Book Notes #42: The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni

Title: The Five Dysfunctions of a Team
Author: Patrick Lencioni
Year: 2002
Pages: 229

When teams break down, it’s rarely because of poor skills or bad intentions. It’s almost always something deeper, messier, and harder to talk about.

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni gets right to the heart of that. Told through a relatable leadership fable, it walks you through the hidden traps that keep teams stuck—and shows what it really takes to build a group that works together, argues well, and delivers results.

It’s not a manual—it’s a mirror.

And if you’ve ever felt frustrated working with people who just can’t seem to get aligned, this book will hit close to home in the best possible way.

As a result, I gave this book a rating of 9.0/10.

For me, a book with a note 10 is one I consider reading again every year. Among the books I rank with 10, for example, are How to Win Friends and Influence People and Factfulness.

3 Reasons to Read The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Book Overview

What if the real reason your team isn’t performing isn’t about strategy, tools, or headcount—but something much simpler, and far more human?

That’s the bold premise behind The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni.

On the surface, it’s the story of a struggling startup and a new CEO trying to turn things around. But beneath that is something far more universal: a framework that reveals why even the most talented teams fall apart—and what it really takes to make them thrive.

The story centers around Kathryn Petersen, an unlikely tech leader brought in to rescue DecisionTech. Her secret weapon isn’t technical knowledge or industry clout.

It’s her ability to build real teams. And what she uncovers is a familiar mess—smart individuals who aren’t acting like a team.

The deeper she looks, the clearer it becomes: the issues are systemic. And they fall into five layers, each feeding the next.

Let’s walk through each dysfunction, not as theory, but as it shows up in the day-to-day—and how to deal with it when it does.

1. Absence of trust

This is the foundation, and without it, everything else crumbles. But this isn’t the usual definition of trust. It’s not “I trust you to meet your deadline.” It’s “I trust you enough to admit I messed up, or that I’m feeling overwhelmed.”

In dysfunctional teams, people put on armor. They don’t ask for help. They don’t admit when they’re stuck. They spend more time managing their image than solving problems. And what makes this so dangerous is that it’s invisible. On the surface, things seem polite, professional. Underneath, there’s fear.

You can spot this when no one admits mistakes, when people hesitate to speak openly, or when meetings feel a bit too “nice.” There’s no conflict because no one’s being fully honest.

To rebuild trust, Kathryn starts small—with something as simple as sharing personal stories. Childhood, early jobs, formative experiences. It breaks the ice. It reminds everyone they’re working with real people, not just job titles. From there, deeper vulnerability can start to grow—but only if it’s modeled by the leader.

2. Fear of conflict

Without trust, people don’t feel safe speaking up. And without healthy conflict, teams don’t solve real problems. They either avoid issues entirely or talk about them in side conversations, never in the room where decisions are made.

In the book, you see this clearly in DecisionTech. Meetings are stiff. People nod along but disagree in silence. Issues fester. And when someone does challenge an idea, it’s seen as disruptive.

What makes this so tricky is that most teams think avoiding conflict is a good thing. They equate conflict with drama. But Lencioni flips that idea on its head. He says the real damage is done when teams choose artificial harmony over honest disagreement.

You’ll know conflict is missing when no one ever disagrees in meetings—or when the real debates happen in hallways, not conference rooms.

To fix it, the team needs to practice disagreeing—and learn that it’s not personal. One of the most powerful shifts comes when someone challenges an idea and the team still leaves the room aligned, not bruised. It takes time, but once people experience productive conflict, they stop fearing it.

3. Lack of commitment

If no one has spoken their mind, don’t expect them to commit to the final decision.

This dysfunction is sneaky. Teams leave meetings thinking they’ve agreed—until things start falling apart. Deadlines slip. Priorities get ignored. People drag their feet. Not because they’re lazy—but because deep down, they never really bought in.

Lencioni explains that commitment isn’t about consensus. You don’t need everyone to agree, but you do need everyone to buy in. That only happens when people feel heard—even if the decision goes the other way.

The fix here is clarity. Every meeting should end with: What did we decide? Who’s doing what? By when? Kathryn makes this a routine. When there’s ambiguity, she stops and says, “Let’s make sure we’re all clear.” And slowly, the fog lifts.

4. Avoidance of accountability

Without commitment, accountability disappears. And this is where good teams quietly start to fail.

No one wants to be “that person”—the one who calls out a colleague. So instead, people stay silent. Standards slip. And resentment builds.

You know this is happening when deadlines keep moving with no pushback, when underperformance becomes normal, or when one person’s behavior drags the whole team down and no one says a word.

The breakthrough comes when peers—not just leaders—hold each other accountable. It’s awkward at first. But once people see that calling someone out doesn’t destroy trust—it actually builds it—they start doing it more. Not to police each other, but to protect the team.

5. Inattention to results

This is the final breakdown—and often the hardest to spot.

It happens when people start prioritizing their own department, goals, or ego over the collective success of the team. They might be hitting their numbers, but the company isn’t growing. Or they’re avoiding failure instead of chasing bold results.

In DecisionTech, this shows up in subtle ways—team members who defend their turf, dodge responsibility, or subtly undermine decisions to make themselves look good. Lencioni says teams lose sight of results when status and personal success come first.

To fix this, Kathryn does something simple but powerful: she creates a shared scoreboard. Everyone agrees on what winning looks like—not just for their function, but for the team. Revenue. Customer success. Product quality. And they review it together, often. That shared focus becomes a rallying point.

Bringing it all together

None of these dysfunctions live in isolation. They stack. If you’re missing trust, you’ll fear conflict. Without conflict, you won’t commit. Without commitment, there’s no accountability. And without accountability, results suffer.

But when you rebuild from the ground up—starting with trust—everything changes.

That’s what makes The Five Dysfunctions of a Team so effective. It’s not a magic formula. It’s a mirror. It shows us the very human ways we get in our own way—and what it takes to turn a group of talented individuals into a real team.

By the end of the story, DecisionTech isn’t perfect. But it’s real. The team argues, holds each other accountable, and chases results together. And that, more than any plan or playbook, becomes their advantage.

If you’ve ever felt like your team has the potential to do more—but just can’t seem to get there—this book won’t just explain why. It’ll show you what to do about it.

And that journey starts with the courage to say, “Maybe it’s not about doing more. Maybe it’s about doing it together.”

Chapter by Chapter

The Power and Pain of Teamwork

Teamwork isn’t just important—it’s everything. That’s how Patrick Lencioni opens The Five Dysfunctions of a Team. He doesn’t start with finance, strategy, or technology. He cuts straight to the point: real, effective teamwork is the most powerful competitive advantage a company can have. And yet, it’s incredibly rare.

The book begins with a quote from a friend of the author: “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.” Every time Lencioni shares this quote with executives, he says they nod in agreement—yet with a kind of defeated look. Deep down, they know how true it is… and how nearly impossible it feels to make happen.

That’s the paradox. Teamwork is simple—but hard. It’s not about complicated theories or fancy strategies. It’s about mastering basic, human behaviors—things like trust, commitment, and accountability. Easy in theory. Brutally hard in practice.

Lencioni believes the root of the problem is us—human beings. We’re naturally imperfect. That means when you bring people together in a team, dysfunction is almost inevitable. But dysfunction doesn’t have to be permanent. It can be understood. It can be addressed. And most importantly, it can be overcome.

Interestingly, this whole framework wasn’t originally designed for teams. Lencioni explains that the model came out of his earlier work on The Five Temptations of a CEO, a book about the common traps that individual leaders fall into. But his clients began using those ideas not just for personal leadership, but to improve how their entire leadership teams worked together. And it worked. That’s when he realized the same principles could apply to groups—executive teams, church groups, schools, sports coaches—anywhere teamwork is required.

To make the message stick, Lencioni uses a fable. A fictional story based on real scenarios he’s witnessed over the years. He believes.

Underachievement

The rise and fall of DecisionTech

The story begins in Half Moon Bay, a foggy town just outside Silicon Valley. That’s where DecisionTech, once one of the hottest start-ups in the area, had set up shop. They had everything going for them—big investors, seasoned executives, and an unbeatable business plan. It was the kind of company people lined up to join before they even had an office.

But within two years, everything started to fall apart. Deadlines were missed. Key employees quietly left. Morale dropped. And despite all their advantages, they just weren’t getting things done. Eventually, the board had seen enough. The CEO and co-founder, Jeff Shanley, was asked to step down and take a different role in business development. He accepted, hoping to stick around for the eventual payday. But the real story starts when his replacement is announced: Kathryn Petersen.

Enter Kathryn—and skepticism

Kathryn was the opposite of what anyone expected. She was 57 years old, had no tech background, and came from the world of manufacturing. Her résumé didn’t scream Silicon Valley, and that alone raised eyebrows among the staff. She had started her career in the military, raised three boys, and worked her way up in the auto industry. While some admired her track record, most saw her as completely out of place in a company full of young, tech-savvy execs.

To make it more awkward, Kathryn didn’t storm in with big changes. In her first few weeks, she mostly walked the halls, observed meetings, and listened. She didn’t even lead the executive meetings—she let Jeff continue doing it while she quietly took notes. Her only major move? Scheduling a series of off-site retreats. That decision alone sparked grumbling among the team. Why waste time on retreats when the company was in trouble?

Why Kathryn said yes

Kathryn hadn’t been looking for a new job. She was retired, and comfortable. But when the Chairman—an old friend whose son had once been coached by her husband—called with the offer, she felt pulled back in. What he saw in her wasn’t just her track record in operations. It was her reputation for building strong, cohesive teams. That’s what DecisionTech desperately needed.

Even Kathryn was surprised by the offer. But it was clear to her that the real reason she was brought in wasn’t her industry experience—it was her ability to unite people. She knew it wouldn’t be easy, especially given how deeply divided the company seemed. Still, she believed the dysfunction was fixable.

Her first impressions of the team

Kathryn quickly noticed the executives weren’t a team at all. People called them “The Staff,” and that said a lot. Meetings were stiff, decisions were slow, and there was a strange mix of passive tension and apathy. Yet, when looked at individually, the team was made up of smart, accomplished people. That contrast—between individual talent and collective failure—was the heart of the problem.

Getting to know the players

Each executive brought their own strengths and flaws. Jeff, the former CEO, was well-liked and good at raising money but lacked true management skills. Mikey, the marketing star, had talent but alienated people with constant complaints and superiority. Martin, the tech genius, was disengaged in meetings and often sarcastic. JR, head of sales, was friendly but unreliable. Carlos, in customer support, was quiet, competent, and well-respected, though his role wasn’t clearly defined. Jan, the CFO, was sharp and responsible with money. And Nick, the COO, was impressive on paper but frustrated by his vague role and secretly believed he should be running the company.

What Kathryn saw ahead

Kathryn knew she was stepping into a mess. But she wasn’t intimidated. Her mix of real-world leadership experience and calm confidence gave her an edge. She wasn’t interested in being the most tech-savvy leader in the room. She wanted to build a team that could actually function. And although she had no idea just how dysfunctional things really were, she was ready to face it head-on.

Lighting the Fire

The first test of leadership

Kathryn’s leadership gets its first real test before the team even makes it to the off-site retreat. An email from Martin, the head of engineering, casually announces that he and JR are skipping the retreat to meet with a potential customer. It’s the kind of subtle rebellion that says a lot—sent to the whole team, no mention of the schedule conflict, no request for approval. Just a quiet act of defiance.

But Kathryn doesn’t flinch. Instead of replying by email, she walks straight into Martin’s office. Calmly and firmly, she tells him the meeting will have to wait. The retreat is the priority. When Martin tries to argue, saying sales should come first, Kathryn reminds him that without a cohesive team, there won’t be any sales. Then she subtly drops a power move—she knows the CEO of the company he wants to meet and can help reschedule. End of discussion.

This moment sets the tone. Kathryn isn’t here to micromanage. She’s here to rebuild the team. And that starts with making the off-site a non-negotiable.

Pushback from inside and above

The pushback doesn’t stop with Martin. Jeff, the former CEO, takes Kathryn out to lunch and gently sides with Martin. Shouldn’t the customer meeting take priority? Kathryn stands her ground. She tells Jeff what’s really broken is not sales—it’s the leadership team itself. Without fixing that, everything else is noise.

Later, even the Chairman calls her. Kathryn expects support but gets advice instead—maybe she should slow down, build some bridges. Kathryn’s response is firm but respectful. If they wanted easy, they wouldn’t have hired her. Fixing a dysfunctional team, she says, is like setting a broken bone—it hurts more when you have to rebreak it, but it’s the only way to heal.

The off-site begins

They gather in Napa, a setting meant to feel a bit removed from the office but not too luxurious. Everyone shows up on time—except Martin, who walks in at the last minute, causing a small wave of tension. But Kathryn stays focused. This is the moment she’s been waiting for.

She starts with a clear message: the team is dysfunctional. Despite all their talent, resources, and funding, they are underperforming. The reason? They’re not acting like a team. Kathryn says things are going to change. And not everyone might stick around to see it through.

To frame the work ahead, she draws a triangle with five layers—the model they’ll use over the next two days. At the base: absence of trust. That’s where they’ll begin.

Starting with trust

Trust, Kathryn says, is about vulnerability. Teams that trust each other don’t hold back. They admit mistakes, weaknesses, and fears without worrying about judgment. It’s not soft. It’s essential.

The team is skeptical. Jan asks whether Kathryn even knows them well enough to make that call. Nick pushes back, saying lack of debate doesn’t necessarily mean lack of trust. But Kathryn points out the obvious—this team avoids hard conversations. Meetings are too polite, too structured. If they trusted each other, they’d be arguing more, not less.

Then Martin breaks the moment—by opening his laptop and typing. It’s the perfect example of disengagement. Kathryn addresses it calmly but directly. She sets two ground rules: be present and participate. Laptops closed. Everyone engaged.

Getting personal

To build trust, Kathryn starts with a simple exercise—sharing personal histories. Childhood stories, first jobs, biggest challenges. In less than an hour, something starts to shift. They laugh. They learn new things about each other. Even Martin and Mikey open up a bit. It’s a small step, but it softens the walls.

Later, they go deeper. Using tools like the Myers-Briggs, they talk about their behavior styles, strengths, and weaknesses. Over pizza and beer, the conversations become more real—and more playful. People start teasing each other, even poking fun at themselves. Everyone, that is, except Mikey. She stays quiet. And when the conversation turns to her, she deflects. She doesn’t trust the group yet—and the group knows it.

Facing vulnerability

The next day, Kathryn introduces a tougher exercise. Everyone must name their biggest strength and weakness. Kathryn goes first, then Nick, then Jan. One by one, they get real—owning both what they bring to the team and what holds them back. Jeff, surprisingly, opens up about his fear of failure and how it led him to take too much on alone. It’s raw. And it lands.

Then it’s Mikey’s turn. Her answers feel surface-level. No emotion. No risk. And no one responds. The silence says it all—she’s holding back. Still.

Carlos and JR follow with more genuine insights, and even Martin surprises everyone with honesty. He admits he struggles with empathy and prefers to deal in logic over feelings. Jeff calls him out gently, and Martin takes it well. There’s progress.

Bringing it home

Kathryn then jumps ahead to the top of the model: inattention to results. She warns about the danger of personal agendas—when team members care more about their own success than the team’s. She uses her husband’s high school basketball team as an example. Talented players were benched if they didn’t play for the team. Results came first. Ego came second.

The group starts to get it. They brainstorm what their collective “scoreboard” should be—things like revenue, customer satisfaction, and market awareness. But as the conversation turns practical, old habits creep back. Martin criticizes the process. JR dismisses the metrics. Mikey defends her department. The energy starts to fade.

Kathryn holds firm. She reminds them: they’re not individuals doing their own jobs—they’re a team. Everyone is responsible for everything. That’s the shift they need to make.

A hard truth

When Kathryn calls out the group’s politics, the reaction is swift and defensive. Even Jeff and Mikey push back. But Kathryn doesn’t back down. She defines politics clearly: when people say or do things based on how they’ll be perceived, not based on what they actually think.

That lands.

Martin, of all people, cuts the tension: “Okay, we’re definitely political.” And the room laughs, not just because it’s funny—but because it’s true.

The cracks begin to show

As they push deeper, JR challenges Kathryn directly. Why not just list all the dysfunctions now? Kathryn agrees—and begins to fill in the triangle. They’ve seen the bottom (absence of trust) and the top (inattention to results). Now, she adds the second layer: fear of conflict.

She explains: without trust, people avoid conflict. They keep things polite instead of being honest. That means unresolved issues, fake harmony, and poor decisions. Conflict, done right, is how teams get better.

Some push back. Isn’t that just wasting time? But Jan and Carlos jump in to defend the point: avoiding conflict has cost them time, energy, and progress.

And with that, the team is finally beginning to wrestle with the real work of becoming a team.

Heavy Lifting

Progress doesn’t stick—yet

Back in the office after the off-site, Kathryn could tell things weren’t quite clicking. For all the bonding and vulnerability they experienced in Napa, her team had quickly snapped back into their old behaviors. Hallway interactions were cold. People avoided eye contact. It was as if they were embarrassed by how open they’d been and wanted to pretend it hadn’t happened.

Kathryn wasn’t shocked. She’d seen this pattern before. Real change takes time—and pressure. And pressure came quickly in the form of a proposed acquisition: a company called Green Banana. Nick called the meeting, but it quickly unraveled into the very dysfunctions they were supposed to be overcoming.

The Green Banana meeting explodes

Nick pushed the idea hard. He wanted the team to move fast on buying this struggling company. Kathryn was skeptical. So were others. She challenged Nick’s assumptions and questioned why Mikey, the head of marketing, wasn’t even invited. Nick’s sharp reply—saying Mikey wouldn’t “add value”—was a red flag.

Then it got worse. Nick questioned Kathryn’s qualifications, saying she didn’t “know squat” about the business and should defer to him and Jeff. No one defended her. Martin even left the meeting early.

That’s when Kathryn knew: she had to confront this head-on.

A private reckoning

Kathryn pulled Nick aside. Calmly, she made it clear—personal attacks, especially behind someone’s back, wouldn’t fly. But instead of lashing back, Nick opened up. He admitted he felt underused, frustrated, and like he’d made a mistake moving across the country. In a moment of honesty, he said what he hadn’t dared to before: he was bored, and desperate to prove himself.

Kathryn didn’t let him off the hook. She asked the hard question: was he helping the team or tearing it down? That made Nick pause. She urged him to choose—his own advancement or the success of the team. Not because they’re always at odds, but because one has to come first.

Nick’s turning point—and JR’s departure

Later that day, during Kathryn’s first official staff meeting, Nick surprised everyone. He publicly apologized for the Green Banana meeting, admitted his real motives, and asked the team for help getting back on track. It was a moment of raw honesty the group hadn’t seen before.

Then Kathryn dropped a bomb: JR had quit.

He didn’t give a clear reason, but made it clear he wasn’t interested in team-building or off-sites. That shook the team. Even those who’d been skeptical of Kathryn’s approach began to wonder if this work was driving people away instead of bringing them together.

But then something interesting happened—Martin, of all people, stood up for the work. He said JR’s exit wasn’t about the team-building. It was fear. JR had never had to sell without a big brand behind him. He wasn’t ready to fail.

The team begins to speak the hard truths

Carlos offered to take over sales. Jan pushed back, suggesting Nick instead. Everyone agreed it made more sense. Nick had the experience, the relationships, and the time. Eventually, he accepted the role. A fire drill ended the meeting, but not the momentum.

Still, things were messy. Kathryn overheard a tech from IT talking about Mikey’s behavior in the off-sites. That was a red flag—confidentiality was breaking down. So in the next retreat, she asked the team a big question: Who is your first team?

Who do you really work for?

This question struck a nerve. Most admitted their loyalty was stronger to their own departments than to the executive team. Jan, especially, felt like a parent to her people. Kathryn didn’t criticize their loyalty—but pointed out the cost. When leaders prioritize their departments over the leadership team, silos form. And when that happens, the company suffers.

She asked them to flip the script. The executive team had to become their “first team.” That shift wouldn’t be easy, but it was essential.

Facing the hard trade-offs

Carlos brought up a tough topic: maybe engineering was getting too many resources. Mikey agreed, saying she didn’t even know what half the engineers did. Martin, unsurprisingly, got defensive. But instead of shutting down, the team stayed in it. They debated. They pushed. They challenged assumptions. And for the first time, they truly collaborated.

By the end, they made a big decision: delay some future products and shift engineers to help sales. It wasn’t perfect, but it was a real team decision—with everyone involved.

Learning to hold each other accountable

Kathryn didn’t let the energy die. She moved into the next dysfunction: avoidance of accountability. Using a real project—tracking progress on key sales drivers—she showed how the team still avoided tough conversations.

Carlos hadn’t started a key initiative. No one had called him out. Kathryn used it as a teachable moment: accountability means holding each other to commitments, even when it’s uncomfortable. It’s not about being harsh—it’s about caring enough to challenge.

Mikey hits a wall

Then came Mikey’s moment. She had finished the product brochures—but hadn’t involved the sales team. When Nick raised the issue, she deflected. When asked to attend sales training, she resisted. Her attitude made it clear: she wasn’t part of the team.

Kathryn had seen enough.

After the meeting, she sat down with Mikey and had the hardest conversation of all. Calmly, respectfully, but directly, she told Mikey she wasn’t a fit for the team—and probably didn’t even want to be there.

Mikey fought back, threatened legal trouble, and accused others. But in the end, she left.

The mourning after

The team was shaken. Some worried it was too extreme. Others wondered if Mikey was really the problem. Kathryn told a powerful story about a mistake she made early in her career—promoting her most talented analyst even though he was toxic. It tanked the whole department. Not because of his behavior alone, but because of her tolerance of it.

Her message was clear: you don’t build a strong team by keeping brilliant jerks. You build it by making the hard calls and protecting the group.

Rallying together

Back at the office, the team regrouped. Kathryn led a transparent conversation about replacing Mikey and recommitted to finding someone who truly fit the values of the team.

As the team debated sales resources again, Nick and Jan clashed. Jan got frustrated and said maybe Mikey wasn’t the problem after all. But Kathryn stopped her. “This is exactly what we want. Real conflict about important issues.” The team wasn’t falling apart. They were finally doing the work.

Over the next few weeks, Kathryn pushed harder. She called out smugness, silence, and hesitation. And for the first time, the team didn’t push back—they leaned in.

They were becoming a real team.

Traction

Kathryn’s familiar speech—and a turning point

The final off-site begins with Kathryn repeating a message they’ve all heard before: despite their advantages—talent, resources, connections—they’re still behind their competitors. But this time, something shifts. Nick speaks up and asks her to stop giving that speech. A month ago, this kind of blunt challenge would’ve caused tension. Now, it feels natural.

Kathryn holds her ground. She says she’ll stop saying it when it’s no longer true. But she also reassures the team—they are making progress.

Self-assessment time

She draws the familiar triangle on the board and asks the team to reflect honestly. Jeff starts: they trust each other more now, though it’s still a work in progress. Jan says conflict is better but still uncomfortable. Kathryn agrees—real conflict is never cozy. The key is to keep doing it anyway.

Nick brings up accountability. He’s worried that people might still hold back from confronting one another when someone drops the ball. Surprisingly, it’s Martin who steps in. He says he’s willing to face discomfort if it means avoiding a return to the political, dysfunctional environment they came from.

Finally, Nick closes the loop: results won’t be an issue—because if the company fails, none of them win. That shared understanding of accountability and mutual success marks a big shift.

Not out of the woods yet

Kathryn praises their progress but warns them not to get too comfortable. Change takes time. Teams often slip backward. It’s about discipline and persistence—continuing to show up, challenge each other, and focus on results. And over the next two days, the team gets a taste of that reality: some arguments, some collaboration, and slow, steady movement forward.

Kathryn notices something different this time. People stay together during breaks. They laugh more. And when the retreat ends, they’re already planning follow-ups. The team is growing stronger—not just in structure, but in spirit.

Gut Check

An unexpected offer

Three months later, the team meets again. There’s a new face in the room—Joseph Charles, the new VP of Marketing. But Kathryn opens with a shocker: Green Banana, the company they once considered acquiring, now wants to buy them.

Everyone is stunned. The offer is financially attractive—well above DecisionTech’s current value. The room goes silent. You can feel people calculating the payout in their heads.

And then Martin, with classic British flair, breaks the silence: “No bloody way.” He refuses to hand over their progress to a company named after unripe fruit. The group bursts into laughter—but they know this is serious.

A test of commitment

Jan raises a valid point. There’s no guarantee they’ll succeed. This is real money. Jeff says the board is leaving the decision to them—to see if they truly have the “fire in their bellies.” In other words, are they all in?

One by one, the team says no to the offer. Even Jan, after a beat, says: “Green Banana? Are you kidding?” The humor masks a deeper truth—they’re committed. To the mission. And to each other.

Kathryn quickly shifts gears. They have work to do. And Joseph gets his first real experience of this team in action.

A masterclass in dysfunctions

The team takes Joseph through the five dysfunctions model. Nick explains trust. Jan and Jeff tackle conflict and commitment. Carlos describes accountability. Martin, of all people, closes with results.

Then the debates begin. Passionate, focused, and sometimes intense—but always in service of clarity. There are tough calls and honest feedback. Joseph is amazed. He knows this team is different—and he’s excited to be part of it.

The March

Performance starts to catch up with potential

Over the next year, DecisionTech begins to grow fast. Sales improve. Revenue goals are met in three out of four quarters. They move into a virtual tie for the number one spot in their industry. Morale goes up. Turnover slows down. Even when they miss a target, Kathryn gets a call—not to criticize, but to encourage.

Team size matters

With the company now over 250 people, Kathryn decides it’s time to reshape the executive team. As the company grows, she believes the leadership group must shrink. Too many voices slow things down, no matter how cohesive they are.

She restructures reporting lines. Nick becomes COO, finally earning the title he always wanted. Carlos and the head of sales now report to him. HR reports to Jan. Kathryn keeps five direct reports: Martin, Jan, Nick, Joseph, and Jeff.

Then comes another surprise.

Jeff steps back—for the team

At the next quarterly meeting, someone notices Jeff isn’t there. Kathryn explains: he’ll no longer be part of the executive team. Not because he quit. Not because he was fired. But because he chose to step back and report to Nick.

Jan is stunned. She wonders if Jeff feels slighted. Kathryn smiles. It was Jeff’s idea. He knew it was the right move for the company—and the team.

This moment says everything about the transformation. The old Jeff—the insecure, overstretched founder—had evolved. He wasn’t chasing status anymore. He was choosing what was best for the whole.

Let’s get started

With that, Kathryn turns to the group and simply says: “Let’s get started.”

The dysfunctions hadn’t magically disappeared. The business wasn’t perfect. But something fundamental had changed. This was a real team now. Imperfect, yes—but committed, accountable, and aligned.

And that made all the difference.

The Model: Understanding the Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Simple in theory, tough in practice

Lencioni doesn’t dress things up with fancy jargon. He says it plainly: teamwork is hard, but not complicated. The real challenge isn’t complexity—it’s discipline. In this final part of the book, he breaks down the model he’s been illustrating through the story. And the key message is that these five dysfunctions are not isolated problems. They’re deeply connected. One leads to the next. If you ignore even one, the whole thing can fall apart.

Let’s walk through them, one by one.

1. Absence of trust

This is where everything begins—or breaks.

Trust, in this model, doesn’t mean trusting someone to finish a project on time. It’s not about reliability. It’s about vulnerability-based trust. The kind where teammates feel safe enough to say “I messed up,” or “I need help,” without fear of being judged or blamed.

That kind of openness doesn’t come easily, especially in the workplace, where people are trained to look strong, polished, and in control. But when trust is missing, people hide their mistakes, avoid asking for help, and spend more energy managing impressions than solving problems.

The irony? Vulnerability feels risky—but it’s what makes teams stronger. Without it, no real collaboration happens. With it, teams get real—and that’s when things start to click.

2. Fear of conflict

When there’s no trust, conflict becomes scary. People tiptoe around issues. They avoid honest debates. Meetings feel polite on the surface, but nothing important really gets said.

Lencioni argues that healthy teams fight well. Not about personal stuff, but about ideas. They push, challenge, and debate—because they care about finding the best solution. And when it’s done right, there’s no bitterness left afterward—just better decisions.

The worst teams aren’t the ones who argue too much. They’re the ones where everything is “fine.” That’s where frustration builds in the background, and the real issues never get addressed.

3. Lack of commitment

Here’s where silence becomes a problem. If people don’t speak up—if they don’t share their real opinions during conflict—they won’t truly commit to the decision the team makes.

You’ll get fake agreement. Nods in the meeting, doubts in the hallway.

Great teams don’t need perfect consensus. They just need clarity and buy-in. Everyone should feel their voice was heard—even if the final decision wasn’t their preference. When that happens, people leave meetings aligned and ready to act, not second-guessing or dragging their feet.

The need for certainty is also a trap. Sometimes you have to move without perfect data. A bold, clear decision—even if it turns out wrong—is better than endless hesitation.

4. Avoidance of accountability

Without commitment, there’s nothing to hold people accountable to.

This dysfunction shows up when team members avoid the awkward conversations. They notice someone not following through—but say nothing. Or they lower their standards to avoid conflict.

But Lencioni is clear: peer-to-peer accountability is key. The leader shouldn’t be the only one calling out bad behavior. In great teams, everyone feels responsible for the group’s success—and that means being honest when someone is slipping.

Yes, it’s uncomfortable. But it builds respect. Avoiding accountability doesn’t protect relationships—it weakens them.

5. Inattention to results

This is the final breakdown. When there’s no trust, no conflict, no commitment, and no accountability, people stop focusing on collective success. Instead, they focus on their own department. Their own ego. Their own career.

Some teams get comfortable just being part of a “cool” company or having the title. That’s team status. Others chase individual status—doing what makes them look good, even if it hurts the group.

But high-performing teams stay focused on results. They measure success clearly, commit publicly, and reward based on real outcomes—not effort alone.

When the whole team wins, everyone wins. And when they lose, they feel it together.

How it all connects

What makes this model powerful is how each layer supports the next. Without vulnerability-based trust, you won’t have healthy conflict. Without conflict, people don’t commit. Without commitment, there’s no accountability. And without accountability, results become blurry.

It’s a chain. One broken link, and the whole system weakens.

Putting it into practice

Lencioni offers tools to help teams break through the dysfunctions—simple but powerful practices like:

• Sharing personal histories to build trust
• Mining for conflict during meetings
• Clarifying decisions and messaging as a team
• Making expectations public and visible
• Tying rewards to team results, not individual efforts

But more than any tool, what makes the difference is consistency. Discipline. The willingness to have the hard conversations again and again—without giving up.

The leader sets the tone

At every stage, the leader has a special role. Not to control the team, but to model the behavior the team needs most.

Want trust? Be vulnerable first.
Want conflict? Let it happen—don’t shut it down.
Want commitment? Push for clarity and decision.
Want accountability? Don’t do all the calling out—let the team hold each other to the standard.
Want results? Focus on them relentlessly—and reward accordingly.

In the end, Lencioni reminds us that great teams aren’t perfect. They’re just human teams that do the hard work to stay real, stay aligned, and stay focused.

And that’s what makes them unstoppable.

4 Key Ideas from The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

6 Main Lessons from The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

My Book Highlights & Quotes

“… Trust is knowing that when a team member does push you, they’re doing it because they care about the team…”

“… Remember teamwork begins by building trust. And the only way to do that is to overcome our need for invulnerability…”

“… Great teams do not hold back from one another. They are unafraid to air their dirty laundry. They admit their mistakes, their weaknesses, and their concerns without fear of reprisal…”

“… 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…”

“… 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…”

“… Not finance. Not strategy. Not technology. It is teamwork that remains the ultimate competitive advantage, both because it is so powerful and so rare…”

“… 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…”

“… 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…”

“… A fractured team is just like a broken arm or leg; fixing it is always painful, and sometimes you have to rebreak it to make it heal correctly. And the rebreak hurts a lot more than the initial break because you have to do it on purpose…”

“… If we don’t trust one another, then we aren’t going to engage in open, constructive, ideological conflict…”

“… The enemy of accountability is ambiguity…”

“… 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…”

“… 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…”

“… Commitment is a function of two things: clarity and buy-in…”

“… 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…”

“… Trust is the foundation of real teamwork…”

Conclusion

In conclusion, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni is a must-read for any team leader looking to build a successful team.

Not only does The Five Dysfunctions of a Team provide an insightful framework to identify and address common team dysfunctions, but he also offers practical tips and advice to help build a strong team culture and foster collective success.

With its engaging narrative, the book will undoubtedly leave readers inspired and motivated to implement the principles and strategies outlined in The Five Dysfunctions of a Team.

I am incredibly grateful that you have taken the time to read this post.

Support my work by sharing my content with your network using the sharing buttons below.

Want to show your support and appreciation tangibly?

Creating these posts takes time, effort, and lots of coffee—but it’s totally worth it!

If you’d like to show some support and help keep me stay energized for the next one, buying me a virtual coffee is a simple (and friendly!) way to do it.

Do you want to get new content in your Email?

Do you want to explore more?

Check my main categories of content below:

• Book Notes
• Career Development
• Essays
• Explaining
• Leadership
• Lean and Agile
• Management
• Personal Development
• Project Management
• Reading Insights
• Technology

Navigate between the many topics covered in this website:

Agile Agile Coaching Agile Transformation Art Artificial Intelligence Blockchain Books Business Business Tales C-Suite Career Coaching Communication Creativity Culture Cybersecurity Decision Making Design DevOps Digital Transformation Economy Emotional Intelligence ESG Feedback Finance Flow Focus Gaming Generative AI Goals GPT Habits Harvard Health History Innovation Kanban Large Language Models Leadership Lean Learning LeSS Machine Learning Magazine Management Marketing McKinsey Mentorship Metaverse Metrics Mindset Minimalism MIT Motivation Negotiation Networking Neuroscience NFT Ownership Paper Parenting Planning PMBOK PMI PMO Politics Portfolio Management Productivity Products Program Management Project Management Readings Remote Work Risk Management Routines Scrum Self-Improvement Self-Management Sleep Social Media Startups Strategy Team Building Technology Time Management Volunteering Web3 Work

Do you want to check previous Book Notes? Check these from the last couple of weeks:

• Book Notes #127: The Laws of Simplicity by John Maeda2025-04-04
• Book Notes #126: Inevitable by Mike Colias2025-03-24
• Book Notes #125: Revenge of the Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell2025-03-21
• Book Notes #124: Radical Candor by Kim Scott2024-09-04
• Book Notes #123: The Personal MBA by Josh Kaufman2024-05-09

Support my work by sharing my content with your network using the sharing buttons below.

Want to show your support tangibly? A virtual coffee is a small but nice way to show your appreciation and give me the extra energy to keep crafting valuable content! Pay me a coffee: