Why trust without validation fails in teams

Have you ever said or done something based on bad data from others? I have, and I don't want to be there again. How do you build a data-driven dream team that makes smarter choices? We've all been there. Someone throws out a statistic from a "highly reliable source" (read: Jenny heard it from Sam...), or a "surefire" conversion tweak boasts impressive results based on... a sample size of 5. As managers, these become the data sources for your decisions, and the resulting bad decisions doesn’t just hurt the team, it can irreparably dent your credibility. Here are 3 ways to improve the quality of data used in decision making. 1. Embrace "Trust But Verify" for Data-Driven Decisions. Think of it like your favorite hiking buddy. You trust them, but you still check your own compass, right? The same goes for data. Trust your team's work, but double-check for accuracy, especially for high-stakes decisions. Ask clarifying questions: Who collected the data? What was the methodology? Are there any limitations?   2. Invest in Data Savvy, Not Just Data. Be clear with your team that they are expected to analyze the data first hand before making recommendations. Invest in training and resources - for example, a data validation checklist - that equip them to analyze data rigorously and extract its true meaning. 3. Recognition: The Fuel for a Data-Driven Culture. When someone embodies these desired behaviors, recognize them publicly. Recognition fosters motivation for others on the team. Building a culture of trust, verification and continuous learning raises the collective decision making of teams. What steps can we take where questioning and verifying data is encouraged, rather than seen as a sign of distrust?

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

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

'My executives are all A-players. They just don't trust each other.' That's what a $60M CEO told me over coffee this morning. His revenue was up 40%, but his leadership team was falling apart. Sound familiar? Here's the counterintuitive truth I've learned after working with dozens of scaling companies: High performers often create low trust. Not because they're untrustworthy, but because they're too capable. Think about it. When you stack your leadership team with ambitious, competent executives, each one is used to being 'the person with the answers.' They've built careers on being right. But scaling a business isn't about being right. It's about being aligned. Last month, I watched a Chief Revenue Officer and COO nearly sink a $100M deal. Not because either was wrong - both had valid concerns. But their inability to trust each other's judgment created decision paralysis. The real cost of low trust: - 3x longer decision cycles - Duplicated efforts across departments - Missed market opportunities - Rising stress, falling margins Your smartest executives are often your biggest trust barriers because: - They have the strongest opinions - They're used to being proven right - They've succeeded through individual excellence - They struggle with shared vulnerability Want to build trust between high performers? Start here: ✅ Create shared defeats, not just shared victories. Nothing builds trust like failing together and recovering stronger. ✅ Stop celebrating individual heroes. Start rewarding collaborative wins. ✅ Make decisions visible. Trust grows in transparency and dies in darkness. ✅ Build accountability around team outcomes, not departmental metrics. Remember: You don't have a trust problem. You have an alignment challenge. Your executives don't need trust falls. They need a compelling reason to depend on each other. Curious: Have you ever had a high-performing team that struggled with trust? What turned it around? #Leadership #OrganizationalDevelopment #ExecutiveTeam

The most dangerous thing in a meeting isn’t a heated debate—it’s silence with a fake nod. In low trust teams, they don’t speak up in meetings, then vent in private. They smile at the plan, but quietly ignore it. They avoid conflict, and call it being “a team player.” The best teams? They debate. They challenge (the ideas) They raise their hand and say, “I see it differently and here’s why.” Because real alignment only comes after real conflict. If your team never disagrees, they’re not aligned—they’re avoiding. So, what do you do? 1️⃣ In decision-making meetings, try designating someone to challenge the prevailing view—even if they agree with it. It normalizes dissent. It protects the team from groupthink. And it gives quiet voices permission to speak truth without fear. Because when conflict is expected, it becomes productive. 2️⃣ Ask each person privately: “What’s one thing you think but haven’t said out loud in our meetings?” Then just listen. No defending. No fixing. When people feel heard without punishment, trust starts to grow. Invite them to share more of those views in group settings. And when they do, welcome it. Say, “This may feel uncomfortable for some of you, but I want us all to welcome more debates over ideas. It’s not me vs you, but me and you vs the problem.” If they still aren’t voicing dissent in team meetings, it may not be that they don’t care— but because they don’t feel safe. Then try going first and modeling the behavior you want with vulnerability. In your next meeting, say: “Here’s where I might have dropped the ball. What am I not seeing?” Or, “Here’s where I might be wrong. What am I missing?” Vulnerability builds trust. And trust invites truth. And when disagreement is safe, alignment gets real. How do you build a culture of healthy conflict over ideas?