Canadian HR Reporter

APRIL 21, 2014 CANADIAN HR REPORTER & STRATEGIC CAPABILITY NETWORK When teams turn toxic When teams turn toxic Dysfunctional teams kill productivity – but they're not always easy to spot Dysfunctional teams kill productivity – but they're not always easy to spot BY LIZ BERNIER YELLING, SCREAMING, backstabbing and passive-aggressive be- haviour — these are just a few of the things that come to mind when thinking of dysfunctional teams. Liane Davey has seen more than her share of these over-the-top behaviours. But devolving into a screaming match is not the only way for a team to become dys- functional, she says — in fact, the most insidious teams are often the ones that don't appear dysfunc- tional at all. at was the core message of a Strategic Capability Network event in Toronto delivered by Davey, vice-president of team so- lutions at Knightsbridge Human Capital Solutions. e promise of a great team is that everything works better, faster and easier, says Davey. But, all too often, that is not the reality. "Unfortunately for many of us, the sad reality of teams is that we spend way too much time in meetings because everyone has to speak and somehow we've de- cided that all people must agree before we move forward. ere's passive-aggressiveness — we nod our heads in the room and we then try and re-open decisions through back-channels. The reality of teams today is either unproductive, uncollaborative or, in many cases, truly toxic to individuals at the organization," she says. Just like environmental toxins, sometimes these issues can be immediately obvious, while other times they are diffi cult to spot. "A lot of people react when I use the word 'toxic' — it's a very strong word. But I chose it very deliberately because toxic teams are very much like toxins in our environment. There are toxins circling that you can come across that will cause you to keel over im- mediately. And some of the toxic teams are teams that have abso- lutely ground their organizations to a halt, and it's a very, very obvi- ous problem," she says. "But there are other toxins in teams that are actually not things that you can see. They're not things you might even recognize but, slowly and surely over time, they begin to bog down the team, make it less eff ective — and those are the kinds of things we probably need to be even more aware of." Two of the more obvious types of toxic teams are the "crisis junk- ies" and the "royal rumble" teams, says Davey. A royal rumble type is a team that frequently boils over into loud, confrontational argu- ments — while a crisis junkie team is exactly what the name implies. "Crisis junkie teams are teams that can only function in a crisis. And what happens is they start to manufacture crises. But as you start to manufacture crises, they have to be bigger and bigger and more critical crises to actually get people to lift their heads. And then in business as usual, things stagnate — they get nothing done," she says. en, there are the less obvious types of toxic teams — which can often be the most insidious, says Davey. e "bleeding back" team uses passive-aggressive behaviour, back-channels and backstabbing as its modus operandi. By all indi- cations, this team seems to work really well together in meetings and face-to-face — but don't turn your back. "If you go to the water cooler or if you are in the washroom or be- hind a closed door, you wouldn't recognize that as the same group of people or the same conversa- tion that you saw in the (meet- ing) room. Passive-aggressive behaviour. Gossip. Sarcasm. Re- opening of decisions through back-channels. So this is a really scary kind of team. And it's actu- ally, in surveys that we've done, the number one most prevalent team in Canada," says Davey. "I'm pretty convinced that this ALIGN > pg. 12 " ere are toxins in teams that are actually not things you can see. Slowly and surely, over time, they begin to bog down the team, make it less eff ective."

• Cover