Easy Alignment Makes Me Uncomfortable

A few years back, I read a compelling book titled Five Temptations Of A CEO by Patrick Lencioni. There’s a line of thinking from that book that has stayed with me over the years, because it is counterintuitive.

Most leaders, especially as they grow, start to value harmony. Fewer disagreements. Smoother meetings. Faster alignment. It feels like progress.

But Lencioni, in the book, flips that idea on its head.

He argues that great CEOs don’t pursue harmony. They invite conflict. Not the loud, emotional kind. But the uncomfortable, thoughtful kind where ideas collide and assumptions get questioned.

Similarly, they don’t chase certainty. Because certainty is often an illusion at scale. What they really need is clarity. Enough clarity to move forward, even when not everything is known.

I’ve found this to be true.

The bigger the decision, the more it sits at the intersection of opposing views. Speed vs rigour. Growth vs risk. Short-term vs. long-term.

Trying to eliminate that tension is the mistake.

The real work is to hold both sides long enough, debate them honestly, and then decide with conviction.

Clarity emerges from that tension. Not from avoiding it.

Harmony feels good in the moment.

But conflict, handled well, is what actually moves things forward.