May 28, 2025 • 37 mins
What happens when you gather a group of educators in a room and call them a "team"? Usually, not much. Despite our best intentions, many school leadership teams waste countless hours in meetings without achieving their potential impact - because simply assigning people to work together doesn't make them a team.
Rob Stones, with over 35 years of educational leadership experience including 22 years as a principal, shares his transformative approach to building genuine teams in schools through "The Tao of Teams." Drawing from extensive research and practical application, he reveals how vulnerability-based trust forms the foundation for teams that can tackle complex educational challenges with remarkable effectiveness.
The conversation unpacks four essential steps to team formation that transcend superficial team-building exercises. Beginning with establishing trust, Rob explains how teams must learn to navigate conflict productively before developing commitment and accountability. His practical activities - like using quote discussions to reveal thinking patterns and "compass point" exercises to understand conflict styles - provide immediate tools for school leaders to implement.
Most compelling is Rob's explanation of the "law of requisite variety" - why a diverse team inherently possesses greater problem-solving capacity than even the most capable individual leader. Through consensus decision-making techniques like "five-finger voting," he demonstrates how to harness this collective intelligence while ensuring everyone has a genuine stake in outcomes.
Whether you're struggling with a dysfunctional leadership team or simply want to elevate your already solid team to new heights, this episode offers concrete strategies you can implement immediately. Ready to transform your school's leadership approach? Listen now and discover how investing in true team development can dramatically improve your school's effectiveness and student outcomes.
Links and References:
To view our Professional Learning Offerings, visit:
https://www.nswppa.org.au/professional-learning
To view our latest offerings, visit: https://www.nswppa.org.au/catalogue
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Drew (00:05):
Welcome to Season 3 of Professional Learnings, the New
South Wales PPA EducationalLeadership Podcast.
I'm Drew Janicki, back as yourhost for a brand new season.
It's great for you to be withus as we continue this journey
of learning, leading and drawinginspiration from the incredible
insights of our amazing guests.
(00:27):
Let's dive into our latestepisode In this podcast with Rob
Stones, we explored the Tao ofTeams and uncovered how school
leaders can significantlyenhance collaboration and
effectiveness within theirschools.
Delivered in partnership withthe New South Wales Primary
Principals Association, RobStone shares his valuable
(00:49):
insights and practicalstrategies that highlight the
dynamics of successful teamwork.
Rob's approach helped usunderstand how to leverage the
collective strengths of staffmembers effectively.
Before we dive into the fullconversations, here's a quick
audio grab from Rob to set thestage.
Rob (01:10):
Yeah.
So you have to actually do somethings which seem in some
senses a little bit ofartificial because they don't
actually address the team agenda, but they're activities which
enable you to understand who isin the room and a bit about how
they think, and you start towork on the process of trying to
(01:31):
get some cohesion around ideas,exploring the edges of
different people's opinions.
So the one that's on the screenat the moment is a simple one.
It's called quotes.
You post the quotes.
At the moment is a simple one.
It's called quotes.
You post the quotes around theroom.
You ask each person to chooseone.
As you can see, these are allquotes about teamwork.
(01:52):
We can choose anything.
You can choose things that thegroup may have to talk about, to
explore the different people'sopinions.
So then people find out whoagrees with them, who disagrees
with them.
They share their opinions, andwhen I do it, I often ask people
to come to an agreed ranking ofthe quotes in order of
(02:16):
importance, and that's quite achallenging activity, but at the
end of it people understandwhere the other people in the
room are coming from and and ifin during the first you know,
month or six weeks of the team'sformation, they do three or
four similar activities, many ofthem in the book.
(02:37):
Um then, as they get stuck intothe work they do together, they
they understand a little more,a lot more, usually, of the
perspectives of the other peoplein the room.
Drew (02:55):
All right, rob Stones, welcome to our podcast.
It's great for you to be withus today as we discuss your work
, the Tao of Teams, reallylooking forward to our
conversation today.
Rob (03:10):
Thank you, it's a pleasure to be here and it's a pleasure
to talk about team, because I'ma little bit obsessive about
taking the trouble to form aproper team rather than just
bundle a group of people into aroom.
Drew (03:28):
Yeah, it's an interesting concept, the concept of team,
and in our previous conversationyou've said how it's so
interesting of exploring why isthat so.
So I'm really looking forwardto you sharing the thoughts of
what a good team is.
Rob (03:51):
And I suppose the reason I'm a bit passionate about it is
because I think that an awfullot of time is wasted in teams,
because people put togethergroups of people because of
their roles and they expect themto work as a team, but it
(04:13):
doesn't happen.
Because you have to invest thetime first of all in creating a
culture and a sort of cohesionand agreeing a shared purpose,
and then, when you put all thattogether, it'll repay your
efforts.
But if you simply put togethera group of people say they're
(04:33):
the such and such team or myleadership team, they can easily
consume each other's timesitting around the table without
any sense of achieving verymuch the table without any sense
of achieving very much so interms of that process.
Drew (04:51):
how does that occur?
Is this what the course isabout?
Rob (04:56):
in terms of showing yes.
So the course is about how theyput together the team so they
work so well together that theycan achieve far more than just
their individual efforts.
So for grads in those schools,every team member will be
working hard with their own yearlevel or department or whatever
(05:17):
it is, and that will achieve acertain amount.
But putting together theharnessing of the individual
differences to serve the wholeschool's purpose, that's called
synergy.
That's the effect you get.
And if I can explain it quickly, there's something called the
(05:42):
law of requisite variety, whichwhich applies to humans working
together to counter thecomplexity of situations.
So a group of people inevitablyhas far more flexibility of,
can create far more flexibilityin behaviors than a single
(06:04):
individual.
So that when we've got reallycomplex situations, as we have
in our school, then making theteam the controlling system
means it has more variety thanjust the principal or senior
executive team.
And that's why a team approachis so valuable, because it gives
(06:25):
the team the capacity to tacklethe complexities of managing
and leading a school.
Drew (06:37):
Yeah, interesting in terms of the synergy.
Can you elaborate further onthe TAO team?
Rob (06:45):
Can you elaborate further on the TAO team?
So the program, the workshop,will walk you through the four
steps of team formation andshare some of the activities
that enhance team effectiveness.
So the four steps to teamformation is first of all, you
have to actually put themtogether with some simple
(07:12):
processes that mean they cantrust each other.
That's the team building.
And then you have to explorehow on earth are we going to
speak frankly to each other sothat we can share the different
opinions, because you don't wanta bunch of yes-men.
That just reduces the capacityto tackle complexity.
(07:32):
And then the group unitesaround a shared purpose and we
use various team processes andpractices to enable them to work
effectively.
So essentially, that's thestructure of the course, and the
supporting activities arechosen from some of the 160-odd
(07:53):
activities in the book, whichwe'll use as a handbook in order
to do all that.
Yeah, it is interesting in termsof those, those concepts, those
, those four activities you ofand essentially bound by trust,
(08:13):
as you said at the startingpoint so see, and the book um is
really owes its origin to theart of leadership, because we
have, as you know, a variety ofteam practices during the art of
leadership.
We actually do go through theprocess of forming the group as
(08:35):
a team so that they'll worktogether in the art of
leadership.
But over time, people have saidto me where do we find these
activities?
We want to use these for ourteam.
Over time, people have said tome where do we find these
activities?
We want to use these for ourteam.
And so, really, I put the Towerof Team in practice together as
(08:55):
a book, as a resource book, sothat principals who want to
build their team have got enoughactivities to choose from to be
able to run a five-yearschedule of team-building
activities without everrepeating.
They're not doing the samething over and over again and
(09:15):
each activity lends a differentdimension to its process in
forming and sustaining the team.
So the first step is what youmentioned just then is about
trust, and trust is the firstthing you have to do in team
formation.
Because Robert Lencioni, whowrote the Five Dysfunctions of
(09:44):
the Team a really significantbook for people who want to know
about how teams work and don'twork.
I could put this, you know, ifyou look at the triangle, if the
people don't trust each other,okay, then when they move on to
the next step, when there'sconflict, when people have
(10:04):
different ideas because theydon't trust each other, they
fear the conflict and they don'tlike it, and so they don't
conflict.
People say things that theydon't agree with and they mutter
about it in the meeting, andthey, you know it'd be under
their breath.
And when they get back to theirstaff room, they say how stupid
(10:27):
it was, but a decision getsmade anyway, and then nobody has
commitment.
They hadn't said what theydisagreed about, but they don't
really agree.
And if you don't have agreement, you don't have commitment.
So nobody feels accountable.
That was their ideas, not mine,and the focus on delivering
(10:48):
results disappears.
And so Len Ciarri said thefirst step is to create
vulnerability-based trust.
That's the kind of trust whichmeans that you disclose parts of
yourselves not personal, butprofessional and opinions, and
so on and so forth, so thatpeople in the room where the
(11:12):
team meets know who's in there.
They know you more than yourname and your role, but they
actually know how this personthinks.
Drew (11:28):
They actually know how this person thinks.
Yeah, so it's more than just asurface level, so to speak, and
it's more than just having anice meeting which actually
doesn't lead to productivity assuch.
You need to have that rigor,but you also need to have trust,
but you also need to have whatI heard is vulnerability and
(11:53):
rigour before going to the nextstep of that triangle.
Rob (12:01):
Yeah.
So you have to actually do somethings which seem in some
senses a little bit artificialbecause they don't actually
address the team agenda, butthey're activities which enable
you to understand who is in theroom and a bit about how they
think, and you start to work onthe process of trying to get
(12:24):
some cohesion around ideas,exploring the edges of different
people's opinions.
So the one that's on the screenat the moment is a simple one.
It's called quotes.
You post the quotes around theroom.
You ask each person to chooseone.
As you can see, these are thequotes around the room.
You ask each person to chooseone.
As you can see, these are allquotes about teamwork, but you
can choose anything.
You can choose things that thegroup may have to talk about, to
(12:49):
explore the different people'sopinions.
So then people find out whoagrees with them, who disagrees
with them.
They share their opinions, andwhen I do it, I often ask people
to come to an agreed ranking ofthe quotes in order of
importance, and that's quite achallenging activity, but at the
(13:12):
end of it, people understandwhere the other people in the
room are coming from and ifduring the first month or six
weeks of the team's formationthey do three or four similar
activities, plenty of them inthe book.
Then, as they get stuck intothe work they do together, they
(13:36):
understand a little more, a lotmore, usually of the
perspectives of the other peoplein the room.
Drew (13:43):
Yeah, makes a lot of sense in terms of having that
perspective, but also havingthat rigour and understanding
each person's perspective andwhy they have said that really
adds to, which is also linkedwith the Art of Leadership
program.
Rob (13:59):
Yeah, and it's not accidental.
You know, obviously some groupmembers will get to know each
other really well and some willjoin the team already knowing
each other well.
But this makes sure that you'renot relying on a trust level
that hasn't been established,not relying on a trust level
(14:22):
that hasn't been established andin terms of personality type
there, rob, that is also shownthrough the Art of Leadership
program, as you know, is that acontributing factor that you
need to be aware of in theseactivities.
(14:44):
Yes, and we don't expecteverybody to rush out and have
their whole team do an MBTIprogram, though of course you
can, but there's somerudimentary MBTI activities in
the book in the Tower of Teams,the resource book, which will
enable people to find out awhole lot about their MBTI type.
Drew (15:00):
Yeah, mbti type is very interesting.
Yeah, it's interesting.
Can you tell us further aboutthe different types of
activities?
Rob (15:08):
So I mean if the team's going to be any good, they have
to face up to the fact that,with different kinds of thinking
, which are all essential forthe team to work, they've got to
be able to manage the differentways in which they disagree.
You know people getting upsetwith each other and things like
that.
So, um, you've got to explorehow to disagree and how to agree
(15:33):
, encourage vigorous debate, butalso really thoughtful
listening so that people willlearn from each other.
So, you know, one of theactivities that I like is the
one on the next slide, which is,um, uh, people to to actually
explore their conflictspreference.
(15:54):
So, um, you, um you.
You choose the north, south,east and west, or the center,
and um standing around the room,okay, in the position.
So north is confrontative, um,south is avoidance, passivity,
(16:15):
um, compromise is meetinghalfway and collaboration is
finding win-win andaccommodation.
You yielding to the rest of thegroup to maintain harmony is
the fourth option.
So you choose your compasspoints.
The people who stand at thecompass points explain why
that's their difference, andthen you come to have a pretty
(16:37):
deep discussion about when,given these conflicting styles,
how do we resolve conflict inthe team without um diluting the
quality of the decision we'remaking?
Drew (16:53):
yeah, really interesting in terms of, and and what's the
feedback from this activity been.
Rob (17:01):
Usually really really good.
You know, when people know thewhole group knows that the
people who are standing at westare trying to find a win-win
solution and the people standingat south have a tendency not to
(17:21):
engage with the conflict, okay,they can coach each other.
They've got to say, listen, wewant to know your real opinion.
And the competitive people?
Okay, we have to in the team,because the team always coaches
each other when it's workingwell.
Drew (17:40):
you have to say, yeah, okay, we know you've got a
strong opinion about that, butlisten to the other opinions
it's, it's uh, it's interestingin terms of the topics of
managing team, managing conflict, which is something that is not
explicitly sort of taught insociety.
You're taught to get along, benice, work through the problem,
(18:08):
but it's.
Rob (18:12):
We don't want to be nice.
Being nice solves the problemin the room, but doesn't address
the problem that you're workingon, which is something that's
happening outside the room.
Drew (18:26):
And then?
So then we move intodecision-making.
Rob (18:33):
Decision-making and I really think it's important that
decision-making is discussedearly on because it's kind of
easy.
I've think it's important thatdecision-making is discussed
early on because it's kind ofeasy I've done it myself right
to have a lot of discussion andthen the principal, or whoever
is leading the team, shuffles uphis papers and said, okay, well
, you give me a lot to thinkabout, okay, and I'll work out
(18:56):
what to do.
But that's not committing teammembers.
If team members think thatthey're just a sounding board,
they don't have a stake in thedecision.
And if you want them to quitepassionately and can be
(19:18):
committed and engaged towhatever decision we make,
they've got to have a stake inthe decision.
They've got to know that theycontribute to the decision.
And then if we do that, if wehave decisions where people
leave the room going we havedecided, then you get a huge
amount of engagement from theteam.
Drew (19:42):
Yeah, rather than the authoritarian figures saying
leave that with me, I'll makethe decision based on what you
have given me.
It completely changes thedynamic of the group.
Rob (19:58):
Yes, and a lot of people don't do it because they think
it's really difficult to do thatto get a group decision.
But there's so many ways ofdoing it.
When I started talking aboutconsensus decision making
(20:20):
instead of relying on voting, Imean you can vote if you like.
But the problem with voting isif you've got 11 members in your
team and six are in favour andfive are strongly against, okay,
you get a one-vote majority.
People may say they'll committo it, but if they've got really
(20:41):
strong opinions, they find itreally difficult.
So the resource book willexplore this whole business of
consensus decision-making.
Okay, because there are so manyways to do it.
Okay.
So, as a principle, one of thethings that I would say is look,
it sounds like we've got atentative agreement that's the
(21:02):
one over on the right-hand side,top but do we need to do
anything to improve on it?
We're not really all committed.
What would improve thatdecision so that everybody
thought it was good?
There are all sorts of options.
At one stage I didn't.
I.
(21:24):
In one of my schools, wehabitually use five-finger
voting, which is on the nextslide, and it's kind of
interesting to do so.
If you try to get agreement,you test how much of an
agreement there is.
So we say, okay, well, we'vegot to a point where we should,
(21:44):
you know, bring this to a headand decide what's best.
So five fingers if you're 100%in favor, four fingers if you're
in favor not quite 100%, butready to commit, and so on and
so forth.
You know, it's that one finger.
I don't like this, and if we'reon the wrong track here, we
(22:05):
should be thinking aboutsomething else, seeing as
there's no agreement, and whatyou learn is that decisions that
are supported by mainly two orthree thinkers will not have
enough champions to actuallywork in practice.
You want to see if you can geteverybody to at least threes and
(22:26):
fours, and then you know thatyou've got people who are going
okay, either I'm in favor or I'mtrusting the group and will
commit to the team's decision.
It's really easy to do.
Drew (22:43):
And that feedback loop that you get from that protocol
is just there straight in frontof you to see.
So, in terms of the next,what's the next process, Rob?
Rob (23:01):
Well, the team has to learn then to really work together.
Okay, so we work out meetingprocedures, ways to keep on
sharing and deepening trust,ways to learn together, deciding
what the team needs to learn inorder to make good decisions,
(23:22):
so that, in the end, the teamneeds to learn in order to make
good decisions, so that in theend, the team has a shared
knowledge, some common skillsand expresses that willingness
to be more effective together,so that as the team works
(23:42):
through the year, they gaintools that make them more
effective.
And again, you know, learningmeans that sometimes the team
has to put aside its immediateagenda, right, all the urgencies
that can drive them and go hangon, let's just spend this
(24:02):
meeting working out how we workmore effectively as a team.
And again, the book is full ofideas for how you can do that
and those in the workshop.
We're not obviously going to do160 activities in the workshop,
but we will try and, quiteswiftly and with a lot of
(24:26):
discussion, go through somereally key ones to expose people
to how effective they are.
And so at the end of the teamworkshop even though today I
think people will see, willlearn about the new skills and
knowledge and so on, and theywill also get that feeling that
(24:53):
good teams get, that they knowthese people and they trust them
and they enjoy working withthem.
And so that will.
Because we can achieve that inthe workshop, people will, I
hope, walk away from theworkshops thinking I can do this
with my team at school theconfidence to be able to do that
.
Drew (25:11):
Is there any point where you've can teams, just teams are
just as you said at the startof such a webs and flow?
Is there any any time whenprincipal can say, yep, we're
nailing this, we've got, ourteam is humming.
Or from the flip side, rob,I've tried all of these
(25:35):
activities.
Some have worked really well.
I still don't feel like my teamis together.
What's your advice to those twodifferent perspectives?
Rob (25:47):
Mostly people who commit to building team find that the
experience does build a sense ofconnection and a sense of
cooperative synergy as they go.
Few people who truly are tryingto achieve a sense of
(26:11):
togetherness in the room reallyfail at it.
I've met people who said, oh,we'll try a couple of those
activities and then work.
But they don't work inisolation.
They work with the sense thatwe're really open about.
We're trying to build a teamhere and part of that will be
(26:33):
there's lots of activities wherethe team can give each other
feedback.
So if the team leader is beinga bit overbearing, then
everybody can find a way togently tell them and we can
adjust the way in which the teamworks.
Really, the people who mainlywho have said to me that it
(26:56):
doesn't work and don't want itto work.
They want to be the autocraticleader of the group and they
want to make all the decisionsand that's a decision any leader
can make.
But knowing that they won't,they won't be able to assemble
the degree of flexibility as a,as a group, that will work out
(27:17):
in the best interest of theschool.
Drew (27:21):
And absolutely, and then taking on that feedback to be
able to do that, such as a 360evaluation, if leaders are
vulnerable enough to do that.
Rob (27:32):
Yeah, I don't like 360s.
I think that in a professionaland supportive setting, which is
what we're trying to achieve,then people will be able to tell
each other the truth abouttheir behavior.
(27:53):
Okay, 360s are a way of snipingfrom behind the cover of
anonymity and, to my personalexperience, I like I'm qualified
to do the whole range of 360activities, but I don't use them
anymore Because I don't likethe the people that participants
(28:21):
become when they think they'vegot unbridled ability to share
negative things with otherpeople without disclosing
themselves.
That's by its essence.
That's not the best way to dothings.
The best way to do things is toset up processes where people
(28:43):
talk to each other enough andfrankly enough, and build enough
trust so that anybody can sayanything to anybody.
Drew (28:51):
Yeah, that's good in terms of that thinking around that
and I love that straightforward.
What you said is not a fan ofthem and you explain why because
it's that anonymous piece to itwhich is the opposite of that
foundation opposite of trust.
Rob (29:13):
At the start of building a team, I shared an interesting
experience.
I went to the USA to train inthe most reliable 360 and we all
had to do a 360 before we wentand take it and talk about it.
And I shared mine and you knowlike I thought that the opinions
(29:39):
expressed in it because I'm atthe same time on the side
teaching people to say what theythink to me, so it wasn't
universal acclaim and it wasn'teverybody thinks Rob, this Rob's
a great guy, but all of theother people in the room had
these 360s which indicated thatthey pretty much walked on water
(29:59):
.
I was thinking so, you know,over a drink.
Afterwards I was talking tosome of the others and they said
, oh no, people in my teamwouldn't dare to say anything
different because I'd track themdown and figure out who'd done
it.
And I'm thinking well, there weare.
You know you can get the resultyou want from a 360 if you're
(30:21):
prepared to do that sort ofthing but they would be
absolutely valueless in terms ofactual feedback for the team
leader.
Drew (30:36):
Yeah, it gives a really and thank you for sharing that
insight into your experiencewhich, from what I've heard, is
showing it necessarily can beskewed, the results can be
skewed from the leader, so tospeak.
Rob (30:46):
And the other thing is that the result you know if somebody
says to you, drew, there's aproblem with the way you
communicate with people and I'monly going to score you a three
out of five, whatever it is onthat.
So you want to know, so what isit about my communication with
other people?
That's that has you saying that.
(31:09):
But you can't ask that questionbecause you you just have to
try and interpret it foryourself and because you get an
average in the scores as well asthe range, you're never really
quite sure.
Is you know.
So what are these peoplethinking?
Some of them are thinking thisand some of them are thinking
(31:30):
that.
How seriously do I take that?
Is it based on something I didthis morning or last week, or is
it based on my overallperformance?
There are so many questionsthat are left hanging by 360s.
Drew (31:44):
Anyway, there is no 360 in the tower team no, and it was
interesting in terms of I knowwe digress, but it was
interesting if we say that is atool that a lot of leaders, rob,
do refer to and is used as auniversal tool to say oh well,
how are you as a leader?
(32:06):
I utilize a 360.
But in terms of yourchallenging that notion for
those people listening, thinkingabout challenging that notion
and also thinking about how doyou bring your team together and
, through this course, the towerteam, tell us further about the
(32:28):
, the course and what, whatother experiences that
participants will have so soit's experiential.
Rob (32:35):
So there's not just presentation but there's minimal
presentation, because that getsin the way of the most
important thing, which is peopledoing what's important in a
team.
We're sharing their experience,experimenting, trying to try
some different ways of workingwith a team, working with the
(32:55):
whole thing of having a smallgroup of people and being
absolutely frank with them andlearning to trust each other so
that in the course you get toexperience the power of the team
building for yourself and so,in terms of the tower of teams
terms of tower of teams forpeople listening and curious how
(33:19):
the question in the back ofyour mind is how are your teams
currently at the moment?
Drew (33:26):
and in terms of the courses, as you've heard, you've
heard from rob discussing thetower of teams and also the
different activities you alsohave you'll be able to get
access to the books and thelinks, and links and references
will be in our show notes forthose people interested in
(33:46):
further understanding of thetower teams.
Rob's, is there any final wordsof advice or pitch that you'd
like to share for our audiencelistening in?
Rob (33:58):
as I started out by saying how passionate I was about team,
and I think that everybody whoattends the workshop will walk
away with new insights, newcapabilities and capacities.
Not only did I have my own teamleading experience in the years
(34:19):
as a school principal, in theyears as a school principal, but
over the past 15 years I'vecoached and supported lots and
lots so many, I can't hardlycount it school teams, and we
have been, with the ascent ofthe principal, privileged to
(34:44):
work with these teams and to usethese processes, and I've never
walked away without being toldthat it has made a huge
difference to how the team workstogether.
Drew (34:55):
It's come out of the Art of Leadership program.
A lot of Rob's work has comeout as a master class
facilitator, as well as also theco-designer of the Art of
Leadership program.
With over 35 years ofexperience, including 22 years
as a school principal, it'salways a pleasure to talk with
(35:18):
you, rob, and for thoselistening, the link will be for
the tower of teams on ourwebsite in this year.
Thank you again, rob Stonesthank you.
Rob (35:46):
As a principal, I spent a lot of time trying to get the
very best out of the team ofpeople around me.
It's an ongoing issue withschools that with the changing
personnel, often it's achallenge to form and sustain a
highly performing team of peoplewho can work together in order
(36:11):
to get the best possible resultsfrom the school.
So in the 30 or so years thatI've been experimenting with
team activities, I've managed toput together 160 activities
that will help you to form ateam.
Okay, help the team learn howto work together and then work
(36:31):
successfully as a team.
If you do that, you'll reallyunderstand the benefits, because
a cohesive team with a sharedpurpose and add immeasurably to
the kind of decision making andcollaborative work that the
school does and lead to betteroutcomes in every area in which
(36:52):
you're working.
The alternative is just to workwith a group of people and not
bother too much about formingthem as a team, and that's
really not a good alternativebecause you'll spend a lot of
time looking at each otheracross the table, but not
necessarily time doingproductive work.
In the program the Tower ofTeam, you'll get a copy of my
(37:16):
book and you'll get theexperience of working with a
team because in the programwe'll actually build the team
culture and the team environmentthrough the activities and the
cultural changes that arenecessary to put a team together
.
So I hope that you'll join meto work through a really busy
(37:40):
day of learning how to form ateam.
Welcome to Season 3 of Professional Learnings, the New
South Wales PPA EducationalLeadership Podcast.
I'm Drew Janicki, back as yourhost for a brand new season.
It's great for you to be withus as we continue this journey
of learning, leading and drawinginspiration from the incredible
insights of our amazing guests.
(00:27):
Let's dive into our latestepisode In this podcast with Rob
Stones, we explored the Tao ofTeams and uncovered how school
leaders can significantlyenhance collaboration and
effectiveness within theirschools.
Delivered in partnership withthe New South Wales Primary
Principals Association, RobStone shares his valuable
(00:49):
insights and practicalstrategies that highlight the
dynamics of successful teamwork.
Rob's approach helped usunderstand how to leverage the
collective strengths of staffmembers effectively.
Before we dive into the fullconversations, here's a quick
audio grab from Rob to set thestage.
Rob (01:10):
Yeah.
So you have to actually do somethings which seem in some
senses a little bit ofartificial because they don't
actually address the team agenda, but they're activities which
enable you to understand who isin the room and a bit about how
they think, and you start towork on the process of trying to
(01:31):
get some cohesion around ideas,exploring the edges of
different people's opinions.
So the one that's on the screenat the moment is a simple one.
It's called quotes.
You post the quotes.
At the moment is a simple one.
It's called quotes.
You post the quotes around theroom.
You ask each person to chooseone.
As you can see, these are allquotes about teamwork.
(01:52):
We can choose anything.
You can choose things that thegroup may have to talk about, to
explore the different people'sopinions.
So then people find out whoagrees with them, who disagrees
with them.
They share their opinions, andwhen I do it, I often ask people
to come to an agreed ranking ofthe quotes in order of
(02:16):
importance, and that's quite achallenging activity, but at the
end of it people understandwhere the other people in the
room are coming from and and ifin during the first you know,
month or six weeks of the team'sformation, they do three or
four similar activities, many ofthem in the book.
(02:37):
Um then, as they get stuck intothe work they do together, they
they understand a little more,a lot more, usually, of the
perspectives of the other peoplein the room.
Drew (02:55):
All right, rob Stones, welcome to our podcast.
It's great for you to be withus today as we discuss your work
, the Tao of Teams, reallylooking forward to our
conversation today.
Rob (03:10):
Thank you, it's a pleasure to be here and it's a pleasure
to talk about team, because I'ma little bit obsessive about
taking the trouble to form aproper team rather than just
bundle a group of people into aroom.
Drew (03:28):
Yeah, it's an interesting concept, the concept of team,
and in our previous conversationyou've said how it's so
interesting of exploring why isthat so.
So I'm really looking forwardto you sharing the thoughts of
what a good team is.
Rob (03:51):
And I suppose the reason I'm a bit passionate about it is
because I think that an awfullot of time is wasted in teams,
because people put togethergroups of people because of
their roles and they expect themto work as a team, but it
(04:13):
doesn't happen.
Because you have to invest thetime first of all in creating a
culture and a sort of cohesionand agreeing a shared purpose,
and then, when you put all thattogether, it'll repay your
efforts.
But if you simply put togethera group of people say they're
(04:33):
the such and such team or myleadership team, they can easily
consume each other's timesitting around the table without
any sense of achieving verymuch the table without any sense
of achieving very much so interms of that process.
Drew (04:51):
how does that occur?
Is this what the course isabout?
Rob (04:56):
in terms of showing yes.
So the course is about how theyput together the team so they
work so well together that theycan achieve far more than just
their individual efforts.
So for grads in those schools,every team member will be
working hard with their own yearlevel or department or whatever
(05:17):
it is, and that will achieve acertain amount.
But putting together theharnessing of the individual
differences to serve the wholeschool's purpose, that's called
synergy.
That's the effect you get.
And if I can explain it quickly, there's something called the
(05:42):
law of requisite variety, whichwhich applies to humans working
together to counter thecomplexity of situations.
So a group of people inevitablyhas far more flexibility of,
can create far more flexibilityin behaviors than a single
(06:04):
individual.
So that when we've got reallycomplex situations, as we have
in our school, then making theteam the controlling system
means it has more variety thanjust the principal or senior
executive team.
And that's why a team approachis so valuable, because it gives
(06:25):
the team the capacity to tacklethe complexities of managing
and leading a school.
Drew (06:37):
Yeah, interesting in terms of the synergy.
Can you elaborate further onthe TAO team?
Rob (06:45):
Can you elaborate further on the TAO team?
So the program, the workshop,will walk you through the four
steps of team formation andshare some of the activities
that enhance team effectiveness.
So the four steps to teamformation is first of all, you
have to actually put themtogether with some simple
(07:12):
processes that mean they cantrust each other.
That's the team building.
And then you have to explorehow on earth are we going to
speak frankly to each other sothat we can share the different
opinions, because you don't wanta bunch of yes-men.
That just reduces the capacityto tackle complexity.
(07:32):
And then the group unitesaround a shared purpose and we
use various team processes andpractices to enable them to work
effectively.
So essentially, that's thestructure of the course, and the
supporting activities arechosen from some of the 160-odd
(07:53):
activities in the book, whichwe'll use as a handbook in order
to do all that.
Yeah, it is interesting in termsof those, those concepts, those
, those four activities you ofand essentially bound by trust,
(08:13):
as you said at the startingpoint so see, and the book um is
really owes its origin to theart of leadership, because we
have, as you know, a variety ofteam practices during the art of
leadership.
We actually do go through theprocess of forming the group as
(08:35):
a team so that they'll worktogether in the art of
leadership.
But over time, people have saidto me where do we find these
activities?
We want to use these for ourteam.
Over time, people have said tome where do we find these
activities?
We want to use these for ourteam.
And so, really, I put the Towerof Team in practice together as
(08:55):
a book, as a resource book, sothat principals who want to
build their team have got enoughactivities to choose from to be
able to run a five-yearschedule of team-building
activities without everrepeating.
They're not doing the samething over and over again and
(09:15):
each activity lends a differentdimension to its process in
forming and sustaining the team.
So the first step is what youmentioned just then is about
trust, and trust is the firstthing you have to do in team
formation.
Because Robert Lencioni, whowrote the Five Dysfunctions of
(09:44):
the Team a really significantbook for people who want to know
about how teams work and don'twork.
I could put this, you know, ifyou look at the triangle, if the
people don't trust each other,okay, then when they move on to
the next step, when there'sconflict, when people have
(10:04):
different ideas because theydon't trust each other, they
fear the conflict and they don'tlike it, and so they don't
conflict.
People say things that theydon't agree with and they mutter
about it in the meeting, andthey, you know it'd be under
their breath.
And when they get back to theirstaff room, they say how stupid
(10:27):
it was, but a decision getsmade anyway, and then nobody has
commitment.
They hadn't said what theydisagreed about, but they don't
really agree.
And if you don't have agreement, you don't have commitment.
So nobody feels accountable.
That was their ideas, not mine,and the focus on delivering
(10:48):
results disappears.
And so Len Ciarri said thefirst step is to create
vulnerability-based trust.
That's the kind of trust whichmeans that you disclose parts of
yourselves not personal, butprofessional and opinions, and
so on and so forth, so thatpeople in the room where the
(11:12):
team meets know who's in there.
They know you more than yourname and your role, but they
actually know how this personthinks.
Drew (11:28):
They actually know how this person thinks.
Yeah, so it's more than just asurface level, so to speak, and
it's more than just having anice meeting which actually
doesn't lead to productivity assuch.
You need to have that rigor,but you also need to have trust,
but you also need to have whatI heard is vulnerability and
(11:53):
rigour before going to the nextstep of that triangle.
Rob (12:01):
Yeah.
So you have to actually do somethings which seem in some
senses a little bit artificialbecause they don't actually
address the team agenda, butthey're activities which enable
you to understand who is in theroom and a bit about how they
think, and you start to work onthe process of trying to get
(12:24):
some cohesion around ideas,exploring the edges of different
people's opinions.
So the one that's on the screenat the moment is a simple one.
It's called quotes.
You post the quotes around theroom.
You ask each person to chooseone.
As you can see, these are thequotes around the room.
You ask each person to chooseone.
As you can see, these are allquotes about teamwork, but you
can choose anything.
You can choose things that thegroup may have to talk about, to
(12:49):
explore the different people'sopinions.
So then people find out whoagrees with them, who disagrees
with them.
They share their opinions, andwhen I do it, I often ask people
to come to an agreed ranking ofthe quotes in order of
importance, and that's quite achallenging activity, but at the
(13:12):
end of it, people understandwhere the other people in the
room are coming from and ifduring the first month or six
weeks of the team's formationthey do three or four similar
activities, plenty of them inthe book.
Then, as they get stuck intothe work they do together, they
(13:36):
understand a little more, a lotmore, usually of the
perspectives of the other peoplein the room.
Drew (13:43):
Yeah, makes a lot of sense in terms of having that
perspective, but also havingthat rigour and understanding
each person's perspective andwhy they have said that really
adds to, which is also linkedwith the Art of Leadership
program.
Rob (13:59):
Yeah, and it's not accidental.
You know, obviously some groupmembers will get to know each
other really well and some willjoin the team already knowing
each other well.
But this makes sure that you'renot relying on a trust level
that hasn't been established,not relying on a trust level
(14:22):
that hasn't been established andin terms of personality type
there, rob, that is also shownthrough the Art of Leadership
program, as you know, is that acontributing factor that you
need to be aware of in theseactivities.
(14:44):
Yes, and we don't expecteverybody to rush out and have
their whole team do an MBTIprogram, though of course you
can, but there's somerudimentary MBTI activities in
the book in the Tower of Teams,the resource book, which will
enable people to find out awhole lot about their MBTI type.
Drew (15:00):
Yeah, mbti type is very interesting.
Yeah, it's interesting.
Can you tell us further aboutthe different types of
activities?
Rob (15:08):
So I mean if the team's going to be any good, they have
to face up to the fact that,with different kinds of thinking
, which are all essential forthe team to work, they've got to
be able to manage the differentways in which they disagree.
You know people getting upsetwith each other and things like
that.
So, um, you've got to explorehow to disagree and how to agree
(15:33):
, encourage vigorous debate, butalso really thoughtful
listening so that people willlearn from each other.
So, you know, one of theactivities that I like is the
one on the next slide, which is,um, uh, people to to actually
explore their conflictspreference.
(15:54):
So, um, you, um you.
You choose the north, south,east and west, or the center,
and um standing around the room,okay, in the position.
So north is confrontative, um,south is avoidance, passivity,
(16:15):
um, compromise is meetinghalfway and collaboration is
finding win-win andaccommodation.
You yielding to the rest of thegroup to maintain harmony is
the fourth option.
So you choose your compasspoints.
The people who stand at thecompass points explain why
that's their difference, andthen you come to have a pretty
(16:37):
deep discussion about when,given these conflicting styles,
how do we resolve conflict inthe team without um diluting the
quality of the decision we'remaking?
Drew (16:53):
yeah, really interesting in terms of, and and what's the
feedback from this activity been.
Rob (17:01):
Usually really really good.
You know, when people know thewhole group knows that the
people who are standing at westare trying to find a win-win
solution and the people standingat south have a tendency not to
(17:21):
engage with the conflict, okay,they can coach each other.
They've got to say, listen, wewant to know your real opinion.
And the competitive people?
Okay, we have to in the team,because the team always coaches
each other when it's workingwell.
Drew (17:40):
you have to say, yeah, okay, we know you've got a
strong opinion about that, butlisten to the other opinions
it's, it's uh, it's interestingin terms of the topics of
managing team, managing conflict, which is something that is not
explicitly sort of taught insociety.
You're taught to get along, benice, work through the problem,
(18:08):
but it's.
Rob (18:12):
We don't want to be nice.
Being nice solves the problemin the room, but doesn't address
the problem that you're workingon, which is something that's
happening outside the room.
Drew (18:26):
And then?
So then we move intodecision-making.
Rob (18:33):
Decision-making and I really think it's important that
decision-making is discussedearly on because it's kind of
easy.
I've think it's important thatdecision-making is discussed
early on because it's kind ofeasy I've done it myself right
to have a lot of discussion andthen the principal, or whoever
is leading the team, shuffles uphis papers and said, okay, well
, you give me a lot to thinkabout, okay, and I'll work out
(18:56):
what to do.
But that's not committing teammembers.
If team members think thatthey're just a sounding board,
they don't have a stake in thedecision.
And if you want them to quitepassionately and can be
(19:18):
committed and engaged towhatever decision we make,
they've got to have a stake inthe decision.
They've got to know that theycontribute to the decision.
And then if we do that, if wehave decisions where people
leave the room going we havedecided, then you get a huge
amount of engagement from theteam.
Drew (19:42):
Yeah, rather than the authoritarian figures saying
leave that with me, I'll makethe decision based on what you
have given me.
It completely changes thedynamic of the group.
Rob (19:58):
Yes, and a lot of people don't do it because they think
it's really difficult to do thatto get a group decision.
But there's so many ways ofdoing it.
When I started talking aboutconsensus decision making
(20:20):
instead of relying on voting, Imean you can vote if you like.
But the problem with voting isif you've got 11 members in your
team and six are in favour andfive are strongly against, okay,
you get a one-vote majority.
People may say they'll committo it, but if they've got really
(20:41):
strong opinions, they find itreally difficult.
So the resource book willexplore this whole business of
consensus decision-making.
Okay, because there are so manyways to do it.
Okay.
So, as a principle, one of thethings that I would say is look,
it sounds like we've got atentative agreement that's the
(21:02):
one over on the right-hand side,top but do we need to do
anything to improve on it?
We're not really all committed.
What would improve thatdecision so that everybody
thought it was good?
There are all sorts of options.
At one stage I didn't.
I.
(21:24):
In one of my schools, wehabitually use five-finger
voting, which is on the nextslide, and it's kind of
interesting to do so.
If you try to get agreement,you test how much of an
agreement there is.
So we say, okay, well, we'vegot to a point where we should,
(21:44):
you know, bring this to a headand decide what's best.
So five fingers if you're 100%in favor, four fingers if you're
in favor not quite 100%, butready to commit, and so on and
so forth.
You know, it's that one finger.
I don't like this, and if we'reon the wrong track here, we
(22:05):
should be thinking aboutsomething else, seeing as
there's no agreement, and whatyou learn is that decisions that
are supported by mainly two orthree thinkers will not have
enough champions to actuallywork in practice.
You want to see if you can geteverybody to at least threes and
(22:26):
fours, and then you know thatyou've got people who are going
okay, either I'm in favor or I'mtrusting the group and will
commit to the team's decision.
It's really easy to do.
Drew (22:43):
And that feedback loop that you get from that protocol
is just there straight in frontof you to see.
So, in terms of the next,what's the next process, Rob?
Rob (23:01):
Well, the team has to learn then to really work together.
Okay, so we work out meetingprocedures, ways to keep on
sharing and deepening trust,ways to learn together, deciding
what the team needs to learn inorder to make good decisions,
(23:22):
so that, in the end, the teamneeds to learn in order to make
good decisions, so that in theend, the team has a shared
knowledge, some common skillsand expresses that willingness
to be more effective together,so that as the team works
(23:42):
through the year, they gaintools that make them more
effective.
And again, you know, learningmeans that sometimes the team
has to put aside its immediateagenda, right, all the urgencies
that can drive them and go hangon, let's just spend this
(24:02):
meeting working out how we workmore effectively as a team.
And again, the book is full ofideas for how you can do that
and those in the workshop.
We're not obviously going to do160 activities in the workshop,
but we will try and, quiteswiftly and with a lot of
(24:26):
discussion, go through somereally key ones to expose people
to how effective they are.
And so at the end of the teamworkshop even though today I
think people will see, willlearn about the new skills and
knowledge and so on, and theywill also get that feeling that
(24:53):
good teams get, that they knowthese people and they trust them
and they enjoy working withthem.
And so that will.
Because we can achieve that inthe workshop, people will, I
hope, walk away from theworkshops thinking I can do this
with my team at school theconfidence to be able to do that
.
Drew (25:11):
Is there any point where you've can teams, just teams are
just as you said at the startof such a webs and flow?
Is there any any time whenprincipal can say, yep, we're
nailing this, we've got, ourteam is humming.
Or from the flip side, rob,I've tried all of these
(25:35):
activities.
Some have worked really well.
I still don't feel like my teamis together.
What's your advice to those twodifferent perspectives?
Rob (25:47):
Mostly people who commit to building team find that the
experience does build a sense ofconnection and a sense of
cooperative synergy as they go.
Few people who truly are tryingto achieve a sense of
(26:11):
togetherness in the room reallyfail at it.
I've met people who said, oh,we'll try a couple of those
activities and then work.
But they don't work inisolation.
They work with the sense thatwe're really open about.
We're trying to build a teamhere and part of that will be
(26:33):
there's lots of activities wherethe team can give each other
feedback.
So if the team leader is beinga bit overbearing, then
everybody can find a way togently tell them and we can
adjust the way in which the teamworks.
Really, the people who mainlywho have said to me that it
(26:56):
doesn't work and don't want itto work.
They want to be the autocraticleader of the group and they
want to make all the decisionsand that's a decision any leader
can make.
But knowing that they won't,they won't be able to assemble
the degree of flexibility as a,as a group, that will work out
(27:17):
in the best interest of theschool.
Drew (27:21):
And absolutely, and then taking on that feedback to be
able to do that, such as a 360evaluation, if leaders are
vulnerable enough to do that.
Rob (27:32):
Yeah, I don't like 360s.
I think that in a professionaland supportive setting, which is
what we're trying to achieve,then people will be able to tell
each other the truth abouttheir behavior.
(27:53):
Okay, 360s are a way of snipingfrom behind the cover of
anonymity and, to my personalexperience, I like I'm qualified
to do the whole range of 360activities, but I don't use them
anymore Because I don't likethe the people that participants
(28:21):
become when they think they'vegot unbridled ability to share
negative things with otherpeople without disclosing
themselves.
That's by its essence.
That's not the best way to dothings.
The best way to do things is toset up processes where people
(28:43):
talk to each other enough andfrankly enough, and build enough
trust so that anybody can sayanything to anybody.
Drew (28:51):
Yeah, that's good in terms of that thinking around that
and I love that straightforward.
What you said is not a fan ofthem and you explain why because
it's that anonymous piece to itwhich is the opposite of that
foundation opposite of trust.
Rob (29:13):
At the start of building a team, I shared an interesting
experience.
I went to the USA to train inthe most reliable 360 and we all
had to do a 360 before we wentand take it and talk about it.
And I shared mine and you knowlike I thought that the opinions
(29:39):
expressed in it because I'm atthe same time on the side
teaching people to say what theythink to me, so it wasn't
universal acclaim and it wasn'teverybody thinks Rob, this Rob's
a great guy, but all of theother people in the room had
these 360s which indicated thatthey pretty much walked on water
(29:59):
.
I was thinking so, you know,over a drink.
Afterwards I was talking tosome of the others and they said
, oh no, people in my teamwouldn't dare to say anything
different because I'd track themdown and figure out who'd done
it.
And I'm thinking well, there weare.
You know you can get the resultyou want from a 360 if you're
(30:21):
prepared to do that sort ofthing but they would be
absolutely valueless in terms ofactual feedback for the team
leader.
Drew (30:36):
Yeah, it gives a really and thank you for sharing that
insight into your experiencewhich, from what I've heard, is
showing it necessarily can beskewed, the results can be
skewed from the leader, so tospeak.
Rob (30:46):
And the other thing is that the result you know if somebody
says to you, drew, there's aproblem with the way you
communicate with people and I'monly going to score you a three
out of five, whatever it is onthat.
So you want to know, so what isit about my communication with
other people?
That's that has you saying that.
(31:09):
But you can't ask that questionbecause you you just have to
try and interpret it foryourself and because you get an
average in the scores as well asthe range, you're never really
quite sure.
Is you know.
So what are these peoplethinking?
Some of them are thinking thisand some of them are thinking
(31:30):
that.
How seriously do I take that?
Is it based on something I didthis morning or last week, or is
it based on my overallperformance?
There are so many questionsthat are left hanging by 360s.
Drew (31:44):
Anyway, there is no 360 in the tower team no, and it was
interesting in terms of I knowwe digress, but it was
interesting if we say that is atool that a lot of leaders, rob,
do refer to and is used as auniversal tool to say oh well,
how are you as a leader?
(32:06):
I utilize a 360.
But in terms of yourchallenging that notion for
those people listening, thinkingabout challenging that notion
and also thinking about how doyou bring your team together and
, through this course, the towerteam, tell us further about the
(32:28):
, the course and what, whatother experiences that
participants will have so soit's experiential.
Rob (32:35):
So there's not just presentation but there's minimal
presentation, because that getsin the way of the most
important thing, which is peopledoing what's important in a
team.
We're sharing their experience,experimenting, trying to try
some different ways of workingwith a team, working with the
(32:55):
whole thing of having a smallgroup of people and being
absolutely frank with them andlearning to trust each other so
that in the course you get toexperience the power of the team
building for yourself and so,in terms of the tower of teams
terms of tower of teams forpeople listening and curious how
(33:19):
the question in the back ofyour mind is how are your teams
currently at the moment?
Drew (33:26):
and in terms of the courses, as you've heard, you've
heard from rob discussing thetower of teams and also the
different activities you alsohave you'll be able to get
access to the books and thelinks, and links and references
will be in our show notes forthose people interested in
(33:46):
further understanding of thetower teams.
Rob's, is there any final wordsof advice or pitch that you'd
like to share for our audiencelistening in?
Rob (33:58):
as I started out by saying how passionate I was about team,
and I think that everybody whoattends the workshop will walk
away with new insights, newcapabilities and capacities.
Not only did I have my own teamleading experience in the years
(34:19):
as a school principal, in theyears as a school principal, but
over the past 15 years I'vecoached and supported lots and
lots so many, I can't hardlycount it school teams, and we
have been, with the ascent ofthe principal, privileged to
(34:44):
work with these teams and to usethese processes, and I've never
walked away without being toldthat it has made a huge
difference to how the team workstogether.
Drew (34:55):
It's come out of the Art of Leadership program.
A lot of Rob's work has comeout as a master class
facilitator, as well as also theco-designer of the Art of
Leadership program.
With over 35 years ofexperience, including 22 years
as a school principal, it'salways a pleasure to talk with
(35:18):
you, rob, and for thoselistening, the link will be for
the tower of teams on ourwebsite in this year.
Thank you again, rob Stonesthank you.
Rob (35:46):
As a principal, I spent a lot of time trying to get the
very best out of the team ofpeople around me.
It's an ongoing issue withschools that with the changing
personnel, often it's achallenge to form and sustain a
highly performing team of peoplewho can work together in order
(36:11):
to get the best possible resultsfrom the school.
So in the 30 or so years thatI've been experimenting with
team activities, I've managed toput together 160 activities
that will help you to form ateam.
Okay, help the team learn howto work together and then work
(36:31):
successfully as a team.
If you do that, you'll reallyunderstand the benefits, because
a cohesive team with a sharedpurpose and add immeasurably to
the kind of decision making andcollaborative work that the
school does and lead to betteroutcomes in every area in which
(36:52):
you're working.
The alternative is just to workwith a group of people and not
bother too much about formingthem as a team, and that's
really not a good alternativebecause you'll spend a lot of
time looking at each otheracross the table, but not
necessarily time doingproductive work.
In the program the Tower ofTeam, you'll get a copy of my
(37:16):
book and you'll get theexperience of working with a
team because in the programwe'll actually build the team
culture and the team environmentthrough the activities and the
cultural changes that arenecessary to put a team together
.
So I hope that you'll join meto work through a really busy
(37:40):
day of learning how to form ateam.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.