Strong Leaders Serve with Teri Schmidt

180. Leading Through the Tension: Creating High-Performing Diverse Teams with Henrik Bresman

• Teri Schmidt

Share episode

 Building a diverse team doesn't automatically lead to better performance — and without the right environment, it can even create new challenges. 

In this episode, Teri is joined again by leadership and team performance expert Henrik Bresman to explore why psychological safety is the key to unlocking the true potential of diverse teams. We’ll also discuss practical steps leaders can take to foster belonging, innovation, and resilience in today’s uncertain environments. 

Resources:



Connect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/teri-m-schmidt/

Get 1-on-1 leadership support from Teri here: https://www.strongleadersserve.com/coaching

Set up an intro call with Teri: https://calendly.com/terischmidt/discoverycall

Have you ever been told that simply adding more diversity to your team will automatically lead to better performance or groundbreaking innovation? While diversity can be a powerful force for teams, research shows, it doesn't guarantee better outcomes, and in some cases, without the right conditions, it can even create new challenges. Especially in uncertain environments. I'm Terry Schmidt, executive and leadership coach at Strong Leaders Serve, where we help compassionate driven leaders transform potential into performance. And today I'm excited to dive into this complex and important topic with a guest who should be familiar to you from episode 1 74, Henrik Breman. Henrik is a professor of organizational behavior at N CID and a recognize expert on leadership, high performance teams and organizational change. He works with companies and public sector organizations around the world to lead large scale transformations, and his research has appeared in the Academy of Management Journal, Harvard Business Review, and the Economist. He is also the co-author of the bestselling book, XTE, how to Build Teams That Lead, innovate and Succeed, henrik received his PhD from MIT and brings real world experience as a former manager, consultant, and entrepreneur into his work. In today's conversation, we'll explore why diversity alone isn't enough. What hidden barriers prevent diverse teams from reaching their potential, and how psychological safety can change everything. We'll also talk about practical ways leaders can create environments where every voice is heard. And why? Avoiding the topic of diversity altogether could be a serious risk for your team. Let's dive in.

Teri Schmidt:

Well, welcome back to the Strong Leaders Serve Podcast, Henrik. It's so great to have you for another episode.

Henrik Bresman:

It is my pleasure. Great to be back.

Teri Schmidt:

Yeah, and for anyone who hasn't had the opportunity to listen yet, we had an excellent conversation about teams back on episode 1 74, and we started having another conversation about diversity. And realize that might be a little bit too much for one episode. So you graciously said that you would come on and do the second episode, and I'm really looking forward to our conversation today.

Henrik Bresman:

Me too. Me too.

Teri Schmidt:

And you know most of what we're gonna be talking about you published an article about some research that you had done with Dr. Amy Abson back in Harvard Business Review and. And

Henrik Bresman:

Hmm.

Teri Schmidt (2):

one of the findings there was that despite what is, I would say, popular belief, you found that increased diversity on a team doesn't always lead to improved performance. So I'm curious, what did you find are the primary causes of the difficulty when working on diverse teams and how are they exacerbated in uncertain times?

Henrik Bresman:

Such a big question and such an important question. I, I wonder if I should step back a little bit and, and and start with where I usually start a conversation on on this topic. I, I, I work with different audiences, big groups, small groups, senior leaders, emerging leaders. Private sector, public sector. And whenever I ask the question, on average, think of a, a team that is incredibly diverse, one that is the opposite, very homogeneous, which one do you think performed better? Now, the on average part of that question is a little bit devious because of course the answer is, it depends on, on the context. But on average. Most people answer that question between 80 and a hundred percent in my experience. Answer that question. Well, of course the diverse team. And then you have a, a conversation about. You know why that is? It's the different perspectives, et cetera. And, and then someone typically brings up the, the other side of it, that the, that also working with a diverse team also involves communication costs, et cetera. But typically people just assume that it's the diverse team. And then I show this this picture of that, that is, displayed in this article that you, that you mentioned that actually on average the homogeneous teams do a little bit better. We, we looked at this in a context of the pharmaceutical industry, but this basic finding has been found again and again and at least two meta-analyses that I'm aware have looked at. Thousands of teams where, where they find the same basic thing related to demographic diversity. And I, when I, when I bring this in, then I need to rush to, to tell everyone that, well, if you're now thinking that you, that you need to get back to the office and fire anyone on the team and hire a bunch of people just like yourself. Say stop. No, your intuition is actually correct. And then I show this this picture that shows that while the, the line showing the average goes slightly down, all of the best performing teams are diverse teams. And that starts in really interesting conversation because what that what that graph shows you, and I need to remind myself that we actually don't film this. So. Imagine what, what this looks like. What what, what you see then in, in this graph is that there's great potential for diversity and in fact diversity is necessary for breakthrough performance to do really well. However, it is not sufficient. We need one more thing. And what is that? That is. Leadership. And what part of leadership? Well, what our research then and that's what we talk about in this article that you mentioned is that absolutely critical to get the potential out diversity is to have psychological safety. Because there, there's a lot of. Challenges related to communication, translation and coordination across differences. And if you don't have the psychological safety required to actually speak about those differences, about the different questions you have, the different perspectives you have things that you know, and also things that you don't know, then you won't actually be able to leverage that, that huge potential that we see in, diversity. So I'll stop there for now, but I, I hope that gives your listeners an overview of what our research showed.

Teri Schmidt (2):

definitely. I'm glad that you took us back there to give that overview. When you talk about the communication challenges or, or some of the challenges that show up on teams can you give a little bit more detail? I think people probably have an idea, but I'd love to hear about. What that looks like in real life for people.

Henrik Bresman:

So that's such a good question. Many people, not everyone, but many people assumes that that means that people are at each other's throats. That these are teams that just don't get along more often. However, it is teams sitting in their corners nodding their heads and not saying much at all.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Mm-hmm.

Henrik Bresman:

And and that goes back to. Human nature. We we like to leave a good impression. We, we like to be seen as positive and, and and helpful and all of that. And, and if we have questions and doubts about what's on the table, then we tell ourselves that that might not be very helpful. And so then we'd rather don't say anything. So, so that's what it typically looks like. It's. And polite, not, not aggressive, and it's really driven by this human tendency to wanna be liked, to leave a good, good impression. And we're worried that we won't, if we speak up about something we disagree with.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah. Yeah. I'm glad you made that distinction.'cause I could see a lot of people thinking that, you know, these are just you know, high conflict teams where everybody is, like you said, getting down everyone's throat. I think, when you even think about simple things with regards to communication, and I think you mentioned it in the article too, there are are certain assumed practices that become more difficult when you have a d diverse team. Different

Henrik Bresman:

Yes.

Teri Schmidt (2):

operating, different ways of communicating.

Henrik Bresman:

Mm-hmm.

Teri Schmidt (2):

are more difficult on diverse teams.

Henrik Bresman:

So I, it, it's, it, what, what you're asking about what, what are the particular challenges perhaps, particularly in a, in a role of a leader is that it's always, I mean, the assumption here is that we are talking about teams that are working under some pressure in some fast moving en environment. And, and in that environment, then you need to come, you need to learn, you need to come up with new solutions. And, and yet we know that, again, going back to human nature, it's exactly under those high pressure circumstances that our, our brains tell us that we need to move. Because we, we have these experiences stored in memory about how we did this before. And our, particularly when there's anxiety and pressure, our brain tells us that we gotta move. We, we have, we have an answer here to, to the problem. And, and that's how you end up with the right answer to the, to the wrong question usually. And, and so what's, what's the way out? Easy to say, difficult to do, but it's exactly in those situations that as a leader, you need to stop and really listen to what people say. And that's hard when you, you feel that you know already what it is that you need to do. And it's particularly hard. And now I'm circling back to the diversity part. When, when someone comes with input that you can't. That you don't naturally connect to, so to to really pay attention to what is said and,

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah.

Henrik Bresman:

and stay with the problem. Here's something that I often say to executives that you, you have, you have solution space and you have problem space, and. Sure. There, there, there are situations in which teams they, they stay too long of a problem space and they're paralyzed by analysis. But in my experience, and it's not only mine that is not the most common problem. Most common problem is that we run straight to solution space. So what you always need to do when you're in a new territory is that you need to stay in problem space a little bit longer. Know what you're co comfortable with. And, and that discomfort and that challenge becomes so much greater in a diverse team because then you really need to listen to things that, that are new to you. And take that in and, and ask questions that you may not have asked before and get answers that might derail where you thought you were going. All of this makes, it makes it hard. Stay in the problem space. But that's, that's the challenge. I, I, I often say to, in my classes, that, that the greatest gift you can give to yourself as a leader is, is to develop your your capacity to ask better questions, to stay in that pro problem space before you move in to to solutions.

Teri Schmidt (2):

And then you don't get to the space you were talking about before where you have the right answer to the wrong question. Yeah.

Henrik Bresman:

Yes, yes. It's a huge, and by the way, I should say that, that's, I, I believe that was Peter Drucker, who first. Said this. He, he talked, so I, I, I want to give credit where credit is due. Peter Drucker, this original management guru, I think he was the first person who was called the management guru for us professor types. That's very annoying because he didn't even have a PhD to work hard to get where we were. And he was this journalist. He, he was brilliant. He, he was before. Time. And, and he was the, as far as I know, the first person who now decades ago said that, that the biggest challenge for leaders is never to find the right solution. It is to find the right question. And I, and I really.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah. You know, I, I think it sounds great and I wholeheartedly agree with it, but I'm, I'm just thinking of that leader out there who's like, I'm going through these times that, you know, I have all this pressure on me. Why do I wanna take on this additional cognitive load of trying to, you know, figure out how to stay in the problem space, how to. Inquire more and ask for more input that I know might result in solutions that were not in my original plan. why is it worth it?

Henrik Bresman:

Well. I would say that there's, there are few other few responses to that question. One is that, well if you want to do well, you may not have, have a choice because ending up with the right answer to the wrong question will, you'll end up in a place that is not good when it comes to performance. But then there is one more thing that we found that I found interesting and, and important at this work on psychological safety is that what we found in these diverse teams that were. That had an above average psychological safety climate. We found that not only did they do better, but they felt better too. So there was higher satisfaction scores as well. And, and this is where I'm getting quite excited about the work we're doing now in the space of, of. Psychological safety. I'm co-editing an issue with Amy and, and a couple of other colleagues around this. And we're really digging into to what we know and what we don't know about psychological safety in fast moving environments. And one reason why I personally am so excited about this is the the promise the potential of psychological safety to not only lead to learning and performance. But also to better the mental health outcomes, which is something that I care about, but also this person for whom you ask that question, why would you care? Why would you take this on? Well, that's, that's another reason that it's, it's all, all good for, for our mental health to live and, and, and work in psychologically safe environments.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Mm-hmm. Which is critically important, and especially in tumultuous times.

Henrik Bresman:

Yes, and we do live in teal's times, don't we? I'm in, I'm in Asia, but I hear that there are things going on over in the US these days as well.

Teri Schmidt (2):

There are there, there definitely are. And you know, I, I think the, the wellbeing elements are, are critically important. I. Especially with everything that everyone has going on outside of work, the last

Henrik Bresman:

Yes,

Teri Schmidt (2):

to do is find that where you spend the majority of your day is somewhere that negatively impacting your health.

Henrik Bresman:

yes yes. No, it's. Important.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Excited to see that. Well. Say we have a leader that's that's bought into this. What are some concrete practices that you and Dr. Edmondson found can help employ psychological safety on these diverse teams?

Henrik Bresman:

Well, so the first thing I wanna say is that it, it, it is, it is a bit of a challenge. I want to acknowledge that. It's hard because in diverse teams, you by definition are people who, who who are motivated in different ways, and also they might perceive your behavior as a leader in, in, in different ways. I mean, you, you have the best of intentions, but there's still a little bit of a blind spot of, you know, how your behavior and your actions land. On the team member might be different from how you, how you intend. And of course, in a diverse team, this, this challenge, which is always there is is multiplied. So the, I have no silver bullets for you here, but something that something that is always true is that it will depend on your context and also who you are and what you can do authentically. So with, with that caveat I often. Think about, and this is certainly something that I've learned a lot from, from Amy, I wanna say that the thoughts I'm sharing here is very much from from her thinking. I, I like to think of a three stage process where you start by, by setting the stage agreeing as a team where you are as it really relates to. Your understanding of the level of uncertainty, what you, what you know, and what you don't know. And then related to that, what, what can you expect when it comes to failure rates? It's a, it's a continuum. There is one very certain space where you basically have all the answers and you don't expect any failures and. And if failures happen, they're, they're bad. And, and maybe it's someone who's been sloppy, but then as you move along this, this continuum, some, somewhere in the middle, you have a setting, like a hospital setting where certainly mistakes, errors are bad, but they happen all the time. Anyone who's been in a, an emergency, room will know that it's impossible to get everything right. The key is to, to speak about the mistakes you make so you can learn from'em and do better. And then the, the other extreme is pharmaceutical drug development. Say where you, you not only are failures not bad, you, you must have them so that you can eventually succeed. For those who know anything about pharmaceutical drug development, then you know that something like 95% of all projects, they, they fail and they have to so that they learn from'em and move on. And if you don't agree on where you are. Well then you can't even start if you, the leader thinks we are out here in experimentation space. And of course, failure is something that we need to have, but the rest of the team, perhaps gun shy from a previous com experience is, is absolutely intolerant of any, any, mistakes or believe that everyone else is well then, then you can't even start to have a conversation. So that's the starting point, to have a foundation of a common understanding of where you are, what you know, what you don't know, and and implications for for failures. The second piece is, so that's step one. Step two is what we might call inclusive leadership. It, it's really to invite participation by reaching out to people. If it's in a, a virtual environment like this, well then it would be me reaching out and say, Terry, I need to, I need to hear from you. You, you're out there, you're in in the us I'm here in Asia, and, and you see things that I don't see. What, what can you tell me? I'm new to this role. I need, I need help. And this, this does a couple of things. First, it it, it lowers the psychological. Cost of speaking up, but it also raises sub psychological cost of, of being silent. Because if I really call you out and say, I need help, well then it's weird to just sit there and not say anything. So that's the, that's the second piece. And here is what role modeling is so important. It's you hear this all the time if you're in talk about leadership, but it, it is true. You need to role model by perhaps sharing stories about. How, how, how you failed and what you learned and how, and that's where the personal piece come comes in. How can you do that? Authentically A lot of leaders, they, they, they are challenged because they think that their authority somehow is, undermined if they share the fact that there's something that they don't know. I actually think we talked about this last time. I said something along the lines of how of course they know that you don't know everything and you know that. You don't know everything, but they don't know that, you know? I, I think that's something important to to remember. So that's the second stage. And then the finally is that you need to respond productively when people speak up. And that's easy when everything people say is gold. But of course, that's not always the case. And, and so people might say something dumb. Now if you then say Thank you, but that's dumb, well then you'll kill any, any possibility for psychological safety right away. So of course you need to come up with some way of praising the courage it took to speak up and then have a separate conversation about how, how it fits to the, the solution.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Mm-hmm.

Henrik Bresman:

So. Those three pieces set the stage, invite participation, and then respond productively. I think that's a good starting point to think about how to, how to build this and, and you asked how do you do this in diverse teams? Well, the way I think about it is that it's, it's the same process. Wherever you are, it's just a little bit more challenging and you need to listen a little bit harder and maybe invite a few more people in a diverse team. But the, the logic is the same.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And I think on diverse teams, it, it may be about maybe remaining curious for longer as well. Someone gives a response, it's not assuming that you understand exactly what they meant by that response.

Henrik Bresman:

Yes. Oh gosh, that is so important. I, I love that word, curiosity. That's another capacity to really nurture. I. The no, a, a wrong turn that many leaders take is that they, they ask questions that they think that they know the answers to already, and, and team members, they will see that. And, and that discourages participation. If you follow your curiosity and ask open-ended questions that you don't know the answers to that, that is a far more productive conversation. And we're back to the importance of asking questions.

Teri Schmidt (2):

right. Yeah. Which can be really hard to do. And you know, especially for new leaders, like I think we talked about last conversation, when you do feel maybe a little insecure and we

Henrik Bresman:

Yes.

Teri Schmidt (2):

you know, you don't want to be vulnerable and let people know that you don't know everything, even though they already know that you don't know everything.

Henrik Bresman:

And, and then there's, there's one more thing. There's another reason why it's so seductive to do that as a new leader, because if you are in a genuinely uncertain environment, the fact is that people want reassurance. They actually gravitate to leaders who say, I have only, I, I have all the answers. Only I can fix it. Just, just follow me. And people will thank you. For, for saying that, because that makes them feel feel better. But of course you don't have all the answers. And you need a lot of people around you to fix something that is new and different and complex. So in the short run, people will celebrate you.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Mm-hmm.

Henrik Bresman:

And that can be quite seductive in the long run. Of course, it will lead to to failure because by definition you don't know everything.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah, yeah, excellent point. If, if we could all be longer term thinkers that would stay in the problem space as long as we need to, I think we would experience more success more quickly. Ironically.

Henrik Bresman:

It, it is a yes and it is a bit of a paradox and there's a lot of colleagues of mine. I'll just name one Ella my Specter, who's a colleague of mine at insead. She's done a lot of work on paradoxical thinking. And that's exactly what this is about. You need to think long term and short term at the same time. You need to, you need to stay in the problem space for longer, but you also need to get into the solution space. You need to think about both at the same time. And, and that's, that's something worth practicing because if you can start to make headway there, you'll be a better leader.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Well, my last question, it might be a little controversial. It, it is that, you know, diversity has almost become a dirty word in some circles. so I am curious, what are the risks to teams when diversity isn't recognized, talked about or planned and adjusted for doing some of the things that we just talked about.

Henrik Bresman:

Well, so there are two scenarios that comes to mind for me. One is where it's just not talked about and recognized because people are worried about using the word. I, I, I spoke to a company, European company active in the US just, just last week, and it's a real issue for them that they, their language around diversity inclusion, they, they now are worried that that might actually be, be. Be illegal or, or punished somehow. So it's, it, it becomes more than just leaders being comfortable or, or not comfortable. And, and, and I, there it's, it's, I think this is playing out. That's a real, real concern. The fact is that to take on diverse problems and complex problems in the world, you need diverse teams to take it. To take it on. That's just a fact. We know this. In that context, it's the people, teams, organizations, they come up with new language to, to get around these blockers, and then they, they talk about the same thing, but they use new words and, and, and I, I, I think that. In the current environment, maybe that's what what you need to do. You stay true to your values. You're doing what you think is important for both the performance and the wellbeing of your team members, and then you put a different label on it because in the current moment, the environment demands that of you. The more common, let me can I take a couple of more minutes on this, this question again, slightly different direction. The more common issue that I come across actually, because thankfully, you know, particularly outside of the us this is the, the, the language of diversity, inclusion, inclusive leadership. It's, it's not. It's not banned. You, you can use it. However managers, leaders tend to tend to be nervous about it and, and still, and then they might come to someone like me and say, okay, all right. I, I think I. I do believe in, in this sort of conceptually. But you know, now, now shareholders, they are get a bit antsy and, and, and so I need to give them the business case. What's the business case? And, and then we get into a pretty tricky territory because. There are plenty of business benefits. To diversity and inclusion. But if you frame in terms of the business case and say, give me the business case, you demand the business case. What, paradoxically, what may happen then is that through that language, you other, the minority, you undermine psychological safety and you won't get there. Get to the business benefit because you create fear And anxiety around, oh God, now I, need to show that, that, that the ROI is there. Um, if on the other hand you frame the issue in terms of breaking groupthink, in terms of imagination, innovation, learning. And mental health, well, then the business benefits will follow. So this is a somewhat nuanced argument that I that I hope, um, that leaders get that the sort of, the, the, I, I fully understand the pressure for the business case, but the best way of actually getting the business benefits is, is to to frame the, the challenge in broader, broader terms.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah, that does make sense. And I, you know, I think that result of group think That you're trying to avoid and break, is so much closer concepts that people who are asking for the business case are, are more comfortable with. So, you know, we need to break that group think in order to deliver innovation. to have innovation on the team,

Henrik Bresman:

yes, absolutely.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Yeah. Yeah. And I, I am just thinking again about like what you said about those people in different corners. You know, when and, and having people in diverse corners, they're almost put there because groupthink is

Henrik Bresman:

Yeah.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Um, and whether that just be the way the leader sees the world,

Henrik Bresman:

Yeah.

Teri Schmidt (2):

That is creating so many blind spots because you have those people in the different corners that aren't necessarily talking to each other.

Henrik Bresman:

And now right at towards the end you introduced this incredibly important word, which is blind spots. we all have them and, and, uh, and it's important to be curious. To use that other important word about your blind spots. Um, and, and you can find a lot of those blind spots by bringing in the people sitting in the corners.

Teri Schmidt (2):

Well, I, I think that's a, a great note to end on. Of course, in the last episode, we shared all the resources that you have

Henrik Bresman:

Mm-hmm.

Teri Schmidt (2):

but is there anywhere else that people should go to follow you if they want to specifically see the work that you're doing on this topic?

Henrik Bresman:

I, I, I try to post thoughts, um, once in a while, uh, on LinkedIn. I have a. Uh, newsletter on LinkedIn called X News with my colleague friend Deborah and Kona, where we talk about, um, um, these issues, uh, the book that we talked about last time. uh, X teams. Uh, and then we, we talk a bit about. Our different, uh, methods for, for developing our skills as team leaders. We have a couple of tools that we have developed a, uh, simulation that we're very excited about, called xchange, and we have a 360 degree instrument called X 360. We like the X there, as you can tell. The Xte, uh, book. We have, uh, card games where people can explore how, how they, um, how they view leadership.'cause it turns out that people have different views, not surprisingly about what leadership, um, is and, uh, and is not. So I'll encourage you to go and explore that. Um, so that's it. Thank you for having me on again and, uh, always, always a pleasure to see where the conversation is going.

Teri Schmidt (2):

yes. Thank you again for giving up your time.

What a powerful conversation. Thank you again to Henrik for taking of his time to come and have this conversation with me as he shared. Diversity alone isn't enough. It's the environment we create as leaders that determines whether diverse voices are heard, respected, and able to contribute meaningfully. So I'm leaving you with a challenge as you step back into your role this week. I challenge you to identify one meeting or conversation where you can intentionally invite input from someone who sees things differently and then actively show that their voice matters. Thank you again for listening, and I hope you have a great week. As a strong leader who serves.