Why Open Dialogue Isn't Enough for Team Trust

Every meeting ended the same way: “Looks good.” “Let’s roll with this.” And yet, nothing got done. Timelines slipped. Decisions dragged. Tensions built quietly. We were working with a client team spread across multiple regions of APAC. Smart folks. Good intent. But three weeks in, it was clear: They weren’t aligned. We finally asked: “What’s holding this back?” One person paused, then said: “Honestly… none of us thought this plan would work. But the senior lead seemed excited, so no one wanted to push back.” That line hit hard. Because it’s something I’ve seen often. People don’t disagree. They stay silent. Why?  “It’s not my place”  “What if I sound rude”  “Let’s just wait, it might fix itself” The result? The real meeting happens after the meeting In side chats. DMs. Quiet venting. But never where it matters. Here’s the thing: Avoiding hard conversations doesn’t protect harmony It erodes trust, stalls progress, and buries problems until they explode Great teams don’t skip friction They make it safe and normal to surface it early Some ways we’ve seen work: - “Red flags” round at the end of each meeting - Rituals like “Start, Stop, Continue” - Prompts like: Is there something we’re not saying out loud?, If this fails in 3 months, why would it be? A healthy team isn’t one where everyone agrees It’s one where people feel safe enough to disagree early, openly, and constructively Let me know what you’ve seen work in your teams. -- ♻️ Reshare if this might help someone. ▶️ Join 2,485+ in the Tidbits WhatsApp group → link in comments

Process won’t save a team that’s afraid to speak up. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a process girl through and through. It’s my bread and butter. It brings rhythm, clarity, and focus. But I’ve seen teams build beautiful workflows that still fall apart. Automations. Templates. Status rituals. All clean on paper. Under the surface? People were second-guessing. Avoiding conflict. Afraid to raise risks. Because culture eats process for breakfast. No tooling can fix a team that doesn’t feel safe. No standup can replace trust. No framework can overcome fear of being blamed. If your retros are quiet, your risks are hidden. If your 1:1s are surface-level, your blockers are buried. If your team looks “on track” but nobody’s pushing back, you’ve got a silent failure in progress. So what can you do as a PM? ✅ You fix the fear. ✅ You lead the trust. Here’s how: ▶ In 1:1s, ask real questions: “What’s something you’ve been holding back?” “What do you wish we’d talk about more as a team?” ▶ In retros, model vulnerability: “I hesitated to speak up about X last sprint. I want us all to feel safe raising things earlier, even if they’re messy or unpopular.” ▶ In meetings, reward truth, not timeline: If someone raises a delay, thank them publicly. Normalize speaking up. ▶ When there’s tension, don’t smooth it over. Get curious. Silence isn’t alignment, it’s fear with a filter. Fix the fear, not just the Jira. Visibility = creating clarity where others stay silent. Leadership = creating space for others to speak freely. 👉 If you're still managing tasks and tools, but not trust, you’re not leading yet. Tag a PM who gets this. ♻️ Repost to help others lead teams with trust 🔔 Follow Elizabeth Dworkin for more like this

I recently sat in on an executive team’s weekly meeting, listening to a report-out from one of the business units. The team was clearly in trouble. Metrics were lagging. Customer complaints were up. And worse, you could feel the tension. It was polite on the surface, but the moment the slides ended, the blame started. “We’re not getting enough support from product.” “Sales keeps overpromising.” “People just aren’t accountable.” I’ve seen this movie before. A team starts missing targets, and instead of pulling together, they turn on each other. The instinct is to protect your lane, control what you can, and avoid being the one to blame. So I asked a question I knew would make everyone uncomfortable: “If we’re honest, how much of this is about the metrics, and how much is about how we’re leading right now?” Silence. Eyes on the table. Then, slowly, the truth started to surface. One leader admitted he’d been micromanaging because he was afraid of more surprises. Another said she’d stopped giving feedback because it never felt safe to disagree. Someone else confessed they were spending more time defending their function than solving problems. It was the first real moment of honesty we’d had in weeks. And it made me think about how often we default to control when things get hard: More status updates. More dashboards. More layers of approval. But control doesn’t build trust. It doesn’t create safety. It doesn’t help people do their best work. So instead of another round of slides and excuses, we tried something different. We used a version of the Stress Test described in Keith Ferrazzi’s excellent book, Never Lead Alone. The exec team abandoned their normal 25 page QBR "death by powerpoint" deck, instead used a short, focused document, three pages, answering three questions: What have we achieved? Where are we struggling? What’s coming next? No big group presentation. No polished deck. Just small groups, honest conversation, and space to ask the real questions: What are we afraid of? Where are we avoiding accountability? What would we try if we weren’t worried about failing? By the end of the session, the team looked different. People were still concerned - but they were no longer performing for each other. They were problem-solving WITH each other. It was a reminder: If you want to raise psychological safety by miles, you don’t need another training. You need to stop managing perception and start surfacing truth. So much of leadership comes down to one simple shift: Move from large-group presentations to small-group conversations. It sounds obvious. But it’s one of the hardest, and most transformational changes you can make. Because when people feel safe enough to admit what isn’t working, they finally have the freedom to fix it. What’s one place this week where you could trade control for trust?

𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻’𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁. And you can’t have trust without safety. In a recent leadership workshop, one participant said something that stuck with me: “People are too afraid to speak. They’re not sure if what they say is safe or correct.” That one sentence explained everything. Because most collaboration issues aren’t really about teamwork. They’re about 𝘀𝗮𝗳𝗲𝘁𝘆. Not physical safety.  But emotional safety. The kind that says: • “It’s okay to share my honest opinion.”    • “I won’t be humiliated if I’m wrong.”    • “My contribution will be valued — even if it’s not perfect.”    Without that, people go quiet. They nod politely. They route communication through middlemen. They avoid meetings. They stop trying. And it’s not because they don’t care. It’s because they don’t feel safe enough to risk caring 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘭𝘰𝘶𝘥. So when leaders tell me, “My team won’t collaborate,” I often ask: “𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝘀𝗮𝗳𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗿𝘆?” Because trust doesn’t grow in high-pressure environments where mistakes are punished and honest feedback is met with defensiveness. 𝗜𝘁 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗻. 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗱. 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱. Even when their view is different. Even when they’re still learning. Even when it’s messy. If collaboration is what you want — safety is where you start.

Silence in a meeting isn’t agreement. It’s fear in disguise. I’ve seen “leaders” mistake quiet rooms for loyal teams. But in reality, that silence often means people have stopped feeling safe to speak. Why? Because too many leaders punish honesty. 👉 Someone raises a concern → they’re dismissed. 👉 Someone shares an idea → it’s ignored. 👉 Someone admits they’re struggling → they’re branded as weak. And then those same leaders wonder: Why problems catch them off guard Why innovation dries up Why their best people leave without warning Here’s the truth: your team already sees the problems. They just don’t trust you enough to tell you. If you want them to open up, change how you respond: Swap “That won’t work” for “Tell me more.” Swap silence for “Thanks for raising that.” Swap “I’ve got all the answers” for “I’m figuring this out too.” The best leaders I know: ✅ Reward honesty, even when it stings ✅ Ask questions before giving directions ✅ Make mistakes safe to learn from The worst ones? ❌ Blame “poor communication” ❌ Act shocked when things break ❌ Wonder why talent keeps walking out the door Your words either build trust or destroy it. There’s no middle ground. 👉 What’s the most frustrating response you’ve ever had when you spoke up?

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

Transformation is often measured in tools, timelines, and revenue. But there's another layer one that doesn't show up in dashboards: cultural transformation. 🌏 When people from different parts of the world come together to work as one team, misalignment isn’t just possible, it’s inevitable. Communication styles, expectations, and norms don’t always line up. And sometimes, even a simple question can spark unexpected tension. Take this example: A quick check-in like "What’s the update on this?" Or a straight forward question on client escalation, might feel completely routine in one culture but come across as confrontational in another. Intentions get lost, feelings get hurt, and frustration builds.  No one is wrong. But everyone feels it.  So, what can be done? ✅We built cultural bridges, placing individuals who understood the nuances of both sides to interpret tone, context, and intent. These weren’t just translators; they were empathy amplifiers. ✅We swapped roles, encouraging team members to shadow each other, experience different workflows, and gain perspective from the other side. Walking a mile in someone else’s shoes changes everything. ✅We invested in immersion, allowing team members to experience working in another location. What once felt confusing over email started to make perfect sense in person. These efforts didn’t erase differences, and that’s not the goal. The goal is understanding. Because trust isn’t automatic in distributed teams, it’s earned through openness, patience, and genuine curiosity. And here’s the truth: There may never be a single fix. Cultural tension is part of the package when building global teams. The win isn’t in eliminating friction but in learning to navigate it gracefully. When teams move from blame to curiosity, from assumptions to questions, that’s where the magic happens. So whether you're an executive or an implementer, I encourage you to approach hard conversations head-on, to listen a little deeper, and to build teams that don’t just span time zones but truly connect across them. 🤝 What’s helped your team bridge the cultural gap? #leadership #culture #empathy #trust #respect

Team trust does not exist. Trust operates on a one-to-one basis - I trust you, you trust me, I trust Bob, Bob trusts me. What we call "team trust" is really a web of individual bilateral relationships. This insight fundamentally changes how we approach team building. Instead of trying to foster "team trust" as an abstract concept, effective leaders need to map and strengthen these individual trust connections. I witnessed this recently with a leadership succession case. The team was stuck because everyone was dancing around unspoken concerns. When we finally got raw and honest about individual relationships and expectations, we accomplished six months of work in a single afternoon. The key? Creating space for vulnerable, one-on-one conversations. When the founder openly shared his personal needs and concerns about specific team members, it allowed others to do the same. This bilateral trust-building broke through years of stagnation. Remember: Team effectiveness isn't built on group trust - it's built on a foundation of strong individual relationships. #trustbuilding #leadership #systemandsoul

Trust doesn’t come from what you say—it comes from what you do. Leaders often preach collaboration and transparency, but when actions favor output over principles, trust erodes rapidly. Here’s the truth: trust is built—or destroyed—in the small moments of leadership. Inconsistency ends up smelling a whole lot like a lack of integrity, and your reports will absolutely notice if your actions don't align with your words. When a direct report struggles, the easy choice is to avoid the hard conversation. But that moment? It’s your chance to teach, to support, and to build trust. Walking away from an opportunity to have a straightforward conversation robs that individual of a learning experience. A culture that values outcomes over behaviors kills innovation. Teams stop taking risks when mistakes aren’t safe. And there is no reason to favor outcomes (or delivery) at the expense of the behaviors, because they can (and must) exist simultaneously to truly have a high performance team. Leaders must align actions with their words. That’s the foundation of a high-performance, high-trust culture. Leadership without trust isn’t leadership—it’s management. I would love to hear shared stories about the impact that trust--or lack thereof--has had on your team in the past. What’s one action you’ve taken that strengthened trust on your team? What's one action you've seen that damaged trust?

FREE SPEECH in the Boardroom? A Myth. Here’s Why. Leaders say they want open dialogue—but let’s be honest. Most boardrooms are full of silent nods, filtered opinions, and unspoken truths. Why? Because free speech doesn’t exist in most leadership meetings. The moment you get people with vested interests in the room to make big decisions, they don’t do free speech. They do self-preservation. More often than we think, they fall victim to power plays, groupthink, and fear of rocking the boat. 4 Reasons Why Open Dialogue Dies in the Boardroom ❌ Fear of Consequences ❌ Hierarchy Kills Honesty ❌ Mistaking Silence for Alignment ❌ Asking for input, ignoring it 4 Ways to Fix It (That Actually Work) - Change Perspectives – Ask, “What if we’re completely wrong?” - Challenge Givens – “Who says this is true?” “What if it wasn’t?”, " How is that being a given?" - Ask Out-of-the-Blue Questions – “What’s the worst possible outcome?” “How would a 10-year-old solve this?” - Mix Things Up – Don’t just sit around the boardroom table. Go outside, change the environment, bring in a facilitator, defuse the tension—especially before big decisions. This is what I do. As a facilitator, I create spaces where tough conversations happen—without the politics, fear, or noise. I’ve seen firsthand how the right environment can transform decision-making and help teams cut through uncertainty. If your boardroom isn’t a place for real conversations, it’s not a place for real leadership. Convince me if I’m wrong. 👀 #Leadership #DecisionMaking #BoardroomCulture #Facilitation #TeamAlignment