Eight Proven Ways to Build Trust With Teams

How do leaders build trust? It was on one of my operational tours in the Balkans that the importance of trust in the workplace really came home to me. At short notice, I was deployed to an existing multi-national mission. I was given a team, drawn from various parts of the military, which had come together at equally short notice. As a leader, I was facing trust issues both externally and internally.

Externally, the other international partners were dubious about our commitment. The UK had been involved before but had then withdrawn. The new team was therefore met with scepticism by the very people I needed to establish good working relationships with.

Internally I had a group of people who had never worked together before and, coming from different branches of the army, were naturally prejudiced against each other. The tribal nature of the regimental system creates in-group/out-group biases that can be challenging to overcome. I knew I had work to do to change this mindset and culture.

To address these issues, I made sure I was honest about previous failings and transparent about what we wanted to contribute. Then, I picked challenging tasks, but ones we could deliver on, to help build my team together while delivering tangible results to the international headquarters. I also gave my team leaders latitude as to how they would achieve their tasks; I just mandated what they needed to do. It was not all smooth going but we did manage to develop a culture of trust both within the team and with our international partners, and because of this, we achieved our mission.

This is just one example where I have faced important issues of trust in the workplace. I can think of many more – both good and bad – where the whole culture of an organisation is affected by the trust people feel for one another.

What do we mean by trust and why is it important?

So hopefully, with the example I have shared, we start to get an idea of why trust is important. But before we get ahead of ourselves let’s just check what we mean by trust. Which words come to mind when you think about trust? How would you define it?

Trust can be thought of as faith, belief, hope, conviction, or confidence. From these synonyms, we can start to see that trust has both a logical and emotional quality. We choose to trust a thing because of how we think and how we feel.

In relationships, trust is foundational, whether that is with friends and family, or with colleagues at work. In this context trust can be defined thus:

“Trust is the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the action of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action.”

Aljazzaf, Oerry, Capretz (2010)

So, whether we are starting to get to know someone and building rapport, or maintaining a long-lasting relationship, trust is critical. But, knowing this, how do you develop a culture of trust and psychological safety in the workplace?

The neuroscience of trust

The first thing we need to understand is how our brains work when it comes to trust. Paul J. Zak has spent many years studying the neuroscience of trust (HBR, 2017). His research has centred around how the hormone oxytocin is related to trust. His work demonstrated that higher levels of trust are linked to the brain producing higher levels of oxytocin.

It is great knowing that oxytocin helps to develop trust, but it is unlikely that we will be wanting to dose ourselves with synthetic hormones just to be more trusting! Fortunately, during his research, patterns emerged of actions that promoted oxytocin levels (positive behaviours) and things that inhibited its production (such as high stress). These were narrowed down to eight key behaviours that foster trust.

The 8 behaviours that foster trust in the workplace

So here are the eight behaviours, identified by Paul Zak, that can help to release oxytocin naturally and build a more trusting culture in the workplace:

1. Recognise excellence
2. Induce “challenge stress” (difficult but achievable tasks)
3. Give people discretion in how they do their work
4. Enable job crafting (let employees choose projects to work on)
5. Share information broadly
6. Intentionally build relationships
7. Facilitate whole-person growth
8. Show vulnerability

It is worth taking some time out to reflect on these. As a leader or manager, what are you doing to foster these behaviours? As an employee, how would you rate your team on each of these behaviours?

With these eight behaviours, we have started to link the neuroscience of trust to the psychology and practice of trusting cultures. As with the cultural iceberg, we are linking what is seen in an organisation with what is unseen. But there is another model that is worth being aware of, and that is the trust equation.

The Trust Equation – understanding the psychology of trust

Charles H. Green developed the Trust Equation, along with David Maister and Robert M. Galford, co-authors of The Trusted Advisor. They explored the psychology of trust by looking at professional services and how people relate to one another. The result of this study was the Trust Equation.

The equation is actually a measure of trustworthiness, in other words, how much trust we are willing to invest in a person. In this context, to have trust between two parties, you need someone who is trusting and another person who is trustworthy. The equation gets to the heart of that relationship.

Equation of Trustworthiness:

Trust (or Trustworthiness) = (Credibility + Reliability + Intimacy)/Self-Orientation

For clarity, it is worth exploring the terms that Green uses in the equation. Here are some questions you can ask to think about how someone might score against each of these terms.

Credibility (words)

• Is the person professionally credible; do they live up to their CV?
• Do the person’s words fit their actions?

Reliability (actions)

• Are they dependable?
• Will they do what they promise?

Intimacy (feelings)

• Do you feel safe or secure around the person?
• Do you trust that person with confidential or personal information?

Self-orientation

• Is a person self-centred, putting themselves before the needs of the vision and team?
• Are they self-obsessed (always framing an issue from their own perspective) or do they look at a situation more broadly?

If you want to quantify each factor you can give a numerical value (1-10) for the answer to each question. You can score someone you are thinking about (to better analyse that relationship) or you can score your team culture to examine the levels of trust within your workplace. Finally, you can also use this as a self-reflection exercise and examine how you perform in each area. Remember to think of evidence – of actual experiences – to back up your scores.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

The steps to building trust

So, those are the steps to building trust. Understand the trust equation and you can quantify the levels of trust that you have with an individual or team. Then you can implement the eight behaviours to develop a more trusting culture in your workplace.

Therefore, which behaviour do you most need to work on today?

As a leader, I often have to speak, at short notice, to various groups of people. This might be in the context of a meeting, while facilitating training, or even at a social function where I might be asked to “say a few words”. When this happens, I have a simple hack that helps me prepare, even if I have just a few seconds. That hack is the rule of 3.

Using the rule of three I quickly come up with three main points that become the structure of any impromptu public speaking. Equally, when I write an essay or article, I start by identifying three core arguments or facts. And again, when decision-making, I generate three courses of action before making my choice.

So, the rule of 3 can be used in many different contexts, but why three? What makes us use trios of information?

What is the rule of three and where does it come from?

The rule of 3 is very simple. Any time you use a triad of information in your communication you are using the rule of 3. A lot of the time we do it unconsciously but there is a long history of using the rule of three to structure stories, speeches, and teachings.

Caesar exclaimed “Veni, Vidi, Vici!” (I came, I saw, and I conquered) but even before that,  Aristotle recommended the following three-part structure for successful rhetoric:

1. Ethos –first establish credibility and character
2. Logos – then bring in the rational argument and facts
3. Pathos –then engage the emotions and connect with an audience

Why are threes so powerful and memorable?

So, history demonstrates that there is something about triads that connects with us on a psychological level and supports effective communication. The rule of 3 certainly encourages clarity, brevity, and memorability.

More recently, neuroscience research has shown that we can generally only remember 3-5 pieces of information. The more complex the information the harder it is to recall all the elements, so it is no surprise that psychologically we fixate on threes. We also forget huge amounts of information, and the attrition of data happens almost immediately (as shown by Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve). Therefore, using a clear structure as with the rule of 3 encourages better recall.

How do you use the rule of three?

The rule of 3 is most associated with writing and is one of the easiest modes to practice using the method. Authors use it at the micro and macro scales and you can too. At the small level, a sentence might include a trio of associated words, clauses, or points (as I have just done here).

In stories, it is common to have triads of characters such as the three bears in Goldilocks. Equally, you can also have three significant events such as the houses of straw, wood, and brick in the three little pigs (which is also has a trio of characters).

In more formal writing, the structure also often falls into threes. The most obvious is the idea of having a beginning, middle and end. This can be further broken down into threes. For example, in an essay, you might have the introduction, the main body and then a conclusion (a three-part structure). Then, the main body could involve three main arguments, each of which might have three supportive points. Of course, it does not always end up this way, but it can be a great way to start a writing project or to create an essay plan.

On a larger scale, many books come in groups of three or start as trilogies. Here The Lord of the Rings, The Hunger Games (Suzanne Collins) and His Dark Materials (Philip Pullman) are obvious examples.

Three Acts in Plays and Trilogies in Movies

The rule of 3 extends into other writing such as scripts and screenplays. Modern plays and movies often have three acts that internally follow this structure:

1. The Protasis (exposition) where we meet the main protagonists
2. The Epitasis (complication) where things take a turn and don’t go to plan
3. The Catastrophe (resolution) where the story finds closure – happily or not

Furthermore (similarly to novels), movies are often released in threes. For example, the Star Wars saga, which was originally a trilogy, became a trilogy of trilogies (under George Lucas’ production). And this is often the case. Literature and films are often envisioned as trilogies but then stretch beyond that due to popularity (e.g. Indiana Jones, The Matrix or the Bourne Trilogy).

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

The Rule of Three for Public Speaking, Publicity and Persuasion

We have already seen that the rule of 3 extends back to the public speaking advice of Aristotle and the ancient philosophers. More recent and well-known advice for public speaking is:

“Tell them, tell them again, then tell them what you said.” 

Anon

When you consider how little people remember then this is very good advice indeed for any communication.

Simon Sinek, when talking about effective communication, recommends using the ‘Golden Circle’ structure of:

1. Why – to explain the motivation behind something and engage the emotions (through the limbic system and older part of the brain)
2. How – to explain how this will help people
3. What – to cover the benefit in logical terms (engaging the neocortex or rational brain)

This premise is explained in his bestselling book Start With Why and reflects his background in advertising. Sinek knows what makes something catchy or sticky (in marketing terms). You will also notice that there are similarities to Aristotle’s advice, even if there is a difference in order.

The Rule of Three: Absolute Rule or Just a Guideline?

The rule of 3 is not really a rule. As with any conceptual model, it is an aid to thinking, not a set of firm laws we must adhere to. In the words of Captain Barbossa (from The Pirates of the Caribbean), “The (rule of 3) is more what you’d call ‘guidelines’ than actual rules.”

Even within this article, I have demonstrated just that. When drafting this post, I did initially utilise a three-part structure. That structure has evolved and becomes less obvious as I have edited the writing. There are still various examples of triads in the sentences that you can pick up on.

So, do use the rule of 3 as a tool to help you. Play with it and experiment, but don’t feel constrained by it. Next time you have to write an email, construct a meeting agenda or have a telephone conversation, jot down three things to start. It will really help!

---

If you would like help developing your communication skills, or those of your team, do drop me a line via the Contact Page.

I once had to suspend a member of my team in the middle of delivering an important project. It was a difficult decision and painful for everyone involved, but it needed to happen. The actions of this individual had eroded the bond of trust that they had with the rest of the group. As a result, the whole team was no longer working effectively. If the individual was allowed to continue, the productivity of the whole organisation would have been undermined. Trust in the leadership, team discipline and work processes would have been damaged.

The behaviour of the individual had impacted output but, in the end, it was all about trust. Trust takes time to build and a moment to lose. Helping to reinforce trust within a team, and to avoid these breaches of trust, is a vital part of a manager’s role. That is because where there is a lack of trust there will also be a lack of high performance.

Even without this example, we all know that trust is important in any relationship. But what do we mean by trust? How would you define it? And having defined it, what can we do to develop trust in our relationships at work?

Defining trust

Trust can be thought of as faith, belief, or hope. It is the feeling of confidence that we have in a person, organisation, or thing. Trust has both a logical and emotional quality. We choose to trust a thing because of how we think and how we feel.

In relationships, trust is foundational, whether that is with friends and family, or with colleagues at work. In the context of relationships trust can be defined as:

“The willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the action of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action.”

Aljazzaf, Oerry, Capretz (2010)

So, whether we are starting to get to know someone and building rapport, or maintaining a long-lasting relationship, trust is critical. But, knowing this, how do you develop a culture of trust and psychological safety in the workplace?

The neuroscience of trust

The first thing we need to understand is how our brains work when it comes to putting faith in someone. Paul J. Zak has spent many years studying the neuroscience of trust. His research has centred around how higher levels of trust are linked to the brain producing higher levels of oxytocin.

It is great knowing that oxytocin helps to develop trust, but it is unlikely that we will be wanting to dose ourselves with synthetic hormones just to be more trusting! Fortunately, during his research, patterns emerged of actions that promoted oxytocin levels (positive behaviours) and things that inhibited its production (such as high stress). These were narrowed down to eight key behaviours to foster trust.

The 8 behaviours that foster trust in the workplace

So here are the eight behaviours, identified by Paul Zak, that can help to release oxytocin naturally and build a more trusting and effective culture in the workplace:

1. Recognise excellence
2. Induce “challenge stress” (difficult but achievable tasks)
3. Give people discretion in how they do their work
4. Enable job crafting (let employees choose projects to work on)
5. Share information broadly
6. Intentionally build relationships
7. Facilitate whole-person growth
8. Show vulnerability

Let’s expand each one a little more.

1.     Recognise excellence.

Public recognition of someone, when they have achieved something, can be a huge boost to oxytocin. If the praise is unexpected and personal it is even more powerful. Such recognition also boosts confidence.

2.     Induce “challenge stress”.

Challenge stress is the idea of setting difficult but achievable tasks. These stretch targets prompt personal growth and team development as they require focus and collaboration. These are the BHAG (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) championed by Jim Collins in his book Good to Great. The balance here is to find the right level of challenge so as not to push people into negative stress and therefore managers should monitor such goals and adjust them accordingly.

3.     Give people discretion in how they do their work.

If people feel empowered to do work in their way, they are likely to be more motivated and therefore more productive. This trust and freedom have also been shown to improve creativity and innovation. The opposite of this autonomy is when people are micro-managed which has opposite effects.

4.     Enable job crafting.

Job crafting goes beyond discretion about how they do tasks and takes this further to allow employees to choose which projects to work on. Not surprisingly, people work harder on the things they care about. Google has famously championed this way of working, allowing employees to pursue personal projects for 20% of their time alongside normal responsibilities. The challenge for the leader is to align people with their passions while covering all the operational outputs required of a team.

5.     Share information broadly.

People like to be informed; conversely, they hate it if they feel kept in the dark, even if unintentionally. This is because we all need levels of certainty to avoid negative stress. To build trust, organisations need to be open about goals, strategies, and even challenges.

6.     Intentionally build relationships.

Relatedness is important. We all want to feel part of something. But you must be intentional about building a sense of belonging to build high-performing teams. Creating social events and opportunities for social interaction is very important. As mentioned earlier, achieving challenging tasks also helps build and deepen these relationships.

7.     Facilitate whole-person growth.

Good leaders have and promote a growth mindset. They help people to develop personally as well as professionally. They also do not limit a person’s growth to the opportunities available within their organisation. Work-life balance, considerations such as family and health, should sit alongside discussions about performance for a person to feel truly valued and supported.

8.     Show vulnerability.

Finally, people need to show each other vulnerability. Opening up to someone (in an emotionally intelligent way) is an act of trust in itself. As Brené Brown highlights in her book Dare to Lead, when a leader shows vulnerability – when they are truthful about what they don’t know, acknowledge mistakes, or ask for advice from subordinates – it actually promotes credibility and strengthens team bonds.

Encouraging positive behaviours in your team

Whether you are a leader, a team member, or a freelancer working with multiple clients, building trust is vital to effective work environments. Therefore, if you want to have good relationships and high-performing teams, seek to build trust through these 8 behaviours:

1. Recognise excellence
2. Induce “challenge stress” (difficult but achievable tasks)
3. Give people discretion in how they do their work
4. Enable job crafting (let employees choose projects to work on)
5. Share information broadly
6. Intentionally build relationships
7. Facilitate whole-person growth
8. Show vulnerability

If you are intrigued by the mindset of trust then I recommend you read How to Stop Your Primal Brain from Hijacking You at Work which explores neuroscientist David Rock’s SCARF model and the psychology behind our social connectivity. This will really help you improve your one-to-one as well as your team interactions.

The Skill-Will Matrix is a situational leadership model, made popular by Max Landsberg in his book The Tao of Coaching (2003). The Skill-Will method is easy to remember and apply, and that is why it remains popular with managers. The approach is primarily used to help identify the leadership style best suited to a given team member, but it can also help managers consider the performance management of their employees.

Situational leadership is a type of leadership theory that advocates for leaders to adapt their management approach to fit the circumstances. The premise is that there is no single correct way to lead in every situation as people, challenges and events are in flux. Therefore, good leaders use their judgement and flex their style according to the needs of the situation.

The Skill-Will method is similar to the classic Hersey-Blanchard situational leadership model but differs in the respect that its focuses on the subject (the employee) rather than the leader (or employer).

The 4 quadrants and leadership styles of the skill-will matrix

The skill-will matrix is a simple way to assess the right leadership style according to an individual or team’s level of will (motivation) or skill (competence). It is easily visualised as a two-by-two table with one axis being will (low and high) and the other axis being skill (low and high).

The matrix then proposes the best leadership style for a person, depending on where the subject falls in the four quadrants:

• Low-will/low-skill: Direct
• High-will/low-skill: Guide
• Low-will/high-skill: Excite
• High-will/high-skill: Delegate

You can see this illustrated in the picture below.

Here is a further explanation of each of the four quadrants and the related leadership styles.

Low-will and low-skill: Direct

When someone has low levels of competence or motivation, then they fall into the low-will/low-skill quadrant. The leader needs to Direct team members in this category. In other words, the manager needs to explain tasks carefully and in detail, set clear deadlines and guidelines, and then monitor closely. Setting SMART or SMARTER tasks (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-based, evaluated, and re-evaluated) is essential.

This type of leadership takes the most time and effort of any of the four quadrants and therefore is generally less preferable. A leader who remains in a directive mode of leadership also runs the risk of micro-managing employees if they apply this style in the wrong circumstances.

A classic example of someone in the low-will/low-skill section of the matrix would be someone new to the workplace. These employees need time and training so they can develop their skills. They also need support and encouragement so they can grow in confidence and motivation.

Though this most commonly applies to new workers, low performers generally also fall into this space. Over time a manager could have tried to help the team member progress beyond this quadrant, but it does not always work out. When this is the case, it can be best for the individual to move elsewhere. Sometimes there is a personality clash, so it is worth considering moving the person sideways to another role or team before moving that person out of the organisation completely. These kinds of moves can be hard, but a good leader seeks to find a place where an individual can thrive, even if it is outside their group.

High-will and low-skill: Guide

If someone is enthusiastic but does not necessarily have the right skills or experience, then they fall into the high-will/low-skill category. Here a leader needs to Guide the team member.

When a person is motivated, the role of the manager is to focus that energy and provide the information or instruction needed to complete a task. In this way the leader can be seen as a guide or mentor, supporting the worker by helping them fill in gaps in their knowledge.

Subjects who fall into this quadrant have great growth opportunities and so a manager can use tools such as Kolb’s learning styles and the GROW model to help identify approaches and tasks to develop the individual.

A typical example of someone in this scenario would be a new graduate who might be very intelligent with high energy levels but lacking some experience and specific industry know-how. The trick here is to help the person develop their skills without them losing their motivation.

There is also a potential win-win opportunity here to develop people from two different quadrants. Someone from the high-skill but low-will zone might prove to be a good mentor for those in the high-will/low-skill area. In this way, the experienced person can take on this coaching or mentoring role and hopefully, they will find this motivating, increasing their will while helping the other person to up-skill.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

Low-will and high-skill: Excite

A person who lacks enthusiasm but has the necessary know-how falls into the low-will/high-skill bracket. Here the leader needs to Excite the team member by finding ways to increase their will and energy levels.

Long-term team members can sometimes fall into this category. They have all the skills they need to do their job but have lost some of their mojo. If work starts to feel stale or dull, then they lose their enthusiasm. The danger here is that this lack of drive can be infectious and impact other members of the team, particularly new ones who might look up to these experienced team members.

In this situation, a manager must find what is going to motivate that person. What are their drivers? A conversation about personal values could illuminate their passions. Exploring their work-life balance, using a tool such as the Wheel of Life, could also be helpful. This can unearth new goals or areas of growth to help motivate the individual.

As mentioned in the high-will/low-skill section, there is an opportunity to team up with more experienced (but less motivated) employees with energetic (but less competent) team members. This can help both parties move up to the high-will/high-skill zone, while also sharing out some of the management burden of the team leader.

High-will and high-skill: Delegate

If people are both able and willing then they fall into the top right quadrant, that of high-will and high-skill personnel. Leaders can Delegate to these individuals, trusting that they can do the job.

This is the ideal quadrant for managers and team members alike. Being able to delegate effectively empowers the individual and allows the leader to think of longer-term issues, such as business development or the further career development of individuals.

Career development becomes an even more important question for team members in this quadrant as they are the most likely people to be promoted, or who get poached by other teams or organisations. One of the biggest frustrations – but equally the most satisfying aspects of leadership – is seeing one’s best people outgrow the team.

Therefore, it is vital that the leader continues to find new challenges and growth opportunities for the people who fall into this zone. A boss can take on more of a coaching leadership style with a light-touch management approach. A manager needs to create space for creativity and should be comfortable with taking more risks with the individual.

An example of the potential pitfalls of the Skill-Will matrix

I once had an excellent employee who sat in the top, high-will/high-skill quadrant of the matrix. They were experienced, an old hand at the job, but still maintained high energy levels that bolstered the team as a whole. They were a good mentor for new team members, and I often delegated leadership responsibility to them in my absence.

So, when I asked this person to organise a team social, I thought nothing of it, I expected a great result. The problem was that the event was a disaster. The timing, location and expense of the event meant that it would not have got the participation I wanted and therefore I had to intervene and organise the event myself. This was largely a failure on my part.

I was lulled by the Halo Effect, a cognitive bias where I assumed that because this person was good at one thing, then they would be good at another. Here, the person in question was excellent at technical work, and in these circumstances, they were high-will/high-skill. But when I gave them a team-building task this pushed them into a high-will/low-skill situation. Because I did not realise this, I had to take their task away and this damaged their motivation, pushing them into the high-skill/low-will area for a while. It took some coaching from me to get them back on track again.

The point of this example is that don’t assume that people remain static in these quadrants. A change in role, task or situation can easily push people out of their zone – for better or worse – and therefore the leader needs to have good situational awareness and be constantly assessing their people to keep applying the best managerial tactic.

How to use the skill-will matrix

I like the Skill-Will matrix as a leadership approach and management tool as it is so easy to remember and apply. I also like the fact that it was developed from a coaching perspective and forces the leader to think about the way to get the best out of each team member.

If you want to assess someone in your team and modify your leadership style to suit them, then use the Skill-Will matrix. Think of the matrix as a graph and then score the person against each axis to help quantify your thoughts by following these steps:

1. First, think of their skill level. What is their training, competency, or experience for the task at hand? Give them a rating of 1-10.
2. Then think of their will. What are their motivation levels? How energised are they to take on the project? Give this a rating of 1-10
3. Now plot these scores onto the Skill-Will table with 1-5 being low and 6-10 being high on each axis.
4. Pick the appropriate style accordingly.

And remember, we all have our preferred style of leading so it might feel uncomfortable to change that style at first. But, as with fitness, the more you work on your flexibility, the easier that stretching of approaches becomes.

If you are interested in other leadership approaches then you can read:

6 Common Leadership Styles

10 Influential Leadership Theories

What is the one thing that wastes most of your time at work?

You might have said ‘emails’, you might even have said ‘that annoying colleague who always hangs around my desk’, but most likely you will have said ‘meetings’.

That is because most employees face meetings overload in their workplace, and arguably it is worst for executives who (according to the Harvard Business Review) spend an average of nearly 23 hours per week in meetings.

But crazy meeting schedules impact everyone in an organisation, and bad meetings are not just wasting people’s time, they are also losing money. Professor Steven Rogelberg conducted research showing that for a company of 5000+ employees, time misspent in meetings equated to around $25,000 per employee annually; that’s over $100 million per year in large companies.

So why do we have so many unproductive and ineffective meetings?

The secret (or common sense) behind running effective meetings

The problem is that most meetings just exist. Someone set them up, way back in the distant past, they entered a schedule and then people just attend them. No one stops to ask the right questions; those that will ensure a good meeting.

I have seen and continue to see this first-hand in the public, private and voluntary sectors. I have worked as a leader, managing things directly for organisations, and as a coach and facilitator, consulting back into these various spheres. Over the years, I have organised and attended countless meetings, from the very good to the very bad, and yes, sometimes I have been guilty of holding unnecessary meetings too.

Whether you are organising, facilitating, or attending a meeting, for it to be productive, you need to know the why, what, where, which, who, how and when of the meeting. Let’s explore that further by expanding these interrogatives and asking the essential questions.

Why do you need the meeting?

The first and most important thing you must ascertain is why you need a meeting.

Think about the meetings you attend. For each one, what is the reason for the meeting? Why does that meeting exist? If you cannot answer that question, I would suggest you either find a ‘why’ for going along, or you should remove yourself from the invitation list.

Every meeting should have a defined purpose. If you are planning a meeting, you must know clearly why the meeting needs to take place and then properly communicate that to the relevant stakeholders.

And that ‘why’ should not just be ‘to get the team together’ or ‘to help communication’. These reasons are too vague. The purpose needs to fulfil some need or solve a problem that you are facing. Don’t move on to the other questions until you have answered this question (or don’t have the meeting).

What does success look like for the meeting?

Once you know why you want to hold a meeting, the next task is to define what success looks like; in other words, what do you want to achieve by the end of the meeting?

The why and the what are related but subtly different. For example, the reason for the meeting could be that it is a kick-off meeting, the first time everyone is getting together. That is the why. Success in this instance might be that everyone leaves the meeting having met all the team members and understanding everyone’s roles. That is the what.

How you define the outcome of the meeting then shapes the agenda. The agenda can be thought of as a mini action plan with the agenda items being the tasks required to get to the desired end-state.

Where is the best place for the meeting to take place?

Location is important. Where you hold the meeting and how that space is set up will have a large impact on the feel and flow of the gathering.

For example, if you meet in a large boardroom, with someone at the head of a huge table, people will naturally defer to that person. This is good for giving direction, but less good if you are wanting participation and creativity. For the latter, you might want to find a more neutral space with a variety of break-out areas and no imposed feeling of hierarchy.

Be creative with your meeting space. Sometimes even changing the location of a regular gathering can help breathe new life into it. I am a great fan of getting outside whenever possible. For example, my favourite one-to-one meetings are walking meetings but I also run workshops and other types of meetings outdoors.

Which type of meeting will create the right outcome?

The idea of a specific type of meeting is linked to the purpose and success of the meeting. Therefore, defining the kind of meeting will refine the why and the what, as well as inform your choice of location. Identifying the nature of the meeting with also help to scope the following questions covering the who, what and when of the meeting.

There are lots of types of meetings but most fall into the following categories:

• Briefing, information sharing or presenting. This is usually biased towards one-way communication of key data.
• Decision-making. Here the purpose and outcome of the meeting are shaped by a specific decision or set of choices.
• Problem-solving. In this case, it is a problem that is the focus of the meeting.
• Brainstorming, creativity, or innovation. These meetings are all about generating new ideas or approaches.
• Team building. Every team requires proactive effort to build them up, but the approach depends upon where they are in terms of team development.
• Kick-off or project start. Any new initiative should have a proper kick-off.
• Catch-up, check-in or status update. Most teams have these sorts of meetings, but these need to be well-disciplined to be effective.
• Planning, progress, and performance.  This covers many management functions such as event planning meetings, quarterly reports, and project progress updates.
• One-to-one. Person-to-person meetings can include interviews, coaching, mentoring, and performance meetings. These are just as important to plan as a large gathering.

Whom do you need at the meeting?

There is an art to identifying who you need in any given meeting. Too few people and you might not have the cognitive diversity, experience, or decision-making power to achieve your aim. Too many people and meetings can become bloated, over-long, and it will be hard to achieve consensus.

Meetings take up people’s time, their most precious resource, so be ruthless. Only invite the people who really need to be there. And if that means people only attend certain agenda items and then leave, that’s fine. Don’t make people sit through things that are not relevant to them; they will not thank you for it.

A good rule of thumb is the cocktail party rule. If you watch a room at a party, groups will rarely exceed eight people because this becomes a natural limit to inclusive conversations. Therefore meetings, particularly if you want to get a decision, should generally consist of fewer than eight people.

If you want to brainstorm something you could push attendance closer to twenty people, although you will want chances to work in smaller groups during the workshop. And if you are just communicating information didactically then there is no real limit (it could be thousands). This approach can be remembered as the 8-18-1800 rule. In other words, 8 people for decisions, 18 for brainstorming, and 1800 for one-way communications.

How should you best run the meeting?

Effective meetings require leadership. The management style that you adopt depends upon the type of meeting and what you want to achieve. For example, if the aim is to pass on information, then the leadership style is likely to be more directive, as you tell people what to do. If you want new ideas, then your approach will be more facilitative, ensuring that everyone contributes and has a voice.

How you craft the agenda can also support the leadership approach you adopt, particularly if people see the agenda before the meeting (which should be the case in most instances). For example, if you want contributions from the team you can craft each section of the agenda accordingly. The first item might be a check-in where everyone has a few seconds to say how they are feeling and what they are thinking. The next item might break down the team into smaller discussion groups before bringing back the key points to the full group. The important thing is to consider the best format for achieving each element of the agenda and how it builds towards the aim you set in question two (the what).

When should the meeting take place, and for how long?

The answer to this question very much depends on the type of meeting you are planning and the exact end-state you want to achieve.

In terms of length, think about what you want to achieve. Meetings span everything from the 5-10 minute standing team meeting that might happen at the beginning of a day, to the whole day creative workshop which is designed to come up with new ideas.

The scheduling of the meeting is then largely dependent upon the length. The longer the meeting, the longer the lead time you will need to give. The more people outside your immediate team that you want to have involved, and the more senior those people are, the further into the future you are going to need to plan. Going back to the previous example, you can call a quick stand-up meeting with only a few hours notice (if that), but an all-day workshop happening offsite is likely to need weeks (if not months) to schedule.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

Before you have a meeting, ask these essential questions

In our work, we are inevitably going to spend many hours in meetings. Therefore, to ensure these are productive it is worth spending a few minutes answering these questions for each gathering you organise or attend:

• Why do you need the meeting?
• What does success look like for the meeting?
• Where is the best place for the meeting to take place?
• Which type of meeting will create the right outcome?
• Whom do you need at the meeting?
• How should you best run the meeting?
• When should the meeting take place, and for how long?

And don’t stop asking these questions. What is true one week may not be true another week. Do not become a slave to a meeting schedule or make the meeting a habit you forget to challenge.

Leadership is an opportunity to bring positive change, no matter where you are in an organisation. So, how can you improve your organisational culture today? This might require challenging the status quo – which can be difficult – but if you can find more effective, productive and time-efficient ways to meet, you will win friends in the end!

Which meetings do you have coming up? How will you ensure that your next meeting is a success?

Most of us have a love-hate relationship with meetings. We get frustrated with how much time they take up but also appreciate that meetings, at some level, are important. So, if we are going to commit time to them, what are the parameters that will make the meeting productive?

If you want a meeting to go well it is vital to prepare effectively. By answering seven simple questions you can plan for success, as you can read in:

The 7 Questions You Need to Answer for Any Successful Meeting

To build on these questions, this post explores the main types of meetings and the subtle differences between them. This is knowledge that has been won through years of not only running gatherings but also through coaching other facilitators and teaching about meetings on leadership courses.

There are lots of types of meetings but most fall into the following categories:

1. Briefing
2. Teaching
3. Decision-making
4. Problem-solving
5. Brainstorming
6. Team building
7. Kick-off
8. Progress
9. Planning
10. One-to-one

Each of these will be considered in more detail but I appreciate it is a long read so you may want to bookmark this article, focus on the section relating to your next meeting, and then come back for reference.

---

Briefing

These are short meetings to convey important information.

Why have this meeting?

These meetings take place when critical information needs to be communicated.

What does success look like?

Success is that the people that attend the meeting receive and understand the critical information.

Where should it take place?

The venue should have minimal distractions. Find a place that helps people focus.

Who should be invited?

Be specific. Ensure you target the people who need to hear and understand the content.

When and how long?

If a briefing is of a critical nature, then the timeline is likely to be a short one. This sort of meeting should be brief – as the title implies – and the content should just cover the essentials.  In my experience, these sorts of briefs can be less than 20 minutes, including questions.

How should it be run?

These didactic meetings are generally one-way, followed by questions. They tend towards a directive leadership style. Preparation is key if the meeting is to be concise. Using a single visual aid –  such as a single slide, plan or map – can aid focus.

Which options should I consider?

Online is an option for briefings, especially if timelines are tight and teams are dispersed. But remember, people often find it harder to focus online so reinforce the critical points.

---

Teaching Forums

These are meetings to disseminate useful information and ideas.

Why have this meeting?

To share learning and educate people.

What does success look like?

Attendees should feel they have learned something important and worthwhile.

Where should it take place?

The venue is driven by the size of the audience; therefore, it could be anything from a small meeting room to a huge auditorium. Holding this sort of meeting online is a good option as this allows maximum attendance (and makes the gathering easy to record).

Who should be invited?

Make sure you target people you need to attend but beyond that education meetings can have a more open invitation.

When and how long?

Teaching sessions can be programmed far in advance to maximise attendance. In terms of length, aim for less than 40 minutes. People’s ability to maintain their attention and retain knowledge goes down sharply beyond this.

How should it be run?

Success is dependent upon the quality of the presenter’s preparation and delivery. For example, if I am preparing new material to deliver to a large audience (and want to do this without reading from notes on stage) then I will plan for an hour of preparation for every one minute of delivery time. This may sound extreme but looking effortless takes a lot of effort.

Which options should I consider?

Consider ways to make things as interactive as possible. With smaller groups, they can be made more interactive, with questions being fired both ways during the session. This is harder with audience sizes beyond around thirty, so for larger audiences consider online tools such as apps for questions or quick polls such as Slido.

---

Decision-making Meetings

Here the purpose and outcome of the meeting are shaped by a specific decision or set of choices.

Why have this meeting?

Because a choice needs to be made to allow progress.

What does success look like?

A decision is made and recorded.

Where should it take place?

The venue could take various forms, but as with briefings, ensure that potential distractions are reduced to keep people focussed.

Who should be invited?

Invite only the minimum number possible to ensure a decision can be made. The more people, the harder to make a choice but, if you don’t have the right people (i.e., those with the right authority) then the choice won’t be official.

When and how long?

There is no hard and fast rule here, but it is worth setting boundaries as a deadline will help ensure a decision. The deliberation will generally take as long as you give people so don’t leave it open-ended. In my experience, if you have not achieved consensus in an hour then you either have the wrong people present, the wrong information or the wrong motivation in the team.

How should it be run?

This requires careful facilitation. The facilitator may not be the person of authority, and it often helps if they aren’t, as they can remain impartial and focused on the process. Whoever leads needs to ensure that the critical information is shared (as per a brief) and then that everyone has a chance to contribute and comment.

Which options should I consider?

Get people to engage with the pertinent information before the meeting. This will speed up the process of getting to a decision when people gather. If you want to influence a decision, meet up with individuals before the meeting and set the conditions.

---

Problem-solving Gatherings

In this case, it is a problem that is the focus of the meeting.

Why have this meeting?

Because there is an issue that needs to be resolved in a timely manner.

What does success look like?

Coming up with a decision, strategy, or plan to address the problem.

Where should it take place?

Pick a space which allows movement, breakouts and access to whiteboards, flipcharts and other aids.

Who should be invited?

Think about gathering the best minds to help solve the issue. This could well be people outside your team. The number is a balance between focus (better with fewer than 10) and diversity of thought (which might require more). My advice is to keep numbers below 20.

When and how long?

This depends upon the problem. Therefore, I generally do an initial meeting for problem analysis, with the expectation there will be a follow-up session to think about actually planning a solution.

How should it be run?

The most important thing is to start with proper problem analysis. If you start trying to sort the problem without identifying the nature of the problem, you are likely to come up with the wrong solution.

Which options should I consider?

Consider using the Grint or Cynefin problem typologies to identify the type of issue.

---

Brainstorming Workshops

These meetings are all about generating new ideas or approaches.

Why have this meeting?

Because you want to foster innovation and creativity.

What does success look like?

A list of novel ideas that can be explored further and new mindsets within the team.

Where should it take place?

Find an environment that is inspiring and challenges people’s normal frame of reference (this is generally not in your normal office space). You will want space that allows you to bring everyone together as well as break out space and as many means as possible for capturing ideas (flipcharts, post-its etc)

Who should be invited?

10-20 people is a good number for brainstorming. Ensure that there is cognitive diversity in the group. It is good to have some outsiders (or mavericks) to challenge assumptions and help avoid groupthink.

When and how long?

Creative sessions generally need more time and I often run them over the course of a day. But the day then needs careful planning, so each session is focussed on a specific outcome and people maintain their energy and focus.

How should it be run?

Have a facilitator who is just focused on running the meeting, not on the ideas. Keep individual sessions below 90 minutes and keep gathering people together to cross-fertilise ideas.

Which options should I consider?

If you have never facilitated this type of meeting before you can try the World Café workshop approach.

---

Team Building Events

Every team requires proactive effort to build them up, but the approach depends upon where they are in terms of team development.

Why have this meeting?

To help the team progress in terms of cohesion and performance.

What does success look like?

That the team has moved or made significant progress towards, the next stage of their team development.

Where should it take place?

This also depends on the development stage. For example, if they are forming you might want them in the new place where they will work together. If they are storming you might want a neutral space, removed from the normal workspace.

Who should be invited?

It is self-explanatory that you need all the members of the team. The challenge is getting all of the team members there as people often see team-building sessions as of lesser importance.

When and how long?

These sorts of meetings usually need to be planned with plenty of lead time, as they are often longer in length. Most team-building sessions I have been involved with are at least a half-day and often run for several days.

How should it be run?

There is flexibility here but ensure that every section or session has a defined purpose. Whether you are throwing around ideas or throwing axes, make sure everyone knows why. And ensure maximum engagement and contribution from all team members.

Which options should I consider?

Use the Drexler-Sibbet team performance model to identify the most important question that your team needs to answer at that point in time. Use that to focus your agenda.

---

Kick-off Meetings

Any new initiative should have a proper kick-off.

Why have this meeting?

Because a new team or project is being initiated.

What does success look like?

That the team understand the new task and their role in achieving it.

Where should it take place?

Try to pick somewhere that helps people envisage or focus on the project.

Who should be invited?

This should be for core team members primarily and, as with team building, the challenge is making sure the whole team is there.

When and how long?

These meetings don’t need to be as long as team-building sessions. For a simple project, this could be less than an hour. For something larger, a half or full day is worth considering so you can combine some team-building elements in too.

How should it be run?

Start with the overall vision. In other words, start with the why, getting their buy-in, before exploring the whoand the how.

Which options should I consider?

Take people on a visit relevant to the task. For example, if you are a construction manager, gather the team on the construction site. If it is a community project, walk the team around the local environment. If it’s a new product, take them to the factory. Help them see the vision.

---

Progress Updates

Most teams have these sorts of meetings, but these need to be well-disciplined to be effective.

Why have this meeting?

To report back on progress (for example on a project, for an operation or given budget)

What does success look like?

That the leader or manager understands the situation and any relevant implications (e.g. things relating to time, quality or budget).

Where should it take place?

These meetings are routine and usual office meeting spaces are therefore suitable.

Who should be invited?

Only the people who need to know (primarily the supervisor) and the key contributors. It does not need the whole team and other stakeholders unless this adds specific value.

When and how long?

These meetings should be planned in as part of the operational routine or to reflect key milestones in a project. Keep them as short as possible; the key danger with these meetings is the feeling that people need to say something (just to sound important or busy).

How should it be run?

Share the critical information first, then give the detail as needed. This is often referred to as giving the BLUF (the Bottom-Line Up Front). As with the brief, keep things punchy then leave time for questions and discussion.

Which options should I consider?

Keep the update concise but hold other detail in reserve. For example, if I am presenting slides, I will create a small number of briefing slides (we are talking single figures) but have the extra data on slides at the end of the pack that I can refer to if needed when addressing questions. I will also have people on standby. They don’t have to be in the meeting necessarily but can be called in as needed to answer specific inquiries.

---

Planning Meetings

This covers meetings that are future focused (compared to progress which is usually looking back).

Why have this meeting?

When you need a plan! This is obvious but planning meetings provide an opportunity for a leader. You can just direct a team but involving them in planning creates ownership and deeper commitment.

What does success look like?

To have a credible action plan. Something that can be communicated and executed.

Where should it take place?

As with brainstorming meetings, it is good to have a flexible space where you can have breakouts, move around and use whichever aids necessary for effective planning.

Who should be invited?

In the 8-18-1800 rule, planning tends to fall between the 8 (best for decision-making) and the 18 (for brainstorming). My advice is, if you have more than 8 people, divide the planning up and have small groups working on different elements.

When and how long?

This depends on the criticality of the issue (how urgent it is) and the complexity of the task. Commonly, these can be anything from 1 hour to 1 day, therefore do a time appreciation before you start. In other words, the planning meeting needs a good plan to get the result!

How should it be run?

Run the meeting like a project. Have specific tasks and deadlines. As with brainstorming, set regular milestones for sharing progress and ideas.

Which options should I consider?

Consider, has there been a problem-solving meeting beforehand? As noted previously, make sure the issue has been properly analysed before rushing into planning.

---

One-to-one Meetings

Although simple in theory, due to being two people, these are just as important to plan as a large gathering.

Why have this meeting?

Person-to-person meetings can include interviews, coaching, mentoring, and performance meetings.

What does success look like?

This depends upon the type of one-to-one meeting, but the important part is to define what success is. Many people forget to define this when just meeting another person.

Where should it take place?

This is also dependent upon the nature of the meeting. For example, if it is a formal meeting such as an interview you may prefer an office meeting room. If it is a less formal mentoring session you might choose to get away from the office. As with other meetings, think about how the environment will help or hinder your stated outcome. You want a good thinking environment.

Who should be invited?

Obvious in this case, being just one other person, but consider how you invite them. The level of formality and detail of the invitation will set the expectation for the content of the meeting.

When and how long?

Again, there are no hard and fast rules but, in my experience, a formal meeting – such as challenging someone over discipline – should be short and concise, a matter of minutes. Coaching and development meetings can be more relaxed and longer. I tend to plan 60-90 mins in these cases which allows for some preparation beforehand and noting taking afterwards.

How should it be run?

Have a plan. If it is a formal meeting, pre-prepare what you are going to say (see how to manage difficult conversations) and if you are going to do a coaching style session, adopt an approach (such as the GROW model) to structure the meeting.

Which options should I consider?

If the meeting is less formal, consider going for a walk. There are many benefits to walking meetings and it is my preferred method for leadership coaching, mentoring and other discursive one-to-one interactions.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

---

The Art and Science of Meetings

There are few hard and fast rules for meetings. It is a mixture of science and art. Even the typology used here, identifying the most common sort of meetings, is just a rule of thumb. You will find plenty of alternative lists but there is little academic agreement on the classification of meetings.

There are overlaps between types of meetings, and situations vary, therefore it is a matter of judgement as to how you approach them. But I hope that my experience – gained over many years – will be helpful as a guide as you start your planning.

And if you disagree with some of the classification or advice on meetings then that is fine! It just means that you are thinking critically about the sort of gathering you want to have. And that is vital, as the worst get-togethers are not the ones that don’t follow these guidelines, they are the ones that people have not thought about, the sort that people just attend. We all have a responsibility to eradicate these!

Remember, running productive meetings is a crucial leadership skill, so it is one worth honing if you want to improve your effectiveness as a leader. And if you found this helpful, check out:

The 9 Best Tips for Running Successful Meetings

What is the best advice you have for running meetings?

It is a fact of working life that leaders and managers have to run meetings. Therefore being able to facilitate effective meetings is an important leadership skill.

The best guidance I have ever received for facilitating meetings comes from acclaimed author and coach Nancy Kline. Nancy Kline gives nine steps for effective meetings in her book Time to Think, to allow gatherings to be conducted according to the principles of the Thinking Environment. The nine precepts are:

1. Give everyone a turn

2. Begin with a positive reality

3. Let them finish

4. Identify assumptions and ask incisive questions

5. Divide into thinking pairs

6. Go round again

7. Give permission to tell the truth

8. Allow people’s feelings

9. End with a positive turn

Let’s expand on what each of these means with some extra advice from my own experience as a leader and professional facilitator.

1. Give everyone a turn

When you are leading a meeting give everyone an opportunity to contribute. The easiest way to achieve this is to ‘do a round’. This is initiated by the chair or facilitator asking a question and then everyone takes a turn to answer. This is very important psychologically as it ensures that everyone has a voice at the table and this balances contributions from the more extroverted (louder) people with the more introverted (quieter) folk within a group.

2. Begin the meeting with a positive reality

Kick off the meeting with something positive. This shouldn’t be something insincere or contrived, just a positive statement. This will help to frame the meeting positively, and – through understanding cognitive bias – will help keep people in a problem-solving mindset.

One way to achieve this is to do an upbeat round starting with something like, “Please can everyone share a success from this past week.” In this way you can achieve the first two points on this list and set a positive tone before doing a second round with the first agenda point.

3. Let them finish

Probably the most important thing in conversations – be that one-to-one or in large meetings – is ensuring that people are not interrupted. It is a sure sign that people are not listening properly.  If people are not allowed to finish, their train of thought will be broken, ideas will be lost, and psychological safety will be undermined. If people are continually interrupted, they will simply stop contributing and you will be left with the loudest (and rudest) people dominating and lose the cognitive diversity of the group.

To achieve this, set the ground rules before you start, so that everyone will have a turn to speak, and no one will be interrupted. Part of this accord is that those speaking will be concise and not go on for too long (no filibustering!)

If you are leading the meeting, you may need to gently remind people of this agreement if interruptions or long monologues take place. Persevere! Many people are not used to this way of working but hold the line and it will pay dividends in productivity.

4. Identify assumptions and ask incisive questions

Everyone needs to be listening carefully (and not interrupting) if they are going to identify assumptions that come up in the conversation. We need to make assumptions when making decisions because we never have all the facts. This being the case, we need to examine our assumptions and make sure they are reasonable. Questions can help do this, and this sort of questioning is at the heart of Socratic dialogue.

Many decisions are made on false assumptions and these need to be identified and explored using incisive questions. For example, you might hear an assumption (stated as a fact) in a meeting such as “it would be impossible to do that.” When you hear that sort of statement you can use incisive questions to gain a deeper understanding of people’s thoughts. In this case, I might ask questions such as “That’s interesting; what makes you say that it is impossible?”. Or “Could you explain your thoughts around what makes that impossible?”

These questions will help separate fact from assumption and will also allow for new insights to emerge. For example, the answer to the question above might be “It is impossible on this budget.” Then you could explore questions such as “What budget would be enough” or “If budget wasn’t an issue, how would we address this issue?”

5. Divide into thinking pairs (or small groups)

Sometimes, to get people engaged, to get out of a thinking rut, or just to be more productive, it can be helpful to break down the meeting into smaller thinking units. Frequently, when facilitating, I will ask people to take a pause and think individually (often noting ideas down for another round) or to break down into pairs or small groups to tackle a specific agenda item.

With small groups, you may need to move around and even use other break-out spaces, so pairs have the advantage of being quick and easy to organise. There are times when you do want to break the flow and use discussion groups of more than two, but it takes time to re-group so do it sparingly.

6. Go round again

If in doubt, do another round. Set another question and let everyone contribute. The whole agenda can be achieved in this way, but you need to think about your questions first. This should be part of your preparation for the meeting. Alongside the agenda, have some questions to help illuminate each point.

For example, you don’t simply want to say, “Can you give us an update?” For starters, this is a closed question, and people might just say “No” or “Not at the moment”. The question is also too broad and likely to lead to some people taking too long. So, keep things specific. Ask something like, “Please give an update on the progress of X relating to X” or “What is the one most important issue relating to X right now?” If someone raises a tricky problem you can then do another round to invite thoughts and solutions relating to that issue.

7. Give permission to tell the truth

Psychological safety is critical to the success of a meeting. Good leaders create an environment where the team can the truth, not just say what they think the boss wants to hear. This sort of atmosphere, where people are not allowed to tell the truth, is an indication of toxic leadership.

If you are the leader, set an example and don’t avoid the brutal realities of your situation. Share the hard facts, admit mistakes, but maintain a positive attitude. As a facilitator, create an environment where people feel safe. Give encouragement to people who share difficult subjects, acknowledging their honesty and their trust in the group.

8. Allow people’s feelings at the meeting

Many people get uncomfortable with the idea of feelings in the workplace. This is largely due to cultural norms (often patriarchal ones) and the philosophical notion that we are (or should be) purely rational. Modern psychology, such as the work by Daniel Kahneman, has debunked this theory. Our brains are not purely logical by design so don’t expect people to be entirely rational at work (or anywhere else for that matter).

Expect emotion. Give space for people to share how they are feeling. That does not mean that a meeting should be a free-for-all of shouting and crying! But allow people to share the good and the bad of what is going on in their work and personal lives.

Many times, I have been facilitating, and dealing with someone who is undermining the meeting, only to find out they had some hidden work frustration or problem at home. Once this was aired, they started to contribute constructively again. Yes, this can be risky, but in my experience, if these instances are handled well, they build deeper trust and cohesion in a team.

You cannot avoid emotions, but you can regulate them and learn from them. How we feel – the fight or flight mechanism that is triggered in social interactions – can indicate issues that need to be resolved. My favourite tools for exploring feelings and their related meanings are The Iceberg Model and the SCARF model. I recommend reading up on these if you are not familiar with them.

And if you can, get people laughing! It does wonders for rapport, creativity and general well-being.

9. End the meeting with a positive turn

You may have had to deal with a lot of challenging material in your meeting, but always try to end on a high. Start positive and end positive. That does not mean that you need to pretend that everything is rosy when it is not. You can be honest but employ a growth mindset and look at everything through the lens of being a learning opportunity.

Lastly, give appreciation. As the leader or facilitator, thank people for their attendance and contributions. Even better, do a final round and get everyone to give a word of thanks or personal comment of appreciation for other members of the team.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

Now to prepare for your next meeting

So, as you look to your next meeting, bear these nine ideas in mind. These guidelines work for in-person and virtual meetings, for small or large gatherings.

And don’t worry if you don’t manage to achieve all these elements in one go. Meeting cultures within organisations run deep. They can be very hard to change. But my advice is to persevere with these ideas; if you do you will find meetings less problematic and more productive, less combative and more creative, less frustrating and more fun.

Yes, meetings can be effective and enjoyable, it is possible! And if you would like more help in your meeting preparation and delivery take a look at:

The Seven Questions You Need To Answer For Any Successful Meeting

How will AI impact leadership and how should leaders lead in the future?

What does it mean to be a leader in the age of artificial intelligence?

Which leadership models best apply to the context of AI? Will leaders still need to exist in the future or are these roles also at risk due to technological disruption?

These are questions that I (along with many others) am pondering. My questions, funnily enough, were prompted by other questions. The first big mental nudge came when I was reading Homo Deus by Yuval Noah Harari. At the end of the book, he poses three important questions, that we need to grapple with:

Are organisms really just algorithms and is life just data processing?

What’s more valuable? Intelligence or consciousness?

What will happen to society, politics, and daily life when non-conscious but highly intelligent algorithms know us better than we know ourselves?

All three questions, and their answers, impact the realm of leadership and it was thinking through how these questions impact leaders that I started to consider supplementary questions that relate to my specific context, i.e.:

1. What does it mean to be a leader in the age of artificial intelligence?
2. Which leadership models best apply to the context of AI?
3. Will leaders still need to exist in the future or are these roles also at risk due to technological disruption?

The deluge of questions relating to AI

These are certainly not the only questions, they may not even be the best questions, but I wanted to start thinking about things where I could bring some practical application, even if it was just in my own small sphere of existence.

There are of course many other questions relating to AI (many of which may ironically be machine-generated) but as a leader of an organisation that is facing significant change, and a professional in the leadership development arena, these three questions are of specific interest to me.

Having mulled over these questions for some time I thought I would share some thoughts. My hope is to generate conversation around how the fields of leadership and artificial intelligence interplay.

I think I should also state my biases up front. Although my wife would say that I generally have a negative bias (I just say that I am a realist), when it comes to AI I am not a prophet of doom. I think there are significant challenges that we need to address. It does feel like a key juncture in our journey as humans, but I don’t think we are just about to lose the human race (excuse the pun) to super-fast computers. You will see why I conclude that in the following reflections.

What does it mean to be a leader in the age of artificial intelligence?

To answer this question, we must ask ourselves, what does it mean to be a leader in any context? What does it actually mean to be a leader and does AI change that?

What is leadership? There are of course many definitions. One of my favourites is from the leadership expert John C. Maxwell who says that leadership, at its most fundamental level, is influence.

“Leadership is influence, nothing more, nothing less.” John C Maxwell

I like this definition as firstly it is simple. Secondly, it highlights that leadership comes in many forms, not just in the direct management of other people. For example, there is self-leadership, thought leadership, leading-up and other types of leadership outside the stereotypical idea of a command relationship.

And that is why I also prefer the term influence to power. They are similar but power tends to have negative connotations and I believe that the idea of power does not translate as well to all types of leadership, for example, those I have just highlighted (self-leadership, thought leadership and leading-up).

Yes, AI will also have influence (or power) in these same realms, but as per this definition, leadership will continue to exist as long as humans choose to influence themselves and others. Let’s hope we are all around to influence each other – in positive ways – for many years to come.

Which leadership models best apply to the context of AI?

I have studied, taught, and written about many leadership models. I apply many of these theoretical frameworks in my everyday practice as a leader. Therefore, I don’t believe that suddenly, in the light of technological advances, these tools have (or will soon) become redundant. As long as we have any sort of human-to-human interaction then ideas such as transformational leadership, authentic leadership or situational leadership all have their place.

However, these models do not directly address the context of AI. The best thinking that I have come across to date, that does confront the issues of AI, is The Threshold by Dr.Nick Chatrath. In his book, Nick does a great job of exploring the second question set by Harari, namely, “What’s more valuable? Intelligence or consciousness?” In applying this to leaders he introduces four paths for evolving our leadership. These are:

Cultivating Stillness

Thinking independently

Embodying intelligence

Maturing consciousness

But it is not merely theory. What I particularly love about Nick’s book is that each section has resources – including questions, exercises, and processes – for the practical application of each path.

• Cultivating Stillness involves stopping to ask questions and taking time to reflect. It is the discipline of not getting swept away by busyness, change and chaos.
• Thinking independently means embracing our unique cognitive powers, utilising the cognitive diversity of teams and creating thinking environments.
• Embodying intelligence consists of embracing all the types of intelligence that humans have, such as emotional intelligence where we connect with our feelings, or kinaesthetic intelligence, where we utilise senses for thinking and communicating.
• Maturing consciousness is a continual process of embracing change and complexity, being humble (and not threatened) by our limitations and serving others with love and wisdom.

I am attracted to the idea of the paths in this model as it does not set up a framework that seeks to solve ‘the problem’ of leading with AI. Instead, it is a map, indicating the journey that we can embark on, alongside those we lead and the artificial intelligence that we interact with.

Will leaders still need to exist in the future or are these roles also at risk due to technological disruption?

Much of the discussion around AI has centred on who is going to lose their jobs to machines and how soon.

For many workers, machine intelligence will force an evolution of skills and approaches. There are many subtle but important shifts that we need to make.

Such a shift needs to take place for leaders too. Here we come back to the question “What is leadership?” If our answer relates to leadership as a role or position then yes, it is likely that some jobs will be at risk. But as per the earlier definition of leadership, if leadership is about influence, then this will take place as long as humans exist.

And the emergence of new intelligence opens novel leadership opportunities. Burgeoning machine minds need influencing too. This might spawn a whole new field of leadership. There are new leadership books to be written for sure! How about:

• Start With WhAI
• Thinking Fast (machines) and Slow (Humans)
• Good to GreA.I.t
• How to win friendly algorithms and influence highly intelligent, rapidly developing non-biological self-learning entities

Well, maybe not those exactly, but something for sure. And, in this arena, I expect that the concept of values-based leadership will be increasingly important, as how we want to influence the machines that influence us will involve an ethical approach to decision-making. Therefore, leaders are likely to need to study more philosophy and less management. It is a shift that I have already made in my reading and personal development.

What is the future for leaders in a world of artificial intelligence?

So, dear conscious readers, (no, not you, ChatBot, or at least, not yet). Leadership certainly does have a place in the world of AI. The idea of leadership, the exerting of influence will remain.

Leadership will evolve, as with many other roles and professions. New models (such as the 4 paths of The Threshold) will emerge to cover how we better lead humans and machines.

I also believe that we leaders need to broaden our own minds and be more philosophical if we are to grapple effectively with the ethical issues concerning AI, business, work, and life in the future.

And one of the most important things we can do is to talk about this stuff. It is through the sharing of thoughts and ideas that we shape our future. As we engage in dialogue we influence each other. In other words, we lead. If we keep doing that, then there is hope for humans, AI or no.

So, I look forward to the continuing conversation on artificial intelligence and leadership (in all their various forms).

Yours ever, humanly (or at least until I get an upgrade),

Simon (1.0)

Dysfunctional Teams: Seven reasons why teams fail (and what you can do to help)

Have you ever been a member of any dysfunctional teams?

If you have then you know how frustrating, depressing, and stressful it can be. I certainly have been, both as an employee and as a manager, and leading an underperforming team has given me plenty of sleepless nights as I have sought to turn things around.

My experience has taught me the truth of Stephen R. Covey’s list of team problems. Stephen Covey, author of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, went on to write Principle-Centred Leadership, which builds on the first book and highlights the vital importance of personal values in effective leadership models. The book includes lots of practical advice for leaders and managers, including an explanation of the seven persistent issues that undermine organisations.

The 7 chronic problems he identifies are:

1. No shared vision or values

2. No strategic path

3. Poor alignment

4. Wrong style

5. Poor skills

6. Low trust

7. No self-integrity

They are called chronic because, as with chronic diseases, dysfunctional team problems are persistent and cause continual pain. If these chronic issues are not treated then the organisation will continue to deteriorate and could even die.

So here is a further explanation of each and some tips on how to avoid these pitfalls, or treat the problems if they already exist.

YouTube video: How to spot the 7 chronic problems of dysfunctional teams

1. No shared vision or values

Every organisation needs a purpose. On the meta scale, a business needs a clear reason to exist, something that attracts customers and employees alike. On the micro-scale, all teams need to know the vision they are working towards.

The problem is that many leaders fail to communicate a vision. Occasionally that is because they don’t know what the vision is, they are unsure of exactly where they are going. But all too often they just forget to tell people their dream or outline exactly the part the team has to play in delivering the larger organisational vision.

One key element of transformational leadership is communicating a team’s vision. If you are a leader and have not outlined your vision then take some time to think about it and put it into words. You need to be able to explain it in simple terms. Paint a picture of the better future that you are working towards. If you are an employee who does not understand the vision then ask; get your boss to share what it is that drives them, the change they want to make.

2. No strategic path

The next problem is related to the first. You cannot have a strategic path without knowing what the vision is. But, even if you have a vision, a leader still needs to lay out the path to get there.

The team needs to know the overarching plan of how they will get to a better future. This is what strategy is. Richard Rumelt, author of Good Strategy, Bad Strategy, gives the following definition:

“A strategy coordinates action to address a specific challenge.”

People need a plan to coordinate their actions. It does not need every detail sorted out, but it does require enough specific direction so that people can keep moving in the right direction. And that too leads us on neatly to our next chronic problem.

3. Poor alignment

Having a vision and strategy are essential, but they won’t guarantee success on their own. Individuals need to be aligned to that direction and that comes down to knowing their role within the team and the values that drive the organisation.

Roles are vital, but here I am not talking about mere titles. If you want an idea of the deluge of lengthy, cool-sounding but confusing job titles, then just take a look on LinkedIn, but I can guarantee that even their owners can struggle to explain their actual role. Here I mean the exact role we have to play in our team and our part in the overall plan.

Within a team we need to know how we fit alongside, to complement their strengths and weaknesses. Using a model such as Belbin’s team role finder can help this process. Individuals also need to understand how their tasks support the overall success of the organisation.

For example, Field Marshall ‘Monty’ Montgomery, when he took over the British 8^th Army in 1942, was in retreat across the African desert. To turn things around, he made sure that everyone, right down to the typists in Battalion headquarters, knew the importance of their contribution. In this way, he aligned everyone to the task of winning and led the Allies to victory in Tunisia in 1943.

4. Wrong style

The next problem is that of leadership style. A manager must employ an effective leadership approach to align their team to the strategy and vision. Situations change and employees differ so a good leader can flex their style accordingly.

If you are unsure how to adapt your management approach then I recommend Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership model along with Max Landsberg’s Skill-Will matrix. Both of these tools help leaders to assess the best approach for the circumstances and team members.

Equally important as finding a good leadership style is avoiding a bad one. Toxic leadership is a sure-fire way to team dysfunctionality so avoid the seven traits of bad leaders, including incompetence, rigidity, intemperance, or being callous, corrupt, insular or evil.

5. Poor skills

Incompetence can be a cause of toxic leadership but competency can be a problem across a whole team. Sometimes people are just not experienced enough to do the job. Fortunately, this is one of the easiest things to fix. If people have the right character and a growth mindset, then they can learn the right skills.

In this instance, the responsibility of the manager is to identify the skills gaps and create personal development plans for individuals. These might be technical skills but don’t forget to consider people’s soft skills. These are often overlooked but are critical. If you don’t know where to start then the United Nations list of the 10 most important life skills can help. For managers who want to improve themselves, using Robert Katz’s framework of leadership skills is a good place to start to identify areas of growth.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

6. Low trust

Nothing undermines a team’s performance as quickly as a lack of trust. Trust is the fundamental building block of all relationships, so when this breaks down teams are truly dysfunctional as the lack of trust is a blocker to working together.

We all know that trust is important but sometimes it is hard to quantify and that is why the Trust Equation is so helpful. Research by Green, Maister and Galford (2001) showed that:

 Trust (or Trustworthiness) = (Credibility + Reliability + Intimacy)/Self-Orientation

Here, credibility and reliability are self-explanatory but intimacy is worth explaining. In this instance, it relates to how safe you feel around a specific person. For this model, self-orientation equates to how self-centred a person is.

Where trust is lacking, there are proven behaviours that can help build trust in teams. Paul Zak identified eight behaviours that help foster trust in teams. These are:

1. Recognise excellence
2. Induce “challenge stress” (difficult but achievable tasks)
3. Give people discretion in how they do their work
4. Enable job crafting (let employees choose projects to work on)
5. Share information broadly
6. Intentionally build relationships
7. Facilitate whole-person growth
8. Show vulnerability

7. No self-integrity

Finally, a lack of self-integrity is symptomatic of poor team health. Integrity is best described as walking the talk, so if a leader or team’s actions do not match their words then there is a problem. At the fundamental level, this is about values. Are people aligned with their principles and are they making decisions that are aligned with the values of their organisation?

My favourite tool for exploring the relationship between behaviours and values is The Iceberg Model. It is a very simple theory. As with a physical iceberg, the visible bit (in this case people’s behaviours and words) is the small element that exists above the surface. Below the surface is the greater mass. In terms of organisational culture, this hidden space includes people’s thoughts and feelings, values and beliefs, fears and needs. To understand the behaviour you have to use questions to dig below the surface and discover the cause. Only once this diagnosis has taken place can a plan be put in place to change the behaviour.

Is your team dysfunctional? Does your team display any of the seven chronic problems?

It is worth taking a few seconds to reflect on your team. How is it performing? If there is a problem, can you identify which of the seven chronic problems are to blame? Ask yourself:

• Is there a shared vision and common values?
• Does the team have a strategic path?
• How well are the team aligned with the strategy?
• Does the management have the right leadership style?
• Are there any skill gaps?
• Is there a lack of trust in the team?
• How is the team’s integrity – do people walk the talk?

If you are a manager, why not get team members to give you some answers as well? It might feel like a painful process, but every team has challenges, so it would be a surprise to not find an area of weakness.

Take heart. What you have done is take the first positive step, that of diagnosis. As Dr Dean Ornish says,

“Awareness is the first step of healing.”

The good news is that you have now taken the first step. Next, you can plan and work out a way to solve the problems, because that is what high-performing teams do; they always seek to be better.

Do you think leadership is important? Do you consider yourself as a leader?

Maybe leadership feels natural to you. Or perhaps, you don’t feel like a leader, even if you are in a management position.

In my case, for a long time, I didn’t think I was a leader. I certainly did not feel that I was born a leader or that I encompassed what I thought were key leadership qualities, such as large amounts of charisma, power, and self-confidence.

But then, much to my surprise I was given some small management roles and (hiding my insecurity) I started to lead others. I won a scholarship with the military and became an Army Officer, gaining invaluable leadership training and practical experience in command.

From there, I have gone on to various leadership roles with increasing levels of responsibility. As well as leading a large organisation, I coach senior leaders, write a regular leadership column, and facilitate leadership courses.

But you would never have predicted that if you had seen me in my early years. So, what happened? What made the difference?

The 3 Simple Truths of Leadership

The shift for me was gradual, but I can now point to three simple (but revolutionary) truths that have impacted my leadership journey. These are:

1. Leadership is all about influence
2. Everyone is a leader to some extent
3. We can all improve and develop our leadership

These truths now drive my purpose. I help others in their leadership path and often this involves de-bunking unhelpful assumptions about what a leader is. And this is an inclusive approach to leadership; everyone can lead and get better at leading.

I love adventure (it is one of my core values) and I like to think of life as a journey. On our road, we often meet or travel alongside others. Each meeting is an opportunity to serve, no matter how long or short the time is that we spend together. With every interaction with others, I think, “What can we teach each other that will make us better leaders and equip us for the next stage of our adventure?”

Therefore, even though we are not together in person now, this is still a moment of connection. I hope some of my thoughts will help you on your journey.

What is the definition of leadership?

Before we unpack the 3 truths of leadership a little more, let’s first define our terms. Specifically, let’s define what we mean by leadership.

There are many definitions of leadership. W.C.H. Prentice, in his famous HBR article of 1961 defined leadership as:

“The accomplishment of a goal through the direction of human assistants”

W.C.H Prentice

Most people think about leading in these terms. It is about one person using other people to get stuff done.

However, this definition does not quite capture all types of leadership. For example, what about self-leadership, followership, 360-degree leadership, or thought leadership?

Therefore, my favourite definition of leadership is that of author John C. Maxwell who says that leadership is, in its essence, influence.

“Leadership is influence, nothing more, nothing less.”

John C. Maxwell

Thus, I would define leaders as people who use their influence (or power) to initiate change.

How can everyone be a leader? Am I a leader?

With this definition, of leadership as influence, we can now see the logic of how everyone is, to some degree, a leader. This is because we all have a measure of influence, on ourselves and others.

“Everyone is a leader because everyone influences someone.”

John C. Maxwell

The term influence is synonymous with power, but I prefer the term influence. That is mainly due to how people view themselves. If you ask someone “Are you powerful?” very few people would say yes. However, if you ask someone “Do you have a degree of influence, on yourself and others?” then most people would recognise that they do.

Even when people protest that they have little influence on others, they can see that they do have influence on themselves. This is self-leadership. And we all have friends, families, associates, and colleagues who we interact with. Every interaction we have creates little micro changes in ourselves and our environment. So, even if small, our influence is important, because it affects the people we love most.

Therefore, we need to think about what we want to do with our influence. What changes do we want to initiate? To step up as leaders, all we need to think about is what future we are trying to create. What is the positive world that we are trying to bring about in people and our environment?

We can all be better: leaders require a growth mindset

That change starts with us. It is a choice, committing to self-improvement and then to lead ourselves and others better. The first vision we need is one for ourselves. What is the better version of us that we want to grow into? What sort of leader do you want to be? If we want effective change, we need a clear picture of what we want to change into.

“Be the leader you wish you had.” 

Simon Sinek

And that growth never stops. You may be a new team lead or the CEO of a large company, but the simple fact remains; we can all improve our performance. Therefore, no matter how far along our leadership journey we are, we all need time to reflect and work out what we work on next.

There are many different tools that can help us assess our strengths and weaknesses or identify areas for growth. One useful framework is that of Robert Katz who breaks down skills into technical, human, and conceptual competencies. My preferred approach is to think about the Five Levels of Leadership, and which skills we most need at each strata of responsibility.

Once you have decided upon an area for development you can start to experiment and learn. A growth mindset is dependent upon experiential learning. As with David Kolb’s learning cycle, we have an experience, we then reflect on it and we think about conceptual tools that can help us. Then we experiment with applying those concepts, thereby creating a new experience, and so the cycle starts again. We might make mistakes, and some things might not work, but by following this cycle we fail forward; always learning and progressing.

And if you are really committed to self-improvement then there are various leadership training programmes and leadership coaching options that you can consider.

Leadership Development: Master the Top Leadership and Life Skills

Better lead in life and work to maximise your success. Sign up and access materials for free!

Are leaders born or made?

No one is born a fully-fledged leader, and no one is a leader by birthright. We should not see someone as either a born leader or not.

“Leaders aren’t born, they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work. And that’s the price we’ll have to pay to achieve that goal, or any goal.”

Vince Lombardi

So we can dispense with Great Man Theory; the idea that some people are destined from birth to be the makers of history. But, if leading is about influence and we all have some influence, then we are all born with some capability to be leaders in that respect.

You may not have been born a leader but you were born to lead.

Whether we recognise that fact, develop ourselves, increase our influence and have a positive effect? That is a personal choice.

So, what choice will you make?

“A leader is anyone who takes responsibility for finding the potential in people and processes and has the courage to develop that potential. Leadership is not about titles or the corner office. It’s about the willingness to step up, put yourself out there, and lean into courage.”

Brené Brown

---

If you would like any support for you or your team on your leadership journey, for example with leadership coaching or leadership development courses, please do drop me a line via the Contact Page.