctions, "absence of trust" and "fear of conflict." Giving feedback can become toxic and adversarial without the surety that people's intentions are pure and a willingness to engage in unfiltered ideological debates.

As part of our standard protocols, my team always partakes in monthly blameless retrospectives to unpack any dysfunctions within the team and make appropriate adjustments. This is part of our adaptation of the agile framework and gives us an opportunity for continuous improvement. Is it 100% effective? NO... but is it better than quietly resenting your teammates? YES!