April 30, 2025 • 36 mins
Building a diverse team doesn't automatically lead to better performance — and without the right environment, it can even create new challenges.
In this episode, Teri is joined again by leadership and team performance expert Henrik Bresman to explore why psychological safety is the key to unlocking the true potential of diverse teams. We’ll also discuss practical steps leaders can take to foster belonging, innovation, and resilience in today’s uncertain environments.
Resources:
- Episode 174: Teams in Transition with Henrik Bresman
- X-Teams: How to build teams that lead, innovate, and succeed
- X360 and XChange simulation
- Professor Bresman's LinkedIn
- Harvard Business Review article with Amy Edmonson: To Excel, Diverse Teams Need Psychological Safety
- Sloan Management Review Article with Debra Ancona: Turn Your Teams Inside Out
Looking for a community of leaders where you can tackle real challenges, share wins, and grow together—without office politics getting in the way? Join Leadership Thought Partners, a coach-led, group-directed space launching in July—early bird pricing ends May 31, 2025 at strongleadersserve.com/ltp!
Connect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/teri-m-schmidt/
Get 1-on-1 leadership support from Teri here: https://www.strongleadersserve.com/coaching
Set up an intro call with Teri: https://calendly.com/terischmidt/discoverycall
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Have you ever been told thatsimply adding more diversity to
your team will automaticallylead to better performance or
groundbreaking innovation?
While diversity can be apowerful force for teams,
research shows, it doesn'tguarantee better outcomes, and
in some cases, without the rightconditions, it can even create
(00:20):
new challenges.
Especially in uncertainenvironments.
I'm Terry Schmidt, executive andleadership coach at Strong
Leaders Serve, where we helpcompassionate driven leaders
transform potential intoperformance.
And today I'm excited to diveinto this complex and important
topic with a guest who should befamiliar to you from episode 1
(00:41):
74, Henrik Breman.
Henrik is a professor oforganizational behavior at N CID
and a recognize expert onleadership, high performance
teams and organizational change.
He works with companies andpublic sector organizations
around the world to lead largescale transformations, and his
research has appeared in theAcademy of Management Journal,
(01:04):
Harvard Business Review, and theEconomist.
He is also the co-author of thebestselling book, XTE, how to
Build Teams That Lead, innovateand Succeed, henrik received his
PhD from MIT and brings realworld experience as a former
manager, consultant, andentrepreneur into his work.
(01:25):
In today's conversation, we'llexplore why diversity alone
isn't enough.
What hidden barriers preventdiverse teams from reaching
their potential, and howpsychological safety can change
everything.
We'll also talk about practicalways leaders can create
environments where every voiceis heard.
And why?
(01:45):
Avoiding the topic of diversityaltogether could be a serious
risk for your team.
Let's dive in.
Teri Schmidt (02:47):
Well, welcome back to the Strong Leaders Serve
Podcast, Henrik.
It's so great to have you foranother episode.
Henrik Bresman (02:54):
It is my pleasure.
Great to be back.
Teri Schmidt (02:57):
Yeah, and for anyone who hasn't had the
opportunity to listen yet, wehad an excellent conversation
about teams back on episode 174, and we started having
another conversation aboutdiversity.
And realize that might be alittle bit too much for one
episode.
So you graciously said that youwould come on and do the second
(03:19):
episode, and I'm really lookingforward to our conversation
today.
Henrik Bresman (03:23):
Me too.
Me too.
Teri Schmidt (03:25):
And you know most of what we're gonna be talking
about you published an articleabout some research that you had
done with Dr.
Amy Abson back in HarvardBusiness Review and.
And
Henrik Bresman (03:39):
Hmm.
Teri Schmidt (2) (03:40):
one of the findings there was that despite
what is, I would say, popularbelief, you found that increased
diversity on a team doesn'talways lead to improved
performance.
So I'm curious, what did youfind are the primary causes of
the difficulty when working ondiverse teams and how are they
(04:03):
exacerbated in uncertain times?
Henrik Bresman (04:07):
Such a big question and such an important
question.
I, I wonder if I should stepback a little bit and, and and
start with where I usually starta conversation on on this topic.
I, I, I work with differentaudiences, big groups, small
groups, senior leaders, emergingleaders.
(04:30):
Private sector, public sector.
And whenever I ask the question,on average, think of a, a team
that is incredibly diverse, onethat is the opposite, very
homogeneous, which one do youthink performed better?
Now, the on average part of thatquestion is a little bit devious
(04:50):
because of course the answer is,it depends on, on the context.
But on average.
Most people answer that questionbetween 80 and a hundred percent
in my experience.
Answer that question.
Well, of course the diverseteam.
And then you have a, aconversation about.
You know why that is?
It's the different perspectives,et cetera.
(05:11):
And, and then someone typicallybrings up the, the other side of
it, that the, that also workingwith a diverse team also
involves communication costs, etcetera.
But typically people just assumethat it's the diverse team.
And then I show this thispicture of that, that is,
(05:32):
displayed in this article thatyou, that you mentioned that
actually on average thehomogeneous teams do a little
bit better.
We, we looked at this in acontext of the pharmaceutical
industry, but this basic findinghas been found again and again
and at least two meta-analysesthat I'm aware have looked at.
(05:52):
Thousands of teams where, wherethey find the same basic thing
related to demographicdiversity.
And I, when I, when I bring thisin, then I need to rush to, to
tell everyone that, well, ifyou're now thinking that you,
that you need to get back to theoffice and fire anyone on the
(06:12):
team and hire a bunch of peoplejust like yourself.
Say stop.
No, your intuition is actuallycorrect.
And then I show this thispicture that shows that while
the, the line showing theaverage goes slightly down, all
of the best performing teams arediverse teams.
And that starts in reallyinteresting conversation because
(06:33):
what that what that graph showsyou, and I need to remind myself
that we actually don't filmthis.
So.
Imagine what, what this lookslike.
What what, what you see then in,in this graph is that there's
great potential for diversityand in fact diversity is
(06:57):
necessary for breakthroughperformance to do really well.
However, it is not sufficient.
We need one more thing.
And what is that?
That is.
Leadership.
And what part of leadership?
Well, what our research then andthat's what we talk about in
(07:18):
this article that you mentionedis that absolutely critical to
get the potential out diversityis to have psychological safety.
Because there, there's a lot of.
Challenges related tocommunication, translation and
coordination across differences.
And if you don't have thepsychological safety required to
(07:41):
actually speak about thosedifferences, about the different
questions you have, thedifferent perspectives you have
things that you know, and alsothings that you don't know, then
you won't actually be able toleverage that, that huge
potential that we see in,diversity.
So I'll stop there for now, butI, I hope that gives your
listeners an overview of whatour research showed.
Teri Schmidt (2) (08:04):
definitely.
I'm glad that you took us backthere to give that overview.
When you talk about thecommunication challenges or, or
some of the challenges that showup on teams can you give a
little bit more detail?
I think people probably have anidea, but I'd love to hear
about.
What that looks like in reallife for people.
Henrik Bresman (08:26):
So that's such a good question.
Many people, not everyone, butmany people assumes that that
means that people are at eachother's throats.
That these are teams that justdon't get along more often.
However, it is teams sitting intheir corners nodding their
heads and not saying much atall.
Teri Schmidt (2) (08:44):
Mm-hmm.
Henrik Bresman (08:45):
And and that goes back to.
Human nature.
We we like to leave a goodimpression.
We, we like to be seen aspositive and, and and helpful
and all of that.
And, and if we have questionsand doubts about what's on the
table, then we tell ourselvesthat that might not be very
helpful.
(09:06):
And so then we'd rather don'tsay anything.
So, so that's what it typicallylooks like.
It's.
And polite, not, not aggressive,and it's really driven by this
human tendency to wanna beliked, to leave a good, good
impression.
And we're worried that we won't,if we speak up about something
(09:27):
we disagree with.
Teri Schmidt (2) (09:28):
Yeah.
Yeah.
I'm glad you made thatdistinction.
'cause I could see a lot ofpeople thinking that, you know,
these are just you know, highconflict teams where everybody
is, like you said, getting downeveryone's throat.
I think, when you even thinkabout simple things with regards
to communication, and I thinkyou mentioned it in the article
(09:48):
too, there are are certainassumed practices that become
more difficult when you have a ddiverse team.
Different
Henrik Bresman (09:57):
Yes.
Teri Schmidt (2) (09:57):
operating, different ways of communicating.
Henrik Bresman (10:01):
Mm-hmm.
Teri Schmidt (2) (10:02):
are more difficult on diverse teams.
Henrik Bresman (10:04):
So I, it, it's, it, what, what you're asking
about what, what are theparticular challenges perhaps,
particularly in a, in a role ofa leader is that it's always, I
mean, the assumption here isthat we are talking about teams
that are working under somepressure in some fast moving en
(10:25):
environment.
And, and in that environment,then you need to come, you need
to learn, you need to come upwith new solutions.
And, and yet we know that,again, going back to human
nature, it's exactly under thosehigh pressure circumstances that
our, our brains tell us that weneed to move.
(10:46):
Because we, we have theseexperiences stored in memory
about how we did this before.
And our, particularly whenthere's anxiety and pressure,
our brain tells us that we gottamove.
We, we have, we have an answerhere to, to the problem.
And, and that's how you end upwith the right answer to the, to
the wrong question usually.
(11:08):
And, and so what's, what's theway out?
Easy to say, difficult to do,but it's exactly in those
situations that as a leader, youneed to stop and really listen
to what people say.
And that's hard when you, youfeel that you know already what
(11:30):
it is that you need to do.
And it's particularly hard.
And now I'm circling back to thediversity part.
When, when someone comes withinput that you can't.
That you don't naturally connectto, so to to really pay
attention to what is said and,
Teri Schmidt (2) (11:49):
Yeah.
Henrik Bresman (11:49):
and stay with the problem.
Here's something that I oftensay to executives that you, you
have, you have solution spaceand you have problem space, and.
Sure.
There, there, there aresituations in which teams they,
(12:10):
they stay too long of a problemspace and they're paralyzed by
analysis.
But in my experience, and it'snot only mine that is not the
most common problem.
Most common problem is that werun straight to solution space.
So what you always need to dowhen you're in a new territory
is that you need to stay inproblem space a little bit
(12:31):
longer.
Know what you're co comfortablewith.
And, and that discomfort andthat challenge becomes so much
greater in a diverse teambecause then you really need to
listen to things that, that arenew to you.
And take that in and, and askquestions that you may not have
asked before and get answersthat might derail where you
(12:55):
thought you were going.
All of this makes, it makes ithard.
Stay in the problem space.
But that's, that's thechallenge.
I, I, I often say to, in myclasses, that, that the greatest
gift you can give to yourself asa leader is, is to develop your
your capacity to ask betterquestions, to stay in that pro
(13:15):
problem space before you move into to solutions.
Teri Schmidt (2) (13:19):
And then you don't get to the space you were
talking about before where youhave the right answer to the
wrong question.
Yeah.
Henrik Bresman (13:27):
Yes, yes.
It's a huge, and by the way, Ishould say that, that's, I, I
believe that was Peter Drucker,who first.
Said this.
He, he talked, so I, I, I wantto give credit where credit is
due.
Peter Drucker, this originalmanagement guru, I think he was
the first person who was calledthe management guru for us
professor types.
That's very annoying because hedidn't even have a PhD to work
(13:49):
hard to get where we were.
And he was this journalist.
He, he was brilliant.
He, he was before.
Time.
And, and he was the, as far as Iknow, the first person who now
decades ago said that, that thebiggest challenge for leaders is
never to find the rightsolution.
It is to find the rightquestion.
And I, and I really.
Teri Schmidt (2) (14:08):
Yeah.
You know, I, I think it soundsgreat and I wholeheartedly agree
with it, but I'm, I'm justthinking of that leader out
there who's like, I'm goingthrough these times that, you
know, I have all this pressureon me.
Why do I wanna take on thisadditional cognitive load of
trying to, you know, figure outhow to stay in the problem
(14:29):
space, how to.
Inquire more and ask for moreinput that I know might result
in solutions that were not in myoriginal plan.
why is it worth it?
Henrik Bresman (14:44):
Well.
I would say that there's, thereare few other few responses to
that question.
One is that, well if you want todo well, you may not have, have
a choice because ending up withthe right answer to the wrong
question will, you'll end up ina place that is not good when it
(15:04):
comes to performance.
But then there is one more thingthat we found that I found
interesting and, and importantat this work on psychological
safety is that what we found inthese diverse teams that were.
That had an above averagepsychological safety climate.
We found that not only did theydo better, but they felt better
(15:27):
too.
So there was higher satisfactionscores as well.
And, and this is where I'mgetting quite excited about the
work we're doing now in thespace of, of.
Psychological safety.
I'm co-editing an issue with Amyand, and a couple of other
colleagues around this.
And we're really digging into towhat we know and what we don't
know about psychological safetyin fast moving environments.
(15:51):
And one reason why I personallyam so excited about this is the
the promise the potential ofpsychological safety to not only
lead to learning andperformance.
But also to better the mentalhealth outcomes, which is
something that I care about, butalso this person for whom you
(16:13):
ask that question, why would youcare?
Why would you take this on?
Well, that's, that's anotherreason that it's, it's all, all
good for, for our mental healthto live and, and, and work in
psychologically safeenvironments.
Teri Schmidt (2) (16:26):
Mm-hmm.
Which is critically important,and especially in tumultuous
times.
Henrik Bresman (16:32):
Yes, and we do live in teal's times, don't we?
I'm in, I'm in Asia, but I hearthat there are things going on
over in the US these days aswell.
Teri Schmidt (2) (16:42):
There are there, there definitely are.
And you know, I, I think the,the wellbeing elements are, are
critically important.
I.
Especially with everything thateveryone has going on outside of
work, the last
Henrik Bresman (16:58):
Yes,
Teri Schmidt (2) (16:59):
to do is find that where you spend the
majority of your day issomewhere that negatively
impacting your health.
Henrik Bresman (17:09):
yes yes.
No, it's.
Important.
Teri Schmidt (2) (17:12):
Excited to see that.
Well.
Say we have a leader that'sthat's bought into this.
What are some concrete practicesthat you and Dr.
Edmondson found can help employpsychological safety on these
diverse teams?
Henrik Bresman (17:32):
Well, so the first thing I wanna say is that
it, it, it is, it is a bit of achallenge.
I want to acknowledge that.
It's hard because in diverseteams, you by definition are
people who, who who aremotivated in different ways, and
also they might perceive yourbehavior as a leader in, in, in
different ways.
(17:52):
I mean, you, you have the bestof intentions, but there's still
a little bit of a blind spot of,you know, how your behavior and
your actions land.
On the team member might bedifferent from how you, how you
intend.
And of course, in a diverseteam, this, this challenge,
which is always there is ismultiplied.
(18:14):
So the, I have no silver bulletsfor you here, but something that
something that is always true isthat it will depend on your
context and also who you are andwhat you can do authentically.
So with, with that caveat Ioften.
Think about, and this iscertainly something that I've
learned a lot from, from Amy, Iwanna say that the thoughts I'm
(18:37):
sharing here is very much fromfrom her thinking.
I, I like to think of a threestage process where you start
by, by setting the stageagreeing as a team where you are
as it really relates to.
Your understanding of the levelof uncertainty, what you, what
(18:59):
you know, and what you don'tknow.
And then related to that, what,what can you expect when it
comes to failure rates?
It's a, it's a continuum.
There is one very certain spacewhere you basically have all the
answers and you don't expect anyfailures and.
And if failures happen, they're,they're bad.
(19:20):
And, and maybe it's someonewho's been sloppy, but then as
you move along this, thiscontinuum, some, somewhere in
the middle, you have a setting,like a hospital setting where
certainly mistakes, errors arebad, but they happen all the
time.
Anyone who's been in a, anemergency, room will know that
it's impossible to geteverything right.
(19:40):
The key is to, to speak aboutthe mistakes you make so you can
learn from'em and do better.
And then the, the other extremeis pharmaceutical drug
development.
Say where you, you not only arefailures not bad, you, you must
have them so that you caneventually succeed.
(20:01):
For those who know anythingabout pharmaceutical drug
development, then you know thatsomething like 95% of all
projects, they, they fail andthey have to so that they learn
from'em and move on.
And if you don't agree on whereyou are.
Well then you can't even startif you, the leader thinks we are
out here in experimentationspace.
And of course, failure issomething that we need to have,
(20:24):
but the rest of the team,perhaps gun shy from a previous
com experience is, is absolutelyintolerant of any, any, mistakes
or believe that everyone else iswell then, then you can't even
start to have a conversation.
So that's the starting point, tohave a foundation of a common
understanding of where you are,what you know, what you don't
(20:46):
know, and and implications forfor failures.
The second piece is, so that'sstep one.
Step two is what we might callinclusive leadership.
It, it's really to inviteparticipation by reaching out to
people.
If it's in a, a virtualenvironment like this, well then
it would be me reaching out andsay, Terry, I need to, I need to
(21:08):
hear from you.
You, you're out there, you're inin the us I'm here in Asia, and,
and you see things that I don'tsee.
What, what can you tell me?
I'm new to this role.
I need, I need help.
And this, this does a couple ofthings.
First, it it, it lowers thepsychological.
Cost of speaking up, but it alsoraises sub psychological cost
of, of being silent.
(21:29):
Because if I really call you outand say, I need help, well then
it's weird to just sit there andnot say anything.
So that's the, that's the secondpiece.
And here is what role modelingis so important.
It's you hear this all the timeif you're in talk about
leadership, but it, it is true.
You need to role model byperhaps sharing stories about.
(21:51):
How, how, how you failed andwhat you learned and how, and
that's where the personal piececome comes in.
How can you do that?
Authentically A lot of leaders,they, they, they are challenged
because they think that theirauthority somehow is, undermined
(22:16):
if they share the fact thatthere's something that they
don't know.
I actually think we talked aboutthis last time.
I said something along the linesof how of course they know that
you don't know everything andyou know that.
You don't know everything, butthey don't know that, you know?
I, I think that's somethingimportant to to remember.
So that's the second stage.
(22:37):
And then the finally is that youneed to respond productively
when people speak up.
And that's easy when everythingpeople say is gold.
But of course, that's not alwaysthe case.
And, and so people might saysomething dumb.
Now if you then say Thank you,but that's dumb, well then
you'll kill any, any possibilityfor psychological safety right
(22:59):
away.
So of course you need to come upwith some way of praising the
courage it took to speak up andthen have a separate
conversation about how, how itfits to the, the solution.
Teri Schmidt (2) (23:09):
Mm-hmm.
Henrik Bresman (23:10):
So.
Those three pieces set thestage, invite participation, and
then respond productively.
I think that's a good startingpoint to think about how to, how
to build this and, and you askedhow do you do this in diverse
teams?
Well, the way I think about itis that it's, it's the same
process.
Wherever you are, it's just alittle bit more challenging and
(23:31):
you need to listen a little bitharder and maybe invite a few
more people in a diverse team.
But the, the logic is the same.
Teri Schmidt (2) (23:39):
Yeah.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
And I think on diverse teams,it, it may be about maybe
remaining curious for longer aswell.
Someone gives a response, it'snot assuming that you understand
exactly what they meant by thatresponse.
Henrik Bresman (23:56):
Yes.
Oh gosh, that is so important.
I, I love that word, curiosity.
That's another capacity toreally nurture.
I.
The no, a, a wrong turn thatmany leaders take is that they,
they ask questions that theythink that they know the answers
to already, and, and teammembers, they will see that.
(24:17):
And, and that discouragesparticipation.
If you follow your curiosity andask open-ended questions that
you don't know the answers tothat, that is a far more
productive conversation.
And we're back to the importanceof asking questions.
Teri Schmidt (2) (24:33):
right.
Yeah.
Which can be really hard to do.
And you know, especially for newleaders, like I think we talked
about last conversation, whenyou do feel maybe a little
insecure and we
Henrik Bresman (24:44):
Yes.
Teri Schmidt (2) (24:44):
you know, you don't want to be vulnerable and
let people know that you don'tknow everything, even though
they already know that you don'tknow everything.
Henrik Bresman (24:54):
And, and then there's, there's one more thing.
There's another reason why it'sso seductive to do that as a new
leader, because if you are in agenuinely uncertain environment,
the fact is that people wantreassurance.
They actually gravitate toleaders who say, I have only, I,
I have all the answers.
Only I can fix it.
Just, just follow me.
(25:14):
And people will thank you.
For, for saying that, becausethat makes them feel feel
better.
But of course you don't have allthe answers.
And you need a lot of peoplearound you to fix something that
is new and different andcomplex.
So in the short run, people willcelebrate you.
Teri Schmidt (2) (25:32):
Mm-hmm.
Henrik Bresman (25:33):
And that can be quite seductive in the long run.
Of course, it will lead to tofailure because by definition
you don't know everything.
Teri Schmidt (2) (25:41):
Yeah, yeah, excellent point.
If, if we could all be longerterm thinkers that would stay in
the problem space as long as weneed to, I think we would
experience more success morequickly.
Ironically.
Henrik Bresman (25:56):
It, it is a yes and it is a bit of a paradox and
there's a lot of colleagues ofmine.
I'll just name one Ella mySpecter, who's a colleague of
mine at insead.
She's done a lot of work onparadoxical thinking.
And that's exactly what this isabout.
You need to think long term andshort term at the same time.
You need to, you need to stay inthe problem space for longer,
(26:22):
but you also need to get intothe solution space.
You need to think about both atthe same time.
And, and that's, that'ssomething worth practicing
because if you can start to makeheadway there, you'll be a
better leader.
Teri Schmidt (2) (26:35):
Well, my last question, it might be a little
controversial.
It, it is that, you know,diversity has almost become a
dirty word in some circles.
so I am curious, what are therisks to teams when diversity
isn't recognized, talked aboutor planned and adjusted for
(26:55):
doing some of the things that wejust talked about.
Henrik Bresman (26:58):
Well, so there are two scenarios that comes to
mind for me.
One is where it's just nottalked about and recognized
because people are worried aboutusing the word.
I, I, I spoke to a company,European company active in the
(27:19):
US just, just last week, andit's a real issue for them that
they, their language arounddiversity inclusion, they, they
now are worried that that mightactually be, be.
Be illegal or, or punishedsomehow.
So it's, it, it becomes morethan just leaders being
comfortable or, or notcomfortable.
(27:40):
And, and, and I, there it's,it's, I think this is playing
out.
That's a real, real concern.
The fact is that to take ondiverse problems and complex
problems in the world, you needdiverse teams to take it.
To take it on.
That's just a fact.
We know this.
(28:01):
In that context, it's thepeople, teams, organizations,
they come up with new languageto, to get around these
blockers, and then they, theytalk about the same thing, but
they use new words and, and, andI, I, I think that.
In the current environment,maybe that's what what you need
(28:22):
to do.
You stay true to your values.
You're doing what you think isimportant for both the
performance and the wellbeing ofyour team members, and then you
put a different label on itbecause in the current moment,
the environment demands that ofyou.
The more common, let me can Itake a couple of more minutes on
(28:43):
this, this question again,slightly different direction.
The more common issue that Icome across actually, because
thankfully, you know,particularly outside of the us
this is the, the, the languageof diversity, inclusion,
inclusive leadership.
It's, it's not.
(29:03):
It's not banned.
You, you can use it.
However managers, leaders tendto tend to be nervous about it
and, and still, and then theymight come to someone like me
and say, okay, all right.
I, I think I.
I do believe in, in this sort ofconceptually.
(29:24):
But you know, now, nowshareholders, they are get a bit
antsy and, and, and so I need togive them the business case.
What's the business case?
And, and then we get into apretty tricky territory because.
There are plenty of businessbenefits.
(29:45):
To diversity and inclusion.
But if you frame in terms of thebusiness case and say, give me
the business case, you demandthe business case.
What, paradoxically, what mayhappen then is that through that
language, you other, theminority, you undermine
psychological safety and youwon't get there.
(30:10):
Get to the business benefitbecause you create fear And
anxiety around, oh God, now I,need to show that, that, that
the ROI is there.
Um, if on the other hand youframe the issue in terms of
breaking groupthink, in terms ofimagination, innovation,
(30:33):
learning.
And mental health, well, thenthe business benefits will
follow.
So this is a somewhat nuancedargument that I that I hope, um,
that leaders get that the sortof, the, the, I, I fully
understand the pressure for thebusiness case, but the best way
(30:56):
of actually getting the businessbenefits is, is to to frame the,
the challenge in broader,broader terms.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:05):
Yeah, that does make sense.
And I, you know, I think thatresult of group think That
you're trying to avoid andbreak, is so much closer
concepts that people who areasking for the business case
are, are more comfortable with.
So, you know, we need to breakthat group think in order to
(31:25):
deliver innovation.
to have innovation on the team,
Henrik Bresman (31:30):
yes, absolutely.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:32):
Yeah.
Yeah.
And I, I am just thinking againabout like what you said about
those people in differentcorners.
You know, when and, and havingpeople in diverse corners,
they're almost put there becausegroupthink is
Henrik Bresman (31:47):
Yeah.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:48):
Um, and whether that just be the way the
leader sees the world,
Henrik Bresman (31:53):
Yeah.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:54):
That is creating so many blind spots
because you have those people inthe different corners that
aren't necessarily talking toeach other.
Henrik Bresman (32:01):
And now right at towards the end you introduced
this incredibly important word,which is blind spots.
we all have them and, and, uh,and it's important to be
curious.
To use that other important wordabout your blind spots.
Um, and, and you can find a lotof those blind spots by bringing
(32:22):
in the people sitting in thecorners.
Teri Schmidt (2) (32:25):
Well, I, I think that's a, a great note to
end on.
Of course, in the last episode,we shared all the resources that
you have
Henrik Bresman (32:34):
Mm-hmm.
Teri Schmidt (2) (32:34):
but is there anywhere else that people should
go to follow you if they want tospecifically see the work that
you're doing on this topic?
Henrik Bresman (32:43):
I, I, I try to post thoughts, um, once in a
while, uh, on LinkedIn.
I have a.
Uh, newsletter on LinkedIncalled X News with my colleague
friend Deborah and Kona, wherewe talk about, um, um, these
issues, uh, the book that wetalked about last time.
(33:03):
uh, X teams.
Uh, and then we, we talk a bitabout.
Our different, uh, methods for,for developing our skills as
team leaders.
We have a couple of tools thatwe have developed a, uh,
simulation that we're veryexcited about, called xchange,
and we have a 360 degreeinstrument called X 360.
(33:23):
We like the X there, as you cantell.
The Xte, uh, book.
We have, uh, card games wherepeople can explore how, how
they, um, how they viewleadership.
'cause it turns out that peoplehave different views, not
surprisingly about whatleadership, um, is and, uh, and
is not.
So I'll encourage you to go andexplore that.
(33:47):
Um, so that's it.
Thank you for having me on againand, uh, always, always a
pleasure to see where theconversation is going.
Teri Schmidt (2) (33:58):
yes.
Thank you again for giving upyour time.
What a powerful conversation.
Thank you again to Henrik fortaking of his time to come and
have this conversation with meas he shared.
Diversity alone isn't enough.
It's the environment we createas leaders that determines
whether diverse voices areheard, respected, and able to
(34:21):
contribute meaningfully.
So I'm leaving you with achallenge as you step back into
your role this week.
I challenge you to identify onemeeting or conversation where
you can intentionally inviteinput from someone who sees
things differently and thenactively show that their voice
matters.
Thank you again for listening,and I hope you have a great
(34:43):
week.
As a strong leader who serves.
Have you ever been told thatsimply adding more diversity to
your team will automaticallylead to better performance or
groundbreaking innovation?
While diversity can be apowerful force for teams,
research shows, it doesn'tguarantee better outcomes, and
in some cases, without the rightconditions, it can even create
(00:20):
new challenges.
Especially in uncertainenvironments.
I'm Terry Schmidt, executive andleadership coach at Strong
Leaders Serve, where we helpcompassionate driven leaders
transform potential intoperformance.
And today I'm excited to diveinto this complex and important
topic with a guest who should befamiliar to you from episode 1
(00:41):
74, Henrik Breman.
Henrik is a professor oforganizational behavior at N CID
and a recognize expert onleadership, high performance
teams and organizational change.
He works with companies andpublic sector organizations
around the world to lead largescale transformations, and his
research has appeared in theAcademy of Management Journal,
(01:04):
Harvard Business Review, and theEconomist.
He is also the co-author of thebestselling book, XTE, how to
Build Teams That Lead, innovateand Succeed, henrik received his
PhD from MIT and brings realworld experience as a former
manager, consultant, andentrepreneur into his work.
(01:25):
In today's conversation, we'llexplore why diversity alone
isn't enough.
What hidden barriers preventdiverse teams from reaching
their potential, and howpsychological safety can change
everything.
We'll also talk about practicalways leaders can create
environments where every voiceis heard.
And why?
(01:45):
Avoiding the topic of diversityaltogether could be a serious
risk for your team.
Let's dive in.
Teri Schmidt (02:47):
Well, welcome back to the Strong Leaders Serve
Podcast, Henrik.
It's so great to have you foranother episode.
Henrik Bresman (02:54):
It is my pleasure.
Great to be back.
Teri Schmidt (02:57):
Yeah, and for anyone who hasn't had the
opportunity to listen yet, wehad an excellent conversation
about teams back on episode 174, and we started having
another conversation aboutdiversity.
And realize that might be alittle bit too much for one
episode.
So you graciously said that youwould come on and do the second
(03:19):
episode, and I'm really lookingforward to our conversation
today.
Henrik Bresman (03:23):
Me too.
Me too.
Teri Schmidt (03:25):
And you know most of what we're gonna be talking
about you published an articleabout some research that you had
done with Dr.
Amy Abson back in HarvardBusiness Review and.
And
Henrik Bresman (03:39):
Hmm.
Teri Schmidt (2) (03:40):
one of the findings there was that despite
what is, I would say, popularbelief, you found that increased
diversity on a team doesn'talways lead to improved
performance.
So I'm curious, what did youfind are the primary causes of
the difficulty when working ondiverse teams and how are they
(04:03):
exacerbated in uncertain times?
Henrik Bresman (04:07):
Such a big question and such an important
question.
I, I wonder if I should stepback a little bit and, and and
start with where I usually starta conversation on on this topic.
I, I, I work with differentaudiences, big groups, small
groups, senior leaders, emergingleaders.
(04:30):
Private sector, public sector.
And whenever I ask the question,on average, think of a, a team
that is incredibly diverse, onethat is the opposite, very
homogeneous, which one do youthink performed better?
Now, the on average part of thatquestion is a little bit devious
(04:50):
because of course the answer is,it depends on, on the context.
But on average.
Most people answer that questionbetween 80 and a hundred percent
in my experience.
Answer that question.
Well, of course the diverseteam.
And then you have a, aconversation about.
You know why that is?
It's the different perspectives,et cetera.
(05:11):
And, and then someone typicallybrings up the, the other side of
it, that the, that also workingwith a diverse team also
involves communication costs, etcetera.
But typically people just assumethat it's the diverse team.
And then I show this thispicture of that, that is,
(05:32):
displayed in this article thatyou, that you mentioned that
actually on average thehomogeneous teams do a little
bit better.
We, we looked at this in acontext of the pharmaceutical
industry, but this basic findinghas been found again and again
and at least two meta-analysesthat I'm aware have looked at.
(05:52):
Thousands of teams where, wherethey find the same basic thing
related to demographicdiversity.
And I, when I, when I bring thisin, then I need to rush to, to
tell everyone that, well, ifyou're now thinking that you,
that you need to get back to theoffice and fire anyone on the
(06:12):
team and hire a bunch of peoplejust like yourself.
Say stop.
No, your intuition is actuallycorrect.
And then I show this thispicture that shows that while
the, the line showing theaverage goes slightly down, all
of the best performing teams arediverse teams.
And that starts in reallyinteresting conversation because
(06:33):
what that what that graph showsyou, and I need to remind myself
that we actually don't filmthis.
So.
Imagine what, what this lookslike.
What what, what you see then in,in this graph is that there's
great potential for diversityand in fact diversity is
(06:57):
necessary for breakthroughperformance to do really well.
However, it is not sufficient.
We need one more thing.
And what is that?
That is.
Leadership.
And what part of leadership?
Well, what our research then andthat's what we talk about in
(07:18):
this article that you mentionedis that absolutely critical to
get the potential out diversityis to have psychological safety.
Because there, there's a lot of.
Challenges related tocommunication, translation and
coordination across differences.
And if you don't have thepsychological safety required to
(07:41):
actually speak about thosedifferences, about the different
questions you have, thedifferent perspectives you have
things that you know, and alsothings that you don't know, then
you won't actually be able toleverage that, that huge
potential that we see in,diversity.
So I'll stop there for now, butI, I hope that gives your
listeners an overview of whatour research showed.
Teri Schmidt (2) (08:04):
definitely.
I'm glad that you took us backthere to give that overview.
When you talk about thecommunication challenges or, or
some of the challenges that showup on teams can you give a
little bit more detail?
I think people probably have anidea, but I'd love to hear
about.
What that looks like in reallife for people.
Henrik Bresman (08:26):
So that's such a good question.
Many people, not everyone, butmany people assumes that that
means that people are at eachother's throats.
That these are teams that justdon't get along more often.
However, it is teams sitting intheir corners nodding their
heads and not saying much atall.
Teri Schmidt (2) (08:44):
Mm-hmm.
Henrik Bresman (08:45):
And and that goes back to.
Human nature.
We we like to leave a goodimpression.
We, we like to be seen aspositive and, and and helpful
and all of that.
And, and if we have questionsand doubts about what's on the
table, then we tell ourselvesthat that might not be very
helpful.
(09:06):
And so then we'd rather don'tsay anything.
So, so that's what it typicallylooks like.
It's.
And polite, not, not aggressive,and it's really driven by this
human tendency to wanna beliked, to leave a good, good
impression.
And we're worried that we won't,if we speak up about something
(09:27):
we disagree with.
Teri Schmidt (2) (09:28):
Yeah.
Yeah.
I'm glad you made thatdistinction.
'cause I could see a lot ofpeople thinking that, you know,
these are just you know, highconflict teams where everybody
is, like you said, getting downeveryone's throat.
I think, when you even thinkabout simple things with regards
to communication, and I thinkyou mentioned it in the article
(09:48):
too, there are are certainassumed practices that become
more difficult when you have a ddiverse team.
Different
Henrik Bresman (09:57):
Yes.
Teri Schmidt (2) (09:57):
operating, different ways of communicating.
Henrik Bresman (10:01):
Mm-hmm.
Teri Schmidt (2) (10:02):
are more difficult on diverse teams.
Henrik Bresman (10:04):
So I, it, it's, it, what, what you're asking
about what, what are theparticular challenges perhaps,
particularly in a, in a role ofa leader is that it's always, I
mean, the assumption here isthat we are talking about teams
that are working under somepressure in some fast moving en
(10:25):
environment.
And, and in that environment,then you need to come, you need
to learn, you need to come upwith new solutions.
And, and yet we know that,again, going back to human
nature, it's exactly under thosehigh pressure circumstances that
our, our brains tell us that weneed to move.
(10:46):
Because we, we have theseexperiences stored in memory
about how we did this before.
And our, particularly whenthere's anxiety and pressure,
our brain tells us that we gottamove.
We, we have, we have an answerhere to, to the problem.
And, and that's how you end upwith the right answer to the, to
the wrong question usually.
(11:08):
And, and so what's, what's theway out?
Easy to say, difficult to do,but it's exactly in those
situations that as a leader, youneed to stop and really listen
to what people say.
And that's hard when you, youfeel that you know already what
(11:30):
it is that you need to do.
And it's particularly hard.
And now I'm circling back to thediversity part.
When, when someone comes withinput that you can't.
That you don't naturally connectto, so to to really pay
attention to what is said and,
Teri Schmidt (2) (11:49):
Yeah.
Henrik Bresman (11:49):
and stay with the problem.
Here's something that I oftensay to executives that you, you
have, you have solution spaceand you have problem space, and.
Sure.
There, there, there aresituations in which teams they,
(12:10):
they stay too long of a problemspace and they're paralyzed by
analysis.
But in my experience, and it'snot only mine that is not the
most common problem.
Most common problem is that werun straight to solution space.
So what you always need to dowhen you're in a new territory
is that you need to stay inproblem space a little bit
(12:31):
longer.
Know what you're co comfortablewith.
And, and that discomfort andthat challenge becomes so much
greater in a diverse teambecause then you really need to
listen to things that, that arenew to you.
And take that in and, and askquestions that you may not have
asked before and get answersthat might derail where you
(12:55):
thought you were going.
All of this makes, it makes ithard.
Stay in the problem space.
But that's, that's thechallenge.
I, I, I often say to, in myclasses, that, that the greatest
gift you can give to yourself asa leader is, is to develop your
your capacity to ask betterquestions, to stay in that pro
(13:15):
problem space before you move into to solutions.
Teri Schmidt (2) (13:19):
And then you don't get to the space you were
talking about before where youhave the right answer to the
wrong question.
Yeah.
Henrik Bresman (13:27):
Yes, yes.
It's a huge, and by the way, Ishould say that, that's, I, I
believe that was Peter Drucker,who first.
Said this.
He, he talked, so I, I, I wantto give credit where credit is
due.
Peter Drucker, this originalmanagement guru, I think he was
the first person who was calledthe management guru for us
professor types.
That's very annoying because hedidn't even have a PhD to work
(13:49):
hard to get where we were.
And he was this journalist.
He, he was brilliant.
He, he was before.
Time.
And, and he was the, as far as Iknow, the first person who now
decades ago said that, that thebiggest challenge for leaders is
never to find the rightsolution.
It is to find the rightquestion.
And I, and I really.
Teri Schmidt (2) (14:08):
Yeah.
You know, I, I think it soundsgreat and I wholeheartedly agree
with it, but I'm, I'm justthinking of that leader out
there who's like, I'm goingthrough these times that, you
know, I have all this pressureon me.
Why do I wanna take on thisadditional cognitive load of
trying to, you know, figure outhow to stay in the problem
(14:29):
space, how to.
Inquire more and ask for moreinput that I know might result
in solutions that were not in myoriginal plan.
why is it worth it?
Henrik Bresman (14:44):
Well.
I would say that there's, thereare few other few responses to
that question.
One is that, well if you want todo well, you may not have, have
a choice because ending up withthe right answer to the wrong
question will, you'll end up ina place that is not good when it
(15:04):
comes to performance.
But then there is one more thingthat we found that I found
interesting and, and importantat this work on psychological
safety is that what we found inthese diverse teams that were.
That had an above averagepsychological safety climate.
We found that not only did theydo better, but they felt better
(15:27):
too.
So there was higher satisfactionscores as well.
And, and this is where I'mgetting quite excited about the
work we're doing now in thespace of, of.
Psychological safety.
I'm co-editing an issue with Amyand, and a couple of other
colleagues around this.
And we're really digging into towhat we know and what we don't
know about psychological safetyin fast moving environments.
(15:51):
And one reason why I personallyam so excited about this is the
the promise the potential ofpsychological safety to not only
lead to learning andperformance.
But also to better the mentalhealth outcomes, which is
something that I care about, butalso this person for whom you
(16:13):
ask that question, why would youcare?
Why would you take this on?
Well, that's, that's anotherreason that it's, it's all, all
good for, for our mental healthto live and, and, and work in
psychologically safeenvironments.
Teri Schmidt (2) (16:26):
Mm-hmm.
Which is critically important,and especially in tumultuous
times.
Henrik Bresman (16:32):
Yes, and we do live in teal's times, don't we?
I'm in, I'm in Asia, but I hearthat there are things going on
over in the US these days aswell.
Teri Schmidt (2) (16:42):
There are there, there definitely are.
And you know, I, I think the,the wellbeing elements are, are
critically important.
I.
Especially with everything thateveryone has going on outside of
work, the last
Henrik Bresman (16:58):
Yes,
Teri Schmidt (2) (16:59):
to do is find that where you spend the
majority of your day issomewhere that negatively
impacting your health.
Henrik Bresman (17:09):
yes yes.
No, it's.
Important.
Teri Schmidt (2) (17:12):
Excited to see that.
Well.
Say we have a leader that'sthat's bought into this.
What are some concrete practicesthat you and Dr.
Edmondson found can help employpsychological safety on these
diverse teams?
Henrik Bresman (17:32):
Well, so the first thing I wanna say is that
it, it, it is, it is a bit of achallenge.
I want to acknowledge that.
It's hard because in diverseteams, you by definition are
people who, who who aremotivated in different ways, and
also they might perceive yourbehavior as a leader in, in, in
different ways.
(17:52):
I mean, you, you have the bestof intentions, but there's still
a little bit of a blind spot of,you know, how your behavior and
your actions land.
On the team member might bedifferent from how you, how you
intend.
And of course, in a diverseteam, this, this challenge,
which is always there is ismultiplied.
(18:14):
So the, I have no silver bulletsfor you here, but something that
something that is always true isthat it will depend on your
context and also who you are andwhat you can do authentically.
So with, with that caveat Ioften.
Think about, and this iscertainly something that I've
learned a lot from, from Amy, Iwanna say that the thoughts I'm
(18:37):
sharing here is very much fromfrom her thinking.
I, I like to think of a threestage process where you start
by, by setting the stageagreeing as a team where you are
as it really relates to.
Your understanding of the levelof uncertainty, what you, what
(18:59):
you know, and what you don'tknow.
And then related to that, what,what can you expect when it
comes to failure rates?
It's a, it's a continuum.
There is one very certain spacewhere you basically have all the
answers and you don't expect anyfailures and.
And if failures happen, they're,they're bad.
(19:20):
And, and maybe it's someonewho's been sloppy, but then as
you move along this, thiscontinuum, some, somewhere in
the middle, you have a setting,like a hospital setting where
certainly mistakes, errors arebad, but they happen all the
time.
Anyone who's been in a, anemergency, room will know that
it's impossible to geteverything right.
(19:40):
The key is to, to speak aboutthe mistakes you make so you can
learn from'em and do better.
And then the, the other extremeis pharmaceutical drug
development.
Say where you, you not only arefailures not bad, you, you must
have them so that you caneventually succeed.
(20:01):
For those who know anythingabout pharmaceutical drug
development, then you know thatsomething like 95% of all
projects, they, they fail andthey have to so that they learn
from'em and move on.
And if you don't agree on whereyou are.
Well then you can't even startif you, the leader thinks we are
out here in experimentationspace.
And of course, failure issomething that we need to have,
(20:24):
but the rest of the team,perhaps gun shy from a previous
com experience is, is absolutelyintolerant of any, any, mistakes
or believe that everyone else iswell then, then you can't even
start to have a conversation.
So that's the starting point, tohave a foundation of a common
understanding of where you are,what you know, what you don't
(20:46):
know, and and implications forfor failures.
The second piece is, so that'sstep one.
Step two is what we might callinclusive leadership.
It, it's really to inviteparticipation by reaching out to
people.
If it's in a, a virtualenvironment like this, well then
it would be me reaching out andsay, Terry, I need to, I need to
(21:08):
hear from you.
You, you're out there, you're inin the us I'm here in Asia, and,
and you see things that I don'tsee.
What, what can you tell me?
I'm new to this role.
I need, I need help.
And this, this does a couple ofthings.
First, it it, it lowers thepsychological.
Cost of speaking up, but it alsoraises sub psychological cost
of, of being silent.
(21:29):
Because if I really call you outand say, I need help, well then
it's weird to just sit there andnot say anything.
So that's the, that's the secondpiece.
And here is what role modelingis so important.
It's you hear this all the timeif you're in talk about
leadership, but it, it is true.
You need to role model byperhaps sharing stories about.
(21:51):
How, how, how you failed andwhat you learned and how, and
that's where the personal piececome comes in.
How can you do that?
Authentically A lot of leaders,they, they, they are challenged
because they think that theirauthority somehow is, undermined
(22:16):
if they share the fact thatthere's something that they
don't know.
I actually think we talked aboutthis last time.
I said something along the linesof how of course they know that
you don't know everything andyou know that.
You don't know everything, butthey don't know that, you know?
I, I think that's somethingimportant to to remember.
So that's the second stage.
(22:37):
And then the finally is that youneed to respond productively
when people speak up.
And that's easy when everythingpeople say is gold.
But of course, that's not alwaysthe case.
And, and so people might saysomething dumb.
Now if you then say Thank you,but that's dumb, well then
you'll kill any, any possibilityfor psychological safety right
(22:59):
away.
So of course you need to come upwith some way of praising the
courage it took to speak up andthen have a separate
conversation about how, how itfits to the, the solution.
Teri Schmidt (2) (23:09):
Mm-hmm.
Henrik Bresman (23:10):
So.
Those three pieces set thestage, invite participation, and
then respond productively.
I think that's a good startingpoint to think about how to, how
to build this and, and you askedhow do you do this in diverse
teams?
Well, the way I think about itis that it's, it's the same
process.
Wherever you are, it's just alittle bit more challenging and
(23:31):
you need to listen a little bitharder and maybe invite a few
more people in a diverse team.
But the, the logic is the same.
Teri Schmidt (2) (23:39):
Yeah.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
And I think on diverse teams,it, it may be about maybe
remaining curious for longer aswell.
Someone gives a response, it'snot assuming that you understand
exactly what they meant by thatresponse.
Henrik Bresman (23:56):
Yes.
Oh gosh, that is so important.
I, I love that word, curiosity.
That's another capacity toreally nurture.
I.
The no, a, a wrong turn thatmany leaders take is that they,
they ask questions that theythink that they know the answers
to already, and, and teammembers, they will see that.
(24:17):
And, and that discouragesparticipation.
If you follow your curiosity andask open-ended questions that
you don't know the answers tothat, that is a far more
productive conversation.
And we're back to the importanceof asking questions.
Teri Schmidt (2) (24:33):
right.
Yeah.
Which can be really hard to do.
And you know, especially for newleaders, like I think we talked
about last conversation, whenyou do feel maybe a little
insecure and we
Henrik Bresman (24:44):
Yes.
Teri Schmidt (2) (24:44):
you know, you don't want to be vulnerable and
let people know that you don'tknow everything, even though
they already know that you don'tknow everything.
Henrik Bresman (24:54):
And, and then there's, there's one more thing.
There's another reason why it'sso seductive to do that as a new
leader, because if you are in agenuinely uncertain environment,
the fact is that people wantreassurance.
They actually gravitate toleaders who say, I have only, I,
I have all the answers.
Only I can fix it.
Just, just follow me.
(25:14):
And people will thank you.
For, for saying that, becausethat makes them feel feel
better.
But of course you don't have allthe answers.
And you need a lot of peoplearound you to fix something that
is new and different andcomplex.
So in the short run, people willcelebrate you.
Teri Schmidt (2) (25:32):
Mm-hmm.
Henrik Bresman (25:33):
And that can be quite seductive in the long run.
Of course, it will lead to tofailure because by definition
you don't know everything.
Teri Schmidt (2) (25:41):
Yeah, yeah, excellent point.
If, if we could all be longerterm thinkers that would stay in
the problem space as long as weneed to, I think we would
experience more success morequickly.
Ironically.
Henrik Bresman (25:56):
It, it is a yes and it is a bit of a paradox and
there's a lot of colleagues ofmine.
I'll just name one Ella mySpecter, who's a colleague of
mine at insead.
She's done a lot of work onparadoxical thinking.
And that's exactly what this isabout.
You need to think long term andshort term at the same time.
You need to, you need to stay inthe problem space for longer,
(26:22):
but you also need to get intothe solution space.
You need to think about both atthe same time.
And, and that's, that'ssomething worth practicing
because if you can start to makeheadway there, you'll be a
better leader.
Teri Schmidt (2) (26:35):
Well, my last question, it might be a little
controversial.
It, it is that, you know,diversity has almost become a
dirty word in some circles.
so I am curious, what are therisks to teams when diversity
isn't recognized, talked aboutor planned and adjusted for
(26:55):
doing some of the things that wejust talked about.
Henrik Bresman (26:58):
Well, so there are two scenarios that comes to
mind for me.
One is where it's just nottalked about and recognized
because people are worried aboutusing the word.
I, I, I spoke to a company,European company active in the
(27:19):
US just, just last week, andit's a real issue for them that
they, their language arounddiversity inclusion, they, they
now are worried that that mightactually be, be.
Be illegal or, or punishedsomehow.
So it's, it, it becomes morethan just leaders being
comfortable or, or notcomfortable.
(27:40):
And, and, and I, there it's,it's, I think this is playing
out.
That's a real, real concern.
The fact is that to take ondiverse problems and complex
problems in the world, you needdiverse teams to take it.
To take it on.
That's just a fact.
We know this.
(28:01):
In that context, it's thepeople, teams, organizations,
they come up with new languageto, to get around these
blockers, and then they, theytalk about the same thing, but
they use new words and, and, andI, I, I think that.
In the current environment,maybe that's what what you need
(28:22):
to do.
You stay true to your values.
You're doing what you think isimportant for both the
performance and the wellbeing ofyour team members, and then you
put a different label on itbecause in the current moment,
the environment demands that ofyou.
The more common, let me can Itake a couple of more minutes on
(28:43):
this, this question again,slightly different direction.
The more common issue that Icome across actually, because
thankfully, you know,particularly outside of the us
this is the, the, the languageof diversity, inclusion,
inclusive leadership.
It's, it's not.
(29:03):
It's not banned.
You, you can use it.
However managers, leaders tendto tend to be nervous about it
and, and still, and then theymight come to someone like me
and say, okay, all right.
I, I think I.
I do believe in, in this sort ofconceptually.
(29:24):
But you know, now, nowshareholders, they are get a bit
antsy and, and, and so I need togive them the business case.
What's the business case?
And, and then we get into apretty tricky territory because.
There are plenty of businessbenefits.
(29:45):
To diversity and inclusion.
But if you frame in terms of thebusiness case and say, give me
the business case, you demandthe business case.
What, paradoxically, what mayhappen then is that through that
language, you other, theminority, you undermine
psychological safety and youwon't get there.
(30:10):
Get to the business benefitbecause you create fear And
anxiety around, oh God, now I,need to show that, that, that
the ROI is there.
Um, if on the other hand youframe the issue in terms of
breaking groupthink, in terms ofimagination, innovation,
(30:33):
learning.
And mental health, well, thenthe business benefits will
follow.
So this is a somewhat nuancedargument that I that I hope, um,
that leaders get that the sortof, the, the, I, I fully
understand the pressure for thebusiness case, but the best way
(30:56):
of actually getting the businessbenefits is, is to to frame the,
the challenge in broader,broader terms.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:05):
Yeah, that does make sense.
And I, you know, I think thatresult of group think That
you're trying to avoid andbreak, is so much closer
concepts that people who areasking for the business case
are, are more comfortable with.
So, you know, we need to breakthat group think in order to
(31:25):
deliver innovation.
to have innovation on the team,
Henrik Bresman (31:30):
yes, absolutely.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:32):
Yeah.
Yeah.
And I, I am just thinking againabout like what you said about
those people in differentcorners.
You know, when and, and havingpeople in diverse corners,
they're almost put there becausegroupthink is
Henrik Bresman (31:47):
Yeah.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:48):
Um, and whether that just be the way the
leader sees the world,
Henrik Bresman (31:53):
Yeah.
Teri Schmidt (2) (31:54):
That is creating so many blind spots
because you have those people inthe different corners that
aren't necessarily talking toeach other.
Henrik Bresman (32:01):
And now right at towards the end you introduced
this incredibly important word,which is blind spots.
we all have them and, and, uh,and it's important to be
curious.
To use that other important wordabout your blind spots.
Um, and, and you can find a lotof those blind spots by bringing
(32:22):
in the people sitting in thecorners.
Teri Schmidt (2) (32:25):
Well, I, I think that's a, a great note to
end on.
Of course, in the last episode,we shared all the resources that
you have
Henrik Bresman (32:34):
Mm-hmm.
Teri Schmidt (2) (32:34):
but is there anywhere else that people should
go to follow you if they want tospecifically see the work that
you're doing on this topic?
Henrik Bresman (32:43):
I, I, I try to post thoughts, um, once in a
while, uh, on LinkedIn.
I have a.
Uh, newsletter on LinkedIncalled X News with my colleague
friend Deborah and Kona, wherewe talk about, um, um, these
issues, uh, the book that wetalked about last time.
(33:03):
uh, X teams.
Uh, and then we, we talk a bitabout.
Our different, uh, methods for,for developing our skills as
team leaders.
We have a couple of tools thatwe have developed a, uh,
simulation that we're veryexcited about, called xchange,
and we have a 360 degreeinstrument called X 360.
(33:23):
We like the X there, as you cantell.
The Xte, uh, book.
We have, uh, card games wherepeople can explore how, how
they, um, how they viewleadership.
'cause it turns out that peoplehave different views, not
surprisingly about whatleadership, um, is and, uh, and
is not.
So I'll encourage you to go andexplore that.
(33:47):
Um, so that's it.
Thank you for having me on againand, uh, always, always a
pleasure to see where theconversation is going.
Teri Schmidt (2) (33:58):
yes.
Thank you again for giving upyour time.
What a powerful conversation.
Thank you again to Henrik fortaking of his time to come and
have this conversation with meas he shared.
Diversity alone isn't enough.
It's the environment we createas leaders that determines
whether diverse voices areheard, respected, and able to
(34:21):
contribute meaningfully.
So I'm leaving you with achallenge as you step back into
your role this week.
I challenge you to identify onemeeting or conversation where
you can intentionally inviteinput from someone who sees
things differently and thenactively show that their voice
matters.
Thank you again for listening,and I hope you have a great
(34:43):
week.
As a strong leader who serves.
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.