There are more avenues to helping a leader realise they need to change to create psychological safety than I shared in my blog last week. While showing them what was happening is a good start, you also need to make sure they understand what they can have if they make changes. That is, answer the question “What’s In
Last week I wrote about Kate and her experience of “psychological warfare” which is a culture where psychological safety does not exist. Upon reflection, Kate realised that while she created psychological safety for her team she did not create it for herself. So when she spoke up, her boss and others on the executive felt threatened and
I expect the term psychological warfare interests you because you are wondering which kind I would be writing about. Would it be about China, the US Election or state border restrictions in Australia? None of those. It’s about needing to operate in a culture where psychological safety is not just lacking, it’s non-existent. Recently I
I don’t know if you have noticed, but I have been blogging about measurement, data, and statistics for the past 19 weeks. All to defeat quantifornication – the act of pulling numbers out of thin air for decision making. Numbers that are seemingly reliable but are not. This week, Tuesday 10th November at 15:00hrs AEDT,
“Provided with the freedom to choose, decision makers are likely to act more rationally and be more fully behind the decision.” Is how I finished last week’s blog. Optifying your advice is delivering the freedom to choose in the optimum way. Your optimum way. And it follows the Rule of Three. People like things in threes.