Musar and Healthy Conflict: A Biblical Lens on Team Health

Recently, the International Leadership Team (ILT) of SEND International went through an exercise to identify our strengths and weaknesses in relation to Patrick Lencioni’s model of the Five Dysfunctions of a Team. (Yes, Lencioni wrote a book about this, and it definitely is worth reading.) This framework has been widely used in leadership development because it highlights common barriers to team effectiveness.

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Lencioni’s identifies these five dysfunctions:

Absence of Trust – Team members are unwilling to be vulnerable.
Fear of Conflict – The desire to preserve artificial harmony stifles productive, ideological conflict.
Lack of Commitment – Without clarity and buy-in, decisions lack support.
Avoidance of Accountability – The need to avoid interpersonal discomfort prevents members from holding one another accountable.
Inattention to Results – Pursuit of individual goals erodes focus on collective success.

Fear of Conflict and What Leaders Can Do

Fear of conflict sits second on Lencioni’s list. When teams avoid conflict, they often sacrifice clarity and creativity. Lencioni argues that avoiding conflict produces artificial harmony, weak decisions, and hidden resentment. Healthy conflict is passionate, unfiltered debate about ideas, not personal attacks.

Lencioni advises leaders to address this fear of conflict on their teams by doing the following: ¹

Model openness and invite dissent – Show it is safe to disagree.
Mine for conflict – Actively surface issues people hesitate to raise.
Normalize disagreement – Reframe debate as a sign of commitment and a path to clarity.
Create safety for vulnerability – Go first in admitting weaknesses and asking for help.
Keep discussion focused on issues, not personalities – Ensure conflict remains constructive.

Stirring up conflict in Proverbs

At first glance, Lencioni’s call to “mine for conflict” seems to contradict Proverbs 6:19, which says the LORD hates “one who stirs up conflict in the community.” Stirring up conflict sounds a lot like “mining” for conflict. But really that is purely a superficial resemblance.

First of all, there is a significant difference between stirring up conflict and mining for conflict. To “stir up” in Hebrew means literally to “send out” or “to spread”. In other words, the evil person is seeking to extend and multiply the dissension and discord within the community. In contrast, Lencioni is not advocating for creating more animosity within the team. Instead, he encourages leaders to surface disagreement that already exists but is hidden. His or her goal is to prevent artificial harmony, which can lead to poor decisions and lack of trust. By getting team members to talk about their differences of opinion, the team leader is actually preventing the conflict to spreading and souring interpersonal relationships on the team.

Medan: Harmful conflict

But the differences between mining for conflict and stirring up conflict are even more substantial. The Hebrew word for “conflict” in Proverbs is referring to something quite different from what Lencioni is talking about. The word “conflict” in Proverbs 6:19 is a translation of the Hebrew word mĕdān, which denotes strife or bitter conflict characterized by heated, often violent dissension. The verse condemns someone who stirs up conflict maliciously—creating division, gossip, and strife for selfish purposes. This is destructive behavior that fractures community.

The person who stirs up conflict is grouped with traits like:

Haughty eyes → Pride
A lying tongue → Deceit
A heart that devises wicked schemes → Selfish ambition

Other verses reinforce this:

Proverbs 13:10 – “Where there is strife, there is pride.”
Proverbs 16:28 – “A perverse person stirs up conflict.”
Proverbs 28:25 – “The greedy stir up conflict.”

In summary, Proverbs warns against divisive conflict (rooted in pride, selfish ambition, or deceit). Lencioni promotes constructive conflict (rooted in honesty, clarity, and commitment to truth).

Musar: Corrective Instruction

But the Bible also speaks about communication that is constructive, even though it may be uncomfortable for both the speaker and the hearer.

Proverbs 27:17: “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” Healthy tension can refine ideas and strengthen relationships.
Ephesians 4:15: “Speak the truth in love.” Truthful conversations—even when uncomfortable—are essential for growth.

So if conflict can be good and healthy, I wondered if Proverbs might have another word that more accurately describes speech that contributes to productive, constructive conflict. I thought of the Hebrew word musar (מוּסָר), found 30 times in Proverbs.

Proverbs 1:7: The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 12:1: Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but whoever hates correction is stupid.

While not generally talking about communication between peers, musar is related to Lencioni’s understanding of healthy conflict. The Hebrew word translates as “discipline” or “instruction,” though it can also mean chastisement and refers to corrective discipline. The word derives from the root yasar, meaning “to discipline, admonish, instruct or chasten.”

Like conflict, musar can be uncomfortable and even painful. Furthermore, like Lencioni’s healthy conflict about ideas, musar also is constructive—it aims to guide others toward wisdom and strengthen the community. It is redemptive and growth-oriented, much like Lencioni’s vision for healthy conflict.

Questions Before Engaging in Conflict

So we want to avoid medan and practice musar. How do we know whether our heart is in the right place, so that our speech will be characterized more by musar than by medan?

Here’s a practical self-assessment checklist to help someone (me!) discern whether the conflict we are entering is constructive or destructive:

What is my motive?
- Am I seeking clarity and truth for the good of the team?
- Or am I trying to win, prove myself right, or protect my pride?
Is the issue important enough to address?
- Does this matter affect team health, mission, or decision quality?
- Or is it a personal preference or minor irritation?
Am I focused on ideas or on people?
- Will my comments critique the issue, not attack someone’s character?
- Or am I tempted to make it personal?
Am I prepared to listen as well as speak?
- Do I genuinely want to understand others’ perspectives?
- Or am I only interested in pushing my viewpoint?
Is my tone respectful and my language gracious?
- Would my words build trust and invite dialogue?
- Or could they escalate tension or cause harm?
Am I aiming for reconciliation and unity?
- Will this conversation help us move forward together?
- Or will it deepen division and resentment?
Have I prayed or reflected before engaging?
- Am I approaching this with humility and dependence on God?
- Or am I reacting impulsively out of frustration?

If most answers lean toward the second option in each pair, then I should pause and reconsider. That’s a sign the conflict may be destructive rather than constructive.

The Value of Many Advisors

Proverbs not only warns against destructive conflict but also celebrates the wisdom of seeking counsel. Successful plans and victories are achieved through listening to multiple advisors:

Proverbs 11:14 – “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”
Proverbs 15:22 – “Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed.”
Proverbs 20:18 – “Plans are established by seeking advice; so if you wage war, obtain guidance.”
Proverbs 24:6 – “Surely you need guidance to wage war, and victory is won through many advisers.”

Wise individuals recognize that their own perspective may be limited or flawed:

Proverbs 12:15 – “The way of fools seems right to them, but the wise listen to advice.”

This principle is especially crucial in high-stakes situations like warfare or engaging unreached people—where counsel can mean the difference between success and failure. The recurring theme is clear: diverse counsel provides broader insight, helps identify pitfalls, and increases the likelihood of sound decisions.

For teams, this means embracing healthy dialogue and multiple viewpoints. Mining for conflict, as Lencioni suggests, is not about creating strife—it’s about ensuring that decisions are informed by the collective wisdom of the group.

Conclusion

Healthy conflict is not stirring up strife—it’s practicing musar and seeking perspectives from multiple advisors for the good of the team. When we embrace this biblical principle alongside Lencioni’s model, we lead in a way that honors both Scripture and sound leadership practice.