Higher Performance Insights

Higher Performance Insights | ONE GOOD APPLE

July 15, 2025

How one leader can transform funky team dynamics (without saying a word)

Last week, I shared research about how one negative leader can destroy team performance by 30-40%. This month, a campus president I work with experienced the flip side firsthand.

During a contentious budget meeting, her executive team was fracturing. One VP was openly dismissive. Another had checked out completely. The CFO was getting defensive about every question.

Then something remarkable happened.

Her newest VP—quiet, unassuming, no formal authority over the others—leaned forward when the dismissive leader made a cutting remark. He smiled (not sarcastically), made eye contact, and said,

"That's a really important concern. Help me understand what you're seeing that we might be missing."

The room shifted. Within minutes, the defensive CFO was listening. The checked-out VP re-engaged. Even the dismissive leader found himself contributing constructively.

One person changed everything. And research shows exactly why.

The Outlier Group That Defied Everything

In Will Felps' "bad apple" experiment that I shared last week, there was one group that thrived despite having a planted saboteur trying to destroy their performance.

Nick, the saboteur, was baffled: "This group felt really different to me," he reported. "It was mostly because of one guy."

That person was Jonathan—a thin, curly-haired young man with a quiet voice and an easy smile. While Nick systematically tried to derail the group with negativity, Jonathan's team remained attentive, energetic, and produced high-quality results.

Here's what made this extraordinary: Jonathan didn't seem to be doing anything at all.

"A lot of his really simple stuff is almost invisible at first," Felps observed. When Nick would start being aggressive, Jonathan would lean forward, use open body language, laugh and smile—never in a contemptuous way, but in a way that "takes the danger out of the room."

Then came the pivot: Jonathan would ask a simple question that drew others out: "Hey, what do you think of this?" Sometimes he'd even ask Nick directly: "How would you do that?"

The result? Even Nick, almost against his will, found himself being helpful.

The Invisible Leadership That Changes Everything

MIT's Human Dynamics Lab discovered why Jonathan's approach was so powerful. Using devices called "sociometers," they tracked the micro-interactions of hundreds of teams and found something revolutionary:

You can predict team performance by focusing on how people interact, rather than what they say.

Jonathan was unconsciously mastering what researchers call "belonging cues"—micro-signals that answer the ancient questions always glowing in our brains:

Are we safe here?
What's our future with these people?
Are there dangers lurking?

Jonathan's belonging cues had three qualities:

Energy: He invested fully in each exchange
Individualization: He treated each person as unique and valued
Future orientation: He signaled the relationship would continue

These cues sent one powerful message: "You are safe here."

The Neuroscience Behind the Magic

When someone receives belonging cues, a remarkable phenomenon occurs in the brain. The amygdala—our primeval danger-detection system—literally switches roles.

Instead of scanning for threats, it transforms into what NYU neuroscientist Jay Van Bavel calls "an energetic guide dog" focused on building social connections.

Brain scans reveal the moment: "The whole thing flips," Van Bavel says. "It's a big top-down change, a total reconfiguration of the entire motivational and decision-making system."

Translation for leaders: Simple safety behaviors unlock the cognitive capacity your team needs for breakthrough thinking.

When Belonging Beats Billions: The Google Story

In the early 2000s, the smartest money in Silicon Valley was betting on Overture to dominate the internet advertising market. They had the brilliant founder, the resources, and a $1 billion IPO.

Google was the underdog.

The turning point came on May 24, 2002, when Google founder Larry Page pinned a note in the company kitchen. Three words: "These ads suck."

Jeff Dean, a quiet engineer from Minnesota, saw the note while making a cappuccino. He had no reason to care—he worked in search, not advertising. However, something about the culture compelled him to dive in anyway.

What happened next was extraordinary: Dean worked through the weekend, sent a fix at 5:05 AM Monday, and single-handedly unlocked the problem that made Google's AdWords engine dominant.

The breakthrough: Dean's fix boosted accuracy by double digits. Google's profits went from $6 million to $99 million the following year. By 2014, AdWords was generating $160 million per day.

But here's the strangest part: Dean barely remembered it happening.

"It didn't feel special or different," he said. "It was normal. That kind of thing happened all the time."

Why Google Won and Overture Lost

Google didn't win because it was smarter. It won because it was safer.

While Overture was "hamstrung by infighting and bureaucracy" with "innumerable meetings and discussions," Google was what researchers call "a hothouse of belonging cues."

Google's belonging signals:

Larry Page's technique of igniting whole-group debates around tough problems
No-holds-barred hockey games where no one held back fighting founders for the puck
Wide-open Friday forums where anyone could challenge leadership
Small building with high proximity and face-to-face interaction

The pattern mirrors exactly what MIT found drives team performance:

Everyone talks and listens in roughly equal measure
High levels of eye contact and energetic gestures
Direct communication between all members, not just with the leader
Back-channel conversations and side discussions
Members who explore outside and bring information back

The Hidden Cost of Hoping Culture Will Fix Itself

Every day you wait for someone else to create belonging cues costs you:

Faculty who disengage because they sense leadership division
Students who suffer when initiatives fail due to leadership dysfunction
Community trust that erodes when leadership appears fractured

The brutal reality: Just as one bad apple can destroy performance in 30 seconds, one person creating belonging cues can transform the entire dynamic just as quickly.

The question isn't whether your team needs a Jonathan. The question is: Will you become one?

From Toxic to Transformative: The Belonging Framework

❌ The Typical Approach (Actually Destructive): Hope the negative dynamics burn themselves out

Cabinet scenario: Your resistant executive team member makes dismissive comments during strategic planning. Other leaders start disengaging. You address it privately, but the group dynamic doesn't change.

Result: Good initiatives die. High-performing leaders start looking elsewhere. Strategic momentum stalls.

✅ The Breakthrough Approach (Game-Changing): Create belonging cues that transform resistance

Same scenario, different response: When the resistant leader makes a dismissive comment, you lean forward, make eye contact, and say, "You're raising something important—what am I not seeing here?" Then pivot to the group: "How do the rest of you see this?"

Result: Resistance becomes strategic information. The team stays engaged. Opposition transforms into collaborative problem-solving.

The Simple Signals That Change Everything

Research shows belonging cues work through tiny, consistent signals. Here are the ones that matter most:

Physical proximity and positioning:

Sit in circles when possible
Lean forward during difficult conversations
Make frequent eye contact

Communication patterns:

Keep contributions short and energetic
Ask questions that draw others out
Listen intently and respond to what you hear

Energy and attention signals:

Give people your full presence
Thank individuals by name for contributions
Use humor (not sarcasm) to defuse tension

The key insight: These aren't "soft skills"—they're performance drivers that literally rewire team dynamics.

Transform Any Team Dynamic Starting Today

The Belonging Cue Assessment:

Step 1: Record your next team meeting (audio only) Step 2: Count how many times you create vs. destroy belonging cues Step 3: Notice the team's energy level during each type of interaction

Three Daily Practices:

Lean in when others lean back from conflict
Respond to resistance with curiosity: "What am I missing here?"
Create micro-connections before tackling difficult topics

The Jonathan Protocol for Your Next Team Meeting:

When someone becomes defensive, physically lean toward them
Respond with genuine curiosity instead of defensiveness
Pivot to include the whole group: "What do others think?"
Remember: Your body language and tone matter more than your words
Ask the resistant person directly: "How would you approach this?"

The Choice That Defines Breakthrough Leadership

You can wait for culture to improve, or you can become the person who creates it.

You can hope toxic dynamics will resolve themselves, or you can master the belonging cues that prevent them.

You can manage resistance, or you can mine the wisdom hidden inside it.

You cannot do both.

The most effective leaders I work with understand that being "the good apple" isn't about being nice—it's about being strategic. They've discovered that belonging cues aren't touchy-feely—they're the foundation of cognitive performance.

Because here's what the research proves: Belonging is not "emotional weather"—it's the foundation on which strong culture is built. And one person really can save everything.

But only if they understand that transformation happens through steady signals of safety, not grand gestures of authority.

The Hidden Factor Behind Breakthrough Teams

Here's what I've learned from studying hundreds of leadership teams: The difference between leaders who create belonging and those who spread toxicity isn't just individual awareness—it's about Team Intelligence (TQ).

When teams develop high TQ, they naturally create the belonging cues that prevent toxic dynamics and amplify positive energy. They learn to respond to resistance like Jonathan did—with curiosity that transforms opposition into contribution.

The TQ Advantage:

45% faster recovery from team conflicts
38% higher team member engagement and retention
42% more breakthrough solutions achieved collaboratively

The breakthrough teams I work with understand that you don't need everyone to be a Jonathan. When teams develop TQ, belonging cues become their default mode of interaction.

Ready to Become the Good Apple Your Team Needs?

Stop waiting for someone else to create the culture you want. Start building the Team Intelligence that makes belonging cues your team's natural language.

The first step is understanding your team's current TQ. In just 5 minutes per team member, you can discover:

Where toxic dynamics are most likely to emerge
Which cognitive perspectives naturally create belonging cues
How to transform your most challenging team members into contributors

Discover Your Team Intelligence → https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/team-intelligence-assessment

Because when you can't create safety among leaders, you can't create results for students. But when you develop TQ, one person—maybe you—can truly transform everything.

Just like Jonathan. Just like Jeff Dean. Just like you can, starting today.

References

Felps, W., Mitchell, T. R., & Byington, E. (2006). How, when, and why bad apples spoil the barrel: Negative group members and dysfunctional groups. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 175-222.

Pentland, A. (2012). The new science of building great teams. Harvard Business Review, 90(4), 60-70.

Van Bavel, J. J., Packer, D. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (2008). The neural substrates of in-group bias: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1131-1139.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.

DOWNLOAD LEADER GUIDE

Do you want more leadership topics and guides?

Join THE GROUP

An online community for higher education leaders, where we offer a library of lessons and guides that can be utilized during your leadership sessions and other resources.

JOIN THE GROUP

Help Spread the Word

If you found value in this post, we’d love your help spreading the word! Please consider sharing this on your favorite social media platform and tag Higher Performance Group and Dr. Joe Hill. Your support helps us reach and inspire more awesome people like you!

Like What You've Read?

Get practical, research-based ideas to Accelerate Higher Team Performance delivered straight to your inbox every Tuesday.

< Older Post

More Blog Articles

Higher Performance Insights | ONE BAD APPLE

By HPG Info • July 8, 2025

How a single leader can sink your team (and how one good one can save it) Last month, a superintendent I work with shared what happened during her presentation of the strategic plan to the board. Twenty years of experience, proven results, polished presentation, and promising data. Halfway through, one executive team member sat back, arms crossed, occasionally checking his phone. A board member started shuffling papers. By the end, three others had adopted the same disengaged body language. What should have been an energizing strategic discussion devolved into polite nods and no real commitment. That same week, a university president I consult with described identical dynamics in her executive team meeting. Different building, same pattern: one person's negativity was infecting the entire senior leadership. This painful parallel revealed a leadership truth that research confirms: one person can significantly impact your team's performance by as much as 30-40%. But one person can also save it completely. The Brutal Science: Your Star Leaders Might Be Your Biggest Problem You've hired brilliant people. Advanced degrees, proven results, impressive credentials. But here's what organizational behavior expert Will Phelps discovered when he planted one "bad apple" into 44 different work groups: Performance dropped 30-40% consistently. It didn't matter if the person was: The Skeptic (aggressively questioning every initiative) The Withdrawer (withholding effort on strategic planning) The Pessimist (negative about every proposal) The result was always the same: One leader's negative behavior infected the entire team. "I'd gone in expecting that someone would get upset with the slacker or downer," Phelps said. "But nobody did. They were like, 'Okay, if that's how it is, then we'll be slackers and downers too.'" Your leadership team isn't choosing to underperform. They're unconsciously mirroring the energy around them—what neuroscientists call "emotional contagion." Where One Leader Changes Everything However, one group in Phelps' study remained energetic and produced excellent results despite the presence of the bad apple. The difference wasn't intelligence, experience, or positional authority. It was one person who understood what MIT's Human Dynamics Lab calls "belonging cues"—micro-signals that create a sense of psychological safety. This leader didn't take charge or give motivational speeches. Instead, he did something much simpler: When resistance emerged during budget discussions, he leaned forward, made eye contact, and responded with genuine curiosity. Not fake positivity, but authentic interest that "took the danger out of the room." Then came the pivot: "That's an interesting concern—what would you suggest we do differently?" Result? Even the resistant member, almost against his will, found himself contributing constructively. The Neuroscience Behind Leadership Infection MIT's Human Dynamics Lab studied hundreds of executive teams using "sociometers"—devices that measure micro-interactions between leaders. Their finding changes everything: You can predict team performance by focusing on how leaders interact rather than what they say. The five factors that drive executive team performance: Everyone talks and listens in roughly equal measure High levels of eye contact and energetic gestures Direct communication between all members, not just with the CEO Back-channel conversations and side discussions Members who explore outside the team and bring information back Notice what's missing from this list? Degrees. Experience. Strategic expertise. Belonging cues matter more than credentials. The neuroscience is clear: simple safety signals reduce cognitive load in decision-making, which in turn increases strategic thinking, drives innovation, and creates breakthrough results (Edmondson, 1999). Your leadership team dynamics are literally working for or against your mission. The Executive Infection Gap: When Smart Leaders Create Stupid Results Every negative interaction in your cabinet costs you: Faculty who disengage because they sense leadership division Students who suffer when initiatives fail due to leadership dysfunction Community members who lose confidence witnessing leadership conflicts The research is concerning: 30 seconds—that's how long it takes for negative energy to spread in executive meetings If one senior leader checks out, others follow unconsciously When leadership teams can't create safety, organizational initiatives die Allowing negativity to spread among your senior team affects every student you serve. From Infection to Connection: The Framework That Works ❌ The Typical Approach (Actually Destructive): Hope the resistant leader comes around Cabinet meeting scenario: Your executive team member constantly questions every initiative, rolls their eyes during presentations, and makes dismissive comments. You address it privately, but nothing changes. Other team members start to disengage. Result: Strategic planning stalls. Good initiatives die. High-performing leaders start looking elsewhere. ✅ The Breakthrough Approach (Game-Changing): Respond to resistance with curiosity and inclusion Same scenario, different response: When the executive team member questions an initiative, you lean forward and say, "You're raising important concerns—help us think through what success would look like from your perspective." Then pivot: "What do the rest of you think about these points?" Result : The resistant leader feels heard instead of dismissed. The team stays engaged. Opposition turns into constructive problem-solving. The ROI of Executive Team Belonging The numbers prove leadership safety wins: School districts with high-functioning leadership teams see 23% better student outcomes Campuses with psychologically safe executive teams show 45% higher innovation rates Simple safety interventions can improve leadership team performance by 30-40% in weeks Your leadership team dynamics aren't just "nice to have"—they're driving every outcome in your organization. Transform Your Leadership Team Starting Today The Executive Safety Test: Step 1: Record your next cabinet/executive team meeting Step 2 : Count belonging cues vs. safety threats among leaders Step 3 : If threats outnumber cues, your leadership dynamics are creating the problem Three Daily Practices: Lean forward when team members raise concerns Respond to resistance with "What am I missing?" and actually listen Create micro-moments of safety in every executive decision The Leadership Team Safety Discussion Protocol: For your next executive team meeting: Have each member share when they felt most and least safe to speak the truth in recent meetings Compare responses—what patterns emerge among your senior team? Practice responding to resistance with curiosity instead of defensiveness Identify any leaders who might be unconsciously spreading negativity Remember: resistance usually signals important information, not disloyalty The Choice Every Leader Must Make You can manage resistance or mine wisdom from it. You can hope that negativity will dissipate or actively foster a sense of belonging among leaders. You can let one senior leader infect your team or become the person who transforms it. You cannot do both. The most brilliant superintendents and presidents consistently choose connection over control among their senior teams. They've learned that executive safety isn't soft—it's strategic. They've discovered that belonging cues among leaders aren't touchy-feely—they're performance drivers. Because leadership team safety is simple . Simple safety scales throughout the organization. Scalable safety creates sustainable performance for students. And sustainable student performance is what brilliant leadership actually looks like. The Hidden Factor Behind High-Performing Teams Here's what I've learned from working with hundreds of leadership teams: The difference between teams that foster belonging and those that spread disconnection isn't just about individual awareness—it's about Team Intelligence (TQ) . When MIT studied executive teams, they discovered you could predict performance by ignoring what leaders said and focusing entirely on how they interacted. Teams with high TQ naturally create the belonging cues that prevent negative infection and amplify positive energy. The TQ Advantage: 40% faster problem resolution in complex situations 27% higher team member satisfaction and retention 35% more strategic objectives achieved on time The breakthrough teams I work with understand that one resistant leader doesn't have to destroy team performance. When teams develop TQ, they learn to respond to resistance with curiosity, mine wisdom from opposition, and transform potential "bad apples" into contributors. Ready to Transform Your Team Dynamics?

Higher Performance Insights | WHEN SMART LEADERS SOUND STUPID

July 2, 2025

The 7-Part Framework to Turn Your Bumbling Into Brilliance Here's what happened last Tuesday at a board meeting that was hard to watch. A brilliant superintendent with a post-graduate degree and twenty years of experience spent 45 minutes presenting their "comprehensive student achievement initiative leveraging pedagogical frameworks aligned with district strategic priorities." The board nodded politely. A parent in the back raised her hand: "Can you explain this so my 13-year-old would understand?" The superintendent couldn't. That challenging moment was a graduate course in communication: The most brilliant leaders use language a 13-year-old understands. Smart words are simple, scalable, and sustainable. Fancy words don't edify—they confuse. And to be unclear is to be unkind. Full disclosure: I LOVE words. Early in my career as a young executive, I felt I needed to use a fancy lexicon to prove my competence to my colleagues and community. I was that guy dropping "paradigmatic frameworks" and "synergistic methodologies" in every meeting. Then a colleague lovingly pulled me aside after a presentation and said, "Joe, I think you meant the etymology of this word, not the entomology... That's the study of bugs." No lie, that happened. And I've been on a professional learning track ever since to reform my language to be less fluff and more function. The Brutal Truth: Your Intelligence Might Make You Sound Unintelligent You're brilliant. Your degrees prove it. Your experience confirms it. Your results validate it. But here's what's happening: You sound smart, but communicate unintelligibly Your scholarly vocabulary creates barriers, not bridges Your complex explanations confuse the very people you're trying to help The research is clear: When people encounter complicated messages, they ignore them, seek simplified versions, or research meanings Your brain burns 20% of your body's energy despite being only 2% of your body weight Complex messages literally exhaust people—and exhausted brains don't make decisions The crushing reality: Every fancy word you use to sound smart makes you less effective as a leader. Where Brilliance Meets Clarity The most brilliant leaders pass this test: Can a 13-year-old understand what you just said? If not, you're not communicating intelligently—you're just showing off your vocabulary. Why this matters: It represents your community's actual literacy level It cuts through jargon instantly It forces you to focus on what actually matters It reveals whether you truly understand your own ideas "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Einstein Most leaders fail this test spectacularly. Smart Words Are Simple: The Science Behind Clarity Meta-analyses of narrative transportation research prove that when people become deeply engaged with simple, clear messaging, they experience significant changes in: Attitudes Beliefs Behaviors The neuroscience of understanding: Simple language reduces cognitive load Reduced cognitive load increases comprehension Increased comprehension drives action Action creates results Your fancy words are literally working against your mission. The Team Intelligence Gap: When Smart People Communicate Stupidly Every confused message costs you: Students who don't apply because they don't understand the value Donors who don't give because they can't grasp the impact Faculty who don't engage because they're lost in the jargon The deeper problem: Your brilliant individual leaders are producing average team results because they've confused sounding smart with being effective. The brutal reality: 15 seconds—that's how long people scan content before bouncing If your message needs a translation, you've already lost When leadership teams can't communicate simply, initiatives die in complexity To be unclear is to be unkind to the very people you're trying to serve. The 7-Part Framework To Force Clarity What students want (in everyday language) The problem they face (no jargon, just truth) Why you understand (personal, not professional language) Your track record (results, not rhetoric) Three simple steps (if it's confusing, fix it) What to do next (one clear action) What's at stake (consequences they can picture) Test every sentence: Would your community understand this? From Scholarly Confusion to Simple Brilliance: Real Examples K-12 Transformation: Standards-Based Grading ❌ The "Smart" Approach (Actually Stupid): "Comprehensive Standards-Based Assessment Implementation Initiative" "As part of our commitment to educational excellence and aligned with district strategic priorities, we are implementing a comprehensive standards-based grading framework. This pedagogical shift represents a fundamental reimagining of our assessment paradigm, moving from traditional percentage-based evaluation metrics to proficiency-based learning progressions..." ✅ The Brilliant Approach (Human-Friendly): "Finally Know If Your Child Is Actually Learning" What parents want: You want to know if your child is ready for next year—not just their grade average. The problem: Your child brings home a "B" but you have no idea if they understand math or just turned in homework on time. When they struggle with algebra next year, you're blindsided. What we do: We teach each skill until your child masters it We report exactly which skills they've mastered and which they're still learning We give extra help on skills they haven't mastered yet The result: Schools using this approach see 23% better student performance and 40% fewer students needing help later. Higher Ed Transformation: AI-Powered Mental Health Support ❌ The "Smart" Approach (Actually Stupid): "Innovative Digital Wellness Ecosystem Leveraging Artificial Intelligence" "In response to evolving student needs and technological advancement opportunities, we are launching a comprehensive digital wellness ecosystem that leverages artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms to provide personalized mental health support interventions..." ✅ The Brilliant Approach (Human-Friendly): "Get Mental Health Help Before You're in Crisis" What students want: You want to feel better without waiting three weeks for a counseling appointment. The problem: You're struggling with anxiety or depression, but you're not "sick enough" for crisis help. You suffer alone until things get really bad. What we do: Text our AI counselor anytime, day or night (completely private) Get immediate help tailored to your specific situation Connect with human counselors when you're ready The result: Universities using this system see a 60% decrease in students in crisis and a 45% increase in students completing their degrees. The Pattern Every Brilliant Leader Must See Notice the transformation: Confusing messages focus on the institution and use big words to sound impressive Clear messages focus on the person's problem using words they actually use The brilliant leaders understand: Smart words are simple words Simple words are scalable across all audiences Scalable words create a sustainable impact Sustainable impact is the only measure of true intelligence If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough to lead it. The ROI of Speaking Clearly The numbers prove clarity wins: Organizations with simple, clear messaging see email marketing returns of $36-$40 for every dollar spent Systems that test their messaging for clarity generate ROI improvements of up to 760% Teams that communicate simply create breakthrough performance that scales Your fancy vocabulary isn't impressing anyone—it's costing you everything. Transform Your Team's Communication Intelligence The Clarity Test Step 1: Take your most important initiative Step 2: Explain it in simple, human language Step 3: If you can't, you don't understand it well enough to lead it The gap between complex and simple is the gap between failure and success. Three Questions Every Brilliant Leader Must Answer Would any parent understand what problem this solves? Can anyone follow the steps to solve it? Would people actually care about the outcome? Team Intelligence Discussion Protocol For your next leadership team meeting: The Clarity Audit: Have each team member explain your most important campus initiative in simple, everyday language Compare responses—how different are they? Which explanations would actually help someone? The Jargon Purge: List every fancy word you use to describe your work Replace each with a word a 13-year-old knows Test the new version with actual people The Kindness Check: Review your current website, emails, and presentations Ask: "Are we being kind to the people we're trying to help?" Remember: To be unclear is to be unkind The Choice Every Brilliant Leader Must Make You can sound smart or be effective. You can impress colleagues or help students. You can use fancy words or create real change. You cannot do both. "I would not give a fig for the simplicity that exists on this side of complexity; but I would give my life for the simplicity that exists on the far side of complexity." —Oliver Wendell Holmes The most brilliant leaders consistently choose clarity over complexity. They've done the hard work of mastering complexity so they can deliver simplicity. They've wrestled with the big ideas so they can explain them in small words. They've earned the right to speak like a human being instead of a textbook. Because smart words are simple words. Simple words scale. Scalable words create sustainable impact. And sustainable impact is what brilliant leadership actually looks like. Ready to Lead with True Intelligence? Stop hiding your brilliance behind big words. Start communicating with the clarity that creates change.