How to Fix Dysfunctional Team Dynamics

Summary

HBR On Leadership: How to Fix Dysfunctional Team Dynamics (May 7, 2025)

In the May 7, 2025 episode of HBR On Leadership, hosted by Harvard Business Review, listeners delve deep into the complexities of dysfunctional team dynamics. Featuring esteemed Harvard Business School professor and psychological safety expert Amy Edmondson alongside hosts Allison Beard and Dan McGinn, the episode tackles real-world challenges faced by leaders striving to cultivate effective and harmonious teams. Through the examination of two compelling listener letters, the conversation offers actionable insights and strategies to overcome common team dysfunctions.

---

Listener Letter 1: Navigating a Shift from a Flat to a Hierarchical Team Structure

Overview:
The first letter, received from a senior planning associate in a small strategy office, highlights a significant shift in team dynamics. Previously enjoying a flat office culture, the team has recently experienced a transition towards a more hierarchical structure. The associate expresses frustration over decreased communication, lack of transparency, and feeling undervalued in project acknowledgments.

Key Issues Identified:

• Reduced Communication: Exclusion from project meetings and sudden changes in project assignments without prior discussion.
• Lack of Recognition: Senior planning associates taking on most of the work without receiving due credit.
• Unaddressed Concerns: Attempts to communicate frustrations to leadership have been largely ignored, leading to job dissatisfaction and job searching.

Amy Edmondson’s Insights:

1. Reestablishing Communication:

   • Quote: “I think one of the best ways to put yourself back in the loop is ask good questions.” – [03:12]
   • Strategy: Proactively engage by asking insightful questions about ongoing projects and expressing a desire to contribute more effectively.

2. Understanding Organizational Changes:

   • Quote: “It's probably important for the letter writer to better understand what changed and why from others' perspective...” – [04:16]
   • Strategy: Investigate the reasons behind the shift to a hierarchical structure to better navigate and adapt to the new system.

3. Framing Feedback Constructively:

   • Quote: “I would have to encourage her to not frame it as poor communication... but to frame it as an unintended gap.” – [05:12]
   • Strategy: Approach leadership with observations framed as gaps in understanding rather than direct complaints, promoting a collaborative dialogue.

4. Importance of Recognition:

   • Quote: “The tragic part about that is that it's free... when it's not being given, it's usually blindness.” – [06:37]
   • Strategy: Emphasize the need for recognition in discussions with leadership, highlighting its role in maintaining employee engagement.

5. Adapting to Hierarchical Structures:

   • Quote: “...organizations today... have more and more need for teaming, for different relationships, different collaborations over time.” – [07:52]
   • Strategy: Develop interpersonal skills necessary for effective collaboration within a hierarchical framework, ensuring alignment with organizational expectations.

Hosts' Summary: Allison Beard and Dan McGinn commend the associate for her courage in addressing the issue and suggest practical steps such as asking smart questions to reengage with the team and accurately positioning herself for recognition. They also advise exploring organizational cultures during job searches to ensure alignment with personal preferences for hierarchy versus flat structures.

---

Listener Letter 2: Dealing with a Conflict-Avoidant Boss and a Disrespectful Colleague

Overview:
The second letter presents a senior-level professional who feels trapped between a conflict-averse boss and a disrespectful colleague. The colleague's detrimental behavior, including disparaging remarks about the company to clients, has led to a toxic work environment. Despite attempts to address the issue, the behaviors persist, causing significant stress and impeding work efficiency.

Key Issues Identified:

• Conflict-Avoidant Leadership: A boss who avoids confrontation and fails to address problematic behaviors.
• Disrespectful Colleague: A peer who prioritizes personal career advancement over teamwork, undermining the company's reputation.
• Lack of Trust and Teamwork: The ongoing toxic behavior erodes trust and hampers collaborative efforts.

Amy Edmondson’s Insights:

1. Reframing Bad Behavior:

   • Quote: “The frame of bad behavior is a problematic frame... try to understand what her colleague is intending to do.” – [20:59]
   • Strategy: Shift the perspective from labeling behaviors as inherently bad to exploring the underlying intentions, fostering a more constructive dialogue.

2. Effective Feedback Techniques:

   • Quote: “The art of giving good feedback is challenging, but I think quite important.” – [24:57]
   • Strategy: Utilize specific, behavior-focused feedback that describes the impact without making personal judgments, facilitating better receptivity.

3. Building Trust Through Curiosity:

   • Quote: “...give feedback that conveys the impact and seeks to understand the colleague's perspective.” – [22:20]
   • Strategy: Engage with the colleague to understand their motivations, using curiosity-driven questions to bridge gaps in understanding and reduce defensiveness.

4. Influencing a Conflict-Avoidant Boss:

   • Quote: “...present evidence... focusing on the impact this is having on me...” – [27:06]
   • Strategy: Communicate the issues to the boss by presenting factual evidence of the negative impacts, both personally and organizationally, rather than expressing personal frustrations.

5. Creating a Fearless Organization:

   • Quote: “...leaders have a responsibility to create the conditions and the expectations where people feel they can do that.” – [26:39]
   • Strategy: Advocate for organizational cultures that encourage open feedback and fearless communication, enabling team members to address issues collaboratively.

Hosts' Summary: Allison Beard and Dan McGinn recognize the challenging position of being caught between a passive superior and an antagonistic peer. They advise the letter writer to initiate direct, yet empathetic conversations with both the colleague and the boss, emphasizing the importance of factual impact over emotional appeals. Additionally, they highlight the necessity of developing a strong relationship with the boss to foster an environment where difficult conversations can occur more freely.

---

Key Takeaways and Conclusions

1. Proactive Communication: Leaders and team members must actively seek to reestablish transparent communication channels, especially after organizational changes that alter team dynamics.

2. Constructive Feedback: Framing feedback in a non-confrontational manner that focuses on behaviors and their impacts can lead to more effective resolutions.

3. Understanding Intentions: Moving beyond labeling behaviors as negative to exploring the underlying intentions can reduce defensiveness and promote mutual understanding.

4. Recognition and Trust: Regular recognition and building trust within teams are crucial for maintaining motivation and ensuring that contributions are acknowledged appropriately.

5. Organizational Culture: Cultivating a fearless organization where open dialogue is encouraged can significantly mitigate dysfunctional team dynamics and enhance overall team performance.

Notable Quotes:

• Amy Edmondson: “Recognition doesn't cost anything... when it's not being given, it's usually blindness.” – [06:37]
• Allison Beard: “Reid Hoffman from LinkedIn said the best way to sort of get a team working together is three words. We are allies.” – [17:38]
• Dan McGinn: “The letter writer should look at the cultures where she's interviewing and make sure that if it's a flat hierarchy, that's what she wants...” – [10:29]

This episode underscores that while team dysfunctions can be complex and multifaceted, strategic communication, empathy, and a commitment to understanding underlying issues are pivotal in restoring and enhancing team dynamics. Leaders are encouraged to foster environments where psychological safety is paramount, enabling teams to navigate challenges collaboratively and effectively.

---

Conclusion:
The episode "How to Fix Dysfunctional Team Dynamics" provides invaluable lessons for leaders and team members alike. By addressing real-life scenarios with expert guidance, Amy Edmondson, along with the hosts, equips listeners with the tools necessary to diagnose and remedy team dysfunctions. Emphasizing the importance of communication, recognition, and understanding intentions, the discussion serves as a comprehensive guide to fostering healthier, more productive workplace environments.

Transcript

[Hannah Bates]

Imagine a state where you can get from big cities to big nature in less than half an hour with some of the best quality of life in the nation. Welcome to Minnesota, America's least stressed state. Learn more at exploreminnesota.com live before we begin, we have a couple of questions. What do you love about HBR and leadership? What do you want less of? What would make HBR and leadership even better? Tell us. Head over to hbr.org podcastsurvey to share your thoughts. We want to make the show even better, but we need your help to do that. So head to hbr.org podcastsurvey thank you. Welcome to HBR on leadership case studies and conversations with the world's top business and management experts hand selected to help you unlock the best in those around you. There are endless types of team dysfunction types easier to fix than others. In this Dear HBR episode from 2018, Harvard Business School professor and psychological safety expert Amy Edmondson joins hosts Allison beard and Dan McGinn. They give advice to listeners who are struggling to manage their own dysfunctional teams, and they talk through what to do when your team communication breaks down, when a team doesn't respect its leader, or when a people pleasing boss won't confront a toxic colleague.

[Allison Beard]

Okay, first question Dear hbr, I've been at my current company for a little over four years and a change in our teamwork has me frustrated. I work in a small strategy office. There's a vice president, one corporate director, two senior managers, and one data manager. I'm one of three senior planning associates. People on our team proudly tout that we have a flat office culture, but lately this has changed drastically. About a year ago, our vp, Corporate Director and two senior managers started having meetings about projects without the rest of us. Ever since, there's been a change in our team culture. Communication is less frequent and less transparent. I've been taken off projects or added to them with little or no discussion, leaving me completely in the dark. The expectation is that a project lead with a senior manager title will work together as equals with a senior planning associate, but this is rarely, if ever, the case. Often, as the senior planning associate, I end up doing most of the work on projects, but I receive hardly any of the credit. The senior managers aren't giving my boss an accurate picture of my performance. I've tried to bring these frustrations to her, but she seems to have little interest in listening to my concerns. I've begun looking for other jobs. What else can I do? Amy, what do you think?

[Amy Edmondson]

This is one of those Situations where first we have to back up and say, you know, teamwork is hard and office dynamics are hard. That's the nature of the beast. I think I would start with this issue of communication now seems to be less transparent. I'm not in the loop anymore.

[Allison Beard]

Right.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think one of the best ways to put yourself back in the loop is ask good questions.

[Dan McGinn]

Can you give us an example of a question this letter writer might ask?

[Amy Edmondson]

The question would address the project, the desire to know more and offer to help with important aspects of the work.

[Allison Beard]

But how do you do that as the junior person, without seeming annoying?

[Amy Edmondson]

It really starts with intent. If your intent is to learn, your intent is to offer value. You will not be seen as annoying, I promise.

[Dan McGinn]

The big question I had here is what happened a year ago that made them change their meetings and their decision making process? Whether there was an incident, whether there was the perception that maybe some of the junior people were making decision making more difficult. I don't know that they just would have woken up one morning and said, hey, let's exclude all the junior people and make the decisions in a closed room and not tell them anything about it. Figuring out what the sort of inciting incident that led to the change might be useful information here.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think that's a great point. It is probably important for the letter writer to better understand what changed and why from others perspective, not just from her own perspective. It's probably not the case that we're going to get the old system back. What we want to have is to make the new system feel engaging and functional for her so that she can make the contributions she believes she can make.

[Allison Beard]

I think that's the real problem here, is that the higher ups haven't done any job of communicating why this change has been made. And it was an organization that touted its lack of hierarchy. How can she, as this very junior person who now is operating in a much more hierarchical environment, flag that poor communication to her bosses and make them communicate?

[Amy Edmondson]

I would have to encourage her to not frame it as poor communication, even though it may be poor communication, but to frame it as an unintended gap.

[Allison Beard]

Right.

[Amy Edmondson]

So I saw a change and I don't fully understand the rationale. I would love to understand it better so that I can work most effectively in this new system.

[Allison Beard]

Right. She does mention that she's talked to her boss and it worries me that she's come to her boss with complaints and not solutions.

[Amy Edmondson]

And complaints by definition are not curiosity.

[Dan McGinn]

Do bosses sometimes unintentionally share the wrong Kind of information?

[Amy Edmondson]

Absolutely. So here's the right kind of information. The. The right kind of information is, first and foremost, why it matters that we do what we do. And then very quickly, I've got to give you information that helps you connect what you do in your role to that ultimate purpose. And quite often, that's not done.

[Allison Beard]

So I think one aspect of engagement that bosses overlook is recognition. And our letter writer really seems to want recognition for the work that she's doing. So. So how does she do a better job of letting her bosses know that that is important to her, and that's what's gonna keep her engaged, even if the flat hierarchy is gone for good?

[Amy Edmondson]

The tragic part about that is that it's free. You know, recognition doesn't cost anything.

[Allison Beard]

Right.

[Amy Edmondson]

And I think when it's not being given, it's usually blindness. It's usually that people are forgetting to realize that very deep human need.

[Dan McGinn]

Amy, do you think there's a link between the fact that. That the culture seems to be getting more autocratic and maybe a little bit more political and the fact that there's a grab for credit and people are suddenly conscious of who's getting credit for what?

[Amy Edmondson]

I think there's absolutely a link. You know, when we're in a hierarchy, we suddenly have the mindset of scarce resources and credit, I think, erroneously in a way, but feels like a scarce resource. People feel it as scarce because they want to have the approval of the higher ups, and they want to be in good positions to move up. This is very human, and there are risks to the quality of the work that can be created by that mindset.

[Allison Beard]

It seems to me that part of the problem is that she's never working directly with her boss. She's working with people who are her boss for that project. So how should she approach that just sort of structural issue she has at this organization?

[Amy Edmondson]

Frankly, you're gonna find this in lots of organizations today. If you leave this one, you may find some very similar dynamics in another one, because there's more and more need for teaming, for different relationships, different collaborations over time, rather than nice little stable, you know, flat teams. And so doing this well, kind of working closely, collaborating with someone on a piece of the work takes skill. And it takes the kind of skill to be constantly saying, here's what I'm trying to do. What am I missing?

[Dan McGinn]

One of the things I think this letter writer should think about is that she's not ever going to be happy with a black box decision, because I said so. And as she tries to find a new boss and a new organization. If that's the route she goes, maybe being aware of that need that she has would be useful.

[Amy Edmondson]

But realize that when you opt for a more open, more transparent culture, you're also opting for a workplace where credit is more difficult to pin on an individual. I mean, they have to be the kind of organization where at the end of the day, we say we did it and it's not clear which one of us contributed how much.

[Dan McGinn]

Maybe this wouldn't be such a problem if this company hadn't advertised itself as flat, non hierarchical democratic. It results in a mismatch and a.

[Allison Beard]

Hypocrisy, which is what's frustrating our letter writer.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think you're absolutely right and it's something I've written about this sort of when people perceive hypocrisy, they are extremely demotivated by it.

[Dan McGinn]

So Alison, what are we telling her?

[Allison Beard]

So we feel for her and we understand that she's been put in a frustrating position, but we'd encourage her to try to understand more about the situation, approaching it not with complaints, but curiosity. What changed and how can I work within this new system? She should recognize that this company might never go back to the promise of flat, open, transparent. But we think that she can find ways to insert herself into the decision making and position herself for getting more credit from her bosses just by asking smart questions. If she does explore opportunities outside, she needs to look at the cultures where she's interviewing and make sure that if it's a flat hierarchy, that's what she wants, because that requires intense interpersonal skills. Or if she actually prefers a more hierarchical structure, because then her tasks and deliverables will be perfectly clear.

[Hannah Bates]

Why should you listen to the Worklab podcast from Microsoft? Because it delivers actionable insights on how business leaders can leverage AI to access untapped value, turbocharged decision making and sharpen their competitive edge in a world of rapid change and economic uncertainty. In each episode, host Molly Wood has an illuminating conversation with a thought leader who has a vital perspective on AI and the future of work. Find the knowledge you need on WorkLab. That's W O R K L A B no spaces available wherever you get your podcasts.

[Allison Beard]

So Dan, should we go to the next question?

[Dan McGinn]

We should, in fact. Dear hbr, I'm writing for advice on how to fix a problem I may have created. I'm a senior director for a consulting company in the healthcare industry. When I started with the company, one of my direct reports was a newly promoted director. She had been in this role for around six months before I joined the company. But she was having performance issues. Clients were complaining. So were the teams she managed As a newbie to the company. I had to figure out what to do. She oversees a handful of operations consulting teams of two to five employees, each working with different clients. These clients were complaining that work was not getting done on time. Also, there was a lack of transparency. The teams complained about her management and her communication style. I put her on a performance improvement plan and coached her. I was more or less micromanaging her. I also assigned her some of our company management training modules. She took the feedback constructively. She worked hard to address her performance issues. The work is now being completed on time at a high level. The clients are happy. The majority of her teams are happy with the noticeable change as well. But there's one lingering problem I didn't anticipate. One of our consulting teams continues to second guess her. They try to go above her to me for minor issues that should be handled by her. I want this team to respect her position and her decisions. The last time this came up, I responded that their director briefed me and I support her decision. But am I only perpetuating the issue by admitting I'm checking off on her decisions? How can I get this team to respect the chain of command and give this new and improved team leader the benefit of the doubt regarding her decisions?

[Amy Edmondson]

First of all, I love how he says at the beginning, I'm writing for advice on a problem I may have helped create. That is such a strong sign of leadership and rare, you know, when someone comes to us with the recognition that what they've done may have contributed to the challenge they face. I'm just, I think we're halfway there.

[Allison Beard]

Even after he scored this huge victory by turning this underperforming employee into a high performing one. I mean, that's pretty impressive.

[Amy Edmondson]

Exactly. This concern that he expresses that other people may not be fully seeing the change or may not yet be giving her the benefit of the doubt. This is one of those changes that I think is pretty easy to address.

[Allison Beard]

Wow. Because I totally didn't think it was easy.

[Amy Edmondson]

Really.

[Allison Beard]

So go ahead.

[Amy Edmondson]

See, I just think when people come to him with the minor issues, be very frank with them. I see this as a minor issue. I completely trust the senior director to handle it. Let me know if I'm missing something. But essentially he can be quite direct about the worry he has in this case.

[Dan McGinn]

Yeah. I agree with Amy that two or three well crafted emails could turn this around, you know, if Amy were the subordinate, this is Amy's call. But thanks for reaching out and copy Amy on it or copy the whole team on it. A few demonstrations of the fact that she has authority and respect and is not going to be second guessed. And I think that this element of the problem could go away.

[Allison Beard]

My concern about this boss is that he's done too much for the senior director and he's still trying to solve even these minor problems for her. She needs to solve this problem herself.

[Amy Edmondson]

It may be that both need to happen. I agree with the idea that he probably needs to be stepping back, which is why I like what Dan said, which is answer the question, but answer it in such a way that you convey and demonstrate that this really is the manager's call.

[Allison Beard]

Yeah.

[Dan McGinn]

I wonder if he could have in some ways shown more discretion or been more private so that the team wasn't hyper aware of the fact that she was under the microscope and that she was being counseled and coached.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think that's a really good point. I'm not sure how much other people knew she was on this program.

[Allison Beard]

They did know she was an underperformer.

[Amy Edmondson]

They knew she was an underperformer. Yeah, for sure. Certainly these kinds of developmental opportunities should be done privately and with great concern for people's sort of reputation and privacy. But this is an issue between one of her consulting teams and the letter writer. And it's only one, frankly, not one of a handful. But that consulting team, I think, also needs feedback.

[Allison Beard]

Yeah. I mean, I do wonder what went wrong with this particular team.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think that's the critical issue is first to be curious. Cause we don't know why this team isn't yet happy or why this team is not giving her the benefit of the doubt. So the first thing we have to do is find out is to learn. And we may discover that there are some dysfunctions, you know, they've banded together against her and that that needs to be really looked at and really addressed. We just don't know.

[Allison Beard]

Or she's not leading this particular team as well as she is the others.

[Amy Edmondson]

Right. And it could be a different kind of client. It could be. There could be lots of contributing factors. And job one is to learn what they might be.

[Allison Beard]

I definitely agree with that. Frankly, I was surprised that she did such a good job of earning back the trust of all the other teams. So I think that's where I'm coming from. But I do wonder how they get to a place of trust without it just taking time.

[Amy Edmondson]

I mean, maybe we can do a better job advertising within of how well the other teams are doing, that the clients are happy, the teams are happy. Maybe there isn't a clear enough line of sight on that.

[Allison Beard]

That's a terrific point. The idea of learning from what happened with the other teams, why do you now respect this boss? What's she been doing for you differently? I think that's a fabulous idea.

[Dan McGinn]

Yeah. I think the fact that this is a two to five person team is a big advantage here in the sense that it would not take 20 minutes for the letter writer to sit down with each of them and be very candid and say, look, I know we had a little bit of a rocky start for this new boss, but my sense is she's turned the corner. I trust her. Let's make this work.

[Allison Beard]

I feel like you both come at persuasion from sort of fact based, you know, let's show the team the evidence of how well she's doing. And for me, I want her to emotionally win these people over. Reid Hoffman from LinkedIn said the best way to sort of get a team working together is three words. We are allies. So how can either the boss or the manager just get that connection and trust happening on this team?

[Amy Edmondson]

For me, the best way to improve a relationship is to show interest in them. You know, act like a leader, act like a manager. That is there to make them do the best possible job for the clients. And that is the way you build the relationship. And the senior director who wrote the letter can coach her in doing that.

[Allison Beard]

That's great advice. So, Dan, what are we telling our letter writer?

[Dan McGinn]

First, we're giving him a lot of credit. He recognizes that this is a problem he created. He owns it. He's taking responsibility. He's also turned this performance around. You know, for a new boss, there's often a temptation to just start moving people out of the organization. He didn't do that. He stepped in, he coached. He, he got this new manager who was struggling up to par and beyond par. So first, a lot of credit to him in terms of solving this problem. We hope that it could be done fairly easily with a few gestures and candid communication to the team, that the manager has his trust, that he expects the manager to be able to handle minor decisions without much input from him. The idea that he may have been micromanaging for a little bit of time, but now he's going to be hands off and, and that she has his trust. We also think it's worth looking at whether there was anything that was done during the coaching and performance improvement with this manager. That could have been done a little bit more discreetly to try to keep the problem a little bit less transparent to the teams. We also think the manager has some work to do here. She's succeeded in getting the other teams on her side. She needs to find a way to win over this one team that's a little slow to get there.

[Allison Beard]

Dear hbr, I'm a senior level professional working with two other senior women and I feel trapped in the middle. My boss is a pleaser and afraid of conflict, though she does complain a lot. My colleague is disrespectful and focuses only on doing whatever helps her career. For example, she speaks disparagingly about the company to clients. But each time I've communicated that I find the behavior unacceptable, it's accomplished nothing. No one wants to address it. So she's been allowed to continue with bad behavior. It's getting worse as she becomes more embedded with clients. There's no teamwork, no trust. I'm now tolerating it because my complaints haven't gone anywhere. But I feel I'm enabling my boss, letting her off the hook from having to make tough decisions and rein in this bad employee. The situation is causing me stress. It's a daily distraction. It's getting in the way of work. I've been with the company for 12 months. Should I just accept that my teammates won't change and move on?

[Amy Edmondson]

I have enormous empathy for the challenge that she faces. It's going to be a difficult one to unlock without stopping to do some soul searching of her own.

[Allison Beard]

What kind of soul searching?

[Amy Edmondson]

So I think the frame of bad behavior is a problematic frame. What she needs to do is recognize first and foremost that she is very able to see the impact that the behavior is having. And she is blind to. We all are blind to the intentions because as long as it's framed as bad behavior, it's so threatening and difficult because all you can do is tell the person, well, that's really bad and not working, or stay silent. Those are your only two options and neither one of them works very well. So what she needs to do instead is try to understand what her colleague is intending to do.

[Dan McGinn]

That's an interesting perspective and I didn't think of that one at all. The idea that there may be a motive or an intention to speaking badly about the company should maybe our letter writer ask her colleague, hey, help me understand. How is it good for us when you badmouth the company?

[Allison Beard]

I'm sure you have it sounds a little aggressive.

[Amy Edmondson]

Yeah, no, it's a little too pointed. It's a little too pointed.

[Allison Beard]

But I would feel the same way.

[Amy Edmondson]

Let's remember that wonderful phrase, benefit of the doubt. We've got to start. We may be wrong, but we've got to start by giving the colleague the benefit of the doubt.

[Dan McGinn]

All right, so if I was a little heavy handed in asking the question that way, how would the two of you ask it?

[Allison Beard]

I wouldn't not ask it because I actually do think it's bad behavior. So I would really struggle to come from a place of curiosity. But, Amy, you answered it.

[Amy Edmondson]

But here's the deal. The phrase speaking disparagingly about the company to clients is ever so slightly abstract. We don't actually know what that means. Right. It could mean something as innocuous as we are unable to get things turned around within a week's time. It's just not something we can do. Right. Which is fairly factual, but could sound disparaging because it has a negative tone to it. Or it could be, oh, we're bad, we're hopeless. I mean, we just don't know exactly what that means.

[Allison Beard]

Or it could be the cafeteria isn't great.

[Amy Edmondson]

Right, Right, exactly. So it's too abstract for us to know. And so what we want is for her to get a little bit interested in what the colleague sees herself as doing.

[Dan McGinn]

You've already changed my view of this letter a lot.

[Allison Beard]

But let's not forget that our letter writer also says she's disrespectful and focuses only on doing whatever helps her career. Sounds like interpersonal communication. It sounds like a credit stealing or not sharing situation. 2. I would like to give our letter writer the benefit of the doubt in that this woman isn't a great peer.

[Amy Edmondson]

I agree. I mean, it sounds very much like this woman is not a great peer. I just don't. I don't hear that as other evidence. I hear it as other attributions. And most of us don't see ourselves as putting me first or making my career the most important thing over. So these are the kinds of things that all of us are guilty of saying about others and rarely believe that we engage in. And yet we are at risk for others believing that we're doing that. And we wouldn't know because they don't tell us. So all I'm saying is let's start by walking down what Chris Erdris used to call the ladder of inference. Let's get from more abstract attributions to More concrete data. When you said or did X in that client meeting, I worried, you know, and it conveys the, it describes the behavior and the impact it had on me. It doesn't say when you said you that was really bad and you really messed up and you better stop that because it's unacceptable.

[Allison Beard]

Right.

[Amy Edmondson]

Because most of us never saw ourselves as behaving in ways that are unacceptable or we wouldn't do it. So the art of giving good feedback is challenging, but I think quite important.

[Allison Beard]

Did she make a mistake by going to the boss so early?

[Amy Edmondson]

It's hard to say, but I do think it's important to first give feedback to the colleague. And then if timely, skillful feedback doesn't get you anywhere, then I do think you have a responsibility on behalf of the company to ask for help from the boss.

[Dan McGinn]

I think about you and I, Alison.

[Allison Beard]

Uh oh, who am I in this scenario?

[Dan McGinn]

I was about to say something very nice about you. Really? You and I actually give each other feedback. Like after a meeting, you won't hesitate to pull me aside and say, hey, I would have said this differently and I do the same to you. But that comes out of a pretty close relationship. And it's really hard to give peer to peer feedback lesser until you have that kind of really tight relationship with the person which she doesn't have in this situation.

[Amy Edmondson]

Yeah, no, and I would love, I agree with you, Dan, and I'd love to change that. I think that there is at least the possibility for organizations to create that kind of expectation for everybody. In fact, that's what I might think of as a fearless organization. You two have a long standing work relationship and so you trust each other, you respect each other, you know you can do this. But I would like it to be possible for people who have just met and who work for the same organization to do that. And I understand that's a tall order. And I think that today's leaders have a responsibility to create the conditions and the expectations where people feel they can do that.

[Allison Beard]

Well, that brings us to our letter writer's second problem. She has a conflict avoidant boss. So how does she influence her boss to open up those sorts of conversations?

[Amy Edmondson]

This is a great opportunity for telling your boss the impact it's having on you. Right. It's, we're all tempted to say, boss, you're doing X, Y, Z wrong and it's bad, you know, it's problematic. I think we can readily recognize that won't get you very far.

[Allison Beard]

Right.

[Amy Edmondson]

Because nobody, you know, for obvious reasons. So instead what you can say is here's the impact this is having on me and present evidence, you know. Present. Yeah. So you're, you're coming at it from the I position or even focusing on.

[Dan McGinn]

The performance of the company. I'm not a boss, but I think I would be more receptive to the argument that this is causing our client billings to go down to be more compelling than a. This is making me feel kind of.

[Amy Edmondson]

Well, I don't mean sorry. So I should be clear. When I say impact, I don't mean feelings necessarily. Although feelings matter too. But all I'm saying is you've got to come at the problem with the recognition that yours is simply an account of reality, not reality itself. So here's what I see. I see her do X, I see and worry about impact.

[Allison Beard]

Y. I was worried that this team is so small, it's so hard to take the personalities out of it, you know, it can't be, oh, I'd like to change the way our team works and open us up to having more candid conversation without the colleague feeling as if it's all designed for her specifically, you know, especially since the issues have already been raised.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think she should offer her help. Right. So she should come to the boss and say, here's my concern. Right? Here's why it's my concern. Here's what I've seen and I do worry. Is there any way I can help you in addressing this situation? Yeah, it doesn't, don't even leave open the possibility that the situation shouldn't be addressed, but offer that help with an understanding that. I know this is challenging.

[Allison Beard]

Both of you are suggesting very direct ways of approaching this. Are there any subtle nudges that you can use to encourage either this disrespectful colleague or this conflict avoidant boss to improve their behavior without making it confrontational on this very small team?

[Dan McGinn]

Yeah. I would think whether there's anything she can do in subtle ways to try to limit or undo the damage to clients that these remarks are having. Almost kind of like a good cop, bad cop kind of scenario. Maybe there's a way in a follow up conversation to explain away these negative remarks because it seems like at the end of the day that's the biggest problem here, is that the clients are being left with negative impressions. And, and this is somewhat of an impression management kind of thing. And can she nudge that in the other direction?

[Allison Beard]

So at the end of the letter she does ask, is it time to move on? Do we think that she should even consider that possibility.

[Amy Edmondson]

I think it's possible the question would be, has she given up? Because if she has given up, she's not going to be effective anymore and she might as well go and look for the next organization. The one worry I would have is be wary of expecting the perfect organization to show up. It won't. There will always be conflict resistant bosses. There'll always be colleagues whose behavior you think is ineffective. All of us have to learn how to manage these as well as we can.

[Dan McGinn]

So Allison, what's our advice?

[Allison Beard]

So we think that first she needs to try to take a step back, understand whether her perceptions of her colleague and her boss are totally accurate. One way she can investigate this is by engaging with the colleague first. Ask questions about her intent, why she's behaving with the clients the way she is, and then give specific feedback about why she's worried, what she thinks the potential impact to the team and the performance will be if she's considering other organizations after she's tried engagement, she just really needs to understand that she'll have these problems in most organizations and so she needs to think carefully about making a quick switch.

[Dan McGinn]

Amy, thanks for coming on the show.

[Amy Edmondson]

It was a pleasure to be here.

[Hannah Bates]

That was HBS Professor Amy Edmondson in conversation with Alison beard and Dan McGinn on Dear HBR Edmondson is the author of the book the Fearless Creating Psychological Safety in the Work Workplace for Learning, Innovation and Growth. We'll be back next Wednesday with another handpicked conversation about leadership from Harvard Business Review. If you found this episode helpful, share it with your friends and colleagues and follow our show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. While you're there, be sure to leave us a review. And when you're ready for more podcasts, articles, case studies, books and videos with the world's top business and management experts, you'll find it [e-mail] this episode was produced by Kurt Nickish and me, Hannah Bates. Kurt is also our editor. Music by Coma Media and special thanks to Ian Fox, Maureen Hoch, Erica Truxler, Ramsay Kabaz, Nicole Smith, and Bartholomew and you our listener. See you next week.