I’ve lost count of the times a client sponsor tells me, ‘the problem is John.’
‘Go on,’ I say, knowing what’s coming next.
‘Don’t get me wrong, he’s a brilliant [insert technical expertise here], but he’s causing issues in the team. He sits in meetings with his arms folded and barely has a positive word to say. Everyone’s fed up with him. He needs to go.’
The issue is—John isn’t the issue. And nor is Jane, Brian, Paula, or Paulo for that matter. And here’s why.
John’s behaviour is an expression of an issue that belongs to the whole team, not just to John. The fact that it is John who happens to be ‘leaking the truth’ is inconsequential. He is often merely embodying an issue that the whole team is responsible for creating.
Rather than saying, ‘John is defensive and negative,’ an effective team recognises that ‘defensiveness and negativity are present in our team.’ In other words, the problem belongs to the system, not the individual.
The reason we know this to be true is that, left unnoticed, the problem pops up elsewhere. When John is moved on by an exasperated manager, the problem will reappear in another form six months later, because the team hasn’t recognised what John was inadvertently trying to tell them. The issue remains embedded within the system.
A study by MIT Sloan found that 75% of cross-functional teams are dysfunctional, failing on at least three of five key criteria: meeting a planned budget, staying on schedule, adhering to specifications, aligning with corporate goals, or maintaining team satisfaction. (MIT Sloan Management Review) The root cause? Teams failing to see themselves as an interconnected system, instead focusing on individual performance or blame.
Highly effective teams notice behaviour like John’s and ask themselves, ‘What’s this telling us?’ Instead of singling John out as ‘the problem,’ they ask, ‘What’s trying to emerge here, through John?’ What is this teaching us about ourselves as a system? When John is the problem, individuals lean out, distancing themselves from the ‘culprit.’ But when John is viewed as a mirror for the team’s dysfunction, they lean in towards him. They get curious, and they take collective responsibility for discerning what John is simply an expression of in their evolving system.
From John’s perspective, whatever is causing him to act defensively is likely making him feel powerless. He’s probably the least resourced person in the team to help himself out of this increasingly hopeless place. But if a team member spots his behaviour as an opportunity rather than a threat, they might speak up on John’s behalf—engaging the whole team (including John) in a conversation about what his behaviour is revealing.
Most teams don’t have these conversations, and yet they are imperative for organisations that want to evolve. When leadership expert Amy Edmondson researched psychological safety in teams, she found that high-performing teams were not those with fewer mistakes, but those where people felt safe enough to acknowledge and address mistakes together. (Harvard Business Review) This is exactly the shift needed—moving from blame to collective learning.
Make no mistake—there are times when John does, in fact, need to go. Performance issues, a clash of values, or misalignment with the team’s mission should be spotted early and addressed appropriately. Just make sure the signals point to this, and not to something deeper within the system at large.
An external perspective is often invaluable. When we engage in a team coaching assignment, this is precisely the role we play. We hold up a mirror, helping teams see what’s difficult to notice from within. We don’t impose solutions. We simply help reveal the system to itself so that it can make more effective decisions.
When a team starts to see itself as a single, dynamic entity rather than a collection of individuals, something shifts. Suddenly, they are operating with an entirely new level of intelligence—the intelligence of a connected system.
We designed Synergy to help leaders develop a greater understanding of the complex nature of systems and to lead their teams in a way that harnesses the power of the collective.
The Essence Programme provides a foundation for leading relationships, but we noticed that leaders needed additional skills when it came to navigating team dynamics effectively. Synergy builds on this foundation, helping leaders develop the ability to create cohesive, interdependent, and collectively responsible teams.
It helps leaders look at their version of John in a different light. Sometimes, John is exactly the jolt of awareness a team needs to wake up to what it’s time for.
Find out more about Synergy here.
