October 20, 2025 • 29 mins
What does belonging at work actually look like—beyond posters and policies? Organizational culture expert Faith Clarke (engineer-turned-people-systems strategist) joins us to unpack “yes-yes” solutions, internal vs. external motivation, and how microcultures (5–8 person teams) can transform organizations. We talk listening as leadership, practicing—not preaching—values, and why work besties aren’t just emotional support humans…they’re co-creators of culture.
Top Takeaways
- Culture is practiced, not posted. Microcultures beat macroculture slogans.
- “Yes-Yes” solutions: bridge tensions so both needs are met.
- Internal > external motivation for sustainable behavior and performance.
- Belonging = shared care + protection. People stay and thrive when they feel looked after.
- Start small. Build skills interpersonally, then in small groups, then scale.
- Leaders model vulnerability. Listening with curiosity (not fixing) builds trust.
- 80/20 rule. A few changes in listening and co-creation drive most results.
- Work friendships fuel belonging and make hard work possible.
You can watch the full episode on Youtube
Follow us on IG , TikTok, Threads and LinkedIn
Please rate, comment and provide suggestions for upcoming episodes
Work Besties! Theme Song Written by Ralph Lentini @therallyband
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Faith Clarke (00:00):
Not your your yes my no.
What we need is build theability to create yes yes
solutions.
Claude (00:07):
Culture is not just a policy, it's a partnership.
Hi, I'm Claude and I'm Jess.
We are corporate employees byday, entrepreneurs by night, and
work besties for life.
Jess (00:20):
Join us as we explore how work besties lift each other up,
laugh through the chaos, andthrive together in every
industry.
Work besties.
We talk a lot about belongingat work, but what does that
actually mean?
How do we build cultures whereconflict is handled with care?
Onboarding reflects our values,and our work bestities aren't
(00:42):
just emotional support humans,but co-creators of culture.
Today's guest, Faith Clark,engineer turned organizational
culture expert.
He helps us design ecosystemswhere bipopular neurodiversity
and mission-driven humans don'tjust survive, they lead.
Stay to the end for an answerto the What does it take to
build a team where you feel safeenough to be yourself and bold
(01:05):
enough to lead with others?
Welcome, faith.
Faith Clarke (01:09):
Hi, Claude and Jessica.
Tell us a little bit about you.
I I love humans.
Regardless of what I'm doing, Imoving close to where people
are and listening to where theywant to be and helping them take
the next step.
I was trained as an engineer,worked on Wall Street in
computer engineering, and taughtcollege design systems, code,
and traditional techie stuff.
(01:29):
When things shifted at home,homeschooling, the teacher in me
really felt lonely when my kidsstopped homeschooling.
So I went back into adjunctfaculty while also not
recognizing that my teachingthread was really what I was
doing in organizational spaces.
So as colleagues and friendsasked me for support in
(01:49):
strategic planning or teamworkstuff, it's the same set of
skills.
I really come close, listen towhat's needed.
And if I'm designing whetherit's learning or I'm designing
strategy or tool, it's just helpyou take the next step.
So that's my my backgroundcovers engineering and
psychology and everything inbetween.
Jess (02:09):
You move take the step the step from engineering to
psychology to what got you towhere you are right now.
Faith Clarke (02:15):
It's a multi-step journey, right?
But I remember the first timewhen I was teaching computer
science, the head of departmentat the University of the West
Indies in Jamaica, where he wasa guy who moved from cognitive
science into computer science.
And I was fascinated by thatmove.
He didn't want to teach hisartificial intelligence course
anymore, and I was the grunt newfaculty.
(02:37):
He had handed over artificialintelligence to me.
And I thought, if we're gonnabe teaching artificial
intelligence, we need tounderstand what intelligence is.
So my own approach was thisexploration into intelligence,
which was my segue intopsychology.
And so that was part of whathappened.
The shift into the kind ofpsychology of human performance,
(02:59):
which is what I studied, wasjust this curiosity about
motivation, both founded inwhat's happening with my kids,
because we have autism andsensory processing, anesthesia,
obsessive-compulsive, executivefunctions across the spectrum
with my three humans.
So I became curious about well,if we're not gonna force them,
if we're not gonna manipulatethem, and if we're not gonna
(03:21):
make them afraid, how do wefacilitate their movement and
their learning and theirdevelopment?
And those questions led me intoperformance psychology, which
is basically the same questionsthat we have to explore in the
workplace.
If we're not gonna use a whipand carrot, then what are we
doing?
Claude (03:37):
So what are we doing?
Faith Clarke (03:39):
We're doing it poorly, whatever it is that
we're doing, is what I havenoted.
One of the things that I reallyenjoyed in some of my own
explorations is understandingthe difference from the
difference between motivationfrom the inside and motivation
that's external.
I believe that efforts tosustain our behavior that are
external don't last.
(04:00):
They're not sustainable.
As human beings, we can't keepdoing things for external
rewards.
We don't get there.
And if the external or forpunishment, the external thing,
the punishment has to becomeworse and worse just to sustain
the behavior.
And so I think that a lot ofwhat we've seen in a workplace
has been the failure of ourmotivation systems.
(04:22):
And and part of what we don'ttruly understand, or maybe we're
not really employing, is what'swhere where are humans
motivated?
What are our core needs?
What are our core motivations?
What are we paying attentionto?
If that was being attended to,I bet we would get more
collaborative solutions that arewin-wins.
(04:42):
And so what happens in powerover systems and hierarchical
models, like we're still tryingto get away from, is that it's
not my needs that are beingattended to.
It's not my internalmotivations that are being
attended to.
I am being required to dosomething for the other because
our systems and our models ofwork have not been built on
(05:04):
nourishment and support andcare.
They've been built onextraction.
And by definition, extractionis something that's it's not
about me.
We're just trying to get fromme what you need for the system.
It's about somebody else'sneeds.
And so fundamentally, if we'redoing things for somebody else's
needs, it's not sustainable.
Claude (05:22):
So that's where you were referring to internal
motivation and externalmotivation.
Like, can you give an exampleof internal motivation, you
know, versus that externalmotivation?
Faith Clarke (05:35):
Well, what I'll say is I'll just give a generic
example first.
And say, for example, let's saythat you see yourself as a
healthy eater.
You may be internally motivatedbecause you enjoy the taste of
broccoli.
You may be externally motivatedbecause the image of healthy
eating is important to you.
(05:57):
So the external motivation ofyour image to eat broccoli
versus the internal motivation,a love of the taste of broccoli,
the both of these, on theoutside, what it looks like is
you're eating broccoli.
But what's motivating thebehavior on the inside is what's
going to determine how to helpthis behavior be sustainable.
So an example of internalmotivation for me is that I
(06:20):
really, really love talking topeople.
When I did work with familieswho cared for kids with complex
needs, part of what I would sayis design a business.
The nine to five typicallydoesn't work for us if you have
humans that you're caring forthat have complex needs.
So often these people aretalking about how do I make some
money.
And I'd say design a businessthat if somebody woke you up at
(06:41):
two in the morning, having notslept for 48 hours because your
kid, whatever, you'd just beable to do it.
And those things that you'reable to do are likely things
that are both easy for you andthings that are restorative and
nourishing for you.
So internally motivated, it's athing that satisfies something
deep down on the inside of you,like your love for the taste of
(07:04):
broccoli.
For me, that's talking topeople.
I can do it.
I don't need to be paid to talkto people.
I will spend many hours doingit.
I have many words that I canshare and I listen really well.
So, how how do we design ourinteractions with people in a
workspace in ways that payattention to how they're
internally motivated?
(07:24):
So I fundamentally don't agreewith top-down implementation of
any of these ideas.
I don't believe that we caneffectively, when people say to
me, Hey Faith, how do I do thisat scale?
I'm like, it's the wrongquestion.
Because when we're talkingabout how do we build businesses
(07:45):
where individual human coreneeds are met, right?
We have to build our capacityas individuals to even pay
attention to those core needs inourselves and in others, and
then have those core needs metin an interaction between two
people, and then in aninteraction with three people
and within a group.
(08:06):
And so part of we've done awhole ton of create policies,
create a statement, could dowhat are our values, how do we
operationalize those values?
But what we don't know how todo is in a group of five to
eight people, how do we use theidea of the circle of concern?
(08:26):
And what we've done is buildsystems where the circle of
concern only has certain peoplein it and other people are
commodities in terms of servingwho's in the circle.
Part of what we need to be ableto do is to expand our circle
of concern so that the needs ofeverybody in the circle are
being supported.
How do you build small clustersof people where everybody in
(08:48):
the cluster both understands howto meet the core needs of the
people in the group and tocreate the yes, yes, and to
co-create work and co-createrest and care in ways that serve
that group, knowing fully wellthat when you take one person
out of that group, what you dois change the group, in which
(09:11):
case it's the skill ofunderstanding what's needed.
As you can't create a templatefor that, you have to build the
ability to understand how to doit in any group and then change
it up.
You basically need to be a goodcoach, like of you know, think
in the sports team type ofanalogy.
And then you're duplicatingthat micro model across the
(09:32):
organization and building itthat way.
And so our industrial mindsetdoesn't work for actual humans,
and we do need to move away fromit and think how do I build
these skills interpersonally andthen in small groups, and then
from there, how do I makeanybody in a small group be able
to move to another small groupand have these same skills
(09:53):
implemented?
Jess (09:54):
When you said yes, yes, and what did you mean by that?
Faith Clarke (09:58):
Instead of not your your yes mean my no, what
we want is your yes and my yes,so it's a yes, yes.
And what we have in our systemsbecause of our relationship to
power is we either have powersays yes and you say no, or we
have conformity, which is Ishift my position to be with
(10:21):
whoever so that we can havesameness, so that we can get
what we want, even though whatI'm really doing is denying
myself, or power says, Allright, we can have it your way.
And what I'm saying is what weneed to do is build the ability
to create solutions that areyes, yes solutions.
In research, that that'sbasically find the tension in
the literature, which is wheretwo ideas don't agree, and build
(10:45):
a solution, build somethingthat answers that, that bridges.
And in our interactions in theworkplace, part of what we have
to do is understand why there'stension and then create a bridge
that can be built that holdsthese two ideas together.
That ability is the yes-yesability that we need to be
building.
Jess (11:03):
I think that's an amazing mindset to go into any type of
solution-based, especiallywithin the work environment.
Everyone comes into thesedebates or these topics that
you're trying to solve throughwith your very definitive, this
is what I need to get done.
So it's me versus the we.
And I think that's aninteresting way to go about it.
(11:25):
How can we come both come outof this with a yes?
Faith Clarke (11:27):
There's a redefining of we so that our we
includes us both.
And my the fundamental idea ofof inclusion is about the
meeting of everybody's coreneeds.
Nobody needs to be sacrificed.
There is the understanding ofwhat's needed for there to be
co-creation of things thatactually meet what everybody
(11:48):
needs.
Claude (11:49):
Isn't it so complicated?
After a bigger group, I mean,when you're like two or three,
it's kind of easy to haveeverybody's, I mean, easier to
have everybody meet their needs.
But when you're in a biggergroup, there's even more
difficulty for everybody tomeet.
(12:09):
So do you is there like theleader that is going to try?
Like, how do you define and whois going to define that bridge
that you were talking about?
Faith Clarke (12:20):
It's not defined, it's co-created.
I hear what you're saying aboutthe difficulty, but the
difficulty is a is a difficultyin skill, not a difficulty in
because it's complex.
Because it is complex, butevery time I um, you know,
people say to me, Faith, this isso hard.
And I was like, we have robotson Mars though.
(12:40):
So human beings have nodifficulty with complex
solutions.
The way we got robots on Marsis that we stayed with it until
we understood how to do it.
Part of what needs to happen inour workspaces is that our
ideas around efficiency limitour ability to stay with things
long enough.
So, yes, we do have too manymeetings, but many of our
(13:03):
meetings could be emails.
And instead of using time fordata handing over, we can be
using our time to be with eachother and figure some of this
out.
And yes, it may not be figuredout initially in five minutes,
but the more we engage infiguring out the human-to-human
differences and our relationshipto difference.
Jess (13:22):
Thinking about this in the corporate environment, the old
model of conformity, everybodyjust falls in line because
that's what's being told, hasshifted.
And now you see the companiesthat are more successful have a
high-functioning team thatrespect everyone's opinions and
bring everybody to the tableversus the hierarchical
(13:42):
approach.
Maybe it started first with acertain number of people and
then they just kept expanding.
So there is power in businessresults based off of that too.
Faith Clarke (13:52):
So business results have always been clear,
but there's there's also more atstake in terms of when when
relationship to power has toshift, it's hard.
And there's more than justmoney that makes it hard.
Yeah, engagement more thandoubles, innovation massively
(14:12):
increases.
The revolving door that so manypeople experience, so many
organizations experience dropswhen we are able to build shared
power systems where peopleexperience the belonging and
feel included and feel the valueof their contribution because
it's co-created.
All of those systems are somuch more stable.
(14:33):
And we do get stuck with how dowe build it because the old
models are in our head, even inour new businesses, where I need
to prove that I'm productive, Ineed to prove that all of these
pressures of proving certainthings and making that visible
makes it look like you'rewasting time when you're
spending a couple hours figuringout how to navigate different
(14:57):
on your team so that you're notin conflict situations that
become intractable and peopleleave.
And if you're doing that, itmight be, yeah, but you're not
working.
And is that what we're supposedto be doing?
Are we supposed to be working?
Are we doing woo-woo takingcare of people stuff?
Not recognizing other teams,such as our sports teams,
there's so much time spentunderstanding an athlete's body,
(15:18):
an athlete's emotions, anathlete's interactions with the
other player.
Other teams get this, and evenif they're not applying it in
terms of super holistic, theyget the fact that the individual
and understanding theindividual holistically is
what's needed to build aneffective team.
But in the workplace, we'vemade that be other rules to
(15:38):
execute on our organizationalobjectives.
Claude (15:42):
So, how can we change that now?
Faith Clarke (15:44):
I think we change it in all the pockets where we
have influence.
So, what I say to people isabout restorative team culture.
A culture is really thehabitual thoughts and behaviors
and meaning making of a group ofpeople.
And microcultures are mucheasier to implement than change
in massive macro cultures.
(16:04):
External culture is prettystable.
A culture that's created withfive people and eight people,
you can see the results of thatquite quickly.
When you have the proof case,that's so much easier to go and
invite other people into that.
And so I invite team leadersand like instead of just
thinking of it as informationdissemination, think about
creating a microculture wherecertain values are actually
(16:27):
practiced.
People are much more likely tofeel they have permission to
implement something if they areon the experiencing side of it.
Some of these elements ofbelonging are how are they
helping each other feel caredfor?
How are they helping each otherfeel protected?
How are they paying attentionto what's happening for the
actual individuals on that team?
That will translate into howthose leaders create
(16:50):
micropockets with their directreports.
Jess (16:52):
Do you feel like it can start at any level or any part
of the organization, or do youfeel like it needs to start with
the executive level?
Faith Clarke (17:00):
It can start anywhere.
And there are challengesregardless of where it starts.
I think at the executive level,there's the perception of risk
and loss of power and so on withthe stakeholders is hard to
deal with.
But it's so much more effectiveif you can do it at the
(17:21):
executive level.
Other levels of theorganization, what you end up
having the potential to have isgrassroots movement, things
springing up across theorganization because people you
can see change quickly andpeople can catch it.
Claude (17:35):
So, what are some of the tools to create that five to
eight team?
Faith Clarke (17:40):
Rather than tools, I think they're practices.
Um, so it's not often peoplesay to me, Hey Faith, can you
create a workshop to helppeople?
And I was like, it's not aworkshop, it's not training,
it's practice.
Often people already know thatthey should insert whatever it
is.
So, one, there are practices ofhow to co-create solutions.
(18:03):
It's organizational specific.
At the very bottom of it, it'sreally listening, it's really
knowing that humans have coreneeds and what are they?
I think the expert on who andwhat my core needs are is me.
So, really listening to me.
Fundamentally, humans haverelationship needs, they want to
feel deep connection, they wantto feel competent, they have
(18:24):
competency needs.
So I want to feel like myexpertise is valued and shared
in the space.
I have autonomy needs.
I don't want to be controlled,I want to be able to give into
the space in the ways that feelreally good for me.
And the ways that that showsup, it's listening.
And then I think there is askill of bridge building.
Just how do I connect what Ihear from two people, that's
(18:47):
leadership skill, into the thingthat is the yes, yes.
And that's first of all,believing that there is a
possible yes, yes.
Often people say to me, it'snot possible.
And I'm like, and then we can'tfind it.
If you believe it's notpossible, we definitely can't
find it.
So there is that commitment todoing it that's required, and
then there's building space topractice that.
(19:09):
So if we are trying to figureout how to get team
communications, is a fakefavorite one because it's always
a place where there's so muchdifference.
And instead of just demandingthat everybody be at the morning
meeting at eight o'clock andit's primarily primarily audio,
just have a conversation aboutwhat's the preference, why, how
(19:29):
does that work, and then noticeall the differences.
Feel the discomfort with thedifference and the practice of
actually recognizing that yourdiscomfort isn't gonna kill you,
and we can actually just bewith this in the moment, it's
not a sign of your poorleadership.
How do we take people who areso different and co-create a
communication practice that saysyes to the fact that I might be
(19:52):
more auditory than you are, andnot only that, but meetings of
this sort don't work for me, butthey work for you.
And how do we solve thatproblem?
I think once we take the actualproblems that a team has,
notice what the practices arethat are needed, create time to
practice.
So make sure that in everymeeting we're practicing the
(20:13):
skills that we need.
Over time, what we'll start tosee is it'll just become
automatic.
People will automatically sharepower, people will
automatically say, Oh, so you'resaying this and we're saying
that.
What connects these two?
People start to do their bridgebuilding practice.
People will be like, Oh, I feeluncomfortable with that thing.
I think I have a story aboutyour difference, but that's
(20:35):
about me.
It's not that you're wrong.
People will start to do thosethings and I will start to see
those automatic practices will,you know, show themselves up and
won't take as much time.
Jess (20:44):
Faith, in your um implementation, working with
teams on practicing thesethings, has there ever been a
case or an example wheresomebody is just not along the
journey?
Faith Clarke (20:57):
The luxury of being the consultant, as I can
call it out, I'm often workingboth with the leader and then
with the team.
If I see somebody beingparticularly unable to engage,
whether that's because of unableto see their own blind spot or
unable to engage with thepractices because values-wise
(21:19):
they disagree, I am goingone-to-one.
Um, and then I'm with theleader, trying to help the
leader build their ability torequire the practices, meaning
create a culture where thatpractice is just the norm, even
if that person doesn't uh feelable to engage.
The belief I try to sell isthat 80% of all behavioral
(21:41):
issues are systemic and systemand context.
Only 20% is really theindividual.
You put people in a differentenvironment and they behave
differently.
So there is an opportunity hereto build an environment that
will make it easier for thatperson to practice.
What are the things that weneed to do to make that happen?
So I work with the leaderaround that, work with a team
(22:03):
about their practices, and I goto the other person one-to-one
because I'm trying to understandwhere's the issue.
So I build trust.
Part of how I teach teams towork is to focus on trust
building.
It's trust building and trustbuilding, and then it's trust
building.
I am trust building with thatperson as well.
And usually I'm able to helphear what the issue is and help
(22:24):
the leader know it may nothappen that the person is able
to engage, but what's reallygoing on under here?
People don't really just wantto throw spokes into the wheels.
That's not how we are ashumans.
I love the 80-20 year old.
And 80% of the solution, like80% of the results, will really
come from this 20% anyway, ofstrategy, of tools.
(22:44):
So people think that oh, youneed a whole new no, you need if
you can change a few things inhow you're listening and how
you're engaging and how you'recreating work together.
If you can just shift from umdoing to co-creating, it'll show
up in 80% of the change interms of how people are engaging
with each other.
Claude (23:04):
We are all about work friendship, work besties, right?
Have you seen a correlation ofthis group of yes and yes when
you have this work friendshipbetween people?
Faith Clarke (23:17):
Yes, I did some informal research on belonging
just through socials, and Ibasically just said, Hey, I want
to talk about belonging.
Get on my calendar.
30 people just jumped on in aday.
One person talked about therelationships at work and how
they facilitated her feeling ofbelonging at work.
She built the relationships atwork, and as they left, she
(23:38):
started to feel like shebelonged less and less, and her
work actually became lessmeaningful to her.
Her ability to perform at workshifted.
It's interesting that when wefeel like we belong, which means
when we feel like our careisn't just our responsibility,
when we feel like other peopleare protecting our needs and
(23:58):
will go to bat for us whendamage happens without us having
to advocate for it.
That belonging creates theenergy to build bridges, to do
hard things, which is what'sneeded when we are going to
change our practices aroundanything.
Claude (24:14):
And how do you foster this sense of belonging?
Faith Clarke (24:18):
So, belonging isn't something that we can make
sure another person feels.
There's a ton of humility.
It's hard for us to fostersomething we can only create the
environment, right?
So, at work, number one is toknow that I can't make you feel
like you belong, but I'm gonnado my darnest to build an
environment where your needs arecentered.
(24:40):
Number two is to acknowledgethat we are in a system that has
met the needs of certain peopleand not others.
So it's to understand whoseneeds aren't being met.
There is a roadway here, andsome people aren't on it, and
there are barriers to somepeople, but if I am not the some
people, then I don't know whatthose barriers are.
And part of building belongingis to the ability to know what
(25:03):
the barriers are and not justmake it the responsibility of
the person who has them.
There's a whole awareness piecethat means understanding
people, and the people who arefacing the barriers have built
in lack of trust of people whodon't have those barriers.
So it's in the workplaceknowing that it's a low-trust
environment.
People don't believe that theother people who don't know
(25:25):
about these barriers really arereally committed.
And how do we then show thatwe're committed to overcome to
understanding and overcoming thebarriers?
That's a lot of individual workon the part of the leader who
may or may not be experiencingthose barriers.
But once we're willing to kindof say, hey, I don't know, and I
want to understand that, andyou won't be penalized for
(25:47):
sharing what your barriers are.
And I'm willing to do my ownresearch to find out outside of
this space and to come to youand say, I've understood this or
how can I?
But so far, so being willing tosay that fostering belonging is
a long game because you'regonna have to overcome the lack
of trust that's built in theenvironment, and you're gonna
have to make yourself vulnerableto the barriers that you are
(26:08):
engaging right now.
Facilitating has to be first,I'm doing this, I'm gonna do it
because it's the right thing todo.
So I say this it's a moralissue or ethical issue, and then
it's knowing the powerdifferentials across the team
and in the group so that thepeople with more power are
willing to expose and be morevulnerable because they
recognize that there's higherrisk for people who
(26:29):
traditionally have less power inthe system, so they can build
that understanding of what thebarriers are because then
overcoming the barriers withpeople is part of the care
that's going to create thebelonging.
Jess (26:40):
So it all starts with listening because you have to
listen to what your people aresaying, thinking, feeling, and
what they bring to work or themas themselves.
Faith Clarke (26:50):
It starts with listening for cute just for the
sake of curiosity, not listeningto solve, to fix, to
manipulate.
I want to understand who youare, and I recognize that your
good impacts my good.
And so I know that we'recreating a feedback system of
(27:11):
good that means I want to hearso that I can offer you care in
the ways that I can in thesystem that I have influence.
Jess (27:18):
What does it take to build a team where you feel safe
enough to be yourself and boldenough to lead with others?
Faith Clarke (27:25):
Just start with starting with us as leaders.
It's accepting the maybecalling to greater
vulnerability.
It's accepting that calling tovulnerability so that you can
model how do we engage with ourreal selves, shifting away from
I'm here as leader to help you,to together we create space
(27:46):
where we all are safe.
And I'm gonna let myself beheld by you.
And then I invite you to let mehold you.
Starting with that premise andfiguring out how that how to do
that, inviting help in.
Because when you have a teamwhere you're trying to do that
work, it's hard to be both theperson who is thinking through
strategy and the person who'sletting themselves be
vulnerable.
So having people come in tojust do the holding so that the
(28:10):
team can connect.
Jess (28:11):
Faith, you've provided us some great examples, giving our
teams that space they can feelseen, safe, supported.
Claude (28:18):
And you helped us remember the power of the people
behind, you know, beside us,the colleague who holds space,
the work bestie who reminds uswe belong.
Culture is not just a policy,it's a partnership.
Faith Clarke (28:31):
The policy doesn't create the culture.
It's the it's often women,invisible labor that's creating
whatever belonging we already dohave.
And we want to recognize it.
Jess (28:42):
So work bestie is out there.
If this episode gave you aopen, please share it to your
team, boss, or work bestie.
Claude (28:49):
Until next time, stay human, stay connected, and never
underestimate the power of onegood teammate.
Jess (28:56):
Remember, whether you're swapping snacks in the break
room, rescuing each other fromendless meetings, or just
sending that perfectly timedmeme.
Having a work bestie is likehaving your own personal hype
squad.
Claude (29:09):
So keep lifting each other up, laughing through the
chaos, and of course.
And let's just keep supportingeach other.
Not your your yes my no.
What we need is build theability to create yes yes
solutions.
Claude (00:07):
Culture is not just a policy, it's a partnership.
Hi, I'm Claude and I'm Jess.
We are corporate employees byday, entrepreneurs by night, and
work besties for life.
Jess (00:20):
Join us as we explore how work besties lift each other up,
laugh through the chaos, andthrive together in every
industry.
Work besties.
We talk a lot about belongingat work, but what does that
actually mean?
How do we build cultures whereconflict is handled with care?
Onboarding reflects our values,and our work bestities aren't
(00:42):
just emotional support humans,but co-creators of culture.
Today's guest, Faith Clark,engineer turned organizational
culture expert.
He helps us design ecosystemswhere bipopular neurodiversity
and mission-driven humans don'tjust survive, they lead.
Stay to the end for an answerto the What does it take to
build a team where you feel safeenough to be yourself and bold
(01:05):
enough to lead with others?
Welcome, faith.
Faith Clarke (01:09):
Hi, Claude and Jessica.
Tell us a little bit about you.
I I love humans.
Regardless of what I'm doing, Imoving close to where people
are and listening to where theywant to be and helping them take
the next step.
I was trained as an engineer,worked on Wall Street in
computer engineering, and taughtcollege design systems, code,
and traditional techie stuff.
(01:29):
When things shifted at home,homeschooling, the teacher in me
really felt lonely when my kidsstopped homeschooling.
So I went back into adjunctfaculty while also not
recognizing that my teachingthread was really what I was
doing in organizational spaces.
So as colleagues and friendsasked me for support in
(01:49):
strategic planning or teamworkstuff, it's the same set of
skills.
I really come close, listen towhat's needed.
And if I'm designing whetherit's learning or I'm designing
strategy or tool, it's just helpyou take the next step.
So that's my my backgroundcovers engineering and
psychology and everything inbetween.
Jess (02:09):
You move take the step the step from engineering to
psychology to what got you towhere you are right now.
Faith Clarke (02:15):
It's a multi-step journey, right?
But I remember the first timewhen I was teaching computer
science, the head of departmentat the University of the West
Indies in Jamaica, where he wasa guy who moved from cognitive
science into computer science.
And I was fascinated by thatmove.
He didn't want to teach hisartificial intelligence course
anymore, and I was the grunt newfaculty.
(02:37):
He had handed over artificialintelligence to me.
And I thought, if we're gonnabe teaching artificial
intelligence, we need tounderstand what intelligence is.
So my own approach was thisexploration into intelligence,
which was my segue intopsychology.
And so that was part of whathappened.
The shift into the kind ofpsychology of human performance,
(02:59):
which is what I studied, wasjust this curiosity about
motivation, both founded inwhat's happening with my kids,
because we have autism andsensory processing, anesthesia,
obsessive-compulsive, executivefunctions across the spectrum
with my three humans.
So I became curious about well,if we're not gonna force them,
if we're not gonna manipulatethem, and if we're not gonna
(03:21):
make them afraid, how do wefacilitate their movement and
their learning and theirdevelopment?
And those questions led me intoperformance psychology, which
is basically the same questionsthat we have to explore in the
workplace.
If we're not gonna use a whipand carrot, then what are we
doing?
Claude (03:37):
So what are we doing?
Faith Clarke (03:39):
We're doing it poorly, whatever it is that
we're doing, is what I havenoted.
One of the things that I reallyenjoyed in some of my own
explorations is understandingthe difference from the
difference between motivationfrom the inside and motivation
that's external.
I believe that efforts tosustain our behavior that are
external don't last.
(04:00):
They're not sustainable.
As human beings, we can't keepdoing things for external
rewards.
We don't get there.
And if the external or forpunishment, the external thing,
the punishment has to becomeworse and worse just to sustain
the behavior.
And so I think that a lot ofwhat we've seen in a workplace
has been the failure of ourmotivation systems.
(04:22):
And and part of what we don'ttruly understand, or maybe we're
not really employing, is what'swhere where are humans
motivated?
What are our core needs?
What are our core motivations?
What are we paying attentionto?
If that was being attended to,I bet we would get more
collaborative solutions that arewin-wins.
(04:42):
And so what happens in powerover systems and hierarchical
models, like we're still tryingto get away from, is that it's
not my needs that are beingattended to.
It's not my internalmotivations that are being
attended to.
I am being required to dosomething for the other because
our systems and our models ofwork have not been built on
(05:04):
nourishment and support andcare.
They've been built onextraction.
And by definition, extractionis something that's it's not
about me.
We're just trying to get fromme what you need for the system.
It's about somebody else'sneeds.
And so fundamentally, if we'redoing things for somebody else's
needs, it's not sustainable.
Claude (05:22):
So that's where you were referring to internal
motivation and externalmotivation.
Like, can you give an exampleof internal motivation, you
know, versus that externalmotivation?
Faith Clarke (05:35):
Well, what I'll say is I'll just give a generic
example first.
And say, for example, let's saythat you see yourself as a
healthy eater.
You may be internally motivatedbecause you enjoy the taste of
broccoli.
You may be externally motivatedbecause the image of healthy
eating is important to you.
(05:57):
So the external motivation ofyour image to eat broccoli
versus the internal motivation,a love of the taste of broccoli,
the both of these, on theoutside, what it looks like is
you're eating broccoli.
But what's motivating thebehavior on the inside is what's
going to determine how to helpthis behavior be sustainable.
So an example of internalmotivation for me is that I
(06:20):
really, really love talking topeople.
When I did work with familieswho cared for kids with complex
needs, part of what I would sayis design a business.
The nine to five typicallydoesn't work for us if you have
humans that you're caring forthat have complex needs.
So often these people aretalking about how do I make some
money.
And I'd say design a businessthat if somebody woke you up at
(06:41):
two in the morning, having notslept for 48 hours because your
kid, whatever, you'd just beable to do it.
And those things that you'reable to do are likely things
that are both easy for you andthings that are restorative and
nourishing for you.
So internally motivated, it's athing that satisfies something
deep down on the inside of you,like your love for the taste of
(07:04):
broccoli.
For me, that's talking topeople.
I can do it.
I don't need to be paid to talkto people.
I will spend many hours doingit.
I have many words that I canshare and I listen really well.
So, how how do we design ourinteractions with people in a
workspace in ways that payattention to how they're
internally motivated?
(07:24):
So I fundamentally don't agreewith top-down implementation of
any of these ideas.
I don't believe that we caneffectively, when people say to
me, Hey Faith, how do I do thisat scale?
I'm like, it's the wrongquestion.
Because when we're talkingabout how do we build businesses
(07:45):
where individual human coreneeds are met, right?
We have to build our capacityas individuals to even pay
attention to those core needs inourselves and in others, and
then have those core needs metin an interaction between two
people, and then in aninteraction with three people
and within a group.
(08:06):
And so part of we've done awhole ton of create policies,
create a statement, could dowhat are our values, how do we
operationalize those values?
But what we don't know how todo is in a group of five to
eight people, how do we use theidea of the circle of concern?
(08:26):
And what we've done is buildsystems where the circle of
concern only has certain peoplein it and other people are
commodities in terms of servingwho's in the circle.
Part of what we need to be ableto do is to expand our circle
of concern so that the needs ofeverybody in the circle are
being supported.
How do you build small clustersof people where everybody in
(08:48):
the cluster both understands howto meet the core needs of the
people in the group and tocreate the yes, yes, and to
co-create work and co-createrest and care in ways that serve
that group, knowing fully wellthat when you take one person
out of that group, what you dois change the group, in which
(09:11):
case it's the skill ofunderstanding what's needed.
As you can't create a templatefor that, you have to build the
ability to understand how to doit in any group and then change
it up.
You basically need to be a goodcoach, like of you know, think
in the sports team type ofanalogy.
And then you're duplicatingthat micro model across the
(09:32):
organization and building itthat way.
And so our industrial mindsetdoesn't work for actual humans,
and we do need to move away fromit and think how do I build
these skills interpersonally andthen in small groups, and then
from there, how do I makeanybody in a small group be able
to move to another small groupand have these same skills
(09:53):
implemented?
Jess (09:54):
When you said yes, yes, and what did you mean by that?
Faith Clarke (09:58):
Instead of not your your yes mean my no, what
we want is your yes and my yes,so it's a yes, yes.
And what we have in our systemsbecause of our relationship to
power is we either have powersays yes and you say no, or we
have conformity, which is Ishift my position to be with
(10:21):
whoever so that we can havesameness, so that we can get
what we want, even though whatI'm really doing is denying
myself, or power says, Allright, we can have it your way.
And what I'm saying is what weneed to do is build the ability
to create solutions that areyes, yes solutions.
In research, that that'sbasically find the tension in
the literature, which is wheretwo ideas don't agree, and build
(10:45):
a solution, build somethingthat answers that, that bridges.
And in our interactions in theworkplace, part of what we have
to do is understand why there'stension and then create a bridge
that can be built that holdsthese two ideas together.
That ability is the yes-yesability that we need to be
building.
Jess (11:03):
I think that's an amazing mindset to go into any type of
solution-based, especiallywithin the work environment.
Everyone comes into thesedebates or these topics that
you're trying to solve throughwith your very definitive, this
is what I need to get done.
So it's me versus the we.
And I think that's aninteresting way to go about it.
(11:25):
How can we come both come outof this with a yes?
Faith Clarke (11:27):
There's a redefining of we so that our we
includes us both.
And my the fundamental idea ofof inclusion is about the
meeting of everybody's coreneeds.
Nobody needs to be sacrificed.
There is the understanding ofwhat's needed for there to be
co-creation of things thatactually meet what everybody
(11:48):
needs.
Claude (11:49):
Isn't it so complicated?
After a bigger group, I mean,when you're like two or three,
it's kind of easy to haveeverybody's, I mean, easier to
have everybody meet their needs.
But when you're in a biggergroup, there's even more
difficulty for everybody tomeet.
(12:09):
So do you is there like theleader that is going to try?
Like, how do you define and whois going to define that bridge
that you were talking about?
Faith Clarke (12:20):
It's not defined, it's co-created.
I hear what you're saying aboutthe difficulty, but the
difficulty is a is a difficultyin skill, not a difficulty in
because it's complex.
Because it is complex, butevery time I um, you know,
people say to me, Faith, this isso hard.
And I was like, we have robotson Mars though.
(12:40):
So human beings have nodifficulty with complex
solutions.
The way we got robots on Marsis that we stayed with it until
we understood how to do it.
Part of what needs to happen inour workspaces is that our
ideas around efficiency limitour ability to stay with things
long enough.
So, yes, we do have too manymeetings, but many of our
(13:03):
meetings could be emails.
And instead of using time fordata handing over, we can be
using our time to be with eachother and figure some of this
out.
And yes, it may not be figuredout initially in five minutes,
but the more we engage infiguring out the human-to-human
differences and our relationshipto difference.
Jess (13:22):
Thinking about this in the corporate environment, the old
model of conformity, everybodyjust falls in line because
that's what's being told, hasshifted.
And now you see the companiesthat are more successful have a
high-functioning team thatrespect everyone's opinions and
bring everybody to the tableversus the hierarchical
(13:42):
approach.
Maybe it started first with acertain number of people and
then they just kept expanding.
So there is power in businessresults based off of that too.
Faith Clarke (13:52):
So business results have always been clear,
but there's there's also more atstake in terms of when when
relationship to power has toshift, it's hard.
And there's more than justmoney that makes it hard.
Yeah, engagement more thandoubles, innovation massively
(14:12):
increases.
The revolving door that so manypeople experience, so many
organizations experience dropswhen we are able to build shared
power systems where peopleexperience the belonging and
feel included and feel the valueof their contribution because
it's co-created.
All of those systems are somuch more stable.
(14:33):
And we do get stuck with how dowe build it because the old
models are in our head, even inour new businesses, where I need
to prove that I'm productive, Ineed to prove that all of these
pressures of proving certainthings and making that visible
makes it look like you'rewasting time when you're
spending a couple hours figuringout how to navigate different
(14:57):
on your team so that you're notin conflict situations that
become intractable and peopleleave.
And if you're doing that, itmight be, yeah, but you're not
working.
And is that what we're supposedto be doing?
Are we supposed to be working?
Are we doing woo-woo takingcare of people stuff?
Not recognizing other teams,such as our sports teams,
there's so much time spentunderstanding an athlete's body,
(15:18):
an athlete's emotions, anathlete's interactions with the
other player.
Other teams get this, and evenif they're not applying it in
terms of super holistic, theyget the fact that the individual
and understanding theindividual holistically is
what's needed to build aneffective team.
But in the workplace, we'vemade that be other rules to
(15:38):
execute on our organizationalobjectives.
Claude (15:42):
So, how can we change that now?
Faith Clarke (15:44):
I think we change it in all the pockets where we
have influence.
So, what I say to people isabout restorative team culture.
A culture is really thehabitual thoughts and behaviors
and meaning making of a group ofpeople.
And microcultures are mucheasier to implement than change
in massive macro cultures.
(16:04):
External culture is prettystable.
A culture that's created withfive people and eight people,
you can see the results of thatquite quickly.
When you have the proof case,that's so much easier to go and
invite other people into that.
And so I invite team leadersand like instead of just
thinking of it as informationdissemination, think about
creating a microculture wherecertain values are actually
(16:27):
practiced.
People are much more likely tofeel they have permission to
implement something if they areon the experiencing side of it.
Some of these elements ofbelonging are how are they
helping each other feel caredfor?
How are they helping each otherfeel protected?
How are they paying attentionto what's happening for the
actual individuals on that team?
That will translate into howthose leaders create
(16:50):
micropockets with their directreports.
Jess (16:52):
Do you feel like it can start at any level or any part
of the organization, or do youfeel like it needs to start with
the executive level?
Faith Clarke (17:00):
It can start anywhere.
And there are challengesregardless of where it starts.
I think at the executive level,there's the perception of risk
and loss of power and so on withthe stakeholders is hard to
deal with.
But it's so much more effectiveif you can do it at the
(17:21):
executive level.
Other levels of theorganization, what you end up
having the potential to have isgrassroots movement, things
springing up across theorganization because people you
can see change quickly andpeople can catch it.
Claude (17:35):
So, what are some of the tools to create that five to
eight team?
Faith Clarke (17:40):
Rather than tools, I think they're practices.
Um, so it's not often peoplesay to me, Hey Faith, can you
create a workshop to helppeople?
And I was like, it's not aworkshop, it's not training,
it's practice.
Often people already know thatthey should insert whatever it
is.
So, one, there are practices ofhow to co-create solutions.
(18:03):
It's organizational specific.
At the very bottom of it, it'sreally listening, it's really
knowing that humans have coreneeds and what are they?
I think the expert on who andwhat my core needs are is me.
So, really listening to me.
Fundamentally, humans haverelationship needs, they want to
feel deep connection, they wantto feel competent, they have
(18:24):
competency needs.
So I want to feel like myexpertise is valued and shared
in the space.
I have autonomy needs.
I don't want to be controlled,I want to be able to give into
the space in the ways that feelreally good for me.
And the ways that that showsup, it's listening.
And then I think there is askill of bridge building.
Just how do I connect what Ihear from two people, that's
(18:47):
leadership skill, into the thingthat is the yes, yes.
And that's first of all,believing that there is a
possible yes, yes.
Often people say to me, it'snot possible.
And I'm like, and then we can'tfind it.
If you believe it's notpossible, we definitely can't
find it.
So there is that commitment todoing it that's required, and
then there's building space topractice that.
(19:09):
So if we are trying to figureout how to get team
communications, is a fakefavorite one because it's always
a place where there's so muchdifference.
And instead of just demandingthat everybody be at the morning
meeting at eight o'clock andit's primarily primarily audio,
just have a conversation aboutwhat's the preference, why, how
(19:29):
does that work, and then noticeall the differences.
Feel the discomfort with thedifference and the practice of
actually recognizing that yourdiscomfort isn't gonna kill you,
and we can actually just bewith this in the moment, it's
not a sign of your poorleadership.
How do we take people who areso different and co-create a
communication practice that saysyes to the fact that I might be
(19:52):
more auditory than you are, andnot only that, but meetings of
this sort don't work for me, butthey work for you.
And how do we solve thatproblem?
I think once we take the actualproblems that a team has,
notice what the practices arethat are needed, create time to
practice.
So make sure that in everymeeting we're practicing the
(20:13):
skills that we need.
Over time, what we'll start tosee is it'll just become
automatic.
People will automatically sharepower, people will
automatically say, Oh, so you'resaying this and we're saying
that.
What connects these two?
People start to do their bridgebuilding practice.
People will be like, Oh, I feeluncomfortable with that thing.
I think I have a story aboutyour difference, but that's
(20:35):
about me.
It's not that you're wrong.
People will start to do thosethings and I will start to see
those automatic practices will,you know, show themselves up and
won't take as much time.
Jess (20:44):
Faith, in your um implementation, working with
teams on practicing thesethings, has there ever been a
case or an example wheresomebody is just not along the
journey?
Faith Clarke (20:57):
The luxury of being the consultant, as I can
call it out, I'm often workingboth with the leader and then
with the team.
If I see somebody beingparticularly unable to engage,
whether that's because of unableto see their own blind spot or
unable to engage with thepractices because values-wise
(21:19):
they disagree, I am goingone-to-one.
Um, and then I'm with theleader, trying to help the
leader build their ability torequire the practices, meaning
create a culture where thatpractice is just the norm, even
if that person doesn't uh feelable to engage.
The belief I try to sell isthat 80% of all behavioral
(21:41):
issues are systemic and systemand context.
Only 20% is really theindividual.
You put people in a differentenvironment and they behave
differently.
So there is an opportunity hereto build an environment that
will make it easier for thatperson to practice.
What are the things that weneed to do to make that happen?
So I work with the leaderaround that, work with a team
(22:03):
about their practices, and I goto the other person one-to-one
because I'm trying to understandwhere's the issue.
So I build trust.
Part of how I teach teams towork is to focus on trust
building.
It's trust building and trustbuilding, and then it's trust
building.
I am trust building with thatperson as well.
And usually I'm able to helphear what the issue is and help
(22:24):
the leader know it may nothappen that the person is able
to engage, but what's reallygoing on under here?
People don't really just wantto throw spokes into the wheels.
That's not how we are ashumans.
I love the 80-20 year old.
And 80% of the solution, like80% of the results, will really
come from this 20% anyway, ofstrategy, of tools.
(22:44):
So people think that oh, youneed a whole new no, you need if
you can change a few things inhow you're listening and how
you're engaging and how you'recreating work together.
If you can just shift from umdoing to co-creating, it'll show
up in 80% of the change interms of how people are engaging
with each other.
Claude (23:04):
We are all about work friendship, work besties, right?
Have you seen a correlation ofthis group of yes and yes when
you have this work friendshipbetween people?
Faith Clarke (23:17):
Yes, I did some informal research on belonging
just through socials, and Ibasically just said, Hey, I want
to talk about belonging.
Get on my calendar.
30 people just jumped on in aday.
One person talked about therelationships at work and how
they facilitated her feeling ofbelonging at work.
She built the relationships atwork, and as they left, she
(23:38):
started to feel like shebelonged less and less, and her
work actually became lessmeaningful to her.
Her ability to perform at workshifted.
It's interesting that when wefeel like we belong, which means
when we feel like our careisn't just our responsibility,
when we feel like other peopleare protecting our needs and
(23:58):
will go to bat for us whendamage happens without us having
to advocate for it.
That belonging creates theenergy to build bridges, to do
hard things, which is what'sneeded when we are going to
change our practices aroundanything.
Claude (24:14):
And how do you foster this sense of belonging?
Faith Clarke (24:18):
So, belonging isn't something that we can make
sure another person feels.
There's a ton of humility.
It's hard for us to fostersomething we can only create the
environment, right?
So, at work, number one is toknow that I can't make you feel
like you belong, but I'm gonnado my darnest to build an
environment where your needs arecentered.
(24:40):
Number two is to acknowledgethat we are in a system that has
met the needs of certain peopleand not others.
So it's to understand whoseneeds aren't being met.
There is a roadway here, andsome people aren't on it, and
there are barriers to somepeople, but if I am not the some
people, then I don't know whatthose barriers are.
And part of building belongingis to the ability to know what
(25:03):
the barriers are and not justmake it the responsibility of
the person who has them.
There's a whole awareness piecethat means understanding
people, and the people who arefacing the barriers have built
in lack of trust of people whodon't have those barriers.
So it's in the workplaceknowing that it's a low-trust
environment.
People don't believe that theother people who don't know
(25:25):
about these barriers really arereally committed.
And how do we then show thatwe're committed to overcome to
understanding and overcoming thebarriers?
That's a lot of individual workon the part of the leader who
may or may not be experiencingthose barriers.
But once we're willing to kindof say, hey, I don't know, and I
want to understand that, andyou won't be penalized for
(25:47):
sharing what your barriers are.
And I'm willing to do my ownresearch to find out outside of
this space and to come to youand say, I've understood this or
how can I?
But so far, so being willing tosay that fostering belonging is
a long game because you'regonna have to overcome the lack
of trust that's built in theenvironment, and you're gonna
have to make yourself vulnerableto the barriers that you are
(26:08):
engaging right now.
Facilitating has to be first,I'm doing this, I'm gonna do it
because it's the right thing todo.
So I say this it's a moralissue or ethical issue, and then
it's knowing the powerdifferentials across the team
and in the group so that thepeople with more power are
willing to expose and be morevulnerable because they
recognize that there's higherrisk for people who
(26:29):
traditionally have less power inthe system, so they can build
that understanding of what thebarriers are because then
overcoming the barriers withpeople is part of the care
that's going to create thebelonging.
Jess (26:40):
So it all starts with listening because you have to
listen to what your people aresaying, thinking, feeling, and
what they bring to work or themas themselves.
Faith Clarke (26:50):
It starts with listening for cute just for the
sake of curiosity, not listeningto solve, to fix, to
manipulate.
I want to understand who youare, and I recognize that your
good impacts my good.
And so I know that we'recreating a feedback system of
(27:11):
good that means I want to hearso that I can offer you care in
the ways that I can in thesystem that I have influence.
Jess (27:18):
What does it take to build a team where you feel safe
enough to be yourself and boldenough to lead with others?
Faith Clarke (27:25):
Just start with starting with us as leaders.
It's accepting the maybecalling to greater
vulnerability.
It's accepting that calling tovulnerability so that you can
model how do we engage with ourreal selves, shifting away from
I'm here as leader to help you,to together we create space
(27:46):
where we all are safe.
And I'm gonna let myself beheld by you.
And then I invite you to let mehold you.
Starting with that premise andfiguring out how that how to do
that, inviting help in.
Because when you have a teamwhere you're trying to do that
work, it's hard to be both theperson who is thinking through
strategy and the person who'sletting themselves be
vulnerable.
So having people come in tojust do the holding so that the
(28:10):
team can connect.
Jess (28:11):
Faith, you've provided us some great examples, giving our
teams that space they can feelseen, safe, supported.
Claude (28:18):
And you helped us remember the power of the people
behind, you know, beside us,the colleague who holds space,
the work bestie who reminds uswe belong.
Culture is not just a policy,it's a partnership.
Faith Clarke (28:31):
The policy doesn't create the culture.
It's the it's often women,invisible labor that's creating
whatever belonging we already dohave.
And we want to recognize it.
Jess (28:42):
So work bestie is out there.
If this episode gave you aopen, please share it to your
team, boss, or work bestie.
Claude (28:49):
Until next time, stay human, stay connected, and never
underestimate the power of onegood teammate.
Jess (28:56):
Remember, whether you're swapping snacks in the break
room, rescuing each other fromendless meetings, or just
sending that perfectly timedmeme.
Having a work bestie is likehaving your own personal hype
squad.
Claude (29:09):
So keep lifting each other up, laughing through the
chaos, and of course.
And let's just keep supportingeach other.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.