November 5, 2025 • 43 mins
Vanessa Druskat advises leaders in some of the world’s top organizations. She's an award-winning researcher and leading expert on team leadership. The Team Emotional Intelligence (Team EI) model came from her 3 decades of field research examining team cultures that inspire high-performing collaboration. She and her colleagues have used the model globally to teach leaders how to build higher-performing teams. Dr. Druskat serves on the faculty of the University of New Hampshire’s Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics in Durham, New Hampshire, USA.
Her work is now available to a wider audience through her book, The Emotionally Intelligent Team: Building Collaborative Groups that Outperform the Rest.
First Person Plural is brought to you by The Daniel Goleman Emotional Intelligence Courses, where you can develop your own EI skillset. These tools can help you understand and manage your emotions, build stronger relationships, and be a more effective leader.
PEOPLE AND PLACES MENTIONED IN THE EPISODE:
Daniel Goleman talks about his Emotional Intelligence Courses, available at danielgolemanemotionalintelligence.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Hanuman Goleman (01:03):
Hello and welcome to our first new episode
of first person plural in alittle while. I'm Hanuman
Goleman And I'm Dan Goleman,we're going to be offering a
sort of mini series within firstperson plural. These episodes
have a slightly differentformat. You may know about the
Daniel Goleman emotionalintelligence courses. These
(01:23):
courses offer practicaldevelopment of each ei
competency well for the alum ofthose courses, we've been
hosting an event series calledei a force for good that
features special guests whoseexperience, work and wisdom is
exceptional, and who we feel canadd to our emotional
(01:45):
intelligence, journeys andunderstanding.
Daniel Goleman (01:48):
These speakers go beyond the theory of
emotional intelligence, whatthey share adds understanding of
what ei looks like in variousparts of our world, personal,
interpersonal, work, home,relationship. There are so many
ways that emotional intelligencecan enrich our lives, and these
(02:09):
conversations bring some ofthose to light. This podcast
mini series gives us the chanceto share this wisdom with a
larger audience.
Hanuman Goleman (02:18):
These events are hosted and moderated by our
senior course facilitator,Michael Stern. At the end of the
events, the guests takequestions from the course alum
that lead to some reallyfantastic insights and response
so that the answers make sensewhile not sharing anyone's voice
without their permission. I willre-voice these questions myself.
Daniel Goleman (02:42):
The first podcast from the force for good
events is with Vanessa Druskat.
She has done truly brilliantresearch that brings to light
what ei looks like at the grouplevel, Team emotional
intelligence, Team EI, as shecalls it. She's recently
published her first book, The
Em (03:02):
Building Collaborative Teams that Outperform the Rest.
Vanessa's research has informedmy books, and I'm thrilled for
her work to be getting a largeraudience through This book.
Hanuman Goleman (03:16):
Great! So let's get to the event.
Michael Stern (03:20):
Thank you all so much for being here today. My
name is Michael stern, and I'mhere with Vanessa Druskat, which
is really wonderful. Hi Vanessa,thank you for being here.
Vanessa Druskat (03:43):
Hi Michael.
It's really, really lovely to behere with all of you.
Michael Stern (03:46):
Thank you. Thank you for making time to join us.
So by way of a very short bio,I'll just read this to introduce
you to everybody, if folksaren't familiar with you. So
Vanessa, Druskat is a associateprofessor of organizational
behavior at the University ofNew Hampshire, a social and
(04:08):
organizational psychologist. Shehas spent 30 years researching
team collaboration andperformance, which led her to
pioneer the concept of teamemotional intelligence. And I
know that you had a team in thateffort of
Vanessa Druskat (04:22):
Yes, thank you for mentioning that. Yeah.
Michael Stern (04:25):
So just to start us off, Vanessa, what's live for
you right now? How are youshowing up? What's what's
present for you?
Vanessa Druskat (04:33):
Um, well, excitement about the book. You
know, it's what I'm mostlyexcited about, is, is the
recognition people now havethat, you know, you can build a
collaborative team. There arethings you can do. I think a lot
of leaders don't realize thatthere are actions you can take
that improve the chances thatyou will have a team that
(04:54):
resonates with one another andthat is more collaborative and
and fun. And so that's what Ikeep trying to emphasize. I've
been in a lot of podcastsrecently and talking to
journalists, and, you know, it'sbeen an exciting time for me,
and also, at the same time, allof a sudden, I'm like front and
center in all theseenvironments. It's very
(05:16):
uncomfortable for my introvertedself, you know, I've always been
an introvert who can behave likean extrovert, but it's a little
uncomfortable to be the one outfront and center. And you know,
you mentioned there was a team Iworked with on this, and I
really want a shout out for mycolleague, Steve Wolff, who I
(05:36):
met in graduate school, and thetwo of us did a lot of the work
together. And there were a wholebunch of graduate students and
people, primarily at CaseWestern Reserve University, with
me, who really added great valueto this to the model and to and
to the ideas in the book.
Michael Stern (05:53):
Yeah, shout out to the grad students who never
got their names published. Youknow,
Vanessa Druskat (05:58):
indeed
Michael Stern (05:58):
the light work.
Vanessa Druskat (06:00):
Indeed, indeed.
Michael Stern (06:02):
Yeah, cool. So would you be willing to share a
short story from your personallife about how you first got
connected to this work?
Vanessa Druskat (06:12):
you bet. So it's going to be one story, but
with two branches in it. Littleknown fact is that my father was
a professor at UMass Amherst,and his his field was
international education, and hejust passed. So forgive me if I
talk about him for a momenthere, when Kenya became
(06:34):
independent from Great Britain,he was one of a team of folks
who went over to Kenya to helpafricanize The curriculum for
schools in Kenya. So, you know,they've been using the British
system. And so he came in tohelp, you know, work with people
to create a more Africancurriculum for them. So anyway,
(06:54):
that was two years of my life,living in Kenya with him and
also my brother and my mom, butalso lots of travel throughout
my life with my parents andbeing in different cultures,
constantly with them and seeingthem adapting to different
cultural norms. So, for example,I distinctly remember my father
(07:16):
talking with Kenyans andspending a long time talking
about their families. How's yourfather? How's your grandfather?
You know, conversations thatyou'd never hear, hear him, him
have in the US. Anyway, here'sthe point. I, from a very young
age, understood that culturesinfluence behavior,
(07:39):
and so when I came to the worldof teams, and I was interested
in teams, I was whollydissatisfied with the idea that
individuals were responsible,completely responsible, for
their behavior in teams, what Isaw was cultures affecting
(07:59):
behavior. So let me just say,you know, you can be really
emotionally intelligent, have agreat amount of empathy, and you
can enter a team where that noneof that is displayed or cared
about, and you don't demonstratethose great skills, and so I
started from a young age, reallyunderstanding that culture
mattered a lot in the way peoplebehave. So that is one story.
But I also want to add somethingthat's quite poignant to that my
(08:23):
parents, when I was a five orsix, it took my brother and me
to Dachau in Germany, and, youknow, at the time, we'd been
traveling across cultures andseeing people of different
colors and different origins anddifferent religions, and when
they told me that it was thereligion, differences in
(08:43):
religion, that had created, youknow, the atrocious behavior at
Dachau, I was justflabbergasted. As a child, it
just made absolutely no sense tome. And so what I found is I've
gone back looking through someof the old things I'd written in
high school and college, almostalways my writing was about
(09:06):
valuing differences among peopleand allowing that to add to the
quality of conversations andsuch, and building a culture
that valued those differences.
So I saw it in my parents, but Ialso that shock to my system at
(09:27):
a young age never left me. Andso anyway, those that's pretty
powerful, powerful statementthere. I don't want to drag us
down, but that that that reallyshaped, shapes the way I think
about teams today.
Michael Stern (09:37):
Yeah, culture is it makes me think of that
phrase, you know, the water weswim in, like we just don't
really realize how much ourculture is shaping our behavior
until we maybe find ourselves ina different culture that feels
maybe like jarring to oursystem. And I think often when
(09:58):
we experience that dissonancethere, the the automatic
reaction can be one in thedirection of protection and
othering, and, you know,criticizing and judging and so,
yes, we hear you pointing to theneed to become more conscious of
(10:18):
how culture is impacting us, butthen also to make space for how
other cultures might hold othervalues that may be different
from ours, but are stillimportant and valid and
beautiful in their own way?
Vanessa Druskat (10:34):
Sure? Yeah. And then on top of that, the human
superpower, create your ownculture, to create a culture
that includes everyone, right? Imean, we can assess, adapt,
create the culture that's goingto bring out the best in all of
us, and I think that's really mywish for leaders, that they
(10:54):
recognize that they can create aculture that is both high
performing and that values andhonors the differences.
Michael Stern (11:06):
the humanity side.
Vanessa Druskat (11:07):
Yeah,
Michael Stern (11:08):
Yeah. So maybe let's dig into that, because I
also heard you say that a lot ofleaders may not even realize
that it's possible, or thatthere's a method for how to
actually, intentionally createhigh performing cultures. And in
the description of the book,there's this quote, building a
great team is not as simple asputting a bunch of emotionally
(11:30):
intelligent individuals togetherand expecting great things to
happen. It's about developing anemotionally intelligent culture
based on intentional collectivenorms and habits. So it sounds
like that is the key to unlockthis culture building power. So
maybe you can just say a littlebit more about what that looks
(11:51):
like in your research?
Vanessa Druskat (11:53):
Sure. So I have to say that there is this norm
within the United States that wefocus on individuals. We don't
look at the system, the groupsystem, and most leaders I meet
asked me questions about how tocompose a great team. And hey,
can we compose them withemotionally intelligent people?
(12:15):
And would that make all thedifference? And it reduces, it
reduces what really happens inteams to just the individuals in
the room, what emerges. And whatwe've always known in social
psychology is that you see theindividuals in the room, what
you don't see are the norms arethe habits and the routines that
influence their behavior. Imean, we are social beings, and
(12:38):
we are wired to look to othersto figure out what the norms are
here. So right from the get go,it's fascinating, fascinating
research now, with socialanthropologists looking at soon
as we come out of the womb, weare looking to our parents to
figure out what works here. Howdo I need to behave? How am I
(13:00):
going to get the attention thatI need? And then in high school,
our hormones kick in, and we'relooking to our friends rather
than our parents. Or juniorhigh, probably, well, we forget
that we're doing that, andpeople do that in teams, and
this means that the leaders andthe informal leaders have a lot
of influence over the way groupsoperate. Let me give you a
(13:23):
simple example. The Universitywhere I teach. Currently,
meetings will start, and no onewill even say hello to one
another, I'll pass people in thehallway, and I can't tell you
how often I'm like, hey, hey,you know, it's just my nature,
because I feel like that'smatters, and nobody responds.
These are my colleagues. Okay?
(13:44):
So the norms there are not toacknowledge one another, you
know, it's just the way it is,and people don't realize that we
have control over that, andthat's just the way it is. And
so I think leaders and informalleaders a need to recognize that
all eyes are on them, and thenthey also need to realize that
let's include others in decidingwhat is the environment that we
(14:07):
want. Let's assess theenvironment. Let's find out what
are the norms? Are they workingfor us? Are they including all
of us? Are they leading to thekind of performance that we
want? And how can we tweak them?
And keep in mind, teams are notstatic. They are always waxing
and waning, and so that's aconstant. Thing that needs to
happen is we check in and youknow, Hey, Michael, sometimes
(14:29):
we're going to have to ignoreyour ideas, push you to the
side, but we want to make surethat that's not happening all
the time to you. We want to makesure that we check in and say,
is everyone feeling a valuedmember of this team? And you can
do that, and you can makechange.
Michael Stern (14:45):
So would you refresh our memory, the three
different clusters of Team normsand how they fit together? And
then I would also like to inviteyou to speak a little bit about
the concept of belonging,because I know that that has
emerged in your research as areally key part of what creates
(15:09):
these emotionally intelligentteams and cultures. And my sense
is, I don't know, I'd be curiousto hear what it's been for you
talking with different leadersand podcasts and everything. But
to me, the idea of belongingmakes so much sense when you
look at it from that perspectivethat you were sharing about how
we are social creatures in sucha profound way. You know, like
(15:34):
from the moment we're born, it'sjust a fundamental need and
really shapes our mental andemotional and physical well
being for our whole life. Andyet, I feel like talking about
something like belonging in aprofessional context, in a
leadership context, is one ofthese places where emotional
(15:56):
intelligence might start tosound a little squishy. So
curious how you're how you'reholding that, and how that fits
into your work these days.
Vanessa Druskat (16:06):
Sure, sure. So that's, that's, that's a lot of
you asked me a bunch of things,so let me I'll do my best to tie
it all together. So you knowthat in the model, there are
three clusters of norms that wefound that really make a
difference. And for those of youwho know the model, you may find
it surprising or not sosurprising that I've renamed
(16:26):
some of those things in thebook. So I worked with a lot of
people to help me name themthings that were more memorable
or that fit better for readers.
The first cluster, I'm nowcalling this the cluster that
about individuals. I'm nowcalling it how we help one
another succeed. And I did thatbecause I really want to
emphasize the importance of thefeedback and how critical that
is. You know, when you're in agroup of people who can help you
(16:52):
get better, it's a waste not toget their feedback, and it can
be done in a way that adds valueto their lives. And it's not
necessarily taken as a slight,but it's taken as a value added.
So anyway, the first cluster isabout addressing the needs of
the individual. The secondcluster is about this constant
adaptation and assessment, whereall voices come in to help
(17:14):
create a model of how this teamwants to work right now, and the
priorities and ways and balancestwo pieces. You know, there's a
norm that we call proactiveproblem solving in that group.
There's also a norm that wefocus on optimism with we call
build optimism. I see those as abalance. I see the team is
needing to allow folks who wantto criticize in there, and also
(17:38):
making sure that you allow folkswho create a picture of where
you're heading that's positiveand hopeful to motivate the
change and the work that you'redoing. The final cluster is
about reaching outside, and thisrequires some humility. I work
with a lot of teams that justfeel like they've got everything
(17:59):
they need in the team, but thisis really about reaching out and
learning from people who areoutside that can make you
better. And there's a lot ofresearch that's coming out on
that now, by the way, and abouthow we go out there, you bring
it in and you reflect on it thatyou can't just get a whole bunch
of information in withoutreflecting on what you're
learning and then adapting thatto the team. But anyway, now let
(18:20):
me get to the belonging pieceand how that links to all of
this. So we spent about 20 yearsbuilding the model, and then I
spent about 15 years out on theroad, testing the model, working
with organizations, and seeingwhat happened when I got out
there, and building the normsusing the survey that we had
developed for the research,using it with teams, the survey
basically helps a team look atits culture. It gives you a
(18:44):
snapshot of what are the normsnow? Are you valuing one
another? And what we really likeabout that, by the way, is the
range it provides. So you would,of course, see that the leader
and the high status folks feltlike they were respected, but
you'd see a tail on that with abunch of people not quite
feeling and that's what we wouldpush people to address. You
(19:06):
don't want stragglers. A team isa team. And in fact, by the way,
when you do research, if there'stoo much straggling in that, I
can't call you a team. Researchwon't let me call you a team. If
there's very differentexperiences, you're only a team
if you're doing things together,right? So that's a technicality,
all right. So anyway, what wentout onto the world and spent a
lot of time building teams? Icouldn't believe how well it
(19:30):
worked.
And I started thinking, why?
Because you got to remember thatthe model was built slightly
atheoretically, you know, wewent in there and said, Hey,
what's going on? Much like theEI model was built, you know,
what is it that these greatfolks are doing that we're not
paying attention to? So anyway,I just said, there's a reason
why this is working. And I wentback to the literature, and I
(19:53):
dug deep, and I found thisconcept of belonging, and the
deep literature on it inpsychology, and in particular
the work of Susan Fiske, who isnow at Princeton, used to be at
UMass Amherst for a long, longtime, and she basically argues
and provides a lot of evidencefor the idea that, of all the
(20:16):
social needs we have that areinnate, belonging is the most
important. As a fan of The Lordof the Rings, I like to call it,
this is the need that rules themall okay? And Susan Fiske
basically found and argues thatother needs, like our need for
(20:38):
control and our need for sharedunderstanding, our need for
trust, are all subsets of thisgreater need. So we like to be
in teams where we feel trust,because we know we can maintain
our sense of belonging. Controlallows us to maintain it allows
us to contribute to the team inthe ways we want to, so that we
(21:01):
can maintain our sense ofbelonging. So anyway, I started
looking at that, and I startedthinking about it, and I started
writing about it, I startedbringing it back to
organizations. And lo andbehold, I thought it was going
to be too, you know, woo, woo,or whatever you want to call it.
I can't remember how you referto it here. You know, it's hard
enough to talk about emotionalintelligence, as you all know,
sometimes organizations takeissue with it. Not lately, not
(21:24):
so much, but in the early days,it really, really did. But
everyone embraced it. And thiswas before covid. This was
before we started talking a lotabout dei people embraced it,
and I had tons of inquiriesabout people saying, This is
what we need. This is what weneed. We need the belonging.
(21:46):
People want to feel their part.
So let me just define for youwhat I mean by belonging. And
this is kind of I piecedtogether a couple of different
definitions. You are genuinelyaccepted and you are known and
valued and mutually supported.
Not only that, though, that youalso have a sense of control. So
(22:08):
it's not just that good stuff,it's that you have more control
and influence within the teamand its discussions as well. So
this isn't a fleeting sense.
It's clear through the actionsof the members that you are
valued because of the influencethat they allow you in the team.
And by the way, here's anotherone. Sorry to keep going on. I
know you've got follow upquestions, Michael, you can't
(22:30):
make yourself belong.
And this is some of the mostinteresting research. Is what
happens to people when theydon't feel like they belong, and
what can they do? And you knowwhat? They can't do anything.
You can't make yourself belong.
You have to be invited in. Andhere is the dilemma. This is why
(22:52):
it needs to be built into theculture of the team. And when we
feel like we don't belong, atfirst, we'll ingratiate, okay?
At first, we'll try to get inthat dust. Just doesn't work,
okay? Then we start to behavebadly. So a lot of bad behavior
in teams. We'll disengage. We'llstart becoming a little more
(23:12):
belligerent. We'll repeatourselves over and over again.
And researchers areflabbergasted at how bad people
behave when they aren'trespected, when they're not
treated like they belong. Andtheir assumption is and they
come to this conclusion,especially with these meta
analyzes that we lose ourability to control our emotions.
(23:36):
When you're rejected,ostracized, treated like you're
invisible, you lose your abilityto control your emotional
regulation ability.
Michael Stern (23:43):
Thank you for sharing that. I just think it's
such a powerful idea, and Ireally appreciate the different
aspects of how you define it,and the implications of what
happens when we feel like wedon't belong. And yeah, there's
just so much rich material inthere. So to wrap up, just our
(24:04):
chat for now, with belonging, Inotice like when I look at the
news or look at what's happeningpolitically or just around the
world in different ways, you cansee how powerful that sense of
belonging can be in both what Iwould describe as positive life
affirming ways, but also inharmful and destructive ways. So
(24:29):
I'm wondering what you see aswhat makes the difference, I
guess, between moving in thismore regenerative collective
intelligence direction, or morein this group think conformity
us versus them, kind ofbelonging, and maybe Just in
(24:49):
general, what you hope for,something like teeny eye or
realizing that we can actuallybe more conscious about how we
build culture together.
Vanessa Druskat (24:59):
Sure, I do want to talk about the relevance of
that third cluster of norms,which is where you're reaching
out. Because there is thisphenomenon where, when you start
getting tighter, you start tothink that you're better than
other groups, smarter, morecapable than other groups, and
this is why that third clustercan be so important. You know
(25:22):
that humility. So yes, we wanteveryone to belong, and we want
to have a team that's cohesive,but we don't want to have a team
that thinks it's got everythingit needs and it's better than
everyone else. So I'm just goingto throw that out there, and
that's a very complicatedquestion. I've been in a series
of really interesting talks withthe Tavistock Institute, by the
(25:46):
way, which I'll give a plug to,where we've been looking at you.
Intergroup dynamics around thesekinds of issues. Group think.
Group think is one of thescariest things to have happen
in a team, because it happenswithout you realizing it's
happening, and the team EI modeladdresses it in a number of
ways. So let me tell you whatgroup think is. It's where
(26:09):
people hold back and sharingtheir information because they
think either someone else wouldbring that up if it was
important, or it's going toruffle feathers, or it's not my
place to bring it up. And whatit creates is this illusion of
cohesion around a responsivedecision way of solving a
(26:30):
problem when there isn't reallythat much agreement in the
group. And so in the team AImodel, we have a number of ways
we try to address this, becauseit's so important, it happens so
easily. And let me just take atangent on that. We now know
that when people are in a groupand their idea is different than
others, what happens to theirbrain is they get sent an error
(26:53):
message. Their brain, becauseit's prioritizing its need to
belong, doesn't want to berejected, it will stop you from
sharing something that'sdifferent. Okay? And so you have
to override your instinct, oneinstinct, one emotional
reaction, which is, this isn'tthat important anyway, right?
(27:14):
And so that's why the team hasto really encourage
contributions.
We like to think that the kindof belonging we're talking about
checks the box. So you're in,you're valuable. We want all of
you. We want your authenticself. We want all of your
disagreements. We want all ofyour crazy ideas that you might
(27:35):
think are crazy, but we want tohear them. And I can tell you,
Michael, that research showsthat teams that allow that end
up making better decisionsagain, even if I don't use the
information that you share, ithelps all of our thinking. Of
course, you got to do thatwithin a bounded period of time,
right? You can't let things gowild, but, and you can do that,
especially the more often you doit, you become more efficient.
(27:57):
So anyway, we have that norm, orwe try to build that
understanding, etc, so thatpeople can check the box of
belonging and they don't feelthey have to conform to do that.
The second way we try to addressit is through another norm that
right now we're calling supportexpression, and this is where we
have tools, phrases, things thatwe recommend you repeat over and
(28:19):
over and over again that tellfolks we want to hear your
perspective. We want to hearyour disagreements. One of my
favorite examples is a leader ofhospital here in Boston, they
were engaging in a hugeturnaround, and he bought a
construction cap on Amazon thathad lights that you could turn
on. He put it in the middle ofthe room where his team met, and
(28:42):
he said, anytime you need totalk, anytime you think there's
something that's not being said,or you're not being heard, or
you've got some disagreementthat you think is just slightly
needs to be said. Put that haton, put the light on, we're
going to hear it. And so anyway,that's just an example of a prop
you can use that just remindspeople that we don't want you to
(29:04):
hold back. We want to hear it,right? So anyway, I think that's
that's really, really criticalin teams. I think, I think I
probably said enough. Let mestop right there and let you
follow up or move on. You know.
Michael Stern (29:17):
Yeah, that's great. Thank you so much. Maybe
we can just go to some questionsfrom the rest of the folks now
for our last 10 or 15 minutes.
Hanuman Goleman (29:26):
Hanuman here, and I'll paraphrase the first
question from an alum. It goessomething like this, Vanessa,
I've heard and thought ofbelonging as a choice, and you
were saying the group needs toaccept you. So I'm curious, when
is it a choice, and when is itnot, or is it ever a choice? In
your opinion?
Vanessa Druskat (29:47):
Yeah, thanks.
Thanks for that great question.
I like to think of it in twoways. If I'm talking to someone
like you, I would say sometimesyou got to put a protection
around yourself, and you canmake this choice to declare
yourself someone who belongs,right? And there's a lot of
proponents of that. Brene Browncomes to mind. I don't know if
(30:11):
anybody pays attention to her. Ido. I really like a lot of what
she says. You know, she's allabout, let's just go in there
and belong folks, you know. AndI love that idea. But when I'm
talking to team leaders, I wantto tell them that it's their
responsibility to build aculture that brings everyone in,
(30:32):
because it's so much easier. Youhave to put an armor around
yourself. And frankly, I do thisin my current job. I put armor.
I walk around like I belong, youknow, and it's, it's hard. It
takes energy, right? I'd ratherput my energy into contributing
to things that matter more to meand what we're doing, you know,
(30:54):
educating people where I teach.
But thanks. Thanks for asking.
Michael Stern (30:57):
That reminded me of Bob Kegan's work on
deliberately developmentalorganizations, and he talks
about how most people at theirjob, they're really doing two
jobs. One of their jobs is whatthey're supposed to be doing,
and the other one of their jobsis trying to fit in the
performance of how they'resupposed to be to belong, right?
(31:18):
I don't know if he uses thatlanguage, but just the amount of
energy that that takes that youwere describing, and how much
energy would be released for thereal work if there was that
genuine sense of belongingthere. Yeah, it just made me
think of that. Yeah.
Okay. Poonam, you want to comeon. I'll add your spotlight
here, and you can unmute.
Punam Telford (31:40):
Vanessa, I wondered what your view is on
this scenario. So sometimes whenI'm working through team
performance with organizations,we explore what is it that we
can do to amplify belonging orincrease it, let's say, by 1%
and something that comes upquite regularly as well. I can't
(32:01):
be friends with everyone youknow, and I don't want to be
friends with everyone. I saysome of the things that we then
have to unpack is that, well,friendship and having a
friendship is very different tobeing a team member and
belonging. So I wondered if thatcomes up in the work that you've
done, and what your response hasbeen in that scenario.
Vanessa Druskat (32:17):
Sure. Great question. Thank you. Yeah, it
comes up a lot. And one of thegood things I can tell folks is
that we studied whether or notliking everyone and being
friends mattered to the teamoutcomes. So do we see that more
often in high performing teams?
That was one of the bigquestions that we asked. It
doesn't have to be that way. Youdon't have to like everyone in
your team. You don't have towant to go out in the evenings
(32:40):
or see people outside of work.
That doesn't add, that doesn'tadd. What does matter is that
you know the people in yourteam, and what we find is that
when people feel known, whenthey're asked questions, when
they're able to share what'simportant to them, they feel a
greater sense of belonging. Theyfeel like they can continue to
(33:03):
be more authentic. So there'ssome really interesting research
that's just now coming out withpeople asking these kinds of
questions. You know, what's thebenefit of being known in your
team doing a check in at thestart of meetings? The benefit
is quite huge. It's in the mindof the person who's feeling
known all of a sudden, and it'sin the minds of the people who
now know, you know, I know whatyou've done in the past. I know
(33:24):
what you bring to the table.
Now, one of my favorite thoughtshere is, you don't see a sports
team, you know, let's just say,a group of soccer players. You
need to know how to pass theball to someone. You need to
know what's their strongestside, their left side, the right
side, you know. I mean, probablyin professional both sides are
strong. But in general, the moreyou know about the people you're
(33:47):
playing with, the better theteam can perform. And it's that
kind of information that we findends up making a huge
difference. And one more thingon this, I'm going to say, when
you do feel known, you sharemore information, and that ends
up being valuable.
Michael Stern (34:00):
So we have two more hands up.
Hanuman Goleman (34:04):
Vanessa, in your book, do you explain how to
implement team emotionalintelligence?
Vanessa Druskat (34:10):
First, you got to know why you're implementing
it if you're going to make achange. Because, after all,
changing norms is a change, asyou know, and it can be
stressful, and no matter even ifyou even if you want the change,
there's going to be resistance.
So what we usually do is we havea session with a team, and it
varies in length of time, butwhere we do an assessment of
(34:31):
what their current norms are,and there is a sort of a quick
and dirty survey that's in thebook, and I use that quite often
in workshops and things, and ifI only have a short period of
time with a team, and we'll lookat what people think right now,
are you being respected? Is thissomething we need to work on in
this team? Are we evaluating ourperformance periodically? Are we
(34:53):
reaching out? And then I let theteam decide, what do you want to
work on? It's not the leaderthat decides it. It's the team
deciding together which normsthey feel would be most
beneficial for their team rightnow. And we recognize that we
can work on some norms now andthen, in a few months, we can
come in and reassess and work onothers later, depending upon
(35:14):
where we're at. And then, ofcourse, it's assigning tasks to
people to kick off a norm, youhave to engage in activities
that people want to engage in.
So for example, when it comes todefining how we're going to
respect or care for one another.
One of the norms is calleddemonstrating care I have. And
in the book, I share a list ofterms, respect, care, inquiry a
(35:37):
bunch, and I list them out, andI have the team say, how do we
do this now? How could we dothis better? And then come up
with some activities and.
Some ways that the team is goingto do it more often, so that
people really do demonstraterespect with one another. There
was one team that we worked withwhere they decided that respect
(36:00):
meant you looked one another inthe eye and nodded your head up
and down. And so they starteddoing that. It was quite
hilarious when they firststarted doing and it had a huge
impact. You know, it was a smallact, and they did it for quite a
while, and it really peoplestarted sharing more information
with one another, and theystarted feeling more connected
because of it. So anyway, youhave to kick off the norm with
some small activity like that,and then you've got to reassess
(36:22):
later and see because you dolike any change effort, we can
slip back, or we can keep movingwith this norm and keep it
moving along, or let it manifestin other ways.
Hanuman Goleman (36:33):
Here, an alum asks about a time when she was a
leader of a team that seemed tobe splitting in two different
directions. The question isabout the appropriate time to
take the reins as a leader. Halfof her team was commandeering
the group, while the other halfwas grounded in the original
intention. And she asks Vanessahow she would recommend managing
(36:55):
that situation.
Vanessa Druskat (36:57):
I think the way I would manage it, if you're
midstream, is I would talk to afew folks, do a survey of some
kind, and come back to the teamand say, folks have advised me
that we need to make a decisionon this, and as your leader, I'm
going to step in and direct usright now. So this is what I'm
(37:18):
going to put forward, and thisis where I need your help. You
would basically be in thatauthoritative position,
authoritative role, which youneed to have sometimes, but make
sure that on the fringes of itthat you've got people adding
things empowered to add more. Soit's clear that you're not all
sudden becoming an authoritarianleader. And one of the things I
(37:41):
like to do with teams that Iwork with is I like to talk
about the ways of makingdecisions, and I recommend that
teams put this on their agenda,which is that there's different
ways to make a decision.
Sometimes the leader is going tohave to make that decision. So
it's, I'm consulting with you,you're giving me ideas, and I'm
going to make the decision, orwe're going to vote on it, so
it's kind of a democraticdecision. Or we're going to work
(38:05):
through consensus, which reallyis overrated, I think, because
it can take a long time to cometo consensus, but if that's what
you think your team needs, thenyou can do it. One of the
reasons I like that is I likethe team to realize, and they
know this already, but they needto know that sometimes the
leader is going to step in andtake over and make the decision
so that the group can move on. Imean, that's your job. People
(38:27):
want a leader. I like to thinkof it as a ship captain that
knows where they're going andthat can step in when things are
off course. It makes them feelmore secure. And there's times
for it. Let's say the very firstmeeting is a lot of research
that shows in the first meeting,when you're meeting with a team
and you're new, that you're alittle more authoritative than
you are later on. So anyway, Ihope that's helpful. It's not an
(38:53):
easy answer, and I get askedthat a lot, a lot of people have
tough time knowing when to beauthoritative and when to be
more empowering and democratic.
And it's not an all or nothingthing.
Hanuman Goleman (39:04):
The alum brings up subversive side conversations
within the team that she was notinitially aware of and how best
to handle the situation whereteam members were having private
conversations that underminedthe team she felt her response
was more authoritarian thanauthoritative, particularly when
(39:24):
the newest and least experiencedteam members were creating
dissonance through these sidechats, she asked about
strategies to address suchsituations more effectively in
the future, without killing thegroup's dynamics.
Vanessa Druskat (39:38):
Sure, sure, absolutely. And let me say that
you won't be the first leader tobe sidetracked by side chatter.
One of the hardest things isthat side chatter, and it's a
good reason why you want to getinformation from people. You
want to do assessmentsperiodically. You want to find
out what's working, what's notworking. I like to call this a
(39:59):
plus delta, where you can justat the end of a meeting,
periodically, you could send outa survey monkey, what's working
well on the team right now, whatneeds to change. So you're
constantly getting feedback, andyou're role modeling this desire
for feedback, and you can get asense of the overall pulse, but
I got to tell you, you know,you're not going to be liked by
(40:19):
everyone all the time, andthat's it's easy to say that so
hard when you find out. I mean,I'll never forget the first time
I found out that the team I wasleading were talking about me
behind my back, and it's notgood, it happens, but you got to
know you. There's a point atwhich you have to trust
yourself, and you have to notlet it sideway up. I mean, this
(40:41):
is where your emotionalintelligence comes in, right? I
mean, you collect the data, andyou move in a direction, and
you're willing to shift, butyou're taking heat. You know
you're the lightning rod whenyou're the leader.
Michael Stern (40:56):
Okay? Vanessa, thank you so much for being with
us. Any closing remarks orreflections you want to share
before we wrap up?
Vanessa Druskat (41:05):
Um, I just want to thank you all for your great
work. I just think you're doingsuch important work in the
world, and I just appreciateyou. So let me know how I can be
helpful. And I'm in the middleof putting more material on my
website, vanessadruskat.com. I'madding things to it constantly.
I'm going to have a bunch ofmaterial on there that you can
use, and I really want you totake this out. That's my
(41:26):
intention. I've got slides, I'vegot all kinds of things that you
can use that. You can take offand use any way you want to
continue to make a difference inthe world the way you are so
thank you
Michael Stern (41:37):
Amazing. Thank you for that generosity,
Vanessa, and also want to honorthe many years of research and
testing that has gone into thismodel, and your patience and
perseverance and dedication tothis, which I think we would all
agree, is so crucial and neededso thank you for sharing it with
us. Thank you for putting it outthere. Congratulations on the
(42:01):
book. Thank you for spendingtime with us today.
Vanessa Druskat (42:04):
Thanks for inviting me, Michael. I
appreciate it.
Michael Stern (42:06):
Thank you all for being here. May we all continue
to be a force for good in theworld and have positive ripple
effects wherever we go.
Daniel Goleman (42:27):
And thank you for tuning into this podcast and
for bringing EI into your ownlife.
Hanuman Goleman (42:32):
If you're interested in developing your ei
skill set and joining the alumcommunity, find the courses at
(43:02):
Daniel Goleman, emotionalintelligence.com
Hello and welcome to our first new episode
of first person plural in alittle while. I'm Hanuman
Goleman And I'm Dan Goleman,we're going to be offering a
sort of mini series within firstperson plural. These episodes
have a slightly differentformat. You may know about the
Daniel Goleman emotionalintelligence courses. These
(01:23):
courses offer practicaldevelopment of each ei
competency well for the alum ofthose courses, we've been
hosting an event series calledei a force for good that
features special guests whoseexperience, work and wisdom is
exceptional, and who we feel canadd to our emotional
(01:45):
intelligence, journeys andunderstanding.
Daniel Goleman (01:48):
These speakers go beyond the theory of
emotional intelligence, whatthey share adds understanding of
what ei looks like in variousparts of our world, personal,
interpersonal, work, home,relationship. There are so many
ways that emotional intelligencecan enrich our lives, and these
(02:09):
conversations bring some ofthose to light. This podcast
mini series gives us the chanceto share this wisdom with a
larger audience.
Hanuman Goleman (02:18):
These events are hosted and moderated by our
senior course facilitator,Michael Stern. At the end of the
events, the guests takequestions from the course alum
that lead to some reallyfantastic insights and response
so that the answers make sensewhile not sharing anyone's voice
without their permission. I willre-voice these questions myself.
Daniel Goleman (02:42):
The first podcast from the force for good
events is with Vanessa Druskat.
She has done truly brilliantresearch that brings to light
what ei looks like at the grouplevel, Team emotional
intelligence, Team EI, as shecalls it. She's recently
published her first book, The
Em (03:02):
Building Collaborative Teams that Outperform the Rest.
Vanessa's research has informedmy books, and I'm thrilled for
her work to be getting a largeraudience through This book.
Hanuman Goleman (03:16):
Great! So let's get to the event.
Michael Stern (03:20):
Thank you all so much for being here today. My
name is Michael stern, and I'mhere with Vanessa Druskat, which
is really wonderful. Hi Vanessa,thank you for being here.
Vanessa Druskat (03:43):
Hi Michael.
It's really, really lovely to behere with all of you.
Michael Stern (03:46):
Thank you. Thank you for making time to join us.
So by way of a very short bio,I'll just read this to introduce
you to everybody, if folksaren't familiar with you. So
Vanessa, Druskat is a associateprofessor of organizational
behavior at the University ofNew Hampshire, a social and
(04:08):
organizational psychologist. Shehas spent 30 years researching
team collaboration andperformance, which led her to
pioneer the concept of teamemotional intelligence. And I
know that you had a team in thateffort of
Vanessa Druskat (04:22):
Yes, thank you for mentioning that. Yeah.
Michael Stern (04:25):
So just to start us off, Vanessa, what's live for
you right now? How are youshowing up? What's what's
present for you?
Vanessa Druskat (04:33):
Um, well, excitement about the book. You
know, it's what I'm mostlyexcited about, is, is the
recognition people now havethat, you know, you can build a
collaborative team. There arethings you can do. I think a lot
of leaders don't realize thatthere are actions you can take
that improve the chances thatyou will have a team that
(04:54):
resonates with one another andthat is more collaborative and
and fun. And so that's what Ikeep trying to emphasize. I've
been in a lot of podcastsrecently and talking to
journalists, and, you know, it'sbeen an exciting time for me,
and also, at the same time, allof a sudden, I'm like front and
center in all theseenvironments. It's very
(05:16):
uncomfortable for my introvertedself, you know, I've always been
an introvert who can behave likean extrovert, but it's a little
uncomfortable to be the one outfront and center. And you know,
you mentioned there was a team Iworked with on this, and I
really want a shout out for mycolleague, Steve Wolff, who I
(05:36):
met in graduate school, and thetwo of us did a lot of the work
together. And there were a wholebunch of graduate students and
people, primarily at CaseWestern Reserve University, with
me, who really added great valueto this to the model and to and
to the ideas in the book.
Michael Stern (05:53):
Yeah, shout out to the grad students who never
got their names published. Youknow,
Vanessa Druskat (05:58):
indeed
Michael Stern (05:58):
the light work.
Vanessa Druskat (06:00):
Indeed, indeed.
Michael Stern (06:02):
Yeah, cool. So would you be willing to share a
short story from your personallife about how you first got
connected to this work?
Vanessa Druskat (06:12):
you bet. So it's going to be one story, but
with two branches in it. Littleknown fact is that my father was
a professor at UMass Amherst,and his his field was
international education, and hejust passed. So forgive me if I
talk about him for a momenthere, when Kenya became
(06:34):
independent from Great Britain,he was one of a team of folks
who went over to Kenya to helpafricanize The curriculum for
schools in Kenya. So, you know,they've been using the British
system. And so he came in tohelp, you know, work with people
to create a more Africancurriculum for them. So anyway,
(06:54):
that was two years of my life,living in Kenya with him and
also my brother and my mom, butalso lots of travel throughout
my life with my parents andbeing in different cultures,
constantly with them and seeingthem adapting to different
cultural norms. So, for example,I distinctly remember my father
(07:16):
talking with Kenyans andspending a long time talking
about their families. How's yourfather? How's your grandfather?
You know, conversations thatyou'd never hear, hear him, him
have in the US. Anyway, here'sthe point. I, from a very young
age, understood that culturesinfluence behavior,
(07:39):
and so when I came to the worldof teams, and I was interested
in teams, I was whollydissatisfied with the idea that
individuals were responsible,completely responsible, for
their behavior in teams, what Isaw was cultures affecting
(07:59):
behavior. So let me just say,you know, you can be really
emotionally intelligent, have agreat amount of empathy, and you
can enter a team where that noneof that is displayed or cared
about, and you don't demonstratethose great skills, and so I
started from a young age, reallyunderstanding that culture
mattered a lot in the way peoplebehave. So that is one story.
But I also want to add somethingthat's quite poignant to that my
(08:23):
parents, when I was a five orsix, it took my brother and me
to Dachau in Germany, and, youknow, at the time, we'd been
traveling across cultures andseeing people of different
colors and different origins anddifferent religions, and when
they told me that it was thereligion, differences in
(08:43):
religion, that had created, youknow, the atrocious behavior at
Dachau, I was justflabbergasted. As a child, it
just made absolutely no sense tome. And so what I found is I've
gone back looking through someof the old things I'd written in
high school and college, almostalways my writing was about
(09:06):
valuing differences among peopleand allowing that to add to the
quality of conversations andsuch, and building a culture
that valued those differences.
So I saw it in my parents, but Ialso that shock to my system at
(09:27):
a young age never left me. Andso anyway, those that's pretty
powerful, powerful statementthere. I don't want to drag us
down, but that that that reallyshaped, shapes the way I think
about teams today.
Michael Stern (09:37):
Yeah, culture is it makes me think of that
phrase, you know, the water weswim in, like we just don't
really realize how much ourculture is shaping our behavior
until we maybe find ourselves ina different culture that feels
maybe like jarring to oursystem. And I think often when
(09:58):
we experience that dissonancethere, the the automatic
reaction can be one in thedirection of protection and
othering, and, you know,criticizing and judging and so,
yes, we hear you pointing to theneed to become more conscious of
(10:18):
how culture is impacting us, butthen also to make space for how
other cultures might hold othervalues that may be different
from ours, but are stillimportant and valid and
beautiful in their own way?
Vanessa Druskat (10:34):
Sure? Yeah. And then on top of that, the human
superpower, create your ownculture, to create a culture
that includes everyone, right? Imean, we can assess, adapt,
create the culture that's goingto bring out the best in all of
us, and I think that's really mywish for leaders, that they
(10:54):
recognize that they can create aculture that is both high
performing and that values andhonors the differences.
Michael Stern (11:06):
the humanity side.
Vanessa Druskat (11:07):
Yeah,
Michael Stern (11:08):
Yeah. So maybe let's dig into that, because I
also heard you say that a lot ofleaders may not even realize
that it's possible, or thatthere's a method for how to
actually, intentionally createhigh performing cultures. And in
the description of the book,there's this quote, building a
great team is not as simple asputting a bunch of emotionally
(11:30):
intelligent individuals togetherand expecting great things to
happen. It's about developing anemotionally intelligent culture
based on intentional collectivenorms and habits. So it sounds
like that is the key to unlockthis culture building power. So
maybe you can just say a littlebit more about what that looks
(11:51):
like in your research?
Vanessa Druskat (11:53):
Sure. So I have to say that there is this norm
within the United States that wefocus on individuals. We don't
look at the system, the groupsystem, and most leaders I meet
asked me questions about how tocompose a great team. And hey,
can we compose them withemotionally intelligent people?
(12:15):
And would that make all thedifference? And it reduces, it
reduces what really happens inteams to just the individuals in
the room, what emerges. And whatwe've always known in social
psychology is that you see theindividuals in the room, what
you don't see are the norms arethe habits and the routines that
influence their behavior. Imean, we are social beings, and
(12:38):
we are wired to look to othersto figure out what the norms are
here. So right from the get go,it's fascinating, fascinating
research now, with socialanthropologists looking at soon
as we come out of the womb, weare looking to our parents to
figure out what works here. Howdo I need to behave? How am I
(13:00):
going to get the attention thatI need? And then in high school,
our hormones kick in, and we'relooking to our friends rather
than our parents. Or juniorhigh, probably, well, we forget
that we're doing that, andpeople do that in teams, and
this means that the leaders andthe informal leaders have a lot
of influence over the way groupsoperate. Let me give you a
(13:23):
simple example. The Universitywhere I teach. Currently,
meetings will start, and no onewill even say hello to one
another, I'll pass people in thehallway, and I can't tell you
how often I'm like, hey, hey,you know, it's just my nature,
because I feel like that'smatters, and nobody responds.
These are my colleagues. Okay?
(13:44):
So the norms there are not toacknowledge one another, you
know, it's just the way it is,and people don't realize that we
have control over that, andthat's just the way it is. And
so I think leaders and informalleaders a need to recognize that
all eyes are on them, and thenthey also need to realize that
let's include others in decidingwhat is the environment that we
(14:07):
want. Let's assess theenvironment. Let's find out what
are the norms? Are they workingfor us? Are they including all
of us? Are they leading to thekind of performance that we
want? And how can we tweak them?
And keep in mind, teams are notstatic. They are always waxing
and waning, and so that's aconstant. Thing that needs to
happen is we check in and youknow, Hey, Michael, sometimes
(14:29):
we're going to have to ignoreyour ideas, push you to the
side, but we want to make surethat that's not happening all
the time to you. We want to makesure that we check in and say,
is everyone feeling a valuedmember of this team? And you can
do that, and you can makechange.
Michael Stern (14:45):
So would you refresh our memory, the three
different clusters of Team normsand how they fit together? And
then I would also like to inviteyou to speak a little bit about
the concept of belonging,because I know that that has
emerged in your research as areally key part of what creates
(15:09):
these emotionally intelligentteams and cultures. And my sense
is, I don't know, I'd be curiousto hear what it's been for you
talking with different leadersand podcasts and everything. But
to me, the idea of belongingmakes so much sense when you
look at it from that perspectivethat you were sharing about how
we are social creatures in sucha profound way. You know, like
(15:34):
from the moment we're born, it'sjust a fundamental need and
really shapes our mental andemotional and physical well
being for our whole life. Andyet, I feel like talking about
something like belonging in aprofessional context, in a
leadership context, is one ofthese places where emotional
(15:56):
intelligence might start tosound a little squishy. So
curious how you're how you'reholding that, and how that fits
into your work these days.
Vanessa Druskat (16:06):
Sure, sure. So that's, that's, that's a lot of
you asked me a bunch of things,so let me I'll do my best to tie
it all together. So you knowthat in the model, there are
three clusters of norms that wefound that really make a
difference. And for those of youwho know the model, you may find
it surprising or not sosurprising that I've renamed
(16:26):
some of those things in thebook. So I worked with a lot of
people to help me name themthings that were more memorable
or that fit better for readers.
The first cluster, I'm nowcalling this the cluster that
about individuals. I'm nowcalling it how we help one
another succeed. And I did thatbecause I really want to
emphasize the importance of thefeedback and how critical that
is. You know, when you're in agroup of people who can help you
(16:52):
get better, it's a waste not toget their feedback, and it can
be done in a way that adds valueto their lives. And it's not
necessarily taken as a slight,but it's taken as a value added.
So anyway, the first cluster isabout addressing the needs of
the individual. The secondcluster is about this constant
adaptation and assessment, whereall voices come in to help
(17:14):
create a model of how this teamwants to work right now, and the
priorities and ways and balancestwo pieces. You know, there's a
norm that we call proactiveproblem solving in that group.
There's also a norm that wefocus on optimism with we call
build optimism. I see those as abalance. I see the team is
needing to allow folks who wantto criticize in there, and also
(17:38):
making sure that you allow folkswho create a picture of where
you're heading that's positiveand hopeful to motivate the
change and the work that you'redoing. The final cluster is
about reaching outside, and thisrequires some humility. I work
with a lot of teams that justfeel like they've got everything
(17:59):
they need in the team, but thisis really about reaching out and
learning from people who areoutside that can make you
better. And there's a lot ofresearch that's coming out on
that now, by the way, and abouthow we go out there, you bring
it in and you reflect on it thatyou can't just get a whole bunch
of information in withoutreflecting on what you're
learning and then adapting thatto the team. But anyway, now let
(18:20):
me get to the belonging pieceand how that links to all of
this. So we spent about 20 yearsbuilding the model, and then I
spent about 15 years out on theroad, testing the model, working
with organizations, and seeingwhat happened when I got out
there, and building the normsusing the survey that we had
developed for the research,using it with teams, the survey
basically helps a team look atits culture. It gives you a
(18:44):
snapshot of what are the normsnow? Are you valuing one
another? And what we really likeabout that, by the way, is the
range it provides. So you would,of course, see that the leader
and the high status folks feltlike they were respected, but
you'd see a tail on that with abunch of people not quite
feeling and that's what we wouldpush people to address. You
(19:06):
don't want stragglers. A team isa team. And in fact, by the way,
when you do research, if there'stoo much straggling in that, I
can't call you a team. Researchwon't let me call you a team. If
there's very differentexperiences, you're only a team
if you're doing things together,right? So that's a technicality,
all right. So anyway, what wentout onto the world and spent a
lot of time building teams? Icouldn't believe how well it
(19:30):
worked.
And I started thinking, why?
Because you got to remember thatthe model was built slightly
atheoretically, you know, wewent in there and said, Hey,
what's going on? Much like theEI model was built, you know,
what is it that these greatfolks are doing that we're not
paying attention to? So anyway,I just said, there's a reason
why this is working. And I wentback to the literature, and I
(19:53):
dug deep, and I found thisconcept of belonging, and the
deep literature on it inpsychology, and in particular
the work of Susan Fiske, who isnow at Princeton, used to be at
UMass Amherst for a long, longtime, and she basically argues
and provides a lot of evidencefor the idea that, of all the
(20:16):
social needs we have that areinnate, belonging is the most
important. As a fan of The Lordof the Rings, I like to call it,
this is the need that rules themall okay? And Susan Fiske
basically found and argues thatother needs, like our need for
(20:38):
control and our need for sharedunderstanding, our need for
trust, are all subsets of thisgreater need. So we like to be
in teams where we feel trust,because we know we can maintain
our sense of belonging. Controlallows us to maintain it allows
us to contribute to the team inthe ways we want to, so that we
(21:01):
can maintain our sense ofbelonging. So anyway, I started
looking at that, and I startedthinking about it, and I started
writing about it, I startedbringing it back to
organizations. And lo andbehold, I thought it was going
to be too, you know, woo, woo,or whatever you want to call it.
I can't remember how you referto it here. You know, it's hard
enough to talk about emotionalintelligence, as you all know,
sometimes organizations takeissue with it. Not lately, not
(21:24):
so much, but in the early days,it really, really did. But
everyone embraced it. And thiswas before covid. This was
before we started talking a lotabout dei people embraced it,
and I had tons of inquiriesabout people saying, This is
what we need. This is what weneed. We need the belonging.
(21:46):
People want to feel their part.
So let me just define for youwhat I mean by belonging. And
this is kind of I piecedtogether a couple of different
definitions. You are genuinelyaccepted and you are known and
valued and mutually supported.
Not only that, though, that youalso have a sense of control. So
(22:08):
it's not just that good stuff,it's that you have more control
and influence within the teamand its discussions as well. So
this isn't a fleeting sense.
It's clear through the actionsof the members that you are
valued because of the influencethat they allow you in the team.
And by the way, here's anotherone. Sorry to keep going on. I
know you've got follow upquestions, Michael, you can't
(22:30):
make yourself belong.
And this is some of the mostinteresting research. Is what
happens to people when theydon't feel like they belong, and
what can they do? And you knowwhat? They can't do anything.
You can't make yourself belong.
You have to be invited in. Andhere is the dilemma. This is why
(22:52):
it needs to be built into theculture of the team. And when we
feel like we don't belong, atfirst, we'll ingratiate, okay?
At first, we'll try to get inthat dust. Just doesn't work,
okay? Then we start to behavebadly. So a lot of bad behavior
in teams. We'll disengage. We'llstart becoming a little more
(23:12):
belligerent. We'll repeatourselves over and over again.
And researchers areflabbergasted at how bad people
behave when they aren'trespected, when they're not
treated like they belong. Andtheir assumption is and they
come to this conclusion,especially with these meta
analyzes that we lose ourability to control our emotions.
(23:36):
When you're rejected,ostracized, treated like you're
invisible, you lose your abilityto control your emotional
regulation ability.
Michael Stern (23:43):
Thank you for sharing that. I just think it's
such a powerful idea, and Ireally appreciate the different
aspects of how you define it,and the implications of what
happens when we feel like wedon't belong. And yeah, there's
just so much rich material inthere. So to wrap up, just our
(24:04):
chat for now, with belonging, Inotice like when I look at the
news or look at what's happeningpolitically or just around the
world in different ways, you cansee how powerful that sense of
belonging can be in both what Iwould describe as positive life
affirming ways, but also inharmful and destructive ways. So
(24:29):
I'm wondering what you see aswhat makes the difference, I
guess, between moving in thismore regenerative collective
intelligence direction, or morein this group think conformity
us versus them, kind ofbelonging, and maybe Just in
(24:49):
general, what you hope for,something like teeny eye or
realizing that we can actuallybe more conscious about how we
build culture together.
Vanessa Druskat (24:59):
Sure, I do want to talk about the relevance of
that third cluster of norms,which is where you're reaching
out. Because there is thisphenomenon where, when you start
getting tighter, you start tothink that you're better than
other groups, smarter, morecapable than other groups, and
this is why that third clustercan be so important. You know
(25:22):
that humility. So yes, we wanteveryone to belong, and we want
to have a team that's cohesive,but we don't want to have a team
that thinks it's got everythingit needs and it's better than
everyone else. So I'm just goingto throw that out there, and
that's a very complicatedquestion. I've been in a series
of really interesting talks withthe Tavistock Institute, by the
(25:46):
way, which I'll give a plug to,where we've been looking at you.
Intergroup dynamics around thesekinds of issues. Group think.
Group think is one of thescariest things to have happen
in a team, because it happenswithout you realizing it's
happening, and the team EI modeladdresses it in a number of
ways. So let me tell you whatgroup think is. It's where
(26:09):
people hold back and sharingtheir information because they
think either someone else wouldbring that up if it was
important, or it's going toruffle feathers, or it's not my
place to bring it up. And whatit creates is this illusion of
cohesion around a responsivedecision way of solving a
(26:30):
problem when there isn't reallythat much agreement in the
group. And so in the team AImodel, we have a number of ways
we try to address this, becauseit's so important, it happens so
easily. And let me just take atangent on that. We now know
that when people are in a groupand their idea is different than
others, what happens to theirbrain is they get sent an error
(26:53):
message. Their brain, becauseit's prioritizing its need to
belong, doesn't want to berejected, it will stop you from
sharing something that'sdifferent. Okay? And so you have
to override your instinct, oneinstinct, one emotional
reaction, which is, this isn'tthat important anyway, right?
(27:14):
And so that's why the team hasto really encourage
contributions.
We like to think that the kindof belonging we're talking about
checks the box. So you're in,you're valuable. We want all of
you. We want your authenticself. We want all of your
disagreements. We want all ofyour crazy ideas that you might
(27:35):
think are crazy, but we want tohear them. And I can tell you,
Michael, that research showsthat teams that allow that end
up making better decisionsagain, even if I don't use the
information that you share, ithelps all of our thinking. Of
course, you got to do thatwithin a bounded period of time,
right? You can't let things gowild, but, and you can do that,
especially the more often you doit, you become more efficient.
(27:57):
So anyway, we have that norm, orwe try to build that
understanding, etc, so thatpeople can check the box of
belonging and they don't feelthey have to conform to do that.
The second way we try to addressit is through another norm that
right now we're calling supportexpression, and this is where we
have tools, phrases, things thatwe recommend you repeat over and
(28:19):
over and over again that tellfolks we want to hear your
perspective. We want to hearyour disagreements. One of my
favorite examples is a leader ofhospital here in Boston, they
were engaging in a hugeturnaround, and he bought a
construction cap on Amazon thathad lights that you could turn
on. He put it in the middle ofthe room where his team met, and
(28:42):
he said, anytime you need totalk, anytime you think there's
something that's not being said,or you're not being heard, or
you've got some disagreementthat you think is just slightly
needs to be said. Put that haton, put the light on, we're
going to hear it. And so anyway,that's just an example of a prop
you can use that just remindspeople that we don't want you to
(29:04):
hold back. We want to hear it,right? So anyway, I think that's
that's really, really criticalin teams. I think, I think I
probably said enough. Let mestop right there and let you
follow up or move on. You know.
Michael Stern (29:17):
Yeah, that's great. Thank you so much. Maybe
we can just go to some questionsfrom the rest of the folks now
for our last 10 or 15 minutes.
Hanuman Goleman (29:26):
Hanuman here, and I'll paraphrase the first
question from an alum. It goessomething like this, Vanessa,
I've heard and thought ofbelonging as a choice, and you
were saying the group needs toaccept you. So I'm curious, when
is it a choice, and when is itnot, or is it ever a choice? In
your opinion?
Vanessa Druskat (29:47):
Yeah, thanks.
Thanks for that great question.
I like to think of it in twoways. If I'm talking to someone
like you, I would say sometimesyou got to put a protection
around yourself, and you canmake this choice to declare
yourself someone who belongs,right? And there's a lot of
proponents of that. Brene Browncomes to mind. I don't know if
(30:11):
anybody pays attention to her. Ido. I really like a lot of what
she says. You know, she's allabout, let's just go in there
and belong folks, you know. AndI love that idea. But when I'm
talking to team leaders, I wantto tell them that it's their
responsibility to build aculture that brings everyone in,
(30:32):
because it's so much easier. Youhave to put an armor around
yourself. And frankly, I do thisin my current job. I put armor.
I walk around like I belong, youknow, and it's, it's hard. It
takes energy, right? I'd ratherput my energy into contributing
to things that matter more to meand what we're doing, you know,
(30:54):
educating people where I teach.
But thanks. Thanks for asking.
Michael Stern (30:57):
That reminded me of Bob Kegan's work on
deliberately developmentalorganizations, and he talks
about how most people at theirjob, they're really doing two
jobs. One of their jobs is whatthey're supposed to be doing,
and the other one of their jobsis trying to fit in the
performance of how they'resupposed to be to belong, right?
(31:18):
I don't know if he uses thatlanguage, but just the amount of
energy that that takes that youwere describing, and how much
energy would be released for thereal work if there was that
genuine sense of belongingthere. Yeah, it just made me
think of that. Yeah.
Okay. Poonam, you want to comeon. I'll add your spotlight
here, and you can unmute.
Punam Telford (31:40):
Vanessa, I wondered what your view is on
this scenario. So sometimes whenI'm working through team
performance with organizations,we explore what is it that we
can do to amplify belonging orincrease it, let's say, by 1%
and something that comes upquite regularly as well. I can't
(32:01):
be friends with everyone youknow, and I don't want to be
friends with everyone. I saysome of the things that we then
have to unpack is that, well,friendship and having a
friendship is very different tobeing a team member and
belonging. So I wondered if thatcomes up in the work that you've
done, and what your response hasbeen in that scenario.
Vanessa Druskat (32:17):
Sure. Great question. Thank you. Yeah, it
comes up a lot. And one of thegood things I can tell folks is
that we studied whether or notliking everyone and being
friends mattered to the teamoutcomes. So do we see that more
often in high performing teams?
That was one of the bigquestions that we asked. It
doesn't have to be that way. Youdon't have to like everyone in
your team. You don't have towant to go out in the evenings
(32:40):
or see people outside of work.
That doesn't add, that doesn'tadd. What does matter is that
you know the people in yourteam, and what we find is that
when people feel known, whenthey're asked questions, when
they're able to share what'simportant to them, they feel a
greater sense of belonging. Theyfeel like they can continue to
(33:03):
be more authentic. So there'ssome really interesting research
that's just now coming out withpeople asking these kinds of
questions. You know, what's thebenefit of being known in your
team doing a check in at thestart of meetings? The benefit
is quite huge. It's in the mindof the person who's feeling
known all of a sudden, and it'sin the minds of the people who
now know, you know, I know whatyou've done in the past. I know
(33:24):
what you bring to the table.
Now, one of my favorite thoughtshere is, you don't see a sports
team, you know, let's just say,a group of soccer players. You
need to know how to pass theball to someone. You need to
know what's their strongestside, their left side, the right
side, you know. I mean, probablyin professional both sides are
strong. But in general, the moreyou know about the people you're
(33:47):
playing with, the better theteam can perform. And it's that
kind of information that we findends up making a huge
difference. And one more thingon this, I'm going to say, when
you do feel known, you sharemore information, and that ends
up being valuable.
Michael Stern (34:00):
So we have two more hands up.
Hanuman Goleman (34:04):
Vanessa, in your book, do you explain how to
implement team emotionalintelligence?
Vanessa Druskat (34:10):
First, you got to know why you're implementing
it if you're going to make achange. Because, after all,
changing norms is a change, asyou know, and it can be
stressful, and no matter even ifyou even if you want the change,
there's going to be resistance.
So what we usually do is we havea session with a team, and it
varies in length of time, butwhere we do an assessment of
(34:31):
what their current norms are,and there is a sort of a quick
and dirty survey that's in thebook, and I use that quite often
in workshops and things, and ifI only have a short period of
time with a team, and we'll lookat what people think right now,
are you being respected? Is thissomething we need to work on in
this team? Are we evaluating ourperformance periodically? Are we
(34:53):
reaching out? And then I let theteam decide, what do you want to
work on? It's not the leaderthat decides it. It's the team
deciding together which normsthey feel would be most
beneficial for their team rightnow. And we recognize that we
can work on some norms now andthen, in a few months, we can
come in and reassess and work onothers later, depending upon
(35:14):
where we're at. And then, ofcourse, it's assigning tasks to
people to kick off a norm, youhave to engage in activities
that people want to engage in.
So for example, when it comes todefining how we're going to
respect or care for one another.
One of the norms is calleddemonstrating care I have. And
in the book, I share a list ofterms, respect, care, inquiry a
(35:37):
bunch, and I list them out, andI have the team say, how do we
do this now? How could we dothis better? And then come up
with some activities and.
Some ways that the team is goingto do it more often, so that
people really do demonstraterespect with one another. There
was one team that we worked withwhere they decided that respect
(36:00):
meant you looked one another inthe eye and nodded your head up
and down. And so they starteddoing that. It was quite
hilarious when they firststarted doing and it had a huge
impact. You know, it was a smallact, and they did it for quite a
while, and it really peoplestarted sharing more information
with one another, and theystarted feeling more connected
because of it. So anyway, youhave to kick off the norm with
some small activity like that,and then you've got to reassess
(36:22):
later and see because you dolike any change effort, we can
slip back, or we can keep movingwith this norm and keep it
moving along, or let it manifestin other ways.
Hanuman Goleman (36:33):
Here, an alum asks about a time when she was a
leader of a team that seemed tobe splitting in two different
directions. The question isabout the appropriate time to
take the reins as a leader. Halfof her team was commandeering
the group, while the other halfwas grounded in the original
intention. And she asks Vanessahow she would recommend managing
(36:55):
that situation.
Vanessa Druskat (36:57):
I think the way I would manage it, if you're
midstream, is I would talk to afew folks, do a survey of some
kind, and come back to the teamand say, folks have advised me
that we need to make a decisionon this, and as your leader, I'm
going to step in and direct usright now. So this is what I'm
(37:18):
going to put forward, and thisis where I need your help. You
would basically be in thatauthoritative position,
authoritative role, which youneed to have sometimes, but make
sure that on the fringes of itthat you've got people adding
things empowered to add more. Soit's clear that you're not all
sudden becoming an authoritarianleader. And one of the things I
(37:41):
like to do with teams that Iwork with is I like to talk
about the ways of makingdecisions, and I recommend that
teams put this on their agenda,which is that there's different
ways to make a decision.
Sometimes the leader is going tohave to make that decision. So
it's, I'm consulting with you,you're giving me ideas, and I'm
going to make the decision, orwe're going to vote on it, so
it's kind of a democraticdecision. Or we're going to work
(38:05):
through consensus, which reallyis overrated, I think, because
it can take a long time to cometo consensus, but if that's what
you think your team needs, thenyou can do it. One of the
reasons I like that is I likethe team to realize, and they
know this already, but they needto know that sometimes the
leader is going to step in andtake over and make the decision
so that the group can move on. Imean, that's your job. People
(38:27):
want a leader. I like to thinkof it as a ship captain that
knows where they're going andthat can step in when things are
off course. It makes them feelmore secure. And there's times
for it. Let's say the very firstmeeting is a lot of research
that shows in the first meeting,when you're meeting with a team
and you're new, that you're alittle more authoritative than
you are later on. So anyway, Ihope that's helpful. It's not an
(38:53):
easy answer, and I get askedthat a lot, a lot of people have
tough time knowing when to beauthoritative and when to be
more empowering and democratic.
And it's not an all or nothingthing.
Hanuman Goleman (39:04):
The alum brings up subversive side conversations
within the team that she was notinitially aware of and how best
to handle the situation whereteam members were having private
conversations that underminedthe team she felt her response
was more authoritarian thanauthoritative, particularly when
(39:24):
the newest and least experiencedteam members were creating
dissonance through these sidechats, she asked about
strategies to address suchsituations more effectively in
the future, without killing thegroup's dynamics.
Vanessa Druskat (39:38):
Sure, sure, absolutely. And let me say that
you won't be the first leader tobe sidetracked by side chatter.
One of the hardest things isthat side chatter, and it's a
good reason why you want to getinformation from people. You
want to do assessmentsperiodically. You want to find
out what's working, what's notworking. I like to call this a
(39:59):
plus delta, where you can justat the end of a meeting,
periodically, you could send outa survey monkey, what's working
well on the team right now, whatneeds to change. So you're
constantly getting feedback, andyou're role modeling this desire
for feedback, and you can get asense of the overall pulse, but
I got to tell you, you know,you're not going to be liked by
(40:19):
everyone all the time, andthat's it's easy to say that so
hard when you find out. I mean,I'll never forget the first time
I found out that the team I wasleading were talking about me
behind my back, and it's notgood, it happens, but you got to
know you. There's a point atwhich you have to trust
yourself, and you have to notlet it sideway up. I mean, this
(40:41):
is where your emotionalintelligence comes in, right? I
mean, you collect the data, andyou move in a direction, and
you're willing to shift, butyou're taking heat. You know
you're the lightning rod whenyou're the leader.
Michael Stern (40:56):
Okay? Vanessa, thank you so much for being with
us. Any closing remarks orreflections you want to share
before we wrap up?
Vanessa Druskat (41:05):
Um, I just want to thank you all for your great
work. I just think you're doingsuch important work in the
world, and I just appreciateyou. So let me know how I can be
helpful. And I'm in the middleof putting more material on my
website, vanessadruskat.com. I'madding things to it constantly.
I'm going to have a bunch ofmaterial on there that you can
use, and I really want you totake this out. That's my
(41:26):
intention. I've got slides, I'vegot all kinds of things that you
can use that. You can take offand use any way you want to
continue to make a difference inthe world the way you are so
thank you
Michael Stern (41:37):
Amazing. Thank you for that generosity,
Vanessa, and also want to honorthe many years of research and
testing that has gone into thismodel, and your patience and
perseverance and dedication tothis, which I think we would all
agree, is so crucial and neededso thank you for sharing it with
us. Thank you for putting it outthere. Congratulations on the
(42:01):
book. Thank you for spendingtime with us today.
Vanessa Druskat (42:04):
Thanks for inviting me, Michael. I
appreciate it.
Michael Stern (42:06):
Thank you all for being here. May we all continue
to be a force for good in theworld and have positive ripple
effects wherever we go.
Daniel Goleman (42:27):
And thank you for tuning into this podcast and
for bringing EI into your ownlife.
Hanuman Goleman (42:32):
If you're interested in developing your ei
skill set and joining the alumcommunity, find the courses at
(43:02):
Daniel Goleman, emotionalintelligence.com
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.