Quotes About Communication

Contrary to the assumptions of his rivals, Rich O'Connor had no tolerance for touchy-feely off-site meetings. In fact, his staff had come to refer to his meetings as "hug-free zones," a term they coined during Telegraph's first management retreat five years earlier.

small gaps between executives high up in an organization become major discrepancies by the time they reach employees below

All great relationships, the ones that last over time, require productive conflict in order to grow. This is true in marriage, parenthood, friendship, and certainly business.

One of the most difficult challenges for a leader who wants to instill accountability on a team is to encourage and allow the team to serve as the first and primary accountability mechanism.

I'd say that I'm good at solving problems, doing analysis—stuff like that. What I'm not so good at is communicating with human beings." He stopped. "I mean, it's not that I can't do it, but I really prefer people who aren't sensitive. I like to have conversations with people on a purely intellectual level and not have to worry about what they're feeling or anything like that. Does that make sense?

Martin didn't attack statements like that with emotion. He preferred what he liked to call a Sarcratic approach—a sarcastic version of the Socratic method.

Some people are hard to hold accountable because they are so helpful. Others because they get defensive. Others because they are intimidating. I don't think it's easy to hold anyone accountable, not even your own kids.

of the team members. Kathryn continued, "I want all of you challenging each other about what you are doing, how you are spending your time, whether you are making enough progress.

No, trust is not the same as assuming everyone is on the same page as you, and that they don't need to be pushed. Trust is knowing that when a team member does push you, they're doing it because they care about the team.

Harmony itself is good, I suppose, if it comes as a result of working through issues constantly and cycling through conflict. But if it comes only as a result of people holding back their opinions and honest concerns, then it's a bad thing.

Yeah, in my last company we called it 'disagree and commit.' You can argue about something and disagree, but still commit to it as though everyone originally bought into the decision completely.

But I can assure you that we're going to find the right person. That means everyone here will be interviewing candidates and pushing to find someone who can demonstrate trust, engage in conflict, commit to group decisions, hold their peers accountable, and focus on the results of the team, not their own ego.

Building an effective, cohesive team is extremely hard. But it's also simple.

All great relationships, the ones that last over time, require productive conflict in order to grow. This

Great teams do not hold back with one another," she said. "They are unafraid to air their dirty laundry. They admit their mistakes, their weaknesses, and their concerns without fear of reprisal.

DISCIPLINE FOUR: REINFORCE ORGANIZATIONAL CLARITY THROUGH HUMAN SYSTEMS.

When people come together and set aside their individual needs for the good of the whole, they can accomplish what might have looked impossible on paper. They do this by eliminating the politics and confusion that plague most organizations. As a result, they get more done in less time and with less cost.

BE COHESIVE. BE CLEAR. OVER-COMMUNICATE. REINFORCE.

3. How do you talk about and use the answers to these questions?

Building a cohesive leadership team is the most critical of the four disciplines because it enables the other three. It is also the most elusive because it requires considerable interpersonal commitment from an executive team and its leader.

identify one particular insight from their profile that they feel highlights a weakness that they would like to address for the good of the team.

I'm not saying we need to be spending more time in meetings, necessarily. But we definitely need to be having more than one type of meeting.

This blindness occurs because what executives believe are small disconnects between themselves and their peers actually look like major rifts to people deeper in the organization.

When an executive decides not to confront a peer about a potential disagreement, he or she is dooming employees to waste time, money, and emotional energy dealing with unresolvable issues. This causes the best employees to start looking for jobs in less dysfunctional organizations, and it creates an environment of disillusionment, distrust, and exhaustion for those who stay.