How Your Lazy and Lousy Leadership Language May Be Tanking Your Influence with Others

August 8, 2023

I graduated from college in 1991 and landed in central Minnesota to start my professional career as a k-12 teacher and coach. Since I knew few people besides those I worked with, friendships emerged through my coworkers. Many of them had also made big moves for their teaching positions, so we naturally became like a second family to each other. It was easy to ascribe to the phrase: 


“We are like family here.”


While our intentions were good in thinking about my colleagues as family, I grew to realize that phrase was problematic.


Years later, I worked for a boss who regularly espoused that exact phrase, “We're like family.”

man covering his mouth in surprise

That was all lovely until the organization went through a few bumps and the cultural implication at the time became more combative with a domineering fist at the helm barking out orders to help out “the family.”



I didn't fully appreciate the connection until I read Sharone Bar-David's book Trust Your Canary: Every Leader's Guide to Taming Workplace Incivility. She writes in one of her articles:


“At the heart of this belief lies the notion that the closeness and caring that characterize family life allow members of the ‘workplace family’ to cross colleagues’ personal boundaries without being hurtful or inappropriate.”


Her perspective motivated me to eliminate this phrase from my vocabulary. While I still have close relationships with the people I serve, I've stopped short in recent years from thinking about (or espousing) them as actual family.


The Problem with Incongruency


Many of our everyday language traps result from habits that don’t actually align with our intentions. This results in an incongruency. When you and I are incongruent, we project confusion and doubt to others.


The examples below are the most common phrases I regularly encounter when language doesn't match what's intended. I'm still working to eliminate some of these phrases I've said myself.


As many of us discover, the leadership development journey is as much about what to stop as it is about where to start.


Transform Your Future | Lead With Clarity | Grow Your Performance


You aren't alone if you've struggled to find clarity in leading your team forward.


Teams function at less than 60% of their performance potential and community trust is at an all-time low. 


Simply put, leading people and systems has never been more complex.


The Lead Team Institute {LTI} will equip you to break through your growth barriers.


Whether it's leading results-based teams, communicating with success, improving your engagement, increasing influence, refreshing your vision, building trusting communities, or many other challenges we face as campus leaders, you'll know exactly what steps to take to generate momentum for your community.


If you want to build an irresistible campus brand, you will want to join the waiting list to enroll in the next Lead Team Institute {LTI} Campus Cohort. 


Accelerate Your Team’s:


  • Communication
  • Connection
  • Alignment
  • Capacity
  • Execution
  • Culture


Reserve Your Spot for Fall 2023. Join the Lead Team Institute Waitlist Today!



“Frankly…” or “To be honest…”


A common example of incongruent language is prefacing what's about to be said with “Frankly…” or the closely related “To be honest…” Most of the time, when this is said, the intention is to emphasize candor.


Unfortunately, the listener sometimes hears the opposite. A sudden emphasis of candor may leave the other party wondering what changed. When I notice someone say, “To be honest…” during a conversation, I find myself wondering if they've been honest up until that point.


Skip the doubt and drop this qualifying language. If you notice yourself saying this a lot, you might ask yourself:


“Am I actually providing as much candor as I claim?"


Hollow Apologizing


I most regularly see unnecessary apologies at the start of a formal meeting or presentation when something unexpected occurs. It might sound something like this:


“I want to apologize in advance if I miss a few things in this presentation. Jon was supposed to present this section, but he's unexpectedly out today…I just got the material this morning. I'm not really the expert on this, so I hope you'll forgive me if there's missing information or if this leaves you confused.”


Hey, if it's just you and a few colleagues you know well, no big deal, right?


Yet, I've seen it happen often when someone opens with language similar to the above in front of an executive team or board of directors. I begin to doubt the presenter's credibility when I hear this kind of opening.


By all means, apologize if you've done something wrong or errored, but don't dig yourself into a hole before you've even started. Very few people care what preparation didn't quite go according to plan.


Instead, skip the unnecessary apology, give yourself a pep talk, and show up to serve, even if you did get the slides just an hour earlier.


Side Note: A close cousin of the above is spending inordinate amounts of time troubleshooting technology problems in front of your audience. Always arrive early to set up your tech and have a backup plan. If the technology fails and you can't resolve it in 15 seconds while on the game field, move on and adapt. 


“What we came up with…”


We all received an assignment or project that we weren't super excited about but got charged with delivering. I regularly recall presentations in school where a fellow student started a project presentation with, “OK, here's what we came up with…” To me, this phrasing implies throwing something together at the last minute.


That may work fine in your college marketing course, but it's an odd way to start a professional interaction. And yet, I've heard many proposals over the years begin with, “Here's what we came up with…” 


Oddly, most of the time, the person saying it has easily met or exceeded expectations. Still, either out of habit or their lack of personal interest in the topic, their language could be better.


If, indeed, it's the case that you're not as excited about the project as your stakeholder, I'm reminded of this quote from Susan David


“Emotions are data, not directions.”


Just because the work isn't compelling doesn't mean you must announce it. It's about who you are serving, not you.


What's better? Keep it simple and start with, “Here's my proposal…” or “After a detailed analysis, we're making several recommendations…”


Does anybody have any questions?


Like many leaders, I've attended more meetings and presentations in my career than I could count. A majority have been helpful in some way. And many of them ended with this:


“Does anybody have any questions?”


Well-intended? Sure. After all, don't you want to solicit questions?


Yes, but how you do it is critical.


I've often seen the “Does anybody have any questions?” combined with a somewhat nervous glancing around the room, odd facial expressions, and occasionally walking away without saying more. Sometimes, body language suggests that this “question” was merely intended as a segue to the next item on the agenda.


If questions are present, you want to convey that you're ready and willing to respond. I often say, “Who has the first question?” Not only does that wording invite interaction, but it also portrays confidence. Be sure also to provide time for people to think before they respond (the teacher in me recommends 8 seconds). If you only hear silence, follow up with “A question I'm commonly asked is…” that reinforces a key message.


Either way, assume your audience have questions and demonstrate that you are ready and willing to engage.


Self-Congratulatory Language


I regularly listen to podcasts while working out or traveling to expand my perspectives and thinking on timely topics. The hosts on my playlist are all very knowledgeable and highly experienced. 


Many of them also start the episodes explaining how awesome and helpful the forthcoming conversation will be with so-and-so. I typically 1.75X through that noise to get to the good stuff, but it makes me cringe a bit each time I hear someone telling me how to feel about what I am about to experience instead of allowing me to come to a positive conclusion on my own. 


We all need to market our work, but how you do it is critical.


Rather than, “This is some of our best work ever,” or “I know that you're just going to love this,” or using anything containing the phrases “value bomb” or “blown away,” consider a different approach.


Donald Miller, the bestselling author of 
Building a Story Brand, said this recently on one of his latest podcasts that hit a homerun: 


“Insecure People talk about themselves. People who are confident talk about others. Demonstrate through your language that you understand the problem the other party faces, and then explain how you can help address it. If you talk about yourself, do so in the context of how it helps your stakeholder get to where they need to go.”


When it's essential to highlight your credibility, make the claim stronger by citing a respected third party. When my work becomes relevant in a dialogue with someone who doesn't know me, I'll sometimes offer this:


“Google Analytics ranks our HPG site as the #1 search result for “Leadership Team Performance” in the United States.”


The implication? A respected entity other than me says that my work is helpful for campus leaders who want to improve.


Virtually every leader has third-party examples they can point to. Spend a few minutes surfacing your go-to examples to frame your work well.


Insensitive Phrasing


We've all used language that may have seemed fine but landed with another person very differently. Leaders should be especially vigilant about their references to faith, gender, culture, or other dehumanizing phrases that don't align with their intended message.


When expressing disagreement with an idea or another, I sometimes hear, “Well, I don't care if…” or the more direct, “I hate it when…” Yes, while people may use that language in everyday dialogue, expressing “not caring” or “hate” for someone or something might land very differently with others within your sphere of influence.


What's better? Use gracious language that aligns with the intended message. Stating, “I have a different opinion…” or “Yes, I'm aware that finance thinks differently about this…” conveys a clear thought without the emotional baggage.


Avoid language referencing gender, culture, or physical attributes when that's not what you're discussing. Accounting for “man-hours” or referring to all people as “guys” isn't inclusive. 


More problematic phrases like, “We just need some warm bodies” or “It's time to put butts in seats” imply that humans are things, not people. Additionally, language like “He doesn't have the cojones…” may have sounded cool in high school, but mixing or comparing human beings to body parts is never professional.


Instead, say what you mean: “There are four open positions that we need to fill,” or “We still have 40 tickets to sell for the event,” or “I have concerns about his initiative.”


Beware also of analogies that evoke a clear image but not one you intend. An example I’ve heard is, “We all need to open our kimonos…” said in the context of sharing information or data. In addition to being culturally insensitive, it creates an image that isn't appropriate in most workplaces.


Application – Next Steps


Opinions vary on wording, but the more significant point is to examine the leadership language you're using that might not align with what you intend. Perhaps an example above has surfaced where this could be true for you.


Then, pick one phrase to change or replace with different wording. Aim to use it at least once a day. Right now, I'm working on replacing the phrase “you guys” with “you both” when referring to our adult son and daughter together.


Drop me a note if you were poked a little by this post and how we can stay on the journey of “better” together. 



Related Reading

Trust Your Canary: Every Leader's Guide to Taming Workplace Incivility* by Sharone Bar-David.


P.S. Campus teams, on average, function at less than 60% of their performance potential because they don't invest in team capacity and team potential.


The HPG Team has created a training and coaching practice to help teams win against the gravitational pull of average performance, and we can help YOU!


  1. Check out our suite of leader and team resources 👇🏼
    https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/resources
  2. Set up a call to explore the next steps 👇🏼
    https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/schedule


More Blog Articles

By HPG Info August 19, 2025
When Good Leaders Deliver Bad News Badly You know what's remarkable? We train campus leaders to deliver inspiring vision, build collaborative teams, and drive student achievement. But nobody teaches them how to share information that stinks. Last spring, you walked into countless leadership meetings knowing you'd have to deliver news that would make everyone in the room uncomfortable. AI policy shifts. Mental health program restructuring. Cybersecurity mandates. The kind of information that makes people question whether you've lost your way. Here's the thing: bad news isn't going anywhere. In fact, it's multiplying. And most leaders? They're terrible at delivering it. Teacher morale sits at negative 13 on a scale from negative 100 to 100 (Moreland University, 2024), while 51% of college students rate their well-being as poor (Bell-Rose, 2024). Meanwhile, 82% of K-12 schools experienced cyber threat impacts in the last 18 months (CIS MS-ISAC, 2025), and higher education faces hidden retention challenges as more students enter the "murky middle" (EAB, 2025). Federal funding freezes have left districts scrambling, while 63% of educators worry about new forms of cyberattacks from AI integration (CoSN, 2024). But here's what nobody talks about: the leaders who master the skill of sharing information that stinks don't just survive these challenges—they use them to build trust. Every. Single. Time. The Reality Check for Leaders in 2025 The thing about being a leader in 2025... You signed up to change lives. To open minds. To build the future, one student at a time. Instead, you're drowning in someone else's emergency. The federal government says: integrate AI in 120 days (White House, 2025). The data says: one in three college students is contemplating suicide (NEA, 2024). The security reports say: schools get hacked more than once a day—nearly 10,000 incidents in 18 months (CIS MS-ISAC, 2025). And you? You're supposed to figure it out. Here's what they don't tell you: 80% of principals have zero guidance on AI implementation. In high-poverty schools, it's worse (FlowHunt, 2025). Mental health professionals are missing in 80% of districts right when kids need them most (PSBA, 2025). The math doesn't work. The timeline doesn't work. The resources don't exist. Stanford found something remarkable: 73% of educational leaders are making decisions that contradict everything they believed about their job (Stanford Accelerator for Learning, 2025). They became educators to inspire. Instead, they're crisis managers. But here's the thing everyone misses: The problem isn't the crisis. The problem is how we talk about the crisis. Most leaders default to the apology tour: "We're sorry, but circumstances force us to..." Then they explain. Then they hope. Then they brace for impact. That's not leadership. That's surrendering to the narrative. Real leaders? They change the story. They don't apologize for necessary decisions. They don't explain circumstances. They don't hope for understanding. They create it. Because the story you tell about change determines whether people resist it or embrace it. And in 2025, resistance isn't just inconvenient. It's devastating. The Skill Nobody Teaches: Turning Stink Into Strategy Here's what research from MIT's Leadership Center confirms: humans are psychologically wired to resist loss but embrace improvement. Period. When AASA partnered with JED on their District Mental Health Initiative, districts using "enhancement language" saw 43% greater community support for difficult changes compared to those using "necessity language" (AASA, 2025). The skill isn't avoiding the difficult conversation. It's owning the narrative. Organizations that frame necessary changes as "upgrades" rather than "policy changes" reduce stakeholder resistance by 67% (Microsoft Education, 2025). The 2025 CoSN State of EdTech District Leadership report found that 74% of districts face major impact from federal funding cuts, but some emerge stronger because they've mastered this skill (CoSN, 2025). Think about it: Apple doesn't apologize when they remove features. They "reimagine" the experience. Netflix doesn't "cut content"—they "curate premium selections." Your turn. How to Master Bad News Delivery Skill #1: Lead with Value, Never Circumstances ❌ The amateur move: "Due to cybersecurity concerns, we're implementing new AI restrictions." ✅ The professional approach: "We're upgrading our AI integration strategy to include industry-leading security protocols, ensuring our students learn cutting-edge technology while maintaining the highest data protection standards." ❌ The amateur move: "Budget pressures require us to consolidate mental health services." ✅ The professional approach: "We're creating a comprehensive wellness hub that integrates mental health, academic support, and peer counseling in one accessible location, ensuring students receive coordinated care rather than navigating multiple separate systems." Notice the difference? Same outcome, different story. The neuroscience is clear: "upgrade" language activates reward pathways, while "budget cut" language triggers threat detection that increases resistance by 340% (International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2024). Skill #2: Acknowledge the Stink Without Wallowing in It Bad news that stinks needs acknowledgment. But wallowing in it makes everyone feel worse. The Formula: Quick acknowledgment: "This feels difficult because..." Necessity without blame: "Industry standards require..." Immediate pivot to benefit: "This enables us to..." The skill is spending 20% of your time on the stink and 80% on the upgrade. Skill #3: Reverse Engineer from Mission Start with this question: "How do we communicate this change from the perspective of serving our students and community better?" K-12 Application: Begin with your core value (student success, safety, equity) Work backward to show how the difficult decision serves that value Create sound bites your team can repeat with confidence Higher Ed Application: Start with institutional mission (student success, research excellence, accessibility) Demonstrate how the change advances that mission Develop talking points that faculty can share authentically Skill #4: Control the Narrative Early Research from the American Association of School Personnel Administrators shows that educational organizations using proactive communication strategies see 52% less turnover during difficult transitions (AASPA, 2025). The skill: Don't let others define your story. Create a brief strategic document explaining: The specific challenges forcing the decision (cybersecurity threats, federal mandates, mental health crises) How you evaluated alternatives Why this approach best serves your mission Concrete benefits stakeholders will experience Share this with key influencers before going public. Give them the upgraded story first. Why This Skill Matters More Than You Think This isn't just about messaging a single difficult decision. It's about demand and survival. When campus leadership teams master the skill of sharing information that stinks, several things happen: Trust Actually Increases: Teams who understand the strategic thinking behind AI implementation, cybersecurity measures, and mental health restructuring maintain psychological safety even during crisis periods. Stakeholders Become Advocates: Faculty, students, and community members who comprehend the upgrade become defenders rather than critics. Change Becomes Strategic: Organizations practiced in upgrade communication adapt faster to federal mandates, cyber threats, and enrollment challenges. Collective Intelligence Emerges: When everyone understands how to frame challenges as opportunities, the entire system becomes more innovative. From Defense to Transformation: The Identity Shift Consider two campus leaders facing identical cybersecurity mandates: ❌ Leader A (No Skill): Sends email: "Due to new federal requirements, we must restrict AI access and implement additional security measures. We know this is inconvenient but compliance is mandatory." Result: Faculty rebellion, student frustration, implementation resistance ✅ Leader B (Skilled): Leads with: "We're upgrading our technology infrastructure to include enterprise-level AI security, positioning our campus as a model for responsible innovation. Students will learn industry-standard protocols while accessing cutting-edge tools, giving them competitive advantages in their careers." Result: Faculty curiosity, student excitement, collaborative implementation Same mandate. Different skill level. The identity shift is profound: Instead of being someone who delivers bad news, you become someone who upgrades systems. Instead of defending federal requirements, you're advancing institutional excellence. The Collective Intelligence Multiplier Here's where this skill becomes transformational: when your entire leadership team masters upgrade communication, you create what organizational psychologists call "messaging alignment." Research shows teams with shared narrative frameworks demonstrate 78% greater resilience during crisis periods and 45% better performance on complex problem-solving tasks (TimelyCare, 2024). Your monthly leadership meetings stop being crisis management sessions and become strategic advancement workshops. Faculty meetings transform into collaborative problem-solving. Even challenging board meetings become opportunities to demonstrate thoughtful leadership. The outcome: institutional capacity that transcends individual expertise. The Skill That Optimizes Everything The most successful systems in 2025 won't be those with the best circumstances—they'll be those with the strongest skills around sharing information that stinks. Period. Whether you're a superintendent navigating federal AI mandates and cybersecurity requirements or a university president managing enrollment cliff challenges and mental health crises, this skill becomes more than communication technique—it becomes leadership philosophy. Because here's the truth: cyber incidents happen more than once per school day (CISA, 2024). Mental health challenges affect the majority of college students (Inside Higher Ed, 2024). AI integration demands immediate attention while most educators lack training (U.S. Department of Education, 2025). Bad news is inevitable. Being bad at sharing it? That's optional. The skill of transforming stink into upgrade honors both the difficulty of change and the possibility of improvement. It's the difference between leaders who get overwhelmed by circumstances and leaders who create opportunity from challenge. Choose wisely. Ready to Upgrade Your Skill? Stop hoping individual communication abilities will eventually align. Start building the collective intelligence that transforms your most challenging information into trust-building opportunities. The first step is understanding your team's current communication skill level. In just 5 minutes per team member, you can discover: Where your team defaults to defensive rather than strategic messaging Which communication perspectives naturally enhance group intelligence How to transform your most challenging announcements into breakthrough community engagement  Discover Your Team Intelligence → Take the 5-Minute Educational Leadership Team Assessment
By HPG Info August 12, 2025
Trade Up or Stay Mediocre Last Tuesday at 7:23 AM, Principal David Martinez stared at his annual evaluation. "Meets expectations." Check. "Satisfactory performance." Check. "Adequate progress." Check. After 12 years of perfect compliance, David had achieved the impossible: systematic mediocrity. His test scores lived at the 50th percentile. His teacher turnover matched district averages. His parent surveys reflected the predictable bell curve. Every "best practice" from graduate school, implemented flawlessly. The result? Perfect ordinary. Here's what Harvard discovered by studying 1,847 educational leaders: 89% of those implementing traditional "best practices" achieve exactly what those practices promise—status quo results (Chen et al., 2024). Meanwhile, MIT found something stunning: Teams abandoning "good enough" practices outperformed their peers by 340% (Rodriguez & Thompson, 2024). The truth nobody talks about? Best practices weren't designed for excellence. They were designed to prevent failure. In today's world, preventing failure is the express lane to irrelevance. While you're optimizing for compliance, your students are paying the price. They're sitting in classrooms that could be transformational, led by educators who could be extraordinary, trapped in systems that reward being unremarkable. The Five Practices Everyone Uses (And Why They Guarantee Ordinary) These practices worked. Once. When educational challenges moved slowly and "adequate progress" was actually adequate. Those days ended. Today demands breakthrough thinking, not best-practice thinking. Innovation, not implementation. Collective intelligence, not individual expertise. Yet most leaders still optimize for ordinary. Here's how—and what to do instead. PRACTICE 1: DATA-DRIVEN DECISION MAKING Why everyone loves it: Having data used to be revolutionary. Numbers instead of hunches. Accountability where none existed. Why it now guarantees ordinary: Everyone has data now. Your dashboard looks like everyone else's dashboard. Data tells you what happened yesterday. It can't tell you what questions to ask about tomorrow. Those 47-slide PowerPoint presentations? They're creativity killers disguised as leadership tools. What ordinary leaders still do: Start every meeting with "Let me share what the data shows..." Trade up to: Question-Driven Discovery Leaders who ask discovery questions instead of presenting data activate their teams' creative networks while reducing defensiveness by 65%. Instead of "What does the data show?" ask "What questions would unlock our team's best thinking?" Superintendent Rodriguez made this shift. Her defensive reporting sessions became collaborative breakthrough experiences. Teacher retention improved 23% in six months—not from new retention strategies, but from discovering challenges they'd never considered. PRACTICE 2: DISTRIBUTED LEADERSHIP Why everyone loves it: Sharing the load made sense when principals were expected to know everything. More involvement, better buy-in. Why it now creates scattered mediocrity: You're distributing tasks, not developing leaders. Multiple people working individually isn't collective intelligence. It's parallel processing that creates conflicting priorities. Without clear identity, distributed leadership becomes distributed accountability—which means no accountability. What ordinary leaders still do: "Let's form subcommittees and report back next month." Trade up to: Identity-Based Leadership Teams leading from collective identity had 91% higher confidence and 34% better implementation than task distributors. Instead of "Who can take this project?" ask "How does this opportunity develop someone into their best leadership self?" You're not the Chief Task Distributor. You're the Chief Purpose Keeper. Principal Jackson discovered this when her school faced budget cuts. Instead of distributing cost-cutting tasks, she asked: "How do we become the school that thrives regardless of resources?" Her team didn't just find savings—they redesigned their entire approach to learning, creating a model other districts now study. PRACTICE 3: STRATEGIC PLANNING Why everyone loves it: Comprehensive plans with SMART goals and detailed timelines create the illusion of control. Why it's now theater: You're planning for a world that no longer exists. Strategic plans assume emotional robots will implement them. Real humans have feelings that derail every logical plan. You spend more time updating plans than creating results. What ordinary leaders still do: Schedule quarterly retreats to update last year's plan that nobody looks at. Trade up to: Emotional Intelligence in Action Teams practicing collective emotional regulation made 68% fewer reactive decisions. Before major decisions, pause: "What emotions are influencing our thinking right now?" Feel the pressure. Acknowledge it as information. Choose responses based on reality, not anxiety. PRACTICE 4: PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES Why everyone loves it: Structured collaboration time was revolutionary when teachers worked in isolation. Why it's now organized complaining: Most PLCs become deficit-focused sessions where problems multiply, but solutions don't. Starting with what's broken activates defensive thinking, not creative problem-solving. What ordinary leaders still do: "Let's analyze why our struggling students aren't improving." Trade up to: Strength-Based Collaboration Teams focusing on strengths outperformed deficit-focused PLCs by 47% on innovation. Asset-based protocol: Share success stories (10 minutes) Identify success conditions (10 minutes) Brainstorm more of those conditions (15 minutes) Plan one strength-based experiment (10 minutes) PRACTICE 5: EVIDENCE-BASED INSTRUCTION Why everyone loves it: Research backing beats tradition and opinion. Why it's now the scenic route to ordinary: Evidence tells you what worked elsewhere, not what creates breakthrough results in your context. You're implementing someone else's solution to someone else's problem. Multiple evidence-based practices create initiative fatigue, not breakthrough energy. What ordinary leaders still do: Implement this year's strategy with the same enthusiasm they had for last year's abandoned strategy. Trade up to: Catalyst Decision Framework Successful transformations hinged on one key decision creating cascading effects across multiple areas. Instead of five new strategies, identify the one decision that improves everything. One principal chose protected daily collaboration time. It improved instruction, relationships, problem-solving, and morale simultaneously. YOUR 30-DAY TRADE-UP Week 1: Replace three data questions with discovery questions. Week 2: Write who you are as a team (not what you do). Lead from that identity. Week 3: Ask about emotions before every major decision. Week 4: Replace one problem meeting with strength exploration. The Choice That Multiplies Performance Breakthrough-focused leaders achieve 23% faster student engagement improvement, 34% better retention, and 28% higher satisfaction than those comfortable with the status quo. But here's what the research doesn't capture: the moment when a struggling student suddenly believes they can succeed. The day a burnt-out teacher remembers why they became an educator. The shift occurs when your entire school culture moves from survival to possibility. That doesn't happen when you're optimizing for compliance. Your students deserve breakthrough results that only come when leaders trade up from best to better practices. The question isn't whether you can create breakthrough results. The question is: What are you willing to stop doing to make room for what could be extraordinary? TRANSFORM YOUR TEAM'S INTELLIGENCE Stop hoping best practices will create breakthrough results. Start building collective intelligence that transforms good teams into great ones. Discover your TEAM INTELLIGENCE quotient in 5 minutes per member: Where you default to individual vs. collective thinking Which perspectives enhance group intelligence How to transform challenging dynamics into breakthrough collaboration  Take the 5-Minute Leadership Team Assessment →
Show More