PERFORMANCE INSIGHTS FROM "THE CULTURE CODE" BY DANIEL COYLE

I am excited to review this book for my network. It is definitely one of the better books I have ever listened to. I learned a huge amount, and confirmed many observations I have experienced myself as an athlete, commando, leader and coach.

The author spent years researching the secrets of highly successful groups. He was interested in how people show they care, how excellent groups unlock true synergy, and what is most important in achieving consistent success.

There is a popular teambuilding challenge which involves building a tower with limited resources (often including a marshmallow!). This challenge was used in a social experiment to explore which teams would do best. I found it incredible but also intuitively believable, that kindergarten groups consistently beat everyone else, including business school students, CEOs and lawyers. The kids stood shoulder to shoulder, experimented on the fly with no specific plan or strategy, they progressed in short bursts, and they built the highest towers!

The key finding was that interaction is more important than individual skills.

In previous articles I have talked about how interference limits potential. Coyle notes that with adults; concerns about status, comparison with others, and negative rivalry interferes with progress. It handicaps performance. Kindergartners help each other, they work together without ego, in a smarter way! Their method works best for the tower challenge, and is instructive for any culture.

Daniel Coyle visited and researched eight of the most successful groups in the world over a four year period, and this is what he found. The top three criteria for success were these:

Build psychological safety: engender trust and belonging.
Share vulnerability: be transparent and show fallibility.
Establish purpose: clearly communicate, and enrol others in shared goals.

There are some fascinating social experiments described, including one where a “plant” aims to disrupt teams in different ways (behaving like a jerk, slacker, downer). Typically he did bring down performance but with one group he failed to do that because one of the group members diffused his impact by using certain cues. Subtle overarching behaviours made all the difference. The diffuser responded with warmth in order to maintain safety, he asked for input to be vulnerable and keep people curious about the purpose. He created the right conditions for the team to perform despite the attempted interference!

A team that feels safe and solidly connected is like a family. When teams create a fond family name, they definitely feel proud. Google teams for example, refer to themselves as “googlers” which illustrates the point.

Little moments of vulnerability and little moments of social connection are indicators of a team that has become family. Examples sited include sitting in circles, eye contact, physical touch, short energetic exchanges, mixing – everyone talks to everyone, few interruptions, lots of questions, intensive active listening, humour/laughter, courtesy – opening doors for others, addictive chemistry – excitement and deep comfort.

The MIT human dynamics lab researches human signalling using something called a sociometer! This can measure such elements as alpha behaviour, co-operating, mirroring, proximity, and face to face contact. The epiphany for me was the reference to something called belonging cues. These cues promote safe connections in groups and again include proximity, eye contact, energy mimicry, turn-taking, attention, body language, vocal pitch, consistency of emphasis, and whether everyone talks to everybody else in the group.

Belonging cues have three basic qualities; energy, individualisation, and future orientation. Our unconscious brain is deeply obsessed with these cues for a sense of safety and survival.

Do I feel energised? Can I really be myself? Do I have a rewarding future here?

Another fascinating insight reinforces the idea that most communication is about body language and intonation, very little is about what is actually verbalised. A social experiment showed that investors were much more likely to invest in teams that showed belief and confidence in their pitch (non verbal), than in teams that had great ideas (verbal/written content) but did not convey the critical body cues.

Coyle notes that team performance is driven by five measurable leading factors:

Everyone in the group talks and listens in roughly equal measure.
Members maintain high levels of eye contact and gesturing.
Members communicate directly with one another not just with the team leader.
Members continue side conversations within the team.
Members periodically go exploring and find information outside the team, and then bring it back to share with the team.

Culture is created based on what we see rather than what is said. Words are noise whereas behaviour is action which shows whether we are safe and connected.

It is of course fascinating that since this book came out in 2017, we have now had a global pandemic which has significantly reduced face-to-face interactions, and massively increased virtual collaboration. However, belonging cues are critical so what are we doing to ensure safety, vulnerability and purpose on a video call? Organisations that can master this will probably lead the pack in 2021.

The book references the example of Google beating Overture in the race to provide the best search engine in the early 2000s. Culture was the differentiator for Google where people felt psychologically safer, and more committed to help get things done for the team. In fact the commitment model based on shared values and strong emotional bonds has been shown to trump team models which go for stars or skills. A commitment culture based on trust has the resilience to survive when the going gets tough. A study of technology companies in Silicon valley bore this out.

The incredible Christmas truce of 1914 in the trenches of WW1 in Europe where Allied and German troops started singing together and approaching each other is an extreme example of how shared meaning can bring even adversaries together. Tens of thousands of men laid down their arms to embrace their enemies because it felt like the right thing to do.

Looking through the lens of belonging cues this seemingly bizarre event makes perfect sense. The soldiers shared multiple connections; the same daily rhythms, routines, hardships such as cold, wet and homesickness. At Christmas time which signals togetherness, there was a sudden mutual empathy and an emotional exchange of clarity. It was instinctive, and only prevented thereafter by deliberate intervention from above.

Research at a call centre in India revealed a very interesting insight into commitment and loyalty. Employees who participated in a “Lost at Sea” exercise as part of their induction which allowed people to feel valued and heard, were 250% more likely to stay on at the company! An hour of the right collaboration training can save massive turnover and millions of dollars if belonging cues are fired. A sweatshirt with personal names next to the company name is another simple individualised, future oriented, amygdala-activating belonging cue.

I am psychologically safe, able to express myself, and pleased to be part of this group.

In stark contrast, Coyle references the negative culture of nuclear-missile-code missiliers in the USA. Failures began to occur in 2007 and root-cause investigations exposed apathy and misconduct to the highest level in the organisation. When studied, Coyle observed that belonging cues were missing; there were no connections between missile silos, no shared future, no chance of promotion, and no job safety due to constant proficiency tests. If anything, the environment destroyed cohesion. Interestingly, nuclear submarines are different because the sense of connectedness and care is significant.

In the world of sport, Coyle provides insight into the National Basketball Association, San Antonio Spurs and their coach Greg Popovich who is analysed as the best coach in the NBA based on results vs player ratings. The team have won five championships despite a smaller budget than other teams in the league.

The author notes that the Spurs perform 1,000 little unselfish behaviours in every game. Players pass the ball instead of shooting (which actually costs them money!), players are selected for character rather than pure talent, but more than that, Popovich truly connects with each team member. “There is a touch, a smile, eye contact, and most importantly, “Pop” tells the players the truth (no BS) while also showing that he loves the players too.” He is “old school”, preferring real rather than remote communication where possible, and eating together as a team “family” often. He taught the team that basketball was just one aspect of their togetherness and that global issues tied them together as well.

Tough and truthful feedback worked for Popovich and the Spurs because it was done correctly. Research has shown that impactful feedback goes something like this:

“I’m giving you these comments because I have very high expectations and I know that you can reach them.”

This works because the belonging cues are all there.

You are part of this group.
This group is special; we have high standards around here.
I believe you can reach these standards.

This is a safe place, where you will feel strong connection, receive honest feedback, and gain genuine perspective. Good leaders are like film directors using the zoom feature to focus, as well as to frame perspective; or conductors of an orchestra helping achieve harmony with diversity.

The late Tony Hsieh who founded Zappos launched an interesting rebuild campaign in Las Vegas called the “Downtown Project”. Having proven himself as an exceptional entrepreneur, Hsieh decided to rebuild a broken town. Coyle discovered that the following traits had enabled Hsieh to achieve fascinating enrolment and progress despite the many challenges of a project such as this.

Radical openness.
Create the conditions for the right connections to happen.
Meetings while walking rather than sitting.

Hsieh was passionate about “collisions” which are serendipitous personal encounters enabling significant collaboration and creativity.

Hsieh was smart but simple when it comes to people. He was an architect of collisions. A bit like Morpheus in the Matrix, he saw the bigger picture and set up a system which allowed others to figure out what to do for themselves.

Coyle references some other research by Thomas Allen, now famous for the Allen curve which represents an observation made in the 1970s that the further away someone is, the less likely a person will initiate communication.

The distance of desks from each other turns out to be a significant leading indicator of productivity and success! Eight metres is the key distance. Proximity is a connective drug as we intuitively know. Visual contact was shown to be a major contributor to effectiveness, while vertical separation (different level in same building) was shown to be detrimental to effectiveness.

“The ability to see each other every day” Allen said, “is more important than you think.”

Also mentioned is the Dunbar number of 150 people which is the researched maximum within which anyone can have a meaningful relationship or social network.

Interestingly, subsequent research since the advent of digital communications has shown that we also email and message people who are physically close, more than those who are further away. I guess “out of sight, out of mind” does still have some relevance!

Again, a key question for all of us relates to how this insight from the past will evolve in a working world where offices are virtual and discussion is digital.

Coyle goes on to highlight some of the leading indicators of excellence from the organisations he researched. Constructive belonging cues he observed included affirmations, positive body language, vulnerability, kindness, and humility. Coaches who thanked athletes for the chance to coach them created an environment of respect and reverence.

Singling out selfless acts while removing bad apples is a recipe for trust and togetherness. The All Blacks say, “No dickheads”. No one person should be more important than another, and everyone deserves to be heard. Legendary examples of selfless leadership include All Blacks Captains “sweeping the sheds”, and the owner of McDonalds picking up trash at the restaurants!

In his book It’s Your Ship, Captain Abrashoff explained the importance of one-on-ones to build understanding and rapport. Furthermore, the crews have the best ideas for improvement if only they are given a voice.

United Airlines Flight 232 was an airline disaster but it was considered a miracle that the plane was landed at all. The miracle was better understood from the black box recording which revealed the collaboration under pressure of a group of pilots who shared vulnerability and exceptional problem solving against all odds. An experienced pilot asked, “Anyone have any ideas?” which diffused any potential hierarchical barriers. His signal was “I am a helper, and I need help”.

The chapter on closing the vulnerability loop or feedback loop is intriguing. Staring into another person’s eyes for a time, or disclosing something personal, is a step outside the comfort zone and into the vulnerability zone, which is a bridge to the trust zone where teams and tribes incubate. Experiments have shown that vulnerability boosts willingness to collaborate and to co-operate with everyone. Vulnerability precedes trust. The red balloon challenge in 2009 was won by an MIT student team which effectively said “please help!” Signalling for help and sharing fairly creates co-operation. “You have a role, I need you.”

“Exchanges of vulnerability, which we naturally tend to avoid, enable trusting collaboration over time.”

Draper Kauffman who was inspired in WWII France, effectively founded the US Navy Seals with his underwater bomb disposal team selection. The so-called “hell week” which has largely survived unchanged to this day, includes elements of team building which have survived the test of time. The best example is “Log PT” which has two essential conditions; intense vulnerability along with deep interconnectedness. This is the essence of teamwork. A smaller/weaker group of individuals working in sync will outdo a group of athletes who are not working as one unit. This is now woven into Seal training. Taking a risk for the sake of the team is viewed positively over trying to win at others’ expense. True synergy allows a group to be stronger than the sum of its constituent parts.

A group of robbers called the “Pink Panthers” who are thought to be still active, have been successful at what they do because they demonstrate exceptional teamwork. They have a genuine attachment and affection for one another. Their shared experience of growing up in war-torn Yugoslavia meant that they survived together and depended on each other. If anyone failed, the group failed. They have pulled off extraordinary heists which only a truly committed team, forged from exposure to danger, and deeply interconnected, could do.

The Seal Team Six leader who oversaw the execution of Osama Bin Laden, had some interesting insights from his career in the Seals. A near-death experience in Afghanistan taught him a key lesson: Dictatorship is unreliable. If Seal Teams are trying to create leaders among leaders, they need to campaign against authority bias. The author explains that this leader would break down any “do as I say” climates. He would say, “Tell me what is wrong with this idea?” or, “Anyone have any ideas?” He would encourage Seals to challenge everything.

The After Action Review (AAR) is one of the most useful tools available if applied correctly; it has to be safe to talk, “Rank is switched off and humility switched on”; “I screwed up” is the best way a leader can create the right conditions for brutal honesty in an AAR. The session should cover everything chronologically. Ask, ask, ask, and ask again, “What happened, what did we learn?” The aim of an AAR is to build a shared mental model for future missions; not right, or wrong, or blame. Everyone can see the bigger picture and feels part of a true team which is striving to get better together.

“After Action Reviews require a relentless willingness to see the truth and take ownership.”

Once a decision was taken to use stealth helicopters in the bin Laden operation, the Seals rehearsed scenario simulations again, and again, and again. The AARs after each rehearsed simulation ultimately led to the success of this widely-known mission. The downed-helicopter scenarios and drills meant that troops did not miss a beat when the helicopters were affected on the real operation. Relentless training and AARs laid the foundation for that success.

“Being vulnerable together is the only way to become invulnerable.”

As a commando myself, some of our classic mantras ring true here: “No plan survives contact with the enemy.” “Expect the unexpected.” “Train hard, fight easy.” Control the controllables, such as training simulations and preparation. Then the chance of front-line success increases exponentially.

Coyle then references Bell Labs which is credited with numerous super creations such as the Laser, and the Transistor. He comments on research into what helped ensure such breakthroughs there in the 20th century. One interesting commonality for successful scientists and engineers was having lunch with a certain Harry Nyquist. This quirky scientist possessed a warmth and a knack for making people feel cared for. He had a relentless curiosity and was full of ideas and full of questions. His polite, reserved, and skilled listening apparently inspired many inventions in the dining hall.

“If I could get a sense for how your culture works by asking just one person, who would that person be?”

Roshi Givechi who worked at IDEO unlocks creativity through her particularly powerful approach to “nudging” ideas along. She helps leaders and teams with challenges and issues they have been wrestling with. She calls it “surfacing”. Helping people to connect is critical. Coyle describes her approach as discovery not decisiveness, empathetic but also persistent. She is patient but nudges the team towards solutions with a spirit of provocation. She listens with her eyes and uses subtle but poignant questions to prompt opening up. Indeed she apparently helped Coyle come up with his sub title for this excellent book!

Dr Robert Banks a communications scientist conducted research which found that questions comprise 6% of verbal interactions but generate 60% of ensuing discussions. It is worth investing the time to guide people towards their own breakthroughs via nudging, and organic questioning. Coyle notes that Givechi listens with her eyes and explores reasons for any tension. Tone and timing can have meaning. A “nudger” designs questions to ask “the one thing that excites the talker”, it is a subtle focus on the person talking rather than dragging them somewhere you want to take them. “What makes people tick, what do they need?” That’s what she gives.

Coyle goes on to talk about the “pause”. It is so significant for empathic listeners to build trusting bonds. Concordances occur when you respond in an authentic way to what is being said. It doesn’t necessarily involve speech. The right expression is fine. Active, intent listening increases empathy which leads to true concordance or harmony between speaker and listener. Keep it simple, it is two way emotional signalling.

So leader vulnerability is key. Coyle references Danny Meyer who owns Shake Shack. He is open about his nerves before presentations such as his TED talk. He signals that it is safe and preferable to tell the truth and be authentic.

Laszlo Bock who headed up people analytics at Google recommends that leaders ask these key questions of their teams:

What is one thing that I currently do that you’d like me to continue?
What is one thing that I don’t do frequently enough that you’d like me to do more often?
What is one thing that you’d like me to do to make you more effective?

Coyle also makes the point that we all intuitively know but sometimes avoid, which is that any negative news should be delivered in person, face to face. That deals with tension in upfront way and limits negativity after the communication.

There are two critical points when a new group is formed:

The first vulnerability.
The first disagreement.

The way leaders and teams respond to these milestones, can decide the success of the journey ahead. Coyle suggests listening like a trampoline, absorb what is said and then return a valuable contribution with as much if not more energy to engage the others involved! Interact in ways that make other people feel safe. Take a helping, cooperating stance. Gently ask questions to challenge assumptions, and occasional suggestions to open up alternative paths.

The first response to a question is usually not the correct answer so we need to work to surface the truth. Do not interrupt or interfere. “Say more about that” is a recommended prompt.

In summarising the section on vulnerability, Coyle reminds of the following:

After Action Reviews should cover what was intended, what actually happened, and what caused the actual. Then, would we do the same or different next time? Potentially run these without leadership, and note what emerges.

The Brain Trust concept which is used at Pixar involves a group of experts who are appointed to advise a team based on their expert observations and experience. The sessions can be challenging to listen to, but their objectivity always enables a positive breakthrough when teams are stuck.

Red Teaming (or war gaming) involves a team not wedded to plan, and representatives of all stakeholder groups, who challenge the plan in order to find holes and blind spots for breakthrough and improvement. It is popular in the military and now used in the corporate world to good effect.

Language and mentoring are important too, as is autonomy: Coyle cites examples of the San Antonio Spurs, Navy Seals, and All Blacks, preparing alone without their coach in order to build independence and confidence as a team.

Establishing purpose is neatly introduced with the story of the Johnson and Johnson credo. The credo is effectively a value statement or culture code which James Burke decided to challenge with his leadership team when he became president of J&J in the 70s. Burke’s commitment to the values expressed in the credo served as the foundation for everything he did throughout his remarkable career.

He inspired the people of Johnson & Johnson, and indeed the business world, especially with the way J&J responded to the 1983 Chicago Tylenol cyanide poisoning crisis. J&J went from provider of medicine to provider of poison, and Burke’s executive team met with the FBI who suggested there was no need for recall as there was no evidence the tampered medicine was anywhere outside Chicago. But Burke and J&J decided to recall all Tylenol anyway as it was in line with their credo and was the right thing to do. It resulted in significant public approval and trust over time, and represents the very essence of corporate integrity. They truly walked their talk, and lived their credo, which then paid dividends.

Coyle makes the observation that in high performing, high-purpose organisations, “purpose and values are as subtle as a punch in the nose”. Office spaces are a reminder of everything they stand for – the organisations keep telling themselves their own story to reinforce and proudly emphasise the legacy.

Coyle at this point also alludes to the natural phenomenon of starling murmurations. Murmurations are huge groups of starlings that twist, turn, swoop and swirl across the sky in beautiful shape-shifting clouds. Just before dusk, small groups of starlings from the same area come together above a communal roosting site.

From a cultural point of view, the inspiration for aspirant teams is that these birds respond as one. Thousands of birds can remain like a single body because each bird pays attention to a small set of signals in their immediate surrounding. Each starling has focused attention on a key handful of markers, simple beacons which help focus the shared mission and direction. High purpose environments are clear about, “Where we are and where we want to go”.

Coyle relates a basic psychology experiment which any of us can do at any time:

Think about a goal you want to achieve and imagine it has come true.
Think about the obstacles between here and that goal as vividly as possible.

This is called mental contrasting and the method works because what matters is telling and then shaping the story between where we are now and where we want to go.

There is a well-known but fascinating experiment referenced by Coyle in this section. It was the Harvard Test of Inflected Acquisition by Rosenthal and Jacobson in the 1960s. The researchers picked a school, and at the beginning of the school year, in 1964, they presented students with a test to measure academic “blooming”. However, the test had no predictive validity.

After the test, the teachers were given the names of the students who had scored in the top twenty percent. However, these lists of students were completely random and there was actually no difference between those on the lists and those who were not. At the end of the school year, the students were tested again to see if there were differences in the students’ scores.

In the end, Rosenthal and Jacobson found that the teacher’s expectations influenced their behaviour towards the student(s) which in turn influenced the student’s performance. The scores of those whom the teachers were told had more potential showed a greater increase in their test scores by the end of the year than those who were not on those lists. The children started acting in ways that confirmed the teacher’s false perceptions.

Their study demonstrates the self-fulfilling prophecy, the process by which a perceiver’s expectations about a person eventually lead that person to confirm those expectations!

Coyle comments that by replacing one story with another, we can influence the outcome of our individual or collective story. The test feedback acted as a locator beacon that reoriented the teachers towards these particular children and thus changed behaviour and performance.

The four key changes in teacher behaviour towards these alleged high-performance children were warmth, additional input, response opportunity, and deliberate feedback.

The link between the present and the future lit up for teachers based on the new narrative they received and believed!

Another referenced example was getting the stories of school alumni to inspire the school call centre team to energise them and to encourage donations for scholarships based on stories and visits by authentic alumni. The story was brought to life.

Taming soccer hooligans might sound like mission impossible but in Portugal 2004, Clifford Stott, a specialist on crowd violence, managed to do exactly that. Riots seemed inevitable at those European Championships, but by training liaison officers to influence social cues and play by the “shared rules”, there were almost no arrests or incidents! It is an example of a high-purpose environment, signalling that everyone was there to get along.

Coyle then references an interesting study of a number of surgical teams who learned a new technique during a three-day training period then went back to their hospitals to apply the learning and compare performance. Smaller teams ended up doing better despite a clear lack of expertise and infrastructure.

Lessons from observing the high-success teams included the following signals: Framing, roles, rehearsal, explicit encouragement to speak up, and active reflection.

The difference compared to poorer performing teams were the beacons of meaning – ultra clear signals, consistent and shared purpose, and working as one team.

Coyle draws an interesting distinction between high proficiency and high creativity cultures which require different signals.

In the New York restaurant business, only 20% survive after a year. Union Square Cafe owned by Danny Meyer has been described as feeling like “home”. There is a familial thoughtfulness, there is energy, there is connectivity. Like an ant colony or bee hive.

But Meyer had to create a culture for his staff. He taught them to take care of each other, to make people feel at home. He created a language that bore this out and he started a conversation about values. He realised you have to articulate what is important and be clear about priorities; colleagues, guests, community, suppliers, investors.

“Read the guest, have athletic hospitality, and be aware of our emotional wake!”

He talked about collecting and connecting the dots; “we take care of people” so we need to refine the language that supports our priorities. This language says ‘home, family, and warmth’. Also, Meyer stresses the importance of the right team which means that selection, treatment and management of staff is deliberate.

Coyle at this point explores an amazing natural culture which is the “slime mould”. These are amoebae which work together to clear forest floors in autumn. They are magical and orchestral in their coordination and efficiency. Here is a video which explains more…

Slime Moulds

We are introduced to heuristics which is decision making through trial and error, learning and improving until a solution is found. It might not be perfect but it is practical and purposeful.

For creative leadership we learn from Pixar. Making mistakes is ok; projects start painfully but evolve and transform from there. The team needs to be right – the team is succeeding when you can see good body language. There are daily viewings of the the previous day’s footage. Brain Trust interrogation provides painful feedback to teams but with a kaizen approach to continuous improvement it is taken onboard in the right spirit.

Maximum autonomy is given to teams. “Now its up to you”. Some of the points that jump out are as follows “hire people smarter than you”, “fail early – fail often”, “good people over good ideas”.

So proficiency and creativity leadership is subtly different. When Disney purchased Pixar the changes were to help enhance creativity. Most notably was the focus on new ways of interacting as teams.

Coyle closes this superb book with some ideas for action. Successful cultures are often born in times of crisis; This applies to Pixar, the Navy Seals, Meyer’s restaurants, the All Blacks. Times of crisis helped to crystallise identity and purpose. Champions and top teams are ultimately grateful for this unexpected crucible. However, continuous improvement is continuous. It is a never ending process that needs collaborative navigation.

High purpose environments teach the following gold nuggets for any aspirant high performing teams:

Name and rank priorities. Have a clear target, repeat this over and over again. Build awareness of values, awareness of what we are about (DNA), and where we are headed (direction). Leaders cultivate productive dissatisfaction (chronic unease). Values, core values, and mission should be stated everywhere. Create conversations about these. Make no assumptions about what people know, and over communicate. Have you ever been at a campaign retrospect where one of the conclusions was that we communicated too much?
Figure out where the team needs to aim for proficiency and where for creativity. Give clear directions for proficiency; clear models of excellence, check lists and rules of thumb. For creative groups provide support and a protective presence but allow the team to have creative autonomy, ensure it is safe to fail.
Embrace and use catch phrases. These are simple and action-oriented, and they help with clarity. For example the All Blacks say “leave the jersey in a better place”. This short phrase encapsulates the All Blacks legacy.
Create simple and appropriate measures of performance. Have the right leading indicators in order to achieve the best results. For example, measure the length of sales calls rather than just the number. Measure the closure rate of lessons learned, rather than just the number captured.
Use artefacts in the office. Reinforce that this is what matters. Impress subliminal reinforcement when anyone visits your place of productivity. What people see is what is important to us. The Navy Seals HQ has memorabilia which stirs recollection of significant events that involved defence of freedom or patriotism.
Spotlight a single task which represents what the organisation aspires to. For example, the All Blacks talk about sweeping the sheds; never be too big to do the small things that need to be done. In fitness, it may be “one more rep” or “hard work pays off”. Find something that sums up the best example of a “never-quit” mindset. It says “that is who we are”. Running or skating back to make a covering tackle may only pay off once in ten games, but is a small effortful behaviour which show-cases excellence and effort.

The author of this great book, Daniel Coyle, applied and benefited from this research. He adapted his parenting and mentoring in helping a young team of writers.

Whereas he used to do a lot of speaking, he now does more listening. In group settings, he gets elbow to elbow / shoulder to shoulder and asks questions. He asks why? He probes to help others generate solutions. He fist bumps to connect.

He was vulnerable and showed his unfinished book manuscript to the kids. He got the kids to read stories aloud and then encouraged feedback in a safe setting. He used the, “What worked well, and even better if…” type feedback. He used more fist bumps and belonging cues.

He also flooded the zone with catch phrases to encourage the young writers, such as, “The power of the problem.” And, “Use your camera!” He promoted an acronym, VOW which stood for Voice, Obstacles, and Want. Simple, memorable, valuable.

He acted as a guide not teacher.

The result? Extraordinary improvement and excellence.

For leaders and coaches, parents and teams, this book is a must read. Thoroughly recommended.