{"id":6593,"date":"2018-11-18T13:54:46","date_gmt":"2018-11-18T21:54:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/innovationscientific.com\/?p=6593"},"modified":"2018-11-18T14:12:05","modified_gmt":"2018-11-18T22:12:05","slug":"6593-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/innovationscientific.com\/?p=6593","title":{"rendered":"Comments on Article about Trust & High-Performing Teams"},"content":{"rendered":"

Recently a peer sent me an article by<\/span> David Carboni<\/a>\u00a0called, “<\/span>Activating High-Performing Teams:\u00a0Connection eats control for breakfast<\/a>“.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

I thought on this after reading the article. The wisdom is there and yet I was troubled by the primary quote in the article. I knew what I did not like but needed the words to articulate it even though it is a small differentiation and not elegant. The difference however is critical to show a more precise direction on how good leaders interact and why it matters. Here is how I would modify the quote:<\/span><\/p>\n

“The contradiction of leadership is that people say ‘yes’ and feign cooperation because they do not feel safe in their relationship with leadership and\/or with their ability to contribute. They do not feel safe to say, ‘That won\u2019t work because\u2026’ or in the more extreme of leadership missteps do not want to risk their job to say ‘No that unwise, because\u2026’.”<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The lack of safety comes from a deep form of management insincerity (and not necessarily an ignorant or abusive company) and the lack of a process that makes the contradictions between what we need to do on the market end of things versus with what we need internally to make that work and with individual employee needs. Oh, and let\u2019s not forget the shareholder and the community.<\/span><\/p>\n