Unlock hundreds more features
Save your Quiz to the Dashboard
View and Export Results
Use AI to Create Quizzes and Analyse Results

Sign inSign in with Facebook
Sign inSign in with Google

Discover Your Team's Five Dysfunctions - Take the Quiz

Ready to assess your team's trust, conflict and accountability? Start the Five Dysfunctions quiz now!

Editorial: Review CompletedCreated By: Andrew PlinerUpdated Aug 24, 2025
2-5mins
Profiles
Paper art illustration for team dysfunctions quiz on teal background

This Five Dysfunctions of a Team quiz helps you rate your team on trust, conflict, commitment, accountability, and results. Get a quick read on where you stand and spot the next small step to improve. When you finish, you can explore more with our team building activities or try a cooperative learning quiz .

A teammate hints at a risk but lacks evidence. What do you do first?
Invite a safe, no-blame huddle to surface all weak signals
Structure a quick debate to test the risk from multiple angles
Define criteria for whether and when to escalate, then decide
Set a checkpoint with clear owners to verify and report back
undefined
You are kicking off a cross-team initiative. What is your opening move?
Establish norms for candor, confidentiality, and admitting unknowns
Outline a respectful challenge framework and rules of engagement
Clarify decision rights, priorities, and approval paths
Define metrics, owners, and review cadence on a shared board
undefined
A teammate discloses a mistake that may slip the timeline. Your response focuses on:
Normalizing the disclosure and extracting the full context safely
Examining assumptions and debating impact pathways openly
Reconfirming scope, adjusting milestones, and recording the decision
Setting a corrective plan, checkpoints, and visible follow-through
undefined
A design debate is getting heated. What do you introduce next?
A short reset inviting each person to share concerns without rebuttal
A time-boxed pro/con debate with a facilitator and evidence requests
Decision criteria and a DRI to converge on a call by a set time
A clear action list with owners to test both options against outcomes
undefined
A meeting ends without clear ownership. What is your next step?
Recap who feels safe owning which parts and why
Call out the ambiguity and invite challenges to assumptions
Publish a decision log with owners, deadlines, and success criteria
Stand up a tracker with measurable checkpoints and peer reminders
undefined
Deadlines are drifting without updates. How do you intervene?
Create a blame-free space for frank status and blockers
Interrogate risks and trade-offs in a focused challenge session
Re-baseline commitments with documented scope and dates
Institute visible check-ins and outcome-based progress measures
undefined
A stakeholder asks why the team pivoted. What do you provide?
Transparent rationale and what was learned, including missteps
A comparison of alternatives and the debated risks
A concise decision record citing criteria and owner
A performance snapshot linking the pivot to target metrics
undefined
A new member joins mid-project. What do you prioritize for them?
Psychological safety norms and where to surface concerns
How to raise dissent and challenge assumptions productively
Decision map, owners, and current commitments
Dashboards, check-in cadence, and definitions of done
undefined
A rumor is eroding confidence in leadership. Your play is to:
Host an open forum with confidentiality rules and clear facts
Invite pointed questions and address contradictions head-on
Publish a clarifying decision narrative and next steps
Track concerns to closure with visible actions and owners
undefined
The team is split on an approach with time pressure mounting. You:
Ensure everyone can voice risks without repercussion first
Run a rapid debate with red team and blue team roles
Apply decision criteria, secure buy-in, and commit to a path
Set a short experiment with KPIs and an owner to validate quickly
undefined
Sprint review shows mixed results. What lens do you bring?
What felt unsafe or hidden that we should surface now
Which assumptions held, which failed, and why
Which commitments are kept, updated, or retired
How outcomes compare to targets and what to adjust
undefined
Two teams keep clashing on priorities. Your intervention is:
A joint session to align on shared fears and needs
A structured sparring match to surface trade-offs explicitly
A prioritized roadmap with owners and decision rules
A shared scorecard and bi-weekly checkpoint cadence
undefined
An executive wants weekly status. What do you propose?
Real talk highlights: risks, misses, and asks without spin
A brief challenge block on key risks and assumptions
A concise commitment register with changes since last week
A dashboard of outcome metrics with owners and due dates
undefined
You are designing the retrospective focus for this month. Choose:
Moments of candor, safety, and disclosure that accelerated learning
Debates that changed our mind and how we can sharpen them
Decisions that stuck vs. slipped and why
Accountability practices that improved outcomes
undefined
In a 1:1, someone shares a sensitive risk that could derail launch. You first:
Clarify confidentiality and agree how to surface it safely
Test the claim by inviting counterpoints and evidence
Define the decision path, criteria, and who must be informed
Create an action plan with dates, owner, and success signal
undefined
Scope increased quietly over two sprints. Your next move is:
Invite an amnesty-style reveal of adds and their origins
Challenge the necessity of adds and quantify opportunity costs
Re-baseline scope formally with trade-offs and approvals
Update the backlog, owners, and checkpoints transparently
undefined
Priorities changed twice this week. How do you steady the team?
Share context openly and normalize uncertainty signals
Name the conflicting assumptions and test them quickly
Freeze a decision window with clear criteria to commit
Reset the plan with measurable outcomes and check-in rhythm
undefined
Launch readiness criteria are disputed. Your facilitation is to:
Let concerns be voiced without penalty to reveal hidden risks
Debate the criteria evidence and risk tolerance explicitly
Document minimum thresholds and secure visible sign-off
Tie each criterion to a metric, owner, and test date
undefined
For an offsite, what primary objective do you pick?
Rebuilding trust and norms for candid updates
Sharpening challenge skills to avoid groupthink
Aligning on few, clear commitments and decision rules
Setting measurable goals and accountability rituals
undefined
A release failed. What is your first post-mortem anchor?
Psych safety pledge and blameless disclosure of contributing factors
Map faulty assumptions and where dissent was suppressed
Clarify decision points where criteria or ownership was weak
Define corrective actions with owners, dates, and metrics
undefined
Team members hesitate to share early status. What do you try?
Normalize rough updates with an explicit no-repercussion rule
Run short hot-seat sessions to question blocking assumptions
Introduce a shared template for decisions and status clarity
Set lightweight daily checkpoints tied to outcomes
undefined
Mid-project, ownership lines blur. Your instinct is to:
Surface discomforts and clarify expectations jointly
Call out the confusion and test rival hypotheses of ownership
Redraw the RACI and confirm buy-in to decisions
Publish a who-does-what board with review dates
undefined
A partner team misses a handoff twice. You start by:
Opening a candid, blame-free conversation about constraints
Challenging assumptions about capacity and sequencing
Rewriting the handoff contract with clear SLAs and owners
Instituting a visible handoff tracker with due dates
undefined
Your team fears escalation. What practice do you add?
Protected escalation windows and scripts to reduce fear
A challenge ladder clarifying when and how to elevate issues
A decision escalation path with criteria and approvers
A weekly risk review with owners and mitigation KPIs
undefined
Meetings sprawl without closure. Your go-to tool is:
A norm to check emotional temperature and safety mid-call
A challenge queue with time boxes and blockers labeled
A decision log that captures calls, owners, and deadlines
An actions board reviewed at the end with status updates
undefined
A senior leader criticizes the team publicly. Your first move:
Create a safe debrief to process impact and restore trust
Request a facts-based follow-up to challenge inaccuracies
Document what changes, if any, to commitments are required
Translate feedback into specific, owned improvement tasks
undefined
Deliverables are high-quality but late. Your bias is to:
Explore unspoken pressures that delay updates
Interrogate where pushback on scope was missing
Tighten milestone commitments and criteria for changes
Implement interim deadlines with visible progress gates
undefined
Peer feedback is underused. What do you implement?
Psych-safe feedback rounds with opt-in sharing prompts
Debate clubs to practice respectfully challenging ideas
Feedback tied to decision moments and role expectations
Feedback linked to outcomes dashboards and check-ins
undefined
Clear decision rights reduce unproductive debate.
True
False
undefined
Trust only grows when mistakes are punished quickly.
True
False
undefined
0

Profiles

Discover where your team excels and where it can grow across trust, conflict, commitment, accountability, and results. Use these outcome profiles to interpret your five dysfunctions of a team quiz results and plan actionable next steps.
  1. Peak Performers -

    Your team demonstrates high trust, embraces healthy conflict, commits to decisions, holds each other accountable, and relentlessly pursues results. You've mastered the five dysfunctions of a team quiz, proving your collaboration is best-in-class. Tip: Keep momentum by scheduling quarterly team dysfunctions assessments and celebrating collective wins.

  2. Collaborative Climbers -

    Your group builds solid trust and commitment but often shies away from the productive conflict that fuels innovation. This book quiz on the book five dysfunctions of a team highlights your strengths and a single gap: open debate. Action step: Introduce structured conflict exercises to surface fresh ideas and drive continuous improvement.

  3. Committed Contenders -

    You show strong commitment to goals and maintain accountability, yet vulnerability-based trust remains a hurdle. Your team dysfunctions assessment reveals that building personal connections will unlock deeper collaboration. Quick win: Incorporate regular trust-building activities - like shared storytelling - to strengthen bonds and boost overall performance.

  4. Accountability Anchors -

    While committed to outcomes and quick to hold one another responsible, your team often skips the trust and conflict steps that prevent blind spots. The five dysfunctions of a team quiz pinpoints this imbalance. Tip: Foster open discussion forums where candid feedback is encouraged, so accountability drives real progress.

  5. Growth Needed -

    Your results indicate challenges across multiple dysfunctions - trust, conflict, commitment, accountability, and results. This five dysfunctions of a team quiz outcome is a call to action: start with foundational trust exercises and revisit Patrick Lencioni's strategies. Next step: Enroll in a team development program to transform these insights into lasting change.

Powered by: Quiz Maker