Read on for a load of inspiration. And if you want more inspiration, from the same conference, I also shared my insights about collaborating with different generations in the workplace. In the same article, you can also learn about the science of happiness.

Lead image credits: Photo by Kelly

Peter Hinssen: Living in the Never Normal

Peter Hinssen opened the Amsterdam Business Forum with the same mix of humor, energy, and uncomfortable truth that defines his books. His talk revolved around one core idea: we no longer live in “the new normal.” The world has tipped into the never normal—a permanent state of disruption.

He started by tracing his lifelong obsession with technology, showing how each innovation shifts from strange to ordinary and then to invisible. “They always follow the same pattern,” he said. “The place gets slow and then really fast, and it becomes normal.” He reminded the audience that mobile phones were once rare, then suddenly everywhere. That pattern now repeats with AI, quantum computing, and automation—only much faster.

“Innovations always follow the same pattern. The place gets slow and then really fast, and it becomes normal.”

In other words, we overestimate the rate of change at first, then correct our estimations and underestimate the rate of change.

“How did I go bankrupt? Two ways: gradually, and then suddenly.” – Ernest Hemingway

That, he said, is how disruption happens—not in slow motion, but all at once. These “Hemingway patterns” explain everything from collapsing business models to geopolitical upheavals.

To illustrate, he recalled working with economist Carlota Perez, who mapped industrial revolutions through history. Each one took decades to unfold. Now, Hinssen said, “the waves just get bigger and bigger.” Peter illustrated this with the pace of protein research:

“Before DeepMind, researchers found 75,000 protein structures in 30 years. After DeepMind, they found 2 million more in 18 months.”

Hinssen called it a moment of “data outpacing expertise.” People who understand systems, he argued, will outperform deep specialists. In his words:

“Welcome to the new world. We’re going to see people who understand data outperform deep specialists in their field.”

But the biggest danger, he said, isn’t AI itself—it’s our inability to adapt fast enough. “We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technology.” That imbalance is his definition of the never normal: a world of constant instability, yet overflowing with opportunity for those who dare to reinvent themselves early.

“You have to innovate when you can, not when you need, because if you wait until you need, you’re going to be too late.”

He warned that most companies act with “yesterday’s logic” in a world moving at tomorrow’s speed. Drucker’s insight still holds: “The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence itself, but to act with yesterday’s logic.”

“Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position; certainty is an absurdity.” – Voltaire

He quoted Voltaire, linking 18th-century philosophy to modern leadership. Uncertainty, he argued, isn’t something to eliminate. It’s something to weaponize. It’s the central skill for leaders in the never normal: turning volatility into advantage. He challenged the audience not to retreat into fear or risk aversion but to leverage uncertainty. You can say, ‘This is scary, I’ll protect myself,’ or you can say, ‘Can we leverage uncertainty and use the never normal as an advantage?’”

Hinssen ended with a call to action. The never normal isn’t a phase—it’s our new habitat. The pandemic didn’t pause it; it accelerated it. The goal now is not stability, but adaptability. His closing argument landed like a challenge: stop pretending the chaos will end. “What if this is not a transition? What if this is the new planet?” he asked. If that’s true, the most dangerous mindset is nostalgia—clinging to how things used to be. Sadly, that is what many populist leaders are promoting.

Sanna Marin: Optimism as a Leadership Strategy

The former Finnish prime minister didn’t talk about power or politics first. She talked about optimism. “Optimistic leadership,” she said, “couldn’t be more topical.” Her message wasn’t abstract. It came from leading a small Nordic country through global crises—a pandemic, a war next door, and a historic NATO accession—all before turning 35.

“Optimism is the fuel of any successful leader.”

That line set the tone. She defined optimism not as wishful thinking but as belief backed by action. “Without profound belief that this product, idea, or political reform will make a difference,” she said, “that change is not going to happen.” She insisted that optimism only has value when it touches reality. A leader must first look truth in the eye—no denial, no sugarcoating. “I’m not speaking about optimism that rests on false beliefs or high hopes. I’m speaking of an optimism grounded in prudent reality and deep understanding.”

She reminded us that optimism doesn’t mean looking away from horror. It means refusing to surrender hope in the face of it.

“We have very clear reason to be pessimistic,” she admitted, “but we have no other choice but to remain optimistic.”

She said that the required energy and stability for optimism and action comes from strong values:

“Because compromising your core values will only cost you your integrity—and without your integrity, you will eventually lose your ability to lead.”

From there, Marin went global. She mapped her leadership lessons onto Europe’s current crises—from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to rising authoritarianism. Her analysis cut through comfort. “International rules-based order is being challenged systematically, with determination and impunity,” and “What we need now is not hesitation, but decisive action that is firmly grounded in the new realities.”

“If we are willing to compromise the rules-based international order just for one minute, we will eventually end up in a more difficult and costly situation.”

And she warned of what happens when values turn negotiable: “We would openly admit that our principles were not so important for us after all.” What makes Marin’s perspective powerful is her refusal to separate politics from ethics or leadership from emotion. She discussed integrity as stamina—the ability to stay true even when compromise looks easier. It’s what kept her moving through sleepless nights and impossible decisions during Finland’s NATO negotiations.

Her approach also matched the Amsterdam Business Forum’s theme of “Optimistic Leadership.” In a world described by Hinssen as “never normal,” Marin’s answer was not control but conviction. For her, optimism is both leadership strategy and survival mechanism.

Marin’s optimism feels radical because it’s disciplined. It isn’t the shiny, LinkedIn version. It’s the kind that exists because the world is burning, not despite it. Her talk balanced the urgency of war and climate crisis with the humanity of hope.

The Cost of Courage

Sanna Marin wasn’t re-elected. Despite leading Finland through COVID-19, the war in Ukraine, and the fastest NATO accession in history, and despite pushing through 98% of her government’s promised reforms, Marin lost her seat of power.

That paradox says a lot about leadership today. She did almost everything a democratic leader is supposed to do—deliver results, maintain stability, and protect values—yet voters wanted something else.

Her loss was a reflection of how modern politics punishes emotional honesty. Marin led with conviction and transparency. The result shows how hard it is to be a hopeful leader in cynical times. The more open she became, the more critics labeled her naïve. Yet she proved that principled optimism can coexist with performance. Few leaders can say they achieved nearly every goal while facing simultaneous global shocks.

In a world obsessed with polling and short-term gains, Marin’s story is a reminder that integrity doesn’t always win elections—but it does build legacy. She left office with her head high, still young, still outspoken, and still deeply respected abroad.

Simon Sinek: The Courage to Be Available

Simon Sinek walked on stage with his usual calm warmth. He zoomed in on human leadership—no need to be a template of perfection—just your human self.

“Many leaders are afraid to say, ‘I don’t know’ or ‘I made a mistake.’ What distinguishes the great leaders from the good leaders is their ability to say, I made a mistake.”

He described how admitting uncertainty rekindles the thrill of early careers—that mix of fear and excitement when you’re doing something new. “We’re choosing to do this, and I have no idea what to do,” he said. That honesty, far from weakness, becomes a magnet for collaboration. “Make yourself available—be available to admit when you make a mistake. Be available to admit that you need help or ask for help.”

“We don’t build trust by offering help,” he said, “we build trust by asking for it.”

It’s a kind of vulnerability; however, Sinek pointed out that this can sound weak. Last year at ABF 2024, Brené Brown promoted vulnerability, but Sinek proposed the word “availability”—a simple, practical openness that builds trust.

Next, Sinek compared corporate teams to the military units he studied, where psychological safety isn’t a slogan but a survival rule. “We don’t even like to give credit to somebody else. Yet in the military, people will give their lives for each other. I wanted to understand that.”

Trust is love in practice—the willingness to be both open and supportive.

He suggested leaders could learn from that—not to blur professional boundaries, but to remember that attention is oxygen. Most employees don’t need endless feedback or perks; they need to feel seen. “Courage is external. The trapeze artist has the courage to try because of the net. The skydiver has courage because of the parachute. All we need is one person who says, ‘I believe in you.’”

People don’t need certainty—they need belief.

That is the essence of leadership: creating nets for others. When leaders show up as human beings who care, teams find the courage to experiment, fail, and grow.

“Optimism is the undying belief that the future is bright. But it’s not naïve—it can accept darkness.”

Optimism, to Sinek, is emotional realism. You can tell your team, “This is the hardest thing we’ve ever done,” and still lead with hope. What poisons teams is not fear but false positivity—pretending everything is fine when everyone knows it isn’t. “Toxic positivity is when you don’t even believe yourself. You’re putting on an act.”

Finally, Sinek turned to the heart of his new obsession: friendship.

“Friendship is the ultimate biohack. It fixes anxiety, depression, even loneliness—but very few of us are actually good at being friends.”

That’s not sentimentalism. It’s biology. Friendship releases oxytocin, a bonding hormone. Sinek illustrated this with a story about a friend who texted him, ‘Do you have 8 minutes?’

He challenged the audience: Would you cancel a meeting because a friend needs you? Or would you cancel on a friend because of a meeting? Most people choose the latter. “We’re pretty shitty friends,” he said, half-smiling.

He and his friend created this “8-minute rule” as a code for real connection. When one of them sends that text, the other drops everything to give undivided attention. No meetings, no multitasking. Just presence.

In a time when technology accelerates faster than our emotions, Sinek argued that the most revolutionary act might be slowing down long enough to listen: being available.

Adaptability, integrity, and availability for agile growth

As the lights dimmed at the Amsterdam Business Forum, the takeaway was that we can’t control the future—but we can design our response to it.

Hinssen reminded everyone that the future doesn’t arrive gradually anymore; it “happens suddenly.” Marin proved that optimism isn’t a luxury but a discipline. And it is best grounded in values. Sinek showed that leadership starts, quite literally, with friendship. In short:

1. Adapt like an engineer.
   See patterns, anticipate change, and “innovate when you can, not when you need.”
2. Decide like a stateswoman.
   Face reality honestly, act decisively, and anchor choices in values that outlive elections.
3. Connect like a friend.
   Make yourself available. Build trust through honesty and attention.

This triad—adaptability, integrity, and availability—defines what Agile Growth (Wendbaar Groeien) literally stands for. Growth that bends without breaking, moves without losing meaning, and connects without control.

I had great fun at the conference, inspired by the speakers and the group of Bright6 people I was with. I already have a ticket for next year!

The post 16 Leadership Insights to Survive the Fastest Decade in Human History appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

Eliza Filby: Bringing Generations Together in the Age of AI

Eliza Filby took the stage with a clear message: ageism is the last acceptable prejudice. She walked us through the different generations—Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z—and showed how each carries its own history, strengths, and blind spots. From the Boomers, who hold massive wealth but are redefining retirement, to Gen X as the “last tech optimists,” to Millennials as the bridge generation between analog and digital, to Gen Z rewriting the rules of work, every group has a role.

What really struck me was her insistence that the future of work isn’t about dividing the generations but bringing them together. AI and hybrid work will shape our world, but the essence of thriving workplaces will remain deeply human. As she said, “It won’t serve us in our careers if we don’t return to what humans do best—listen, teach, and talk.”

Five Mind Grenades from Eliza Filby:

1. “Ageism is the last acceptable prejudice.”
   • This is something I often encounter when transforming teams into autonomous ones. Managers seem to have given up on the experienced lot and tell me not to bother. While I believe their experience is invaluable.
2. “Millennials are the translators and the bridges of the analog world and the digital world.”
   • I think we need more translators to collaborate and do great things.
3. “The passport was to millennials what the car was to baby boomers.”
   • I get that. But I’m Gen X. Neither is super important to me.
4. “It won’t serve us in our careers if we don’t return to what humans do best—listen, teach, and talk.”
   • Amen to that. Especially the teaching and listing could do with a boost.
5. “Let’s move away from multigenerational friction to harnessing the power of a multigenerational workforce.”
   • That’s what great agile teams are about: diversity and multiple perspectives.

Her talk left me thinking: what if the greatest opportunity of our time is not AI itself, but how we bring wisdom and innovation together across generations?

Neil Pasricha: Happiness First, Not Last

Neil Pasricha stepped on stage with his trademark humor and storytelling, but quickly went deep. He started with a question: if we live in the most abundant society in human history, why are we not happy? Anxiety, depression, loneliness, and suicide rates are all climbing. He argued that the problem lies in the model we’ve been taught all our lives: work hard, succeed, and then be happy. In reality, it’s the other way around.

His words were simple, but they hit home: “We need to train our brains to be happy first.” He showed that happy people aren’t just more joyful—they’re more productive, creative, and resilient. Happiness isn’t the reward at the end of success. It’s the fuel.

What made his talk unforgettable was the vulnerability with which he shared his story—divorce, the sudden loss of his best friend, and how he began blogging about “1000 Awesome Things” to find light in the dark. That project grew into bestsellers and a global movement, but at its heart it was always about choosing joy every single day.

Seven quotes that stayed with me from Neil Pasricha:

1. “We live in the most abundant society ever in human civilization. So then how come we’re not happy?”
   • It’s a question I’m often asking myself when people complain about the smallest things online and in the media. I’m clueless.
2. “Happy people are 50% more likely to get a promotion in the next 12 months.”
   • That’s right: happiness makes you likeable, and likeable people get promoted. The traditional logic is do great work > be successful > become happy. However, in reality, it is more like this: be happy > do great work > be successful.
3. “Happy people just live longer.”
   • Some people eat ‘healthy’ diets to live longer. But I can see their dinner doesn’t make them happy. Would they be shooting themselves in the foot?
4. “We’re three times more dangerous to ourselves than anybody else.”
   • That was when Neil was comparing suicide numbers to homicide numbers. I suppose they were US statistics.
5. “If you can just take 2 minutes to prime your brain for positivity, you change your whole day.”
   • I’m not sure whether it’s THAT easy, but I guess it helps.
6. “Sometimes in life, when everybody has an addiction, it looks like nobody has an addiction.”
   • Back when smoking was OK, nobody noticed. The same way nobody notices anymore that we’re on our phones all the time.
7. “Writing down gratitudes is a brain curl—you’re teaching your brain to look for the positive.”
   • Added to my list of daily workouts, after push-ups, stretching, and heart math. Pasricha’s challenge is practical: every morning, take two minutes to let go, write down something you’re grateful for, and focus your mind. That tiny ritual can rewire your day.
8. “You can’t think yourself into new action; you can only act yourself into new thinking.”
   • The fact that you need to do something, sample it, before you can start enjoying it, makes a lot of sense. I believe we are often too cognitive about new behavior. The logic can do > learn to > do is flawed. Doing comes before all.

Why this matters

Sitting there in Amsterdam, I realized these two talks are deeply connected. Eliza reminded me that the future of work must be human, and Neil reminded me that happiness is not a luxury but a foundation. Together, they made me believe that our challenge—whether in business or life—is to build environments where every generation can thrive, and where joy is cultivated, not postponed.

And that’s what I want to pass on to you. What if we measured success not just in profit, but in how much we help each other grow—and how happy we are while doing it?

Featured image credits: Matheus Bertelli

The post The Future of Work Is Human—And Happier Than You Think appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

How to look the Dragon in the Eyes?

Imagine fear as a dragon guarding a treasure chest of potential and growth. By confronting this dragon, you can unlock new opportunities. Mario Andretti, a legendary race car driver, once said, “If everything seems under control, you’re just not going fast enough.” This means that true progress typically lies beyond comfort zones. Moving beyond your comfort zone is daring, and armor helps. But not all armor works well. Read on to discover how to suit up!

What is good Armor to deal with Product Owner fears?

Some weeks ago, I was at an interview with Brené Brown. She spoke of dealing with fear and the kind of armor you put on. Some armor isolates us, while others empower us to take risks together. Here are some pieces of armor I recognized from my practice as a Product Owner coach.

Knower vs. Learner armor

The armored knower prioritizes being right over learning. But this can lead to rigidity and missed opportunities. I met Product Owners who were so convinced they had to know everything that it totally stressed them out. They were unable to ask for help, for fear they might be unmasked as a not all-knowing. With coaching, we could transition into a ‘daring learner’ armor. We worked on embracing curiosity, and daring to ask for help. The new armor worked well in their Agile team. It engages the intellect and helpfulness of the whole team. One of these Product Owners remarked: “I discovered that the right questions are more important than the right answers.”

Us-Them armor vs. multi-truth armor

An ‘us-them’ armor creates safety by putting people with difficult opinions in an inferior group. This divides teams. I encountered people who would avoid colleagues that were too different. They focused on personal tasks to avoid difficult conversations. For instance, one person I coached, avoided her team by claiming all layout work. She armored up by staking her domain. She hoped to prove to ‘the hard-working people’ that she was delivering great work, and she was not one of the ‘slackers.’ The growing resentment, however, was driving the team into High Conflict. It stressed out everyone. Here, too, I worked with the team on an armor change. We built new armor by disconnecting truth and opinion from identity. The new room for complexity allowed different truths to coexist harmoniously.

Shame and Blame vs. Shared Responsibility

Relying on shame and blame armor is an effective way to ensure mistakes are not yours. However, it stifles creativity and innovation within teams. In my LEGO Scrum Simulations, for instance, teams tend to make mistakes the first time. Often someone looks at me and asks me, as their teacher, to point out who was to blame for the mistake. They intend well, and they are eager to learn new accountabilities. The blame question allows me to show the ‘shared responsibility’ armor in practice: I point out that we were all there when the thing went wrong. Shaming and blaming is pointless. What matters is correcting the mistake and ensuring it does not happen again. I hope Product Owners in my course learn from this experience. I wish all team leaders would cultivate compassion and accountability, creating an environment where risk-taking is encouraged without fear of blame.

How to be a fearless Product Owner?

To thrive as a Product Owner means choosing your armor wisely—embrace learning, lean into conflict with openness, and shared responsibility within your team. It’s OK to feel fear because your new armor protects you. It allows you to face the dragon of fear as a team.

If you’re ready to transform your approach as a Product Owner into one filled with confidence and daring leadership, consider a few coaching sessions with Anton.

The post It’s OK to be afraid as a Product Owner appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

The basic idea is simple: having a growth mindset is believing you can improve at anything with effort. The opposite belief is the fixed mindset. It means you feel that talent is innate: it’s a trait that defines your status. These mindsets seem straightforward. Nigel Holmes’ diagram below explains it pretty well. You’ve probably seen it before.

In the bottom right corner, we see: “Higher levels of achievement and a greater sense of free will.” And all of that just by changing your mind. Sounds good, doesn’t it? If only it was as easy as this diagram.

Let’s go through the pitfalls of the Growth Mindset, starting with one of my weak points: blaming. I tend to blame myself mostly, and I thought it was ok with the Growth Mindset. I was owning my mistakes. Or was I?

A growth mindset means you blame nobody, not even yourself.

The legendary basketball coach John Wooden says you aren’t a failure until you start to blame. He means that you can learn from your mistakes until you deny them or until you pin them on others. Even the successful Jack Welch made multi-million dollar mistakes, admitted them, and owned the results. Instead of blaming, he apologized personally, fixed the problem immediately, and learned to prevent something similar from happening again.

You aren’t a failure until you start to blame.

John Wooden

Did Welch blame himself? In words, he did. But not in action. He cleaned up. There is a subtle difference between blaming oneself and owning your mistakes. Owning the mistake means you don’t fret, but you double down, improving the process and increasing the effort. If the milk spills, you don’t say: “I’m clumsy,” or: “I should have paid attention.” You say: “The milk spilled. Let’s clean it up. And let’s ensure it happens less.”

Owning your mistakes is a careful balance between humility and self-confidence. You have to be humble enough to admit problems and confident enough to clean up. But How humble should you be?

Humility will tell you to put in the extra effort, not to feel superior, and not to blame others. 

Too humble, and nobody sees you. Too humble, and your ambitions will shrink. Not humble enough, and you become arrogant, overbearing, and dismissive of mistakes.

In his autobiography, Jack Welch has an entire chapter titled ‘Too Full of Myself.’ He says there is only a razor’s edge between self-confidence and hubris. And true self-confidence is the courage to be open and to welcome change and new ideas regardless of their source. Genuine self-confidence is your readiness to grow.

From that mindset, Welch rewarded teamwork rather than individual genius: “Leaders were encouraged to share the credit for ideas with their teams rather than take full credit themselves. It made a huge difference in how we all related to one another.”

Internal relations are more valuable than you’d think. It’s not only nice. Science proves that inclusion and diversity are great drivers for team performance. Why? When you solve complex problems, having more perspectives leads to better solutions. The problem is people do not always feel confident enough to voice their perspectives. Stereotyping could be in the way.

Stereotypes stifle the growth mindset.

Stereotyping can be subtle and insidious. Experiments show that when women do work that is not traditionally associated with their gender, their growth mindset is very fragile. A careless remark, reminding them of their gender, just before a task can fill women with self-doubt and put them in a fixed mindset. 

I haven’t read experiments with other stereotypes or ethnicities, but I suppose the same thing will happen, maybe even worse. So you’d better avoid stereotypes if you want your team to learn and achieve great things. 

Avoiding stereotypes helps performance as well as diversity in thinking and perspectives. This diversity prevents groupthink and signals issues early. It helps you work smarter.

Working smarter is part of the growth mindset too. It is not only about putting in the effort. That brings us to another growth mindset myth.

Myth: with enough hard work, you can achieve anything

Hard-work-only is a brute-force approach. Some people think that if brute force doesn’t work, you’re just not using enough. Dweck – and I – disagree. A growth mindset is also about analyzing mistakes and improving the process. Say you have dyslexia. Working harder at reading texts is probably not the best solution for you. Improving the process means experimenting with different fonts or with audio material. 

You hear people say: “I foster a Growth Mindset. I tell my kids they can achieve anything.” It sounds growth-minded, but you could be misleading your kid.

It is more growth-minded and realistic to say. “You can improve at anything if you put in the work and develop the process. Want to be an astronaut? Great! Let’s find out what it takes and have fun trying to become one. Maybe it works out.”

Moonshots are great. They drive curiosity and ambition. But you also need to enjoy the journey for two reasons: not reaching the goal is less of a disappointment, and enjoyable journeys are easier to maintain.

Look for joy in the process.

When my kids pick up a hobby, I put serious effort into selecting a teacher. I need a teacher who masters the process and can transmit the joy of playing on every level—otherwise, these hobbies never last.

For myself, I often make the mistake of giving internal feedback all the time. It may seem like a growth mindset, but it takes away my enjoyment. More and more, I try to also simply enjoy my abilities. Enjoying the moment is especially important when I perform, like in a tennis match or a presentation. The constant internal feedback is detracting.

When I practice tennis or my kids practice music, we do it for the joy of playing. The joy ensures we keep putting in the effort. And we keep things interesting by having a plan. If all the playing goes nowhere, we are sure to lose interest and joy.

So joy helps us to put in the effort. However, some people are so fixed that they fear making an effort will prove they are not exceptional. Why can success be such a blocker for the growth mindset? Let’s find out.

Myth: if you need effort, you don’t have talent.

We grow up with more fixed mindset stories than you’d think. Take, for instance, the hare and the tortoise. The tortoise wins the race through sheer focus and effort. But honestly? I want to be the hare, winning anyway, with a little effort. 

There is a stubborn myth that effort is for those who don’t have the ability. The myth is fueled by many YouTube videos where people do extraordinary things as if it’s easy for them. You never see videos about how long they practiced.

The movie Amadeus portrays Mozart as a born genius, thwarted by the jealous Antonio Salieri. Historians will tell you that this is utter nonsense. Mozart worked hard from an early age, supported by Salieri, to develop his talent. He wrote mediocre music too. But again, that is a less sensational story.

When you think of it, that makes sense. The problem is you don’t often think of it. You have emotions before you think. Your rational brain knows geniuses must have practiced, but your emotional brain remembers amazing YouTube videos or the Amadeus movie. The feeling you get is: I have no talent. Why bother?

Myth: lowering standards boosts self-esteem.

We’re having a self-esteem pandemic with YouTube, TikTok, ADHD, ADD, Dyslexia, and challenging economic times. Self-esteem and self-confidence are essential for success. But science shows that lowering the bar does not work. It’s insincere and smothers ambition. 

The self-confidence we need is not about meeting expectations, even lower ones. We need the confidence that we can improve with process and application. It’s the confidence that you can make mistakes and progress. It’s not about what you are. Clinging to what you are fosters the fixed mindset.

Even when things go well, low standards can halt the learning process. If someone picks up something quickly and flawlessly, praise is risky. A better reaction is: “Whoops, I guess that was too easy. Sorry for wasting your time. Let’s do something you can learn from.”

The magic word for self-confidence is: ‘yet.’ Instead of saying: “I’m not a level 5 tennis player,” you say: “I’m no level 5 tennis player yet.” I have another blog post with tips to make people feel confident through psychological safety.

Let’s finish this paragraph with John Wooden: “Did I win? Did I lose? Those are the wrong questions. The right question is: Did I make my best effort? If so, you may be outscored but never lose.” 

Praise the process by tieing it to the outcome.

Ok, science tells us setting high standards and praising the process fosters learning. But we still have a pitfall to avoid: praising the effort when it’s not there. Praise is not a consolation when people are not learning. People could be making no effort or the wrong effort.

If working harder doesn’t solve it, you need different strategies. You need to tie the process to the outcome when you praise the process. Set high standards and make sure people reach them.

Everyone has both mindsets, fixed and growth.

I firmly believed I had a 100% growth mindset. After reading ‘Mindset,’ I understand everyone has both mindsets. It’s not either-or. You can cultivate the growth mindset and ensure it takes the wheel more often. Your fixed mindset is there for good reasons: it wants to protect you from failure and ridicule. I called my fixed mindset Mr. I-knew-it. In Flemish, that’s Mr. Kwistet. 

Accepting both mindsets made it easier for me to prefer the growth mindset. It also showed me my Mr. I-knew-it triggers. 

Whenever I see people make impressive moves on YouTube, Mr. I-knew-it quietly tells me I don’t have talent. He knew it! The video is proof. So why bother practicing? Much better to go on doomscrolling.

Now that I’m conscious of Mr. I-knew-it, I can laugh at his suggestion and start practicing anyway. I also know this:

Just because some people can do something with little or no training doesn’t mean that others can’t do it.

When I was 16, my girlfriend had just started playing flute and was struggling. I asked if I could try. Surprisingly, I could play 4-5 songs from her book immediately. She broke up with me and never played flute again.

What happened? I had reasonable Saxophone playing skills at the time, having practiced for four years. The fingering and lip tension is very similar for the flute and saxophone. 

Was I talented? Not at all. I was applying something I learned in a different context. That, and my ex-girlfriend had a rather loud fixed mindset. I apologized for this embarrassment much later, and she said it still hurt. Luckily, she also never praised my talent. 

Never ever praise people’s talent (unless you want them to fail).

People say that praise fuels learning and development. And you’d think that criticism hurts self-confidence. But the truth is not that simple. Dweck experimented with praise and came to some stunning conclusions. She gave the same assignment to two groups of students. One group was praised for the process and effort. The other for their talent. What happened? The students who were praised for their talent:

• Preferred easier follow-up challenges over harder ones. They risked losing their ‘talented’ status.
• The students lost interest sooner because they felt like they had reached success.
• The students Lied about their test results to other students for fear of being unmasked as not talented!

Just praising kids for their talent turned them into liars! Praising intelligence and talent makes their confidence and motivation more fragile. I’m pretty sure this also happens with the grown-up kids at work. 

Praising talent may make people feel like they made it. But there is no such thing as having made it. Here’s why.

When you achieve success, there is no happy ever after

Through fairy tales and cowboy stories, we have come to believe that all is well that ends well. In reality, that doesn’t happen. Wouldn’t that be utterly boring?

If you reach the top, you must keep working and training to stay there. Here’s where the fixed mindset fails spectacularly. You cannot win a sports competition and expect to keep winning without training just as hard. You cannot launch a successful product and expect to keep market share without developing it further. It goes for marriages too. You work hard to find a partner, and it’s an illusion that you can stop when the relationship is on.

Change is not automatically maintained when people change their mindset to further their careers, heal from a loss, help their children thrive, lose weight, or control their anger. It’s astounding – once a problem improves, people stop doing what caused it to improve. Once you feel better, you stop taking your medicine. But change doesn’t work that way.

You can help others maintain change with the right kind of praise. We have seen the wrong kind, but what is the right kind?

Reacting to success and failure with the right kind of praise

Ok, praise and feedback are a minefield. We discussed all the wrong things to say. What about the right kind of feedback? When things go well, show interest and admiration for the process:

• “That drawing has so many beautiful colors. Tell me about them.”
• “That homework was long and involved. I admire the way you concentrated and finished it. How did you stick to it?”
• “When you play that song, it gives me a real feeling of joy. How do you feel when you play it?”

When things don’t go as expected, try to work from the partial successes and develop experiments to improve:

• “Everyone learns differently. Let’s keep trying to find the way that works for you.”
• “You didn’t win because the others practiced more. They’ve been at it longer. You’ve come a long way, and if you want, you could train more and stand another chance.”
• “Son, this looks like a boring assignment. You have my sympathy. Can you think of a way to make it more interesting?”
• “Son, I feel sad seeing you missing a chance to learn. Can you think of a way to do this that would help you learn more?”

In summary: I’ve learned much about what the growth mindset is not.

1. A growth mindset is not only about being open-minded and flexible. You can be ‘open-minded’ about ‘losers,’ but you would be blaming and judging. The growth mindset means you cultivate talent. Cultivating talent means no blame. 
2. A growth mindset is not only about effort. No, it is also about continuous improvement and the smarts. It’s the process: Wax-on, wax-off.
3. A growth mindset is not about building false self-confidence by lowering standards. You risk praising the effort when it’s not there. The growth mindset is about high standards and having fun trying to get there. The magic word for self-confidence is: ‘yet.’ Instead of saying: “I’m not a level 5 tennis player,” you say: “I’m no level 5 tennis player yet.”
4. A growth mindset is not believing you can do anything. While setting goals is an integral part of the growth mindset, you can’t have these goals without resources and strategies to achieve them. Also, be careful with the goals. Having a talent is not a goal. Winning is not a goal. It’s about finding success in learning. I will read more biographies of my heroes and get inspiration from their goals and efforts.
5. A growth mindset is not blaming others for having a fixed mindset. “I can’t teach this person. He has a fixed mindset.” Who’s blaming who? Try to figure out what learning strategies these people are missing.
6. You don’t need a pure Growth Mindset. I will embrace my fixed mindset for what it is and ensure it doesn’t take the wheel at inconvenient times. I’ve named him. What’s the name of your fixed mindset?
7. A Growth Mindset is not automatically contagious. Even with a growth mindset, you can react to the setbacks of others with anxiety. Or you could inadvertently praise talent or ability. To truly build the growth mindset of those around you, you must embrace setbacks as learning opportunities. Be interested in the process and the effort. I’ll start by keeping a log of the constructive criticism and process praise I’ve given to others. It probably won’t be much in the beginning.

I hope you enjoyed this article. Consider following this blog or following me on LinkedIn. In my next article, I will write about the Growth Mindset in a Business context.

I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this subject. 

The post I gravely misunderstood the Growth Mindset. Here’s what I learned. appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

Applying the culture map in a team context

Most mixed teams can work if you’re explicit about team culture. You can decide within the team how tightly you want to schedule meetings or how directive you want leadership to be. Just don’t leave it to the assumptions everyone brings from their cultural background.

However, building mono-cultural teams for speed in a less complex context can make sense. The team will lose less energy in inevitable cultural friction.

Another exception is when you’re leading a team with a different culture than yours. Some cultural flexibility from your side goes a long way when building a connection with your team.

High context – low context

High-context communication and low-context communication refer to two different communication styles. The main differences between these two communication styles are:

1. Context: In high-context communication, much of the meaning is conveyed through the context, such as the physical setting, the relationship between the communicators, and the nonverbal cues used. In contrast, low-context communication relies more heavily on explicit verbal messages to convey meaning and less on context.
2. Directness: High-context communication tends to be more indirect, with the speaker using hints, suggestions, and nonverbal cues to convey their message. In contrast, low-context communication tends to be more direct, with the speaker using clear, explicit language to convey their message.
3. Relationship: High-context communication is often used in cultures where relationships are valued highly. The focus is on maintaining harmony and preserving relationships, even sacrificing individual needs. In contrast, low-context communication is often used in cultures where individualism is valued more than relationships. The focus is on efficiency and getting the job done, even if it means being more direct or confrontational.
4. Cultural differences: High-context communication is more common in collectivistic cultures, such as Asia and the Middle East. Low-context communication is more common in individualistic cultures, such as the United States and Western Europe.

The differences between high-context and low-context communication are rooted in cultural values. They can significantly impact how people communicate and interact.

Before you think: “We’re working Agile, low-context is just best! Transparency rules!” Hold your horses. Even in Agile teams, people have sensitivities when it comes to feedback. So it might pay to be a little more circumvent. Furthermore, high-context cultures find it rude if you spell everything out to them explicitly multiple times. They take pride in reading subtexts and picking up subtle cues.

Negative feedback: direct or indirect?

In some cultures, such as Nordic cultures, direct negative feedback is more common. In these cultures, people value honesty and directness and may feel that indirect feedback is dishonest or insincere. Direct negative feedback tends to be more straightforward and to the point. The speaker uses clear and explicit language to convey their criticism. They might even use upgraders – such as “very” or “extremely” – to stress their point.

In contrast, indirect negative feedback is more common in cultures like the UK and Japan. In these cultures, people value saving face and maintaining harmony in relationships. Direct criticism can be seen as confrontational and disrespectful, so indirect negative feedback tends to be more subtle and less explicit. The speaker may use downgraders – such as “maybe” or “a little bit” – but still be adamant about their feedback. You’d better not mistake it for a suggestion.

Not that this is a different dimension than low and high context. Some cultures, like France and Russia, might be high-context but value directness regarding negative feedback. While the UK and, to some extent, the US value explicitness in regular messages, but can be very indirect with negative feedback.

An often-heard feedback principle is a 3:1 ratio between positive and negative feedback. With the cultural differences in mind, you will notice that this is a principle from US business literature. Dutch people might find this circumvent and prefer you come to the point so they can start fixing the problem.

Principles-first or applications-first

In applications-first cultures, people begin persuading with facts, statements, or conclusions and later add concepts to explain. The preference is, to begin with an executive summary. Discussions are practical and concrete instead of theoretical or philosophical.

In principles-first cultures, this is the other way around. People begin with general theories and principles to find common ground. They carefully build up to their conclusion with supporting facts, disagreeing facts, and a final balance. A careful and crisp thinking process is very persuasive in this environment.

Italy and France are on the principles-first side. The US, Canada, and Australia are on the down-to-earth applications-first side.

Egalitarian or hierarchical: power distance

The distance between boss and subordinate – the power distance – is the measure of this cultural dimension.

In egalitarian cultures, the distance between a boss and a subordinate is low. The best boss is a facilitator among equals. Organizational structures are flat, and skipping hierarchical lines is acceptable.

On the other hand, hierarchical cultures favor strong bosses who lead from the front. Status is essential, and communication follows the organizational lines. You do not question the order before executing it.

Consensual or quick decision-making

Power distance is different from the decision-making flow. Some very hierarchical cultures, like Japan, have a very consensual decision-making preference. Decision-making is careful and slow and preserves harmony. Once the decision is made, execution is swift because everyone is on board. You can be sure people stick to their decision.

Hierarchical decision-making cultures make quick decisions and fix the mess later. They might change the decision later or start convincing people after the boss makes the decision.

Trusting: task-based or relationship-based

Task-based trusting means building practical business agreements and coding that into a contract, written or verbal. A dependable legal system ensures that contracts are fulfilled. Past achievements mean a lot for building trust.

Relationship-based cultures put more emphasis on personal connection. Social interaction comes before business discussions. Lengthy lunches or parties make perfect sense because they are a great way of establishing mutual understanding.  

Disagreeing: confrontational or harmonious

Disagreeing is not negative feedback. It just means you have a different opinion on the way forward. Some cultures find the clash of perspectives positive and enriching. The Dutch say: without rubbing, it won’t shine. Other cultures take no risks with group harmony and relationships. They avoid confrontation as much as possible. Confrontation is dangerous as people tend to identify with their values and opinions. These cultures have subtle ways of sharing different viewpoints.

This cultural dimension is tricky because not all cultures are equally emotionally expressive. Danish, Dutch, and Germans avoid emotions in their confrontations and focus on the facts. They find emotions are in the way of a rational impersonal discussion. Showing anger in a disagreement is a sign of poor self-control.

On the other hand, Greek and French are very expressive in their disagreement. They might gesticulate, show anger, or show frustration. It is a sign of passion and caring. After a heated discussion, they can reconcile and respect the differences. 

Tread lightly in unexpressive, unconfrontational cultures like Korea. You might hurt feelings and miss subtle cues. Hurt feelings are not quickly forgiven or forgotten, potentially ruining relationships. 

Finally, don’t mistake emotional expressiveness in Saudi Arabia or Mexico for permission to confront. You will suffer from their expressiveness for a long time if you do. 

Scheduling: linear-time or flexible-time

The final cultural dimension is about the experience of time. Highly industrialized, highly predictable cultures value predictability to the minute. You’d better be on time or even early. 

Cultures with a more turbulent recent history go with the flow and value the moment more. Time is flexible, and the activity’s length depends on the moment’s flow. If things are interesting, there’s no point in stopping on time because the next event might be late or not even happening.

Cultural relativity

Germans might find the French awfully high-context. But the Chinese might find the French shockingly explicit and low-context. It’s all relative to your point of view. Keep that in mind when dealing with different cultures. 

It’s even relative between company cultures in the same country or between family members in the same family. It’s all a matter of preference, and most systems work fine internally.

So what is the ideal culture?

I’m not sure the ideal is the middle of each scale. I like the diversity. The cultural dimensions help me practice cultural flexibility. I’m more aware that not everyone shares my preferences. That awareness helps me build more and better relationships.

The post The Culture Map – cultural dimensions for teamwork appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

Take, for instance, the hamburger method for giving feedback. This method is one of the most cringeworthy. Sadly it’s one of the most popular ways too. The idea behind the hamburger method is to sugarcoat criticism with two bits of praise. Use it frequently, and people will start getting their shields up at the first hint of praise. They know that some dirt is coming. And when people’s guards are up, they don’t take any feedback seriously.

The hamburger method is also much too verbose to be efficient. Imagine an action-adventure movie with a top crew in a tight situation. The hero team using the hamburger method would be plain hilarious!

Raw, honest feedback is the way

A top crew needs something better than a hamburger method. They need raw and honest feedback. It’s fast, concise, and gets the team out of a tight spot. The problem is that this doesn’t work in the average workplace: nobody is serving you the raw and honest facts. And you’re not returning the favor. What is happening? There is a lack of safety and a lack of self-confidence. The politics and uncertainty of professional life seldom encourage honest feedback. But there’s hope: you can build robust platforms for feedback. Let’s investigate how.

Honest feedback can be hard to digest

The raw feedback can be hard to swallow: it might hurt your self-image. Imagine you are fulfilling the ‘Product Owner’ role. Now someone bluntly points out that your Product Backlog wasn’t all that valuable. It stings and you launch into a heated discussion about the correct way to provide feedback. Furthermore, to avoid a hurt ego you never discuss your backlog with that person anymore.

This way of handling feedback will make it very hard for you to grow in your role. You will start to avoid the best feedback. Also, people providing you feedback stop being candid because of your anger and pain.

Build a solid foundation

What you need is a robust foundation. By a foundation, I mean an acknowledged base level of performance from which you can derive enough self-confidence to handle feedback. It is an anchor for your self-esteem and personality. Let’s get back to the Product Owner example above. When you feel pain and despair bubbling up, the better course of action is to ask for the things you did well. The answers to that question will rebuild your platform. After you’ve counted the small successes, you have a platform to investigate the rest of the feedback without hard feelings. 

If you keep a diary – a common practice for successful people – you can use it to build your foundation too. It’s a perfect way to remember your successes. Count your blessings in your diary, and your platform will become more robust every day.

Practice giving direct and honest feedback

Next to building your own platform, you can build that of other too! You can help your team develop their own foundation. This will help them handle honest feedback and make them excel. 

The method is simple: just make it a habit of giving praise where praise is due. Acknowledge good work and valuable behavior. Be honest from the start, but begin practicing with the positive feedback. Make sure to point out the specific action and the effect you appreciated. Avoid making it personal, even the things you value. Don’t say: “You are the best,” but say: “You really made that meeting succeed by finishing on time after having clarified the next steps.” 

No one has full control of results, because unexpected things happen. But we do have a high degree of control over our behavior.

When you get the knack of it, you will have achieved two things: a habit of giving concise feedback and a crew with a platform for stomaching negative feedback. 

Conclusion: now is the time to start building foundations

Forget the hamburger method, the three-step method, the ladder method, and any others you might have learned. There is no quick fix for feedback. It takes conscious effort to build platforms: yours and that of others. It also takes skill to bring the message clearly and to the point. The art of giving praise is surprisingly hard to master. But start practicing today and reap fantastic growth for you and your team! 

If you want help implementing an excellent feedback culture for your team or organization, consider hiring me as a coach. You can also take the full course in Agile Coaching. Maybe check the other teamwork tips on my blog too.

The post Teamwork tip 4: Build a robust foundation to handle raw and honest feedback appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

To give you a sense of how Scrum works, I will first introduce the cast and their Scrum roles. After the roles, we’ll look at the recurring Scrum events. Finally, we’ll discuss how they organize their work with User Stories and Epics.

The cast and their Scrum roles

Maximizing the value out of the small rebel team

We’ll start this Scrum Guide with Leia. Princess Leia sees the bigger picture. She has a keen sense of what is right and what is wrong. She knows what is valuable to living beings across the galaxy. That’s why the rebels value her leadership. Her political savviness was of key importance for uniting all rebel factions. In Scrum, Leia is our (Chief) Product Owner. 

It’s her responsibility to make the most of the few resources the rebels have. This involves a lot of talking, stakeholder management, and decision-making. When necessary, Leia fires her blaster, but she’s by no means a soldier.

Representing the larger organization and their concerns

Next, we have the leaders of all rebel factions. They have a huge stake in the rebellion: their peoples depend on it. The rebel leaders are Stakeholders because they are only involved, not committed to the action. So they support the effort, but they don’t fly X-wings or swing lightsabers.

Delivering a great outcome

Contrary to the rebel leaders, Luke is committed. He’s in the middle of it. He gets things done. He’s a good shot and an expert at lightsabers. Han, Chewie, the X-Wing pilots, and the droids are committed too. Together they are a multidisciplinary team: the Development Team. They are self-organizing too. Han, for instance, performs best when you convince him of the value of the mission. He does not respond well to direct orders. Just let Han figure out the details with Chewie and the droids.

Continuous improvement

Finally, there’s Obi-Wan and Yoda. They are the mentors, the masters. They don’t swing their lightsaber often. Their mission is to teach, mentor and coach the team into performing the best they can. They know they’re not going to be around at all times. That’s why they aim to make themselves redundant from the start. In Scrum, we’d call Yoda and Obi-Wan Scrum Masters. Even when the Scrum Masters are gone, their wisdom (and ghosts) continue to guide the team.

Neither Yoda nor Obi-Wan ever update the Burn Down chart.

Pushing sticky notes around Scrum Boards is something the Development Team does. That team is self-organizing, so it’s up to them to track their progress.

The Evil Empire

The Evil Empire tries to be Agile too. They make some big mistakes, though: in Star Wars, the emperor is both the Chief Product Owner and Scrum Master. Combining both roles in one person hampers Agility. The combined role reduces the effectiveness with which the Empire can inspect and adapt. If they’d adapt, they wouldn’t keep building Death Stars. Surely, each Death Star is better and larger. But the empire never seems to learn that pooling all your resources into one superweapon is risky.

The recurring Scrum events, according to the Star Wars Scrum Guide

Sprint planning

Star Wars, A New Hope kicks off with Leia in a tight spot. Darth Vader is boarding her ship and she has to figure out what to do. She does a quick Scrum Sprint Planning. It’s a timeboxed event – Darth Vader is coming! – where she gets together with her team and makes an action plan. They decide the most valuable thing they can do is warn Obi-Wan Kenobi. They quickly discuss the overall objectives and the steps required and get to work.

Daily Scrum

The droids are self-organizing: once they are off in their escape pod, it’s up to them to figure out how to best achieve the mission goals. They self-organize with frequent funny exchanges in which they make day short-term plans. In Scrum, we’d call that Daily Scrums.
As they are captured by Jawas, their original plan derails completely. It’s a good thing, however, that the droids are Agile: they aren’t programmed with strict tasks. They have a good sense of their mission. And despite being captured and sold, they manage to get help from Luke and Obi-Wan.

The team grows with more expertise. This allows them to deal with the stormtroopers at Mos Eisley spaceport and escape Tatooine. Obin-Wan – the newfound Scrum Master – gets to work in the Millennium Falcon and starts teaching the team about the force and the Empire. The team’s performance rapidly improves. Who would have thought they could free Leia and get the Death Star plans to Yavin IV?

At this point, our Rebel Scrum Development Organisation has grown to multiple teams. They are Scaling Scrum. Leia is the Chief Product Owner, and she ensures team alignment by discussing the mission with the team leader and some representatives. Han leads the smugglers; Gold Leader leads the X-Wing squadron.  

Sprint Review

At Yavin IV, we meet our heroes in a war room, overseeing some holograms with stars, ships, and planets. The heroes are looking at their progress – found the Death Star schematics! – and figuring out what to do next. In Scrum, we call this the Sprint Review. There’s usually a rich assembly of representatives from different rebel factions. For these stakeholders, it’s important to ensure the overall plan – the Product Backlog – works for them and their people. Leia keeps them focused on the bigger picture. What are the broad steps toward a peaceful and inclusive galaxy? They conclude that destroying the Death Star is the obvious first step. The stakeholders agree on the resources and the risks. Now the teams are ready to do their detailed planning. 

Sprint Retrospective in Star Wars Scrum

Finally, before the next sprint, there’s some quiet time for introspection and retrospection. In Scrum, we call this the Sprint Retrospective. The teams review their capabilities and what they have learned. They align on goals and values. They reinforce their bonds and evaluate their commitment. In Star Wars — like in many movies — this is an emotional moment, the silence before the storm.

At this point in the movie, the retrospective focuses on Han’s lack of commitment. Will he come around? Will he really join the team as a full member? The end of the first Sprint Retrospective, it’s also the end of the first Sprint.

Backlog refinement

Alas for the rebels, after Episode IV, the Empire strikes back. They will have to adapt their plans for an inclusive Galaxy as they go. In Scrum, this is Backlog Refinement. They cannot foresee that the Jedi will return in episode VI. This means they have to continuously update their plan with what they know. They only need a plan that is good enough to make the next step.

Themes, Epics, Users Stories, and Tasks in Star Wars Scrum

Many real-world Scrum Teams organize their plan – their Product Backlog – in Themes, Epics, Users Stories, and Tasks. This organizational style is a way to bundle portions of the work in different sizes to keep the oversight.

In Star Wars, the cast didn’t do that explicitly. The writers of the movies did, however. The theme of the Star Wars movies is ‘Space opera.’ It consists of several epics: escape with the Death Star plans, the attack on the first Death Star, Luke’s Jedi training, and the battle of Hoth,…

The epics consist of several (user) stories. Take the epic ‘attack of the first Death Star’: It has the following stories: divert Death Star defenses, destroy gun turrets, and trench run.

The ‘trench run’ story can again be split into several actions: enter the trench, cover Luke, shoot Darth Vader, lock on the target with the Force, and fire a photon torpedo. This vocabulary helps teams connect their smallest actions to the overall mission. 

Conclusion: Scrum focuses teams for great impact

The ideas behind scrum are nothing new: they have been around since a long time ago in galaxies far, far away. What’s new about Scrum is that it formalizes many smart ways to organize effective teams. Star Wars is an epic telling of how small and focused teams can have a huge impact against all odds.

Much like the Evil Empire, some organizations force development teams to do ever more mindless work in ever less time. These organizations combine the Scrum Master and Product Owner roles in one person. Because of that, their stormtroopers will burn out eventually.

I would advise you to follow this Star Wars Scrum Guide and do it right. You can also hire a coach or participate in training. The focused and self-propelled team always wins!

The post What if Star Wars Rebels were organized with Scrum? – a Rebel Scrum Guide appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

I love LEGO, I love building great teams so I thought: why don’t I build the greatest First Lego League team I’ve ever built? Through my practice I’ve become convinced that atmosphere in a team is the greatest driver of performance, joy and success. I view the atmosphere as sculpture. It’s a rough block when you start out with a new team. It could have some nice edges. But overall it needs careful shaping. The first step with a new team is getting to know each other. With the method I describe here you can easily break the ice and lay a foundation for a safe atmosphere.

Safety is the foundation for great creativity.

How to get to know each other with The Teammate Quiz

Insights after the Teammate Quiz with FLL kids

I found that the kids were more willing to cooperate in sub-teams because they would discover new shared interests. They were eager to build LEGO with newfound ‘friends’.

Secondly, I found it hard to steer the conversation away from computer games. I like to avoid discussing computer games because they bring a competitive mindset, induce bragging and lead to shallow conversations. I would be interested in how other people deal with this.

Lastly I found that kids needed way more tips to keep the conversation going than adults. They seem to be naturally more interested in themselves than in others.

Share to help other people!

If this article was useful, remember to share it with other people who might benefit. You can point them to my facebook page about teamwork. You can also point them to LinkedIn. If you’re interested in LEGO MINDSTORMS specific information I have a separate website called Anton’s Mindstorms.

The post What I learned by coaching FLL kids part 1: how to build a fresh team in 6 steps appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

I once worked in a team where one of the team members would regularly skip team meetings. And if she attended, she’d only be there for half the time. It felt like she was unmotivated to contribute. At times it even felt like sabotage. The strange thing was that I knew that person as a hard-working and honest. So I decided to investigate and have a chat. It turned out her honest intention was to save the company money by focussing on work she felt was more valuable. Her actions seemed like sabotage on the surface but her intention was to be more productive.

Investigating the intent

What helped in this situation is carefully making the distinction between actions and intentions. Aligning your actions with the things you want to achieve is hard. And it gets worse: misreading other people’s intentions might upset you and lead to conflict.

For instance, imagine someone makes a sneer at you. You can let it hurt you. And then you can hit back with something even nastier. You could also investigate the intent. Try to investigate it calmly. Usually there’s an unmet need behind a sneer. The sneering person has probably failed to ask nicely. Try asking ‘What is it you need?’ or ‘What did you want to tell with that remark?’ Pro tip: avoid asking ‘Why?’ — this can be perceived as judging and escalate a conflict.

In the book ‘Effect’, the authors call this the law of heterogeneous substances. Action and intention seems one and the same – in other words: homogenous – but really aren’t. Upon closer investigation however, they are heterogenous. They are made up of different things.

Escaping the road to hell

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I once – naively – believed that if only I was honest and intended well, people would appreciate everything I did. I learned through frustration, conflict and disappointment that this was not the case.

Three strategies will help you get off that road to hell.

1. Empathize: before you act, try to imagine what impact your action will have on the other.
2. Communicate: Explain why you are doing things while you are doing them.
3. Be patient: You can generally assume other people will make no distinction between your actions and intentions. They could react in unexpected ways.

Reputation en relationship

When other people guess at the intentions behind your actions, your reputation is a big factor. And your actions and words make up your reputation. Seeing intent and communicating your intent will improve your reputation. This will in turn ensure that people guess wrong less often.

The same goes more or less for relationships: great relationships are built on shared values and intentions. Building solid relationships will give you the benefit of the doubt when people guess at your intentions.

Conclusion: great teamwork does not come from good intentions alone

You will be a better team player if you see the distinction between actions and intentions. This goes both for your actions and the actions of others. And there’s more good news: great relationships and a good reputation will cut you some slack. Now go be a nice team player and share this article!

The post Teamwork tip 3: Escape the road to hell by looking at intentions appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.

Long-term and short-term team performance

There are a lot of things in life that I’d love to do, but don’t. Some examples: just staying in bed when I have to work, eating that whole bag of crisps, binge-watching a Netflix series, just staring out of the window,… These are short-term urges and they will get me in trouble in the long run.

These urges come from the proverbial belly. The belly points us in the direction of our needs. Luckily there’s also a proverbial head to keep the belly in check. The head steers us towards the shoulds.

In every team, people have stuff they should do for the team and the stuff they just need to do from time to time. It’s a fact of life. But how can you balance the two while keeping productivity up?

The rebelling belly

When you’re born, you’re all belly. As you grow up you gradually learn social behavior. You get better at planning and long-term goals. Your head kicks into action.

The belly does not go away, however — and that’s a good thing. The belly stays to remind the head of your bodily needs. It even keeps tabs and can intervene at inconvenient times if you ignore it for too long. The belly rebels against overexertion.

Why is all belly and head stuff so important for teamwork? In the teams I coach, people are using their heads most of the time. They are expected to! This means they tend to ignore their proverbial belly.

Ignoring the belly is a dangerous thing because having too many unmet needs can make people cranky, stressed, or depressed. None of that is good for teamwork. Conclusion? We humans need to balance the head and the belly.

The art of balancing head and belly

“Balance? That’s boring,” you might say: “In our team, it’s rock and roll! Stretching limits!” I have discovered however, that balance can be very dynamic and slippery. Take any YouTube video of an extreme sports athlete: their art is extreme dynamic balance!

So, for teamwork work/life balance means:

• Creating some room for needs between all of the shoulds.
• Get off your butt and start doing something when you’re ready.
• Make time to unwind when you feel pressured.
• Getting some proper alone time when you’ve been talking a lot.

Where’s the threshold? It depends. I try to be mindful of my focus: when my productivity drops I take a break. It’s not hard to notice a productivity drop, but it’s hard to act on it. At first, this felt counterintuitive. I used to think that the best remedy for lowered productivity was just working harder or drinking more coffee. Taking a break, however, rests the mind. The rest usually brings insight into why the productivity dropped in the first place.

Meditate for 15 minutes per day. If you don’t have 15 minutes, meditate for an hour.

Zen saying

Taking true breaks

There are fake breaks and true breaks. A fake break is just doing something else with your proverbial head: checking your email, checking social media or playing a computer game. This kind of activity doesn’t give the mind any break.

A true break is just doing nothing with the head. Activities that work well for me are:

• Talking a walk
• Chatting over a cup of coffee
• Going to the toilet without a smartphone
• Peeling an orange
• Mindfully drinking coffee or tea

I try to avoid mindlessly drinking coffee at my desk. I try to make coffee into a true break. Coffee can be something social or something mindful.

Conclusion: maximize teamwork by balancing work-life

Productivity and rest, the individual and the team, the needs, and the shoulds: they are all deeply intertwined and need to be balanced continuously.

Does this mean that the team should work less? Should you set your ambitions lower? Not at all! You need to work better. Working your butt off is important to achieve great goals. However, you can only really work your butt off if you carefully tune the balance between belly and head.

About this series of articles

This article is part of a series of articles about teamwork. Together they form a summary of the book summary of ‘Effect’. It’s a book full of from a team of ice skating champions. In the previous article, I wrote about how the things you do are often contrary to the effect you desire.

My next article in this series will be about investigating the intent behind other people’s actions and how that helps to create better teams! Are their bellies or heads speaking? Subscribe here and don’t miss the next piece.

The post balance needs and shoulds appeared first on Wendbaar Groeien.