Book Critique for The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni

Critique written by Curt Bradshaw

Educational Administration 789, Section 01

Internship: Superintendency II

Dr. Mike Stabile

Xavier University

Spring 2014


















Curt Bradshaw Internship: Superintendency II
EDAD 789, Section 01 Dr. Mike Stabile, Professor
Spring 2014 Xavier University

Book Critique for The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni

In 2-5 pages, provide a brief synopsis and devote the bulk of the critique to a discussion of the
ramifications of the book to the superintendency and/or educational administration.

For this book critique, I intend to discuss Patrick Lencionis five dysfunctions of a team
through a critical analysis of a team I am currently involved with in my district. Through making
connections between the content of Lencionis book and my practices within my district, I
intend to also discuss how the material in his book could impact the superintendency and
educational administration.

Lencionis book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team is written in the form a fable that
follows the story of Kathryn Petersen, the new CEO of DecisionTech, and her leadership quest
to unite a team that is far from fully functional, hence the title. Lencioni identifies five key
dysfunctions that can challenge any teamfrom the athletic field, to the executive board room
of a Fortune 500 company, to the administrative staff of a public school district. The practical
application and real-world relatability of this text makes this an interesting read. Throughout
the text, the author shows that team dynamics and functionality depend on a strong
foundation of relationship building.

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team


Inattention to Results
Avoidance of
Accountability
Lack of Commitment
Fear of Conflict
Absence of Trust
Description of Team

In the book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Lencioni states that a team is made up of 3
to 12 members. For this critique, I have chosen to focus on my English Language Arts
Intervention/Enrichment 4
th
Grade Teacher-Based-Team (TBT) at Clinton-Massie Elementary
School. This team is an extension of our Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) Building
Improvement Plan. Through this critique, I will discuss each of Lencionis five dysfunctions and
evaluate our teams functions. This team, composed of three teachers, meets weekly on
Monday mornings before school for a variety of purposes. These purposes include to:
o plan intervention and enrichment learning targets, activities, lessons, and units;
o prepare pre-assessment and post-assessment tools to be used prior to and following
instruction, respectfully;
o analyze data based on pre-assessment and post-assessment tools and plan flexible
ability groupings and instruction accordingly;
o make instructional and placement decisions regarding student groupings that
promote the growth and development of differentiated learning in each of the
classrooms; and
o prepare data reports for building and district-level administrators on a bi-weekly
basis and analyze MAP (Measures of Academic Progress) Assessment data to drive
core instruction, intervention, and enrichment.

The team consists of Amy Kreider (4
th
Grade Language Arts teacher), Laura DArcy (4
th
Grade Special Education Intervention Specialist), and myself (Gifted Intervention Specialist).
This team is responsible for providing reading intervention and enrichment for all fourth grade
students during a 30-minute Intervention/Enrichment period each day. To best match our skill
sets, experiences, and expertise, Miss DArcy, being an Intervention Specialist for students with
IEPs, works with our struggling readers. Mrs. Kreider, the full-time Language Arts teacher on
the team, teaches the bubble students who are often just below, at, or near proficient with
targeted reading skills. I, with my experience in gifted education and enrichment, teach the
higher-achieving and gifted students in a Reading Enrichment setting in the Gifted Resource
Room.

Dysfunction #1 Absence of Trust
Positive Approach: Team members trust one another.

In response to the first dysfunction of a team, I am confident in reporting that there is
not an absence of trust within our team. All team members do trust one another, at least from
my perspective. We have all, at some point this year, admitted weaknesses of our own and
sought one anothers ideas for help. We are keenly aware of our strengths, and, as mentioned
above, we have committed to working with specific students for these reasons. I, for example,
completely trust Miss DArcy working with the struggling students on specific learning targets.
She has the skills and expertise to help these students, and she is better suited to work with
these students.

While we are always feeling like there are never enough hours in a day to get our work
completed, we do enjoy coming together on Monday mornings to prepare for the next weeks
work. Another example of our trust of one another is our continuous communication via email.
We are communicating with one another daily via email, asking questions and preparing
interventions and enrichment activities for future rotations. If we did not genuinely trust one
another, we would not seek out communication beyond the required weekly meetings.
Because Miss DArcy and I do not have all of the fourth grade students in class daily, we often
email Mrs. Kreider to seek clarification on how something was taught in class or to ask about
behaviors of a specific student.

As Lencioni suggests in The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, trust requires team members
to make themselves vulnerable to one another, and be confident that their respective
vulnerabilities will not be used against them (Lencioni, page 196). These vulnerabilities include
weaknesses, skill deficiencies, interpersonal shortcomings, mistakes, and requests for help
(Lencioni, page 196). All of the members of our team are comfortable working with another,
and, from my perspective, we place trust in one anothers ability to be equally participating
members of our team.

Dysfunction #2 Fear of Conflict
Positive Approach: Team members engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas.

It would seem that our team usually does not fear conflict. With that said, however,
there have been situations during our weekly meetings when team members have restrained
from making comments to prevent from hurting someones feelings. I find that I am sometimes
guarded in my communication with the other two members on the team, because I dont want
to insult ideas or proclaim that my suggestions are more worthy than someone elses ideas.

It is sometimes very challenging to engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas, while
still working hard to build healthy relationships among team members. As Lencioni explains in
his book, engaging in conflict can be healthy and should be used to help produce the best
outcomes possible. According to Lencioni, 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, pages 202-203). I believe we could
possibly focus on this dysfunction for improved function within our team, though this is
certainly sometimes difficult to do in a group where people fear conflicting with others, which
seems somewhat normal to me.

It is interesting that incorporating healthy conflict into discussions can make meetings
run more efficiently. One team member in particular, Mrs. Kreider, does not often engage in
conflict with Miss DArcy or me, for fear of stepping on toes or hurting feelings. In learning that
all team members can improve in this area, we are now better suited to have meaningful and
sometimes heated discussions. Now that we have gotten to know one another this year, we
will be able to hopefully improve in this area next year, as we work together on the fourth
grade Reading Intervention/Enrichment Teacher-Based-Team. After we get to know someone
and begin to feel more comfortable around them is when we begin to more naturally engage in
controversial and conflict-driven discussions, which, as Lencioni illustrates in his book, can and
should be a part of healthy systematic processes in any team. This supports the idea that
healthy relationship building is integral to the success of any team.

Dysfunction #3 Lack of Commitment
Positive Approach: Team members commit to decisions and plans of actions.

All members of our team commit to decisions and plans of actions. We are all three
equally committed to decisions that are made during meetings. I do not believe there is a lack
of commitment from any team member. Our team is responsible for teaching and reteaching
specific reading skills and learning targets, which are ultimately tested on our end-of-the-year
Ohio Achievement Assessment (OAA) high-stakes test. While Mrs. Kreider is technically the
fourth grade Language Arts teacher and while her name is on the score report that our school
receives this summer for 4
th
Grade Reading, I truly believe that both Miss DArcy and I are fully
committed to the decisions we make to best meet the specific needs of our students. While
Mrs. Kreider is the fourth grade teacher, Miss DArcy and I both have specific students that
we are responsible for, and we both work hard to help our students make academic, social, and
developmental gains throughout the school year and from year to year. It is for this reason that
we flexibly group the students and change rotations bi-weekly based on pre-assessment and
post-assessment data.

According to Lencioni, great teams make clear and timely decisions and move forward
with complete buy-in from every member of the team (Lencioni, page 207). I credit Miss
DArcy for ensuring our decisions are made in a timely manner, as she is very skilled at
accomplishing many tasks at once. Mrs. Kreider and I are usually able to generate ideas, and
Miss DArcy is able to clearly polish our ideas to help our team commit to specific, clearly
explained plans of action. Our team is aligned around common goals, and we often move
forward with plans without hesitation. When a team member is not fully satisfied with a plan, I
believe we have trained ourselves to trust one anothers ideas and change directions without
feelings of hesitation.

Dysfunction #4 Avoidance of Accountability
Positive Approach: Team members hold one another accountable for delivering against plans.

As a team, we hold one another accountable for delivering against plans. We have set
high standards for ourselves, and we make sure that each member is carrying out his/her
duties. At the end of each of our weekly meetings, we set goals and make assignments for each
member of the team. It is expected that when we meet next we will have completed our
assigned task, whether that be design questions for pre- or post-assessments, analyze data,
group students based on data, or reflect on our own teaching practices.

I am always concerned about the possibility of letting down another teammate. For this
reason, I am constantly evaluating my role on the team and making sure that I am following
through with agreed upon plans. Lencioni explains that avoidance of accountability refers to
the willingness of team members to call their peers on performance or behaviors that might
hurt the team (Lencioni, page 212). We are open in our dialogue and feel free to call out
one another on our plans and approaches to teaching specific reading skills. I, for example,
have comfortably challenged another team member to ask her why she did not complete a
specific task (creating a pre-assessment) that was part of the agreed upon plan from the
previous weeks meeting. The other team member explained that she did not create the pre-
assessment because she did not understand what types of questions we specifically wanted to
use to assess students with that skill. We then were able to work as a team to flush out ideas
and make decisions that were clear to all so that the pre-assessment would not only be most
appropriate for the specific reading skill (sequencing), but also would most accurately assess
students prior knowledge of sequencing. As with any team, there is always room for
improvement and after learning about Dysfunction #2, I would like to see our team continue to
hold one another accountable and more freely call out others unproductive behaviors this
spring as we begin planning for next fall.

Dysfunction #5 Inattention to Results
Positive Approach: Team members focus on the achievement of collective results.

As explained previously, our Reading Teacher-Based Team focuses immensely and
exclusively on the achievement of collective results. I wholeheartedly believe that each
member of our team is committed to reaching our ultimate goalmeeting the specific needs of
our varied students to challenge them to learn new reading skills and refine previously learned
concepts.

Because all of the members of our team have a background in Language Arts instruction
and a vested interest in the success and growth of our students, we are certainly attentive to
results. We analyze pre-assessment and post-assessment data each week to constantly revise
and improve our instruction. I am confident that each member of our team cares deeply about
the collective goals of the group. If there were teachers with more of a math or science
background on our team, I would fear that they may not share our same focus on reading
improvement, but, as would be expected, our math and science teachers make up the Math
Intervention and Enrichment Teacher-Based-Team (TBT).

An unrelenting focus on specific objectives and clearly defined outcomes, Lencioni
writes, is a requirement for any team that judges itself on performance (Lencioni, page 216).
We focus on the growth of the team, not specific members. When our administrator awards
credit to specific members, we remind our administrator that one member cannot receive all of
the credit; we work as a team and earn credit as a team. We receive feedback periodically
from our administrator, and negative feedback deeply impacts the morale of our team. Once
given recommendations, like including more reflective dialogue in our meeting minutes, we
respond quickly to such feedback and strive to improve our teams productivity and overall
effectiveness, all while remaining focused on the achievement of our teams results.

Implications for Educational Leadership

In thinking about creating a WE school culture and cultivating a change-ready
environment, I believe, if I were in the position of Superintendent of a school district, I would
use this text for the focus of a book study. I would read this book with my administrative team
(building principals, curriculum directors, student services supervisors, etc.) and work through
the analysis of our functionality (or dysfunctionality) as a team. In the position of
Superintendent, it is essential that you know the strengths and weaknesses of individual
members of your team but also that you have the knowledge and ability to unite individuals to
form a team working towards shared, common goals. From there, I can envision building
administrators using the content and lessons from this fable to facilitate team building within
each grade level or department team in a principals building. Developing a common vision
among team members (faculty, staff, and administration) within and across a district will help
to unite all stakeholders towards those identified key shared goals.

One feature of this text that I particularly appreciate is the discussion of suggestions for
overcoming each of the dysfunctions that Lencioni suggests near the end of the text. For
overcoming issues with trust building, for example, Lencioni recommends involving team
members in a Personal Histories Exercise and Personality and Behavioral Preferences Profiles.
One such tool is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). I use the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
profiling tool with my high school juniors every spring as they learn more about their behaviors
and the implications that these behaviors can have on themselves and team members
according to the ways that they think, speak, and act. I can easily envision using this or a similar
tool with my administrative team.

Another suggestion for encouraging team members to engage in conflict, Lencioni
suggests assigning one member of the team the role of miner of conflict. This persons
responsibility is to extract buried disagreements with the team, shed light on them, and call
out sensitive issues and force team members to work through them (Lencioni, page 204).
Sometimes described as addressing the elephant in the room, this is a simple tool that could
and should be implemented within a team of school administrators. Of course, before this can
happen, a shared sense of trust must be established and nurtured.

To ensure the development of commitment among team members, Lencioni
recommends establishing and holding all team members accountable for deadlines. Of
particular importance in this discussion of the text was a note explaining that committing to
short-term deadlines and goals along the way towards a final commitment is just as important
as the final deadline itself. When everyone is held accountable for check-points along the
way towards a final deadline, this allows for discussion and realignment in the event that there
is disagreement or lack of cohesiveness within the group. As a Superintendent or building
principal, it seems vitally important to hold all stakeholders, including myself, to meeting short-
term and long-term deadlines.

When thinking about overcoming obstacles with avoidance of accountability, Lencioni
suggests posting and publicizing goals and standards. We already do this on several teams that
I am involved in within our district, and I believe this is something very important for any
individual in a leadership position to remember. In our Teacher-Based-Teams (TBTs), Building
Leadership Teams (BLTs), and District Leadership Team (DLT), we develop norms for each group
that we then post and review at the beginning of each meeting. In order to fully maximize each
members contributions to the team, it is important that all stakeholders be held accountable
and that all members of the team (including the Superintendent or building leader) feel
comfortable and confident holding one another accountable.

In the context of educational leadership, I believe it is important to remember what
Patrick Lencioni says about teams and team dynamics. Teams succeed, he writes, because
they are exceedingly human. By acknowledging the imperfections of their humanity, members
of functional teams overcome the natural tendencies that make trust, conflict, commitment,
accountability, and a focus on results so elusive (Lencioni, page 220). This, in my mind, further
reiterates the foundational principles of relationship building and conversational intelligence.
Through our interactions as teachers, principals, central office administrators, and the
Superintendent, we will work towards understanding one another and building group dynamics
that will allow us to become fully functioning, highly successful teams.



Based on my reflections of our English Language Arts Teacher-Based Team and using
Lencionis team assessment diagnostic tool on pages 192 and 193, I would rank our
teams functions as described below, with five stars representing the highest ranking.
As discussed in this critique, this reflection has led us to the conclusion that we need to
work on further developing our team dynamics in the areas of Engagement in Conflict
and Acceptance of Accountability as we continue working this spring and begin planning
for next school year over the summer months.


Function #1 Trust



Function #2 Engagement in Conflict



Function #3 Commitment



Function #4 Acceptance of Accountability



Function #5 Attention to Results


Bibliography

Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.