We use cookies to improve your experience on our site.
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more information on how we use cookies, view our privacy policy.
I once had a coaching client whose career was suddenly jeopardized by a series of team performance mishaps. Several wheels had fallen off. Top management now noticed the adverse effects. They knew just who to blame. After some discussion and inquiry with my client, she realized that she was working with several flawed assumptions. She assumed that everyone on her team had her same high level of personal accountability. The result is she didn’t believe it was necessary to hold them accountable and regularly discuss how they tracked and improved the performance of their teams. Her assumption that accountability discussions were unnecessary also served her belief that being a leader who conducts uncomfortable discussions made her a bad boss.
In the heading above, I carefully altered the parenting axiom that might condone Corporal Punishment. By replacing the word “rod” with “carpet”, I want to empathize that holding others accountable for their responsibilities and promises means you will inevitably need to call them on the carpet to discuss results and performance. Embracing the belief that effective leaders should never take a parental approach can be hazardous to your career. Especially when you’re attempting to lead people who are behaving like children. Let’s face it, sometimes tough love requires uncomfortable conversations. When we avoid them, whose interests are really being served? How long will it take before staying in your comfort zone makes things uncomfortable for everyone?
I’m not talking about saying “I love you” here. Although these words can establish an environment for tough love in the form of accountability and/or misalignment recognition and awareness.
If you seek to avoid being parental, you’ll need develop skills that tactfully move your conversations to adult mode. How? You need to foster an environment where everyone can effectively ask and answer some form of this simple, three word question.
Teams often get tangled in the how and the what—the tactics, preferences, and personalities that can quietly hijack progress. But when a leader introduces the question, “What’s the goal?”, it cuts through that noise like a scalpel.
It’s not just a question; it’s a reframing device. It moves the conversation from opinions to outcomes, from emotion to intention. Suddenly, the problem isn’t who’s right. It’s what’s right for the goal. The tone changes. The body language relaxes. People start listening again.
This simple question restores shared purpose. It reminds the team why they’re there in the first place—and that alignment on direction matters more than agreement on method.
When the focus shifts to the goal, ego steps aside, collaboration steps forward, and accountability starts to feel less like blame and more like commitment.
Before your next team meeting, listen for moments when discussion drifts into personal territory or tactical rabbit holes. That’s your cue to ask:
“What’s the goal?”
Then pause and let the silence do its work. You’ll often see a visible mindset shift as the team re-centers on purpose.
My favorite book on the subject is The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni. It’s a quick reading parable.
For your Cliff Notes coverage, here are his 5 Dysfunctions along with their symptoms and by-products.
Dysfunction | Symptom |
Inattention to Results | Status & Ego |
Avoidance of Accountability | Low Standards |
Lack of Commitment | Ambiguity |
Fear of Conflict | Artificial Harmony |
Absence of Trust | Invulnerability |
As you learn to you effectively challenge your team by asking “What’s the goal?“, you thereby move away from these performance killing dysfunctions and thereby build an achievement centered culture. You avoid making it personal in favor of being universally practical.
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more information on how we use cookies, view our privacy policy.