If it’s broke DON’T fix it
You may spiral into frustration and irrelevance if you try to fix stagnated teams or committees.
Leaders are passionate fixers that love enhancing organizational efficiency and effectiveness. A well-oiled, productive team is a thing of beauty.
However, the larger and older your organization the more likely you’ll encounter dysfunctional teams and committees. Over time they’ve lost their relevance. Their stagnation may frustrate you.
Warning: Everything that’s broken doesn’t need fixing.
Before you fix it:
Before fixing long-standing, entrenched, unproductive teams ask:
- Are they essential to fulfilling organizational mission? At one time they were. However, over time, they may have lost relevance.
- Are they consuming significant resources? For example, volunteers may be donating their own time and resources.
- Do they negatively impact the organization as a whole?
- Is their work relevant to organizational vision? Perhaps the most important question.
- Are they road blocking forward momentum?
If you answer, “No,” to these questions, don’t fix them. Let them continue to spiral out of significance into a slow, irrelevant death. Choose this path in order to avoid distracting, unnecessary conflict and confrontation.
How to move forward:
- Go around. Side step them by heading in new directions with new people and resources.
- Add to. Don’t take away from them. Add another team that enhances mission and vision.
- Work outside. Create a skunk works team that pursues dramatic success.
I regularly receive messages from frustrated people. Sometimes they’re new to an organization. To them, dysfunctional teams are obvious. They want to fix them.
Perhaps your broken team can be ignored.
Things you can’t ignore:
- Any team relevant to organizational success.
- A dysfunctional board of directors or other leadership teams.
*****
Do you have other suggestions to help people decide if they should ignore or fix a dysfunctional team?
Can you think of things within an organization that could be ignored rather than fixed?
Dear Dan,
Communicate, sense, aware and action. When you want to ignore or fix a dysfunctional team, first of all communicate with them and try to sense their motives and behaviors towards you. At the same time be aware about what you share with them, because they may your discussed points in exaggerated or distorted manner. Finally you should also be ready to take action against them, when solution is not possible. I think, communication with the top level is more important because they can understand your position well before somebody else communicate about you. If you are aware about the dysfunctional behavior of the team, you can convey message to superiors before they pass to superiors. This idea is applicable, when you are target of dysfunctional team. When you are part of the team, try to show engaged, appear right and unbiased. But the most important part is that try to show your contribution by your effort.
I believe, any rumor, propaganda or backbiting that do not affect your position, should be avoided. When they affect you, then you should deal with it rigorously, But you should be careful in dealing with situation, because they may take your energy and time that can affect your health, family and your goal. So, you have to make cost comparison while taking any course of action.
Great insights Dan. The key here is the order of priorities. Dysfunctions that negatively affect the customer or employee experience must be addressed promptly for without employees and customers there is no business. Other dysfunctions may be more cosmetic than structural. This can wait to be patched up later. Use your energy where it will have the greatest impact for the good of those the organization is chartered to serve.
“promptly” and directly with total focus on impact on customers. Still ask questions of those living in the land o’ dysfunction to make sure you have a solid picture. Sans additional explanation/rationale, time to help them find a more productive environment, either in the organization or not.
Loved this post, Dan. I came away thinking that even in cases where the dysfunction must be addressed, leaders need to hold the members accountable for fixing their own problems before stepping in and trying to fix them from outside.
Often I’ve seen members of dysfunctional teams squeal to the leader and demand intervention when they have not tried to solve the problem themselves, at the lowest level. We should expect employees to communicate with each other when tensions arise and address unmet expectations, stepped-on toes, and under-performance with their coworkers BEFORE they bring it to the boss. Tattling isn’t good for teams, and leaders who intervene too quickly reinforce it.
I don’t know how I feel about this one over all, I suppose depending on whether I’m in charge or not. Because in my experience pits of stagnation can spread infection or turn into black holes that suck everything else in.
I do think there’s definitely something to be said about not poking it with a stick and instead creating something new that thrives and draws others “to the light” so to speak and let the pit dry up. And sometimes broken things should be gotten rid of or broken back down to component parts to create something new later.
It’s also my experience that new outside perspectives are often helpful, but many pushy ones are sophomoric or narrow in viewpoint. A recent 3-page letter to one of my local groups comes to mind, received from a brand new west coast transplant. Their letter suggests we change our membership and rules to be like where they came from. (The board hasn’t decided how to respond yet.)
Admittedly, Texans can have an attitude when it comes to viewpoints like that. People come to Austin because of its economy and it’s laid back, but if you do that, you have to take the whole package of what that laid back lifestyle means and what created the coveted balance. You don’t get uptight and forget your manners. Around here, that will cost you business. When in Rome, et all. In those cases diplomatically harmonizing core interests might be a better approach.
Thanks for the additional angles to consider Julia and great example…how well does ‘at my last employment we did xxx’ sit with most folks? Presentation presentation presentation
Hey Dan
Yep I’m hanging a bit with Julie here. This is a long way from clear cut. My empathy also sits with the ‘dysfunctionals’ having been supported by thte organisation in the first place, therefore I am driven to support them but in a new way. Walking away only achieves something if people can observe the act and see the direction it is going in, how it is better, why it is not threatening. As in some of your other posts the visibility of leadership is critical here. You my ignore the behaviourbut you can’t ignore the people and what brought them there. Mmm. be very interested to see waht else pops out here. Best, Richard
I disagree about ignoring dysfunctional teams. If a team is dysfunctional, by definition it is keeping the organization from moving ahead.
Organizations need to get rid of it ASAP. If you let it spiral off into irrelevance, it’s still costing the company in some form or another whether it’s money, time, frustrated employees or other resources. A leader needs to be decisive and NOT put off a tough decision, especially when it costs the business resources. The tougher the decision, the greater importance of effective leadership. Forget organizational politics, it’s about the business.
Brings a question to mind…is dysfunction in the eye of the beholder? If the beholder is external, s/he may not understand their function as well as s/he thinks. However, if there is a consensus of dysfunction, I definitely agree with you Mike. It costs the organization energy.
That’s a great point, Doc. Never really thought of the external/internal viewpoint but it’s critical when defining ‘dysfunctional’. For example, externally Glassdoors.com is full of insight from current and past employees talking about dysfunctional teams, management, etc. This knowledge in the aggregate if unaddressed over time affects an organization’s employee morale, perception, employee attrition rate and ultimately revenue.
I would ask Dan, if the plan is for leadership to let the team wither away and not fix it, a) how do we define or measure the “end” (when enough is enough) and b) when that time comes, what is the action plan for making the tough decision to remove or re-organize the team?
If we ignore the problem and assume it will fix itself, there needs to be an action plan with a deadline.
Then again, why would a successful organization have dysfunctional teams in the first place if the technology already exists to anticipate and thus prevent it?
Hmm, was that a rhetorical question Mike? 😉
Either way, you have to shine a light on it and get it clarified.
If things scurry away in the light, you might have your answer for the next steps that have to occur.
It depends on the organization or business. If it a volunteer org. it can be difficult to juts cut them. Many times when a lead person driving the group ends up leaving it will die. Unless the group in question is creating a negative image of the overall organization or violating policies and safety regulations they could be left to disband on their own (ignored). A business organization should address things that are directly affecting other employees or customers. The poison generated by a group or individual can infect other aspects of the business. Building walls between departments thus creating a larger problem. The kindest and most efficient thing to do with them is measure performance. Reviews, surveys, customer feedback (this applies to volunteer and business organizations) can all give a measurable way to redirect a dysfunctional group or put a stop to the dysfunction. It also gives leadership a concrete reason for a reorganization of the group. If the group is not doing anything against policy or unsafe then they can be left go (for a time) allowing the leadership to concentrate on advancing or starting other successful groups. Redirection, reorganization, rather then removing and rebuilding can be a good approach. Again it is all related to the actions of the group and how it affects the image of the organization. A church youth group that meets only occasionally, listens to loud music, wears grungy clothing, but is still following guidelines having fun and coming to church can be ignored but nudged in the direction the organization wants them to go. A group with views opposing the sponsoring organization or creating a negative image of the organization must be dealt with. Not sure I answered any questions as much as created more. You must decide in your specific circumstance if your energy should be placed on this group. Do you have the power and or authority to affect a change in the group or not. Many times we as managers and leaders may see something “wrong” and know what it will take to fix it but management or leaders above you will not allow you to make the changes. In this case you must move on and not allow the dysfunctional group to affect YOU!
Dan,
I agree with you. Much of my work has been done in the non-profit sector and with volunteers. A couple cliche’s I live by when it comes to teams are:
“new people attract new people”
“Irrelevant teams are still teams”
If a team isn’t contributing towards the mission it might be as useful to the leadership but they are still having some needs met as for as participating and they will eventually marginalize themselves. Instead of the sometimes destructive, dismantling of a team I try to build new teams around them. This may take patience, emotional support for all the teams and steady communication but it can be done.
Thanks for the inspiration,
Jim Hill
I am always concerned w/the loss of human capital. If anything, I assume it & any potential creativity & passion for a company or agency is being lost. & I HATE to waste or throw away. So, instead of ignoring or overriding I would:
Engage/softly enquire
Listen
What motivates the team?
How do they feel they contribute?
What are their frustrations now?
Help them problem solve.
Hook them back in or they will find they way to the door.
Residual impact is better for the team members & their encompassing work environment.
Think residual impact of ill will & distrust.
OHHH feel a blog article coming on. Thanks!
Sooo, partner, your organization’s got a hitch in your getalong, welll, that’s just nature’s way of telling you something’s wrong… (thnx Spirit)
Maybe that hitch is/was needed as a check and balance. Maybe that hitch is there because always has been and isn’t needed. Perhaps consider a more longitudinal or historical view, will that clarify the perceived dysfunction? Or maybe one element of the team is stuck and that is impacting the performance. Drill down, ask what has happened, don’t need to fix it if they can unless as others have noted it has immediate impact on customers and/or performance.
Another organizational ‘thing’ might be the nefarious meetings that have always been, lack focus, lack energy, etc. Sure seems to fit here.
In homage to the cool hands graphic at the top Dan…
“Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible. I think it’s in my basement… let me go upstairs and check.” –M.C. Escher
Doc, you’re a gem!
Dan – what an interesting post. There can be a “leading from the middle” twist to this as well. If you can recognize when you are a member of such a dysfunctional team, you might be able to organize a more functional unit within the larger team. This can be of great value if the timeframe of the overall organization is longer. If that “sleeper team” can see that positive change will occur naturally over 5-10 years, that team may be able to sustain each other, maintain productivity of the overall team, and share in eventual rewards.
I feel though that the chances of a broken team to be made entirely by volunteers is pretty slim isn’t it? If they are paid employees, in that case I would like their time to go towards productive tasks rather than something irrelevant. Of course the important lesson here is to understand when it is time to act and when it is time to wait, that’s my personal view at least. You can’t act all the time, and similarly you can’t just sit idle endlessly and wait for things to pass.
This post will generate fabulous dialogue!!
Do you have other suggestions to help people decide if they should ignore or fix a dysfunctional team?
Perhaps some dysfunctions in teams are sort of like a “24 hour bug” that affects us physically – an issue or opinion has popped up that temporarily unbalances a usually balanced team. But attending to it MAY make things worse. I think, though, that in most cases it is better to nip signs of emerging dysfunction in the bud before they grow out of proportion.
Can you think of things within an organization that could be ignored rather than fixed?
Some personal style issues are just things that everyone needs to grow up and move past. If everyone is working together, focused on organizational mission, vision, and values, it’s not worth wasting the energy to tinker.
“Are they essential to fulfilling organizational mission?”
In my humble $.02 if the answer is no, then I have to ask what are they even doing here then? In my experience at small organization there is no room for teams who aren’t directly contributing…
My first thoughts reading this post were that I know I am a fix-aholic and naturally gravitate towards solving the problem. However, more recent events have taught me what I already knew – many times in order to help others become better, you need to have them solve the problem. I can help by having open dialogue to encourage solution finding.
Overall I guess I am in the camp “catch dysfunction early” as its usually a time and resource waster.
Might be the best $.02 ever spent Alicia! I can see/hear the slogan (with your pic?) for Fix-aholics, Anonymous…”Hi I’m _____, I’m a fix-aholic, how can I help you?” 😉
I think the same principles apply to conflict resolution. Not all conflicts can be resolved – which can be a painful lesson.
Another idea for moving forward:
When a new person comes on board, allow them a Get out of Jail Free card for 30 days where they won’t be penalized for telling the truth. Keep the door unlocked and listen to what they see.
Then go back to punishing the truth if you need to. Don’t worry, there will be plenty of people jumping ship and plenty more new people with 30 day Get out of Jail Free cards until the company “gets it.”
Lets put our brains on, have a ball to keep our eye on, keep our eye on the ball, and DO what needs to be done. Forget about fixing. It takes too long to figure out the core broken thing.
Thank you for this. I have been, for sometime now, ignoring people that have the capacity to do tremendous things, but have, in more ways than one, shown a lack of desire to fulfill their potential. I’m not too sure this is the best way, but I’ve began to mentor a younger generation of passionate men and women hoping to instill in them a sense of purpose and belonging with a desire for effective leadership. I have often found myself frustrated to the point of quitting because I looked for these established leaders to step up and be counted, but they seem no longer engaged. Whether it was due to my immaturity or lack of leadership skills (or just their own seasons of life), they have ceased from frontal leadership to utility personnel.
Having begun my work to lead a new set of leaders, I have become more re-engaged and re-energized. I have learned to step back and mentor as supposed to micromanage. I have learned that revival and revitalization doesn’t necessarily need re-ignition of old guards rather a trusting of your vision into new hearts, new heads, and new hands.