Teamership: Dysfunctional teams deplete leaders

When teams are not at their best, by definition, there are some things that aren’t working as well as they could. Photo by Donna Koch on Unsplash

Teams are small, dynamic human systems.

Given how dynamic one human system is and how hard it is to get ourselves functional, it should surprise nobody that quite often, teams are dysfunctional.

It is not as bad as it sounds - every family has some degree of dysfunction and it doesn’t stop families loving each other!

If we look at how Cambridge Dictionary defines dysfunctional, it is simply “not behaving or working normally”.

That’s not terrible, it’s not permanent and it’s also probably not how you want your team’s performance to be described.

When teams are at their best, the system is cohesive and the team works interdependently. In the best teams, leadership and accountability are central to success. In practice rather than being central, leadership and accountability are shared among the team, not just the responsibility of the leader.

None of this happens by accident. Leaders of high performing teams are working hard. They place their energy and efforts into creating and sustaining an environment that allows the team to function well.

No surprise that is also good for organisations.

Gallup research found that business units in the top quartile of team engagement realise 23% higher profitability and 18% higher productivity (sales) compared to those in the bottom quartile.

Sounds great. And it is.

Good teams are a net positive for leaders, teams, organisations and their customers.

When teams are not at their best, by definition, there are some things that aren’t working as well as they could.

Here’s what dysfunction in teams can look and feel like:

• Working together isn’t cohesive - it becomes co-operation rather than collaboration.
  This requires more from the leader to co-ordinate work and connect team members.

• Rather than working interdependently, each team member works on their tasks independently.
  This relies more heavily on the leader to allocate tasks and resources.

• Teams tend to be nice to each other, but avoid difficult conversations.
  This means that the leader is called in to be the arbiter on disagreements.

All of these dysfunctions place more work and responsibility with leaders.

Dysfunction in teams leads to depletion in leaders.

Depleted leaders lead to many, many negative outcomes.

One study found that for depleted leaders (manifesting in depressive symptoms, anxiety and workplace alcohol consumption), their teams experienced increased abusive supervision and organisations reduced transformational leadership.

There are no winners here.

The leader is struggling, the team members are copping it and the organisation isn’t keeping up with its strategic goals.

We could mount a case for chicken and egg here. There is no doubt that leaders can contribute to some of the dysfunction that depletes them. That same argument would suggest that things are only going to get worse if we don’t address team performance as part of the way that we support leaders.

As a leader, there will be times when you experience some of these symptoms - either depletion in yourself or dysfunction in your team. The sooner you act on this, the better.

Here are a few things to consider this week:

1. Can you think about a time when your team was high performing?

   1. What did this take from you?

   2. What did this give you?

2. When have the dynamics in your team been dysfunctional?

   1. What did this take from you?

   2. What did this give you?

3. How might you be better at detecting either dysfunction in your team or depletion in yourself?