Building trust through local feedback systems

Most policies don’t protect people, they protect the system from trusting them. One person messes up and a new policy is born. Not to fix the root cause, but to make sure it never happens again. Soon, you’re not managing performance. You’re managing fear. Buurtzorg Nederland, the Dutch healthcare rebel, did the opposite. They removed middle managers, job descriptions, and HR manuals. Self-managed teams made the decisions, and trust made it work. That challenged me. So when we worked with a construction client in Doha, we asked: What if the policies were the problem? The team was buried in approvals and process. I had my doubts. One supervisor asked, “If we remove the rules, what if someone takes advantage?” Another said, “This won’t work here. We’re not Buurtzorg Nederland.” We didn’t push. We listened. Then we rewired: → Brain-based safety cues → Co-created Trust Charters → Weekly feedback spaces Some leaned in. Others waited unsure if this was just another HR fad. One team went too informal and missed key handovers. We course-corrected. That’s when we saw the truth: Trust isn’t a tool. It’s a muscle. Built conversation by conversation. By week six, a quiet foreman — the one no one expected suggested a workflow change. It was adopted across divisions. No one gave him permission. No one needed to. Because trust made him feel he could. It’s still imperfect. But today, there are fewer policies and more ownership. That feels like a culture shifting. What’s one policy your team follows that no one truly believes in? Let’s explore what trust could do instead. #neurogetics #renergetics

She almost quit. Then one system gave her the power to stay and sparked real change. Sometimes, people don’t leave bad companies. They leave cultures where accountability is optional, especially for leaders. A few months ago, a mentee of mine joined a new organization with high hopes. But almost immediately, she hit a wall. Her manager was a textbook micromanager: Insisted on reviewing every email before it went out Dismissed ideas in subtle, condescending tones Blocked HR initiatives under the guise of “oversight” Ironically, he was relatively new too, but operated from fear, not trust. She felt stuck. Frustrated. Inadequate Disempowered. And almost ready to walk away. Then something changed. The company had implemented their 360-degree review, tied to probation decisions. It wasn’t a tick-box tool. It was real. And taken seriously. For the first time, she had a system to speak up. objectively, respectfully, and without fear of retaliation. And her feedback didn’t disappear into a black hole. Leadership listened. They acted. And everything changed. That manager, a senior director? He got the message He got support. He adjusted. She stayed. And the culture improved, for more than just her. Here’s the point: Culture doesn’t shift because we say the right things. It shifts when we install the right systems, ones that hold everyone, especially leaders, accountable. According to Dave Ulrich, “Leadership is not about control. It’s about the capacity to create the conditions in which others can succeed.” That’s exactly what happened here. One system created space for truth. One process rebuilt trust. And that changed everything. I’ve learned that... Psychological safety isn’t about being nice. It’s about giving candid feedback, openly admitting mistakes, and learning from each other. That’s what made the real difference in her story. A culture where honest feedback wasn’t punished, it was protected. That’s not just culture. That’s design. That’s why I created this: - 4 Real Frameworks for Accountable Leadership & Organizational Culture From leadership modelling to culture scorecards, these are tools that don’t just diagnose, they transform. 📌 Save this. Repost it! 📣 Share with your HR or leadership team. 💬 And if you’ve ever been in her shoes or had a similar experience, I’d love to hear your story. Follow me for more HR strategy, leadership psychology, and culture design that moves the needle.

I regularly work with leadership teams to help them be more effective with their team dynamics and/or culture. One topic that comes up frequently? Nearly every team I work with wants to be great at giving and receiving feedback. Here’s what I notice about teams that have great feedback cultures: When something goes wrong, they don’t have side conversations. Many times, we get in the habit of venting to one of our peers about something challenging going on within the team. Why is this harmful to team dynamics? When we don’t openly talk about challenges with the whole team, it creates invisible barriers for others on the team. If we don’t tell someone we’re frustrated about something, we don’t give them the opportunity to make a needed change. We vent to a peer, feel slightly better, then let it go. We don’t share it, so nothing changes. Inevitably, the pattern returns and we get frustrated again. We go back to venting. We seemingly let it go. But it builds our frustrations and deteriorates trust. Rinse and repeat this vicious cycle. Now that trust is low, we have a hard time opening any feedback. We build walls and the team starts to operate with less efficiency, transparency, and information. So how do we break this cycle? The healthiest and most effective teams have built-in places for open feedback. They regularly talk about challenges. They know that talking about challenges, even when it’s hard, builds trust in the long run instead of breaking it. Instead of going to people within the team to vent, they openly talk about the challenges with the whole team. They hold each other accountable to not having side conversations or meetings-after-the-meeting. Here are three ways to build in regular, safe spaces for feedback into your team operations: 1️⃣ Build in questions to your 1-on-1s to ask things like: “What is one thing I could be doing differently to support you right now?” 2️⃣ Put retro conversations into your team meetings. Regularly ask the team - “What should we be starting, stopping, or continuing right now?” (Google retroactive meeting templates to get more ideas on questions you can ask!) 3️⃣ Instead of focusing on how to GIVE feedback to people as a leader, focus on how you RECEIVE feedback. Do a leadership skill gap analysis. Write down: When someone shares something challenging with you, how do you currently react to feedback? Then write down: How do you want to react when someone gives you feedback? Where’s the gap and what’s one step you could take toward closing that gap? What do you think? What do you think the best teams do to create great feedback cultures?

I once worked with a team that was, quite frankly, toxic. The same two team members routinely derailed meeting agendas. Eye-rolling was a primary form of communication. Side conversations overtook the official discussion. Most members had disengaged, emotionally checking out while physically present. Trust was nonexistent. This wasn't just unpleasant—it was preventing meaningful work from happening. The transformation began with a deceptively simple intervention: establishing clear community agreements. Not generic "respect each other" platitudes, but specific behavioral norms with concrete descriptions of what they looked like in practice. The team agreed to norms like "Listen to understand," "Speak your truth without blame or judgment," and "Be unattached to outcome." For each norm, we articulated exactly what it looked like in action, providing language and behaviors everyone could recognize. More importantly, we implemented structures to uphold these agreements. A "process observer" role was established, rotating among team members, with the explicit responsibility to name when norms were being upheld or broken during meetings. Initially, this felt awkward. When the process observer first said, "I notice we're interrupting each other, which doesn't align with our agreement to listen fully," the room went silent. But within weeks, team members began to self-regulate, sometimes even catching themselves mid-sentence. Trust didn't build overnight. It grew through consistent small actions that demonstrated reliability and integrity—keeping commitments, following through on tasks, acknowledging mistakes. Meeting time was protected and focused on meaningful work rather than administrative tasks that could be handled via email. The team began to practice active listening techniques, learning to paraphrase each other's ideas before responding. This simple practice dramatically shifted the quality of conversation. One team member later told me, "For the first time, I felt like people were actually trying to understand my perspective rather than waiting for their turn to speak." Six months later, the transformation was remarkable. The same team that once couldn't agree on a meeting agenda was collaboratively designing innovative approaches to their work. Conflicts still emerged, but they were about ideas rather than personalities, and they led to better solutions rather than deeper divisions. The lesson was clear: trust doesn't simply happen through team-building exercises or shared experiences. It must be intentionally cultivated through concrete practices, consistently upheld, and regularly reflected upon. Share one trust-building practice that's worked well in your team experience. P.S. If you’re a leader, I recommend checking out my free challenge: The Resilient Leader: 28 Days to Thrive in Uncertainty  https://lnkd.in/gxBnKQ8n