
Free-to-attend online events
For HR, L&D, OD and Coaching professionals.
For HR, L&D, OD and Coaching professionals.
Building a strong team isn’t just about
assembling the right skills.
Optimising Team Dynamics
for High Performance.
for High Performance.
Bringing together different experiences, perspectives, and people helps teams be more creative, solve problems faster, and stay engaged. Learn how trust, psychological safety, and thoughtful team design set the stage for success.
WATCH THE RECORDING BELOW.
This recording is taken from the Facet5 Live Keynote Session: Optimising Team Dynamics.
And is hosted by Martha Kesler. Duration: 52.35 minutes.
My name is Martha Kessler. As as Grant said, I have been, affiliated and associated with FacetFive for about nine years.
You’ll hear a little bit more about that as as we go through this presentation.
Congruism came out of me feeling very cattywampus and misaligned in my own work and my own career.
And I really focus on aligning people’s values, beliefs, and actions. So getting congruent with who they are. Everyone has a bit of an ism, whatever that is. For some people, it’s an incredibly short memory. For some people, it’s alcoholism or drug addiction.
For other people, it’s work.
Whatever that ism, we want to get your values beliefs aligned with the actions that you’re taking. So, but today I’m gonna be talking to you about teams and I believe, most of you signed up for optimizing team dynamics for high performance.
Well, I gotta tell you straight away that that is really a, just get here so I can click. That’s really sort of a bold name. Okay?
It it I’m embarrassed to say it because it’s a name that I derived as an executive order was being signed in the United States by a US president and terminating all of the DEI related mandates, policies, programs, and activities across the federal government in the United States. It was made up as universities that I was working with with FASET five. Their grants were canceled and educators were being issued edicts to remove words from the classrooms.
It was made up as plainfolds of brown people were being flown out of the United States, the land of the free without due process.
I made it up as more and more US government agencies were being closed, gutted, and people that I respected and were were and worked for, I just heard from three more yesterday, were being locked out of their office, labeled as poor performers to halt the meaningful work that they’re doing.
I made up that title out of fear and I remember having a conversation with Grant about it. I made up that conversation out of fear and that fear has now turned to anger and that anger has now turned to action. And so today we are gonna be talking about diverse teams and we’re gonna talk about them deliberately and by design.
We’re gonna talk about diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Words that have been reduced to to an acronym that I admittedly used, but I won’t use any longer.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion are words not to be eradicated by those who use DEI as a single word, as a threat, designed to evoke fear as it did in me.
We’re we’re gonna talk about diversity as a fact, equity as a choice, inclusion as an action, and belonging as an outcome. Because it’s true for every team and we are gonna talk about teams, every team that runs a project and every individual that shows up as a member of a team.
So now that you have a a bit of a sense of where I stand on this topic today, we’re gonna talk about it intentionally because these are not buzzwords.
They are the backbones of high performing teams.
They aren’t dangerous words. They’re powerful. And this conversation isn’t about theory. It’s a call for you.
It’s a call for action for you so that we can develop and specifically design the teams that we lead with the people that we need.
So let’s get a sense of who’s in the room. I’m gonna invite you to just, go ahead and click on or take a picture of this QR code, or I believe Grant’s gonna pop that in the chat for us.
And, you can go to a Mentimeter, and I’m going to be asking that you provide three words that you can use to to describe or convey who you are.
And let’s see. There we go.
Got a few coming in.
Hopefully, we’ll get a few more.
Alright. Passionate, supportive, nonjudgmental, joyful, friendly, easygoing, creative, psychologist, lots of passion. I like that. I’m a little passionate myself if you didn’t gather that from the very beginning.
Okay.
Wonderful.
So those words that we’re seeing here, some of them are descriptors of our roles. Some of them are descriptors of how we might describe our personality or how we might show up.
Some of it is around, sometimes yep. Father. So my role in the family, how I affiliate myself.
Oops. I’m gonna do one other thing real quick before we go out of that.
There we go.
And so when we’re thinking about those words, this is diversity, and it’s real, and it’s right here in our Zoom room with us. That’s the that kind of complexity that that we bring when we all come together.
And this is a model that I, I like. It’s from, Anita, Roe and, Lee Gardens Waltz. And they were pioneers in the diversity, equity, and inclusion space for more than fifty years. And what it’s highlighting is just that that idea of that sense of diversity is more than what we can see. So things like I may not be able to look at you and see that you’re a father or a psychologist, but those are definitely pieces of that diversity.
They’re about the you know, and what I like about this is that sense of multiple layers.
And I’m confident it doesn’t call out everything.
The research shows that, you know, again, this idea of diversity, it isn’t a fringe or a single definition.
In a recent study that the Oxford Review did, they noted that in our global economy, employees today spend more than, more than half of their time in groups or meetings with people that are quite different than themselves.
So I’m curious, pop in the chat when you think of when you’re told we need to have a diverse team look at that, What are the words that come to mind? Just pop those in the chat for me, if you would.
Creative and balanced, different ways of thinking and seeing, innovation, skills, multidisciplinary, multitalented, different backgrounds, inclusive.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Curious or curiosity. Good. Different levels.
I love all of those, different, you know, all of those descriptors.
And so we throw this word of team around a lot, but not every group is a team.
So I don’t know if you’ve ever heard this story before or heard this said in the hallway. You know, we need to pull a team together to work on that. And, let’s see.
Jill’s not doing much. Sam’s been floating around since he got kicked off that other project.
And, we’ve got that new guy. And then, oh, don’t forget, Morgan. If we don’t bring somebody in from from Morgan’s team, they’ll get all upset and and we’ve gotta have that. Oh, and the by the way, I think there’s an executive who’s got that guy that’s been, you know, kinda working with him who he wants to lead. Anybody ever heard that sort of a conversation?
I’m seeing some head nods, some smiles. Okay.
So how do we take that group of people and build a high performing team?
What’s the difference between a group and a team? Let’s pop that in the chat if you would.
I don’t like to do all the work, so I have you guys get involved and engaged there.
So thoughts about the difference between a group and a team.
Team has a shared goal. Group is brought together. Team has a sense of purpose. Shared purpose.
Okay.
Common goals.
Relationship team dynamics and relationships in between.
Wonderful. Thank you.
And so the difference between a group and a team in a lot of ways, it there are a number of different lenses that we can look at that through. And one of those is through selection.
Teams are built by design, not by default, like that little story that I was just relaying that seemed very familiar to some folks.
The orientation of a team is interdependent, not independent.
And so what I find fascinating is that, and we’re gonna get to some statistics later, but the number of times that we are asked to work in teams, even in high school or, in university, We’re asked to work in teams, but the grade is individual. The performance is measured individually, even though the focus is on the teamwork.
So if my orientation is independent, how does that relate to the team versus where the interdependency is what will truly make up a high performing team?
And to that same sense, there’s that sense of ownership of the outcome.
And when we’re working on a team, that is we’re we’re significantly more invested in that outcome. It’s less transactional.
We’re not in it for what we you know, I’ll give this if I can get that. We’re invested in the ownership and in the outcome.
Our skills, somebody mentioned that in the the, chat about skills and that was part of the difference. Those skills on a team are complimentary.
How often have you wound up in a in a group that was called a team to work on this and you realized you didn’t have anybody who really had that deep, maybe cyber expertise or the marketing expertise that you might need. And, well, wait a minute. This is who we’ve gotta work with. So we’ll either go Google it and make it up or go to, as opposed to going and finding who you really needed, to be a part of that group, that team that you’re putting together.
There’s a sense of trust, and someone else mentioned that that sense of relationship and trust.
You people on a team will give people the benefit of the doubt.
They assume that there is not malicious intent or that ideas are being questioned because you want to make them stronger and better.
One of the things I like, tool that I use with teams is to play the game. What I like about this is and.
What I like about that idea is and.
So that there’s just this constant building on it as opposed to, well, have you thought about this or have you thought?
What I like about that idea is this and because there’s always something that you can find in there.
And that’s on the other that’s on the flip side of really, you know, just constantly feeling questioned or feeling like, I need to justify.
You know, why questions as you all know as as professionals should be really minimized.
They put people on the defensive.
In teams that are high performing, conflict gets resolved as opposed to being avoided.
It’s, when a conflict arises, it’s unpacked in a, in a more healthy way.
And oftentimes the team comes out much stronger for it. Because again, you’re going back down if you think about the, the ladder of in of inference.
Generally, what causes conflict is that people have run up that ladder really quickly. And if you can back down the emotions, the values, the understanding, the lenses that people are applying to the situation that’s going on, you can get to a place where you’re able to, to resolve conflict rather than just avoiding it or moving away from it. High performance teams generally are jointly determined or they jointly determine the direction they’re gonna go. They know that there’s an outcome, but the way that they’re going to approach that outcome when we’re thinking about developing a team deliberately is jointly determined.
What are we doing? How are we going to approach it? Who do we need? Those kinds of questions. Versus here’s what you’re gonna do, and oftentimes, here’s how you’re gonna do it.
That doesn’t leave room for that creativity that we talked about being so important.
Hopefully that makes sense. And I know I spent a lot of time on that, but it really is. It’s multidimensional and all too often, it’s like, oh, let’s get a team together and we’ll go do that.
Without the thought that needs to get put behind it because random doesn’t equal diverse and available doesn’t equal qualified.
We’ve really gotta be deliberate in how we create and build those teams.
So maybe the question that we need to be asking isn’t about how do we build a diverse team.
It’s really the question that we need to be asking might be, how do we build teams that work?
How do we build teams that value difference, that enable belonging, that don’t waste time managing perceptions, that bring creativity and learn from mistakes and get things done.
And it’s important to start with the end in mind.
Understand that success is needed, understand how you’re gonna measure that success, and then build intentionally to it.
And now you’re thinking probably, yeah, my clients are going, yeah, no. That takes way too much time. Anybody hear that from their clients when you when you tell them you wanna be deliberate about who you’re picking to come into the team?
Yeah. I’m seeing a few more head nods, and certainly my experience.
And what I get is this sense of we can’t go slow. We’ve gotta just get in there and get it done.
And it does take time and my clients do push back. But my smarter leaders who I get go back to and work with say that smooth is that slow is smooth and smooth is fast.
It’s not done. And so it’s not, done by as a means to slow down the process.
It’s really about investing, taking stock and putting things in front of the process.
I shared a statistic with actually I share this with a lot of clients That really forty percent of the time that we’re working should be spent actually doing the work.
Really working on the outcome of the team.
Forty percent should be talking about how we’re gonna get that work done. Who’s going to be doing what? How are we going to bring in the research? It’s it’s really that digestion of how are we going to get the work done? What are the pieces that we need?
Ten percent is exploring lessons learned so that we can learn from those. We can build on those any mistakes. We can build on successes.
And ten percent is spent celebrating or should be.
So the response I get from people, is, oh, I only have to work forty percent of the time. Great.
No. All of that is work. And if we’ll invest that forty percent up front, talking about how we’re actually going to get the work done, significantly less rework is required.
So teams become more successful and they’re having a better time feeling more creative, feeling more included as they’re going about and getting the work done.
I was just looking in to see if there was anything in the chat. So, there are a lot of team dynamics models. I am familiar with a number of them.
Some of the folks on this call have different perspectives about the best ones to use.
My go to is the Drexler Cibbet model of high performance teams.
If you’re familiar with that model, give me a quick thumbs up. Anybody familiar with Drexler Cibbet?
Yep. Great. Thank you.
The thing that I really like about this model is that it guides us through these individual questions. It guides us through this sense of orientation of why am I here?
Why are you here?
Can I trust you?
What’s being asked of me?
That’s where we get into that goal clarification.
And then also, am I willing to commit?
Now sometimes, again, if if it’s that team that got pulled together in the hallway because it was this random group of people, oftentimes, you don’t feel like you can commit or not.
I’ve I’ve had people come to me and say, you know, can you work on this project with with us? And one of the things I wanna know is what is your expectation of my time?
Because I’m I may or may not be able to give you that amount of time. I may or may not have the right expertise, so I may be able to refer somebody who can.
So that sense of really thinking about why am I here? Why is it that you’re coming to me? But also why are these other people here begins to help us build some of that trust.
And you can see here, the other thing I like about this is that it talks about what happens when we when these pieces or these steps go unresolved, but also when they are resolved.
At the end of the, at the end of the, the presentation, I was gonna say this morning, but I know most of you are a lot of you are, it’s afternoon and even early evening. At the end of of the speak of the talking, there I’m gonna pop a, this model with a cheat sheet, in the chat so you can download it and take a look at it.
Because when teams really go through these steps, they get that sense of clarity of purpose, trust before the push, inclusion, of that enables that ownership that we were talking about.
Now you’ll notice that I’ve only focused on the left hand side of the model, and that really is that sense of creating. There’s a whole nother side to this model, which is around the sustaining.
And that’s that piece about, you know, really beginning to look at how do we move into implementation, how do we recognize that high performance and so forth. But I really wanna be intentional about how we’re creating high performing teams.
Employees now spend about eighty five percent of their team of their time collaborating on tasks. And that eighty five percent includes managing dysfunction and rework. So that rework that I was talking about that that takes so much extra time, but that sense of of the dysfunction, the rework, and the substandard outcomes. So investing up front really does lower the amount of time that it takes teams to accomplish those better outcomes and it increases employee satisfaction.
All of those are measurable And that’s actually those those statistics come out of a Gallup poll that was done in twenty twenty three.
Disengaged employees cost the global economy.
Anybody wanna take a guess?
How much it costs?
Disengaged employees cost, yep. Billions. Yep.
Actually, even trillions. Eight point eight trillion or roughly nine percent of the global GDP is caused by disengaged, employees.
And, you know, I can only propose to you right at the moment how disengaged some of the the US government workers that I know are right at the moment, whether they’re still going into the office or not.
According to McKinsey, poor collaboration and misalignment of teams leads to productivity losses of twenty to twenty five percent in knowledge worker roles.
So again, having the wrong people in the wrong role on a team is is costly not only to the end product or the goal that you’re trying to achieve, but also to that, sense of employee satisfaction.
And according to Harvard Business Review, miscommunication costs companies in the neighborhood of four twenty million dollars per year.
And that jumps excuse me, dollars four hundred and twenty thousand per year. And it jumps to about sixty two point four million annually in companies with more than a hundred thousand employees.
So why have I spent times giving you all of those statistics and all of those numbers?
Do we still think it’s the time invested upfront to build the right high performing team is too costly?
So now let’s take a little bit of time and talk about psychological safety.
Many of you may be familiar with Amy Edmondson.
She is out of Harvard University and has been studying psychological safety for years. This graphic that you’re looking at is a graphic re representation of one of her per, one of her talks that I attended.
And, you know, she she quotes a number of of, her own research, but also a recent study by workplace options that says that we are really the number one concern of people, in workplaces right now. And this is spanning eighteen, eighteen different countries.
But it’s really about the stress for the work that we’re doing. It’s the stress around thinking that I am my I’m not valued, that I am constantly needing to think about my next opportunity or where I can go to be valued.
Because when individuals feel unsafe in a team, members begin to compete with each other. So we’re back to that place in the, in the side by side graphic that I showed you where it becomes more individual focused and less team focused. It becomes more transactional and less engaged.
So team members may wind up undermining the team even, you know, because they believe or that it may elevate their own individual status. So, again, how is the team being recognized and rewarded? Is it on an individual basis, or is there a team incentive, that is attached to the work that’s being done.
Team members may try to hide their perceived weaknesses as well if they’re not feeling valued or included or safe.
And they won’t ask for help, which again can deteriorate the product or the end result that you’re coming into.
So in a psychologically safe team that, you know, that sense of counterproductive, competition is eliminated.
The success of the team really is truly the most important.
And one of the findings that Amy has come out with and she she says that it surprises her, you know, more than anything else because it’s so counter to the way that she was raised and the way that a lot of organization cultures are is that teams that are the best make the most mistakes, but they can talk about them.
And they believe that it’s safe to speak up and that the candor won’t cost credibility.
And that mistakes are part of growth.
And it isn’t that isn’t about being nice. It’s about being real.
And I’ll tell you as somebody with a really high will, sometimes it’s really hard for me to admit that I don’t know.
But if I can think about the ultimate goal of the team, it’s much easier to do that. And when I’m encouraged to speak up and say, you know, I honestly don’t know. I’m pretty confident that, Tanya might know better than I do.
So that must those mistakes are, again, part of the growth.
So now I wanna just, think about for a minute, and I’m gonna pose something that is sort of counter to everything I’ve been talking about so far, which is, diversity isn’t always best. And I’m curious the degree to which come on. Go to the next one. The degree to which you agree or disagree with that statement. So, again, I think we’re pop the the link back into the chat, but you’ve got the, we had the QR code there for a minute. It is the same poll.
Somewhat agree.
And as you’re popping in, as folks are popping in, the responses here, what might be some instances where we want less diversity on our teams?
Just pop those into the chat, and we’ll visit them in a minute.
Okay.
Looks like the the results are in, and we’ve got somewhat agree and somewhat disagree as the highest coming in.
So part of why the I’m not surprised to see the somewhat is that context matters.
That mid range is is totally based on what’s the context that we’re talking about this within. So, again, what’s the end in mind?
And part of what we wanna think about is, is there psychological safety? Do I want to introduce someone new into that team or into a group of people if there isn’t the sense of psychological safety. And it looks like Salma put in the chat, less diversity, very clear task, or process. No need for the creativity. Exactly. You’ve got we’ve got some teams where we may want to have, you know, these are high, highly skilled teams, emergency response units, tactical teams specialized in implementation.
They practice and they bring a sense of diversity.
But when working in the team, they need to have a clear command and control as opposed to, hey. Wait a minute. Maybe we should try, oh, hooking up the lift with the emergency, sling that’s gonna take these people up to the helicopter differently.
It really depends. And and Sue is asking, you know, what does it mean by diversity? I mean, all of that kind of diversity. Diversity of skill set. I don’t necessarily want the marketing person in the operating room.
It’s not the time for that. So we need to be intentional about the diversity and being really clear to think about it. So again, the narrow roles, the time critical situations, low complexity.
Our friends at Facet are are posing and I would that’s exactly the point that I’m trying to make here. It depends. And just as we’re being very intentional about the the broadness that we may wanna have with the diversity, We also wanna be, clear about when we may want more specialized skills.
And I just realized I hadn’t switched back. So again, the question isn’t is diversity good. The question is, what does this team need to succeed?
And have we built the conditions to support that diversity?
So let’s talk about tools for a minute.
And truth be told, and hopefully Grant, you’re smiling.
I love FacetFive, and I’m not just saying that because they invited me to speak here today.
In fact, I came into it very highly opinionated and became a very quick believer.
I especially like Teamscape because in my thirty plus years as a practitioner, it’s the best instrument that I’ve found.
Facet’s Teamscape surfaces personality dynamics that are really often invisible until there’s friction.
So again, that idea of let’s go slow up front, find out who’s here, rather than waiting until there’s friction and we’ve gotta slow down anyway.
Tools like Facet give us language to talk about decision making and decision making styles.
How we handle conflict.
Are we a completely conflict diverse team? That’s not necessarily a team that well, first off, I wouldn’t survive on that team or thrive on that team personally, but it’s also not necessarily one that’s gonna drive the greatest amount of creativity.
Likewise, you know, one that needs a lot of creativity, we don’t necessarily want, that sense of of super high controls. We we can only color within the lines.
It also will help us with our inclusion preferences, and there are other tools that are there.
You know, when I think about inclusion preferences, I also think about the use I use Firo B a lot.
For those of you who aren’t necessarily practitioners, if you’ve got questions about any of these instruments, pop a note in the chat and I will get back to you. I’m happy to do that.
The other thing I like about Facet is that it maps, or maybe I should say direct or cyber maps beautifully to, that that model for team development maps beautifully to the way that we look at things in TeamScape and in Facet.
Around the why are we here, the purpose, and drive, that sense of openness and connection.
And again, how will we get it? What are, what is it that we’re getting done and how will we get it done? So again, understanding the dimensions and the dynamics of how our team is diverse from a personality perspective, from how we approach decision making, from how we approach conflict, from how we want to engage with others. Am I low, low energy and, and prefer to only engage when, when it’s really important or I have something to say?
Understanding those things will help with the speed, that we’re able to move forward with.
So again, most teams find this by accident. But with these kinds of tools and instruments, we can find it by design.
And it matters because when people don’t feel included, they leave.
Now they may not physically get up and go away, but they may just completely withdraw and hold back.
Or they may actually leave, and they may leave right on out of the company if it isn’t something that is becomes part of the culture, this idea of being, of creating psychological safety, of creating teams by design.
Judith Katz, of the acclaimed Khalil Jamieson Consulting Firm. They’re one of the very first diversity and inclusion, firms that was ever founded in the US.
She was working with a firm that lost thirty two employees in a single year.
And when she did the exit interview research discovered that none of these people felt included. They felt like their, contributions didn’t matter. Their voice wasn’t heard.
They believed in the mission of the organization, but did not believe that they could be successful in helping to be a part of something that was gonna bring that, that organization, the success that it needed.
And what they also found was that it cost nearly a hundred thousand dollars per person to replace those people.
So they lost productivity.
They lost, the company lost productivity. They had to, invest in ways to bring on and that that cost of attrition is expensive.
So again, being intentional about this, it isn’t just a nice to have.
It’s economically essential for the teams and the businesses that we’re working with.
Okay. You all may recognize Curly here. Okay. Curly is from one of my favorite movies.
And, we’re gonna just do another poll that taught, that is what is the one thing that can make or break a team? And we’ll jump over here to the Mentimeter and the one thing.
So Curly is from a movie called, oh oh my gosh. It just went totally out of my head. Somebody help me.
I wanna see Blazing Saddles at oh, City Slickers. And the idea was this was this cowboy who’s trying to threaten these City Slickers with, you know, there’s just one thing you’ve gotta know.
One thing that’s important.
And I’m curious what you all think that one thing is.
And again, the link is in the chat if you missed the QR code.
Give a minute for just a couple more responses.
Looks like trust is leading the pack here.
Anyone surprised by that?
Trust, sense of belonging, clarity of purpose.
Okay.
So that sense of, you know, trust is where the is at the root of so much of team dynamics and high performance teams.
Even being able to get that sense of belonging depends on whether or not I can trust that I feel like I belong.
It’s can I trust that my voice will be heard?
Clarity of purpose. Can I ask?
Wait a minute. I don’t understand what we’re going what we’re doing here. Or that idea of have we gone off the rails, but nobody wants to bring us back to center because everybody’s afraid to ask and and maybe worrying that, you know, that something just isn’t isn’t quite there or or ready.
So how do we build trust?
Well, trust falls don’t do it.
Yes. I’ve been dropped. I have really bad experiences with trust falls.
Don’t know if any of the other if any of the rest of you have either. And yes. So for sure, trust is deep set. Everything else derives from it. Absolutely.
Maslow says, air is a basic need. Trust is the air for teams. Could not agree more.
Appreciate that. And so how do we build trust?
So one last model.
I do believe that the work that we do as organization development practitioners, as coaches, as, or, human resource professionals, as managers and leaders.
I truly believe that there is a science to that, which is why I tend to go to the models. I don’t necessarily bring them to my clients. But the one last model that I want to share with you is the formula for trust.
I’ve spent the last, a good portion of the last twenty years of my life working with engineers. They like formulas because they’re mathematical and they can understand them.
This comes from an adaptation.
Charlie Green and Andrea Howe, have built a whole model around trusted advisor and and bringing that sense of of credibility to the people that we work with.
And what they say is that credit that trust is the product of credibility, reliability, and intimacy divided by self orientation.
So credibility.
Am I actually able to do the work that I say that I can do?
Trust isn’t gonna come from incompetence.
Reliability. Do I actually show up and do the things that I said I would do that people know that I’m capable of doing? Can they rely on me? Can you count on me?
Or do I ghost my team?
Intimacy. Am I willing to be a little bit vulnerable to share with you that I’m not the person you want if you want a team that’s not gonna have any kind of conflict or confrontation?
Yes. It is.
So trust is the is the product where we take the sum of credibility, reliability, and intimacy, and then divide it by self orientation.
Hopefully that makes sense.
Alexandros.
So self orientation is again, why am I here and what am I doing? Is my is my intention to show up as me and again, that individual perspective on the team. And that’s why I’m coming forward with what I’m credible for and known for doing. I’m always showing up.
And, you know, maybe I’m my my intimacy may or may not be genuine. Do I wanna know about you because I wanna know about you? Or am I trying to learn things that might give me that edge? So that sense of self orientation is very important, and it needs to be balanced against the sum.
So hopefully, that makes sense. The trust isn’t a vibe. It’s a discipline, and it’s the foundation for every high performing team.
So as we sort of begin to round this out, and I’ve got a also got a handout that, will get posted in the chat, I believe at the end.
You know, if you want high performance, find clarity of purpose.
That was actually one of the things that, you know, what what’s the one thing.
So, that clarity of purpose.
Develop a culture of inclusion.
Build a foundation of trust.
Leverage tools for understanding.
Nurture that mindset that really seeks diversity as a resource and the right kind of diversity at the right time for what you’re trying to do.
So really see it as a as a resource, not as a risk.
Don’t be afraid to talk about it.
Because high performing teams aren’t accidents.
They’re established deliberately with courage, with clarity, with care.
And that means that we have to challenge outdated leadership models and say slow down.
We need to, to challenge current political trends.
It means moving beyond performative diversity and equity activities and into a daily practice that makes inclusion and belonging real.
It means being clear on what kind of culture you’re billing building and who gets to shape it.
Because here’s the truth.
Diversity is a fact.
Equity is a choice.
Inclusion is a practice.
Belonging is an outcome.
And high performance, that’s what happens when you put all of these things together and you build it intentionally on purpose.
So if you would, for me in the chat, I hope you’ve gotten something out of our time together.
But what’s one thing back to Curly, what’s one thing that you might take forward and do just a little bit differently for the rest of your day to day?
One thing that you might noodle on or think about or share with someone else, I’d appreciate that feedback.
And it has been an absolute pleasure to be with you all today. If there is ever anything I can do to be of service to you, please don’t hesitate to reach out. This particular QR code doesn’t go to a Mentimeter. It goes to my website, and also can link you to me.
Okay. Focus on intentionality. I love it.
Trust, is an imperative. Love it.
I saw something about Drexler Cibbet there.
Yep. And hopefully that yep. There’s the the, the cheat sheet on Drexler Civic, and then there was another cheat sheet that’ll get added, I think, as well.
Yeah. It’s just loading now.
No worries. Yeah.
Thank you very much.
Has anyone got any questions? We’ve still got ten minutes of Martha’s time. So please just turn your camera back on and unmute and ask away. I’m really happy to take any questions now, or you can ask them in the, chat as well.
Yeah. I have a question.
Yeah. Hey, Eileen.
Hi.
K.
Going back to the, the trust credibility plus reliability, but plus intimacy divided by self orientation. Can you describe, like, self orientation again?
So self orientation is that why am I showing up? Is it about me, or is it about us?
Gotcha. Am I more focused on, hey. Look at what I what I contributed to the team.
You know, look at, how often I showed up versus more thinking about it from a standpoint of I’m glad I could do my part.
You might like to think about how altruistic you actually are.
Are you putting other people’s needs first or or does your need come first?
There’s another question in here from Claudia, which is how would you start working with a team with low affection overall?
I I think, again, what I would do is for low affection would be really focusing on the, what is the purpose and who are we and why are, you know, what are sort of the tangible reasons that we’re coming together.
And that sense of of understanding will may begin to develop some appreciation.
So an appreciation for who I am and an appreciation for who you are so that it’ll begin to also tap into some of our other our other facets. Things like, you know, my degree of will and, you know, okay. I am appreciated. Therefore, I can show up a little bit more fully and be more appreciative, you know, and and see the value that you’re bringing to the team as well.
It’s gonna need, it’s gonna require a little bit more intentionality. But again, knowing that upfront, using a tool as you’re beginning to develop the team can help you address some of those things and design a team intervention or not not necessarily an intervention because you’re not coming in after there’s a problem, but help to design a team launch that addresses some of those things.
Right.
So, again, just being really intentional about it.
Yeah. Pragmatism pragmatism about being clear, and and trust is earned, not, not given. And it’s a demonstration of trust, as well. And don’t over expect, intimate moments. You expect clarity and and pragmatism, I think in my experience working with low affection people as well.
Another question there from Selma, which is, can you elaborate a bit more on working with passive five emotionality factors in teams?
So, again, I think, you know, as we all know, emotionality is really sort of that overlay to all of the the, other facets.
And I guess when I’ve got a team that is higher emotionality, again, we wanna address that. So if we think about emotionality, I like to think about it sometimes as people who are lower emotionality.
Nothing’s gonna happen. Everything’s gonna work out in the end. People who are in that mid range, well, we’ll figure it out as we go along. And people on that higher end that you’re talking about, I think you were talking a little bit about or maybe not, but if they’re on the higher end, every you know, we we need to plan out every scenario.
And so I think it’s, again, it’s sort of walking them back down just a little bit on the ladder of inference around what is the data that we have that’s having us need to necessarily do we do we think that that’s actually something that we need to play out? So not dismissing the higher end, also challenging the lower end of emotionality that says, oh, you know, we’ve got this. Okay. We’re coming up on a deadline.
Now I don’t know that we need to work every night and every weekend to get there, But we do need to be working on this because it’s not just all gonna automagically work out. So again, it’s it’s knowing that about my team and being able to help balance someone who’s got lower emotionality and higher emotionality through deliberate conversation.
Because again, high performing teams are teams that can talk about these things. That forty percent where we’re talking about how the work’s gonna get done, what is it that we really need to be focusing on?
Do I need to be focusing on and and dialing up some of the urgency, or is this a place where we need to take our time and do a little deeper research?
Does that help?
Thank you. Love your background, by the way.
FREE downloads
See below for supporting documents and additional insight.
Enjoyed this? People also viewed…
Or visit the Facet5 YouTube channel for additional recordings.
Facet5. Supporting some of the world’s biggest companies with
personal, team & organisational development.














