It's an Inside Job
Imagine responding to challenges with quiet strength and living with a clearer sense of direction. It's an Inside Job, hosted by Jason Birkevold Liem, guides you there. This podcast is for anyone who believes cultivating inner resources is the most powerful way to shape their outer reality. We explore practical approaches for fostering resilience, nurturing well-being, and embedding intentionality into your daily rhythm.
On Mondays, we feature longer conversations with insightful individuals, uncovering practical wisdom on how your inner world serves as a compass for your outer experiences, shaping everything from your career to your relationships and personal fulfilment.
On BiteSize Fridays, get concise, actionable guidance for managing stress, making thoughtful choices, and nurturing your growth. If you're ready to consciously build a more aligned and fulfilling life, tune in.
After all, actual growth is an inside job!
It's an Inside Job
Lead Through the Breakdown: Turning Team Conflict into Growth and Trust
Get in touch with us! We’d appreciate your feedback and comments.
“Learning is leadership. If we can embrace our collective leadership through the lens of learning, we will go farther together.” - Susan Asiyanbi
“If you're not regularly reflecting on your leadership, it's much harder to lead others. Start with self.” – Kim Reynolds-Williams
Learn how to transform team conflict into powerful moments of growth with leadership experts Susan Asiambi and Kim Reynolds-Williams. This episode offers actionable strategies for fostering psychological safety, building resilient teams, and mastering the art of honest communication.
What if the moments your team avoids the most—conflict, misalignment, and tension—are actually the keys to stronger trust, innovation, and clarity?
Key Takeaway Insights and Tools
- Breakdowns Are Not Failures – They're Entry Points for Growth
Reframe team conflict as a learning opportunity to reduce fear and build cohesion.
[00:06:17] - Radically Lower the Threshold for What Counts as a Breakdown
Don’t wait for dramatic moments—address even minor tensions to prevent future fallout.
[00:07:24] - Vulnerability Builds Momentum When Reinforced
Leaders must actively model and invite vulnerability, then recognize it when it happens.
[00:15:25] - Three Pillars of Communication: Communication, Engagement, Alignment
Effective communication isn't just telling people what to do—it's engaging them and aligning on implications.
[00:31:16]
Bios:
Susan Asiyanbi is the advisor CEOs call when the stakes are high, the dynamics are complex, and the path forward isn’t obvious. A strategist, pattern recognizer, and trusted executive advisor, she helps senior leaders navigate the technical and adaptive dimensions of change— bridging strategy and culture so leadership teams don’t just move fast but move together.
Today, as CEO of The Olori Network®, she leads a team of experts who help executive leaders identify the root causes of persistent challenges, shift entrenched patterns, and align their teams to move with clarity and cohesion.
Kim Reynolds-Williams is a partner at The Olori Network, where she coaches, trains, and advises C-suite and senior leaders to unlock the full potential of their teams and organizations. A trusted thought partner on executive team effectiveness, Kim brings deep expertise in strategy, team dynamics, and leadership development—shaped by years of experience leading cross-functional teams and supporting top executives.
She is the principal architect of The Olori Network’s leadership thinking, designing practical tools, assessments, and learning experiences on topics such as decision-making, accountability, meeting culture, trust-building, and executive team design.
The Alori Network: www.alorinetwork.com
Sign up for the weekly IT'S AN INSIDE JOB NEWSLETTER
- takes 5 seconds to fill out
- receive a fresh update every Wednesday
This is It's an Inside Job, and I'm your host, Jason Lim. This is the show where we explore the stories, strategies, and science behind growing resilience, nurturing well-being, and leading with intent. Because when it comes down to it, it's all an inside job. Hey folks welcome back to the show and the long-form discussions that i have every monday question for you what if the very moments your team dreads most such as misalignment breakdowns and uncomfortable conversations are actually the ones that hold the most potential for growth Today, I am joined by two fascinating guests, Susan Asiambi and Kim Reynolds-Williams. Now, they are both experienced executive advisors who work with senior leaders when the stakes are high and the answers aren't obvious. So let me give you a brief background on both of my guests. Now, Susan, she is the CEO of the Alori Network. She is the go-to advisor for CEOs navigating complex dynamics and high-pressure decisions. She's a strategist and a trusted thought partner. She helps leadership teams bridge strategy and culture so they just don't move fast, they move together. Now, Kim is a partner at the Elori Network, where she coaches and advises C-suite leaders on team effectiveness, trust building, and performance. She's also the architect behind Elori's practical tools and learning frameworks on everything from decision making to meeting culture to executive team design. So in today's conversation, the three of us explore how to reframe breakdowns as learning opportunities and not failures. Why psychological safety and strategic vulnerability are crucial to team effectiveness. How to create genuine team alignment beyond surface level agreement. We also talk about the practical tools for feedback, accountability and courageous communication. Now, we talk candidly about the leadership habits that hold most teams back and the mindset shifts that unlock trust, clarity, and momentum. And while there's a lot to take away from this episode, what comes up near the end might just challenge how you think about your role as a leader, completely and entirely, and shift the way you approach the conversations you've been avoiding. And so without further ado, let's slip into the stream and meet Susan Asiambi and Kim Reynolds-Williams. I'd like to welcome everyone back to It's an Inside Job. Susan, Kim, welcome to the show. Thanks for having us, Jason. Good to be here. Maybe we can start with you, Susan. Could you introduce who you are and what you do? And then we'll follow up with you, Kim. Absolutely. My name is Susan Asiandi. I'm the CEO of the Alori Network. I have spent years leading complex systems and skilled organizations through change, both across the nonprofit and for-profit spaces. At the Alori Network, we study and research what strong executives, teams, boards do differently. And then we spend our time capturing and codifying those insights about what we've learned. It really takes to lead lasting change, whether it be the principles, the practices, the pitfalls. We use all of these insights to help CEOs, presidents, boards and their executive teams move their systems forwards with both a deep commitment to results, but also in a way that can be joyful because we spend most of our waking hours at work. Very true. Very true. Thank you for that, Susan. Kim, welcome to the show. Yeah, Jason, thanks for having us on. My name is Kim Reynolds-Williams. I'm the partner of the Eloria Network. And as Susan shared, we have the great privilege of helping leaders lead and helping them figure out what are the things that they can learn from and what are the things that we've learned that we want to share about what it takes to lead systems and companies. So when Susan mentioned those things over time from different sectors and different companies, We're trying to distill down leadership. We're trying to bottle the essence of what makes it hard, get it out there and far and wide and help people understand what they can do today with their teams as they're trying to navigate the challenges that they're up against. So it's so good to be here. And thanks again for having us. Thank you for that. You know, one of the common trends that are going through organizations, I think globally, especially in the Western world, is this term psychological safety. And I think it gets bandied around and but I think sometimes a lot of people think psychological safety means that everyone in the room has to be happy everyone has to be agree we have to have you know there can't be rocky situations but I think we've talked sort of before we started recording is that conflict or hard conversations are necessity because if we can't address certain issues, and they can show up in many different forms, is that we have, at least from my experience, you have a brittle and fragile organization. I was wondering, perhaps we could kick off our conversation by understanding from your perspective, what do you think about the fact about having hard conversations and understanding what psychological safety truly means at an operational level? Yeah. Kim, I can try to kick us off and then maybe we can riff with Jason a little bit on this topic around conflict and psychological safety. In our work, Jason, we talk about conflict in terms of breakdowns, that if you are on a team and you are working with bright people who have diverse backgrounds, who have different types of experiences at home, at work and otherwise, cultural, gender, you name it. Like our identities are born of all of these beautiful things, but that means we're going to see the world differently. And so we say that breakdowns are learning opportunity. And that if you reframe breakdowns into learning opportunity in terms of breakdowns as conflict, then the inevitable, which will happen whenever you put any group of human beings together, can be framed in a way that is actually much more productive and healthy. Because in our belief system is that we are all about turning breakdowns into breakthroughs. So we work with our CEOs and their executive teams to talk about what are the ways, what can we do when this friction comes up? Because the friction sometimes will be minor and then they build up over time. That friction that comes up may be something overt that pops and then all of a sudden you're like, we have a thing. But how do we use this as a learning opportunity for people to reflect on what's the contribution that I had here to this breakdown? What can we learn about ourselves? What can we learn about the work? And then what might we do differently the next time? And like the mere fact of like changing your mindset as to the breakdown, instead of it being blame and shame into learning and breakthrough creates a real opportunity. But Kim, I know we talk all about frameworks at the Eloria Network. So I'd love to like hear what you would add on. Yeah. So a couple of things that I would add. One of the biggest learnings that we've had, Jason, is that we want people to radically lower the threshold for what they consider to be a breakdown. I think people are really familiar with seeing breakdowns as conflict, right, as overt conflict. But for us, it actually occurs across the spectrum. So the way that we try to coach people to think about it is a breakdown can be anything from, OK, we've missed each other. We just had a miscommunication or there's been a series of smaller bumps we've gotten through them but it's been a bit of a gradual breakdown it might be over conflict but it also might be like there's a thing between us that just doesn't feel it makes it feel harder or more challenging so we're asking people to number one radically lower the bar for what needs to be addressed and two to make it discussable because we believe that there's actually a lot more to gain by taking those things head on. The amazing thing is that when we've had a chance to support clients and to walk through this with them, I think people are often surprised by what they gain and by how much less scary it was. So whether it is the breakdown boogie monster or something, there's actually a lot of power in helping teams and groups see that we thought this was the undiscussable thing that we could not address or talk about, and yet we did it. And so then over time, what we're trying to do is get people to see that you can take on the hardest, most undiscussable things. You can learn from it and reduce the number and you can get through them faster to get on that path to breakthrough that Susan was sharing, because that's ultimately what we're trying to do. Reduce the number of them, get through them faster so that you can get to the bigger work and get to the outcomes that are most important for your company and see that you can actually strengthen culture through breakdowns. It's not actually something you need to see as a negative thing. You can reframe it and see all that there is to gain and strengthen if you're willing to take that work on. When we get into some sort of, let's call that a breakdown or a conflict, it becomes, we can get emotionally entangled. There can be an emotional gravitas in that. And a lot of the times we will default, from my experience, blaming the other person has bad intention. But it's not always about intention. A lot of the times it's about perspective, different perspective. What information are we missing? I mean, from your experience, how can leaders be better at spotting what they're missing? Kim, do you want to start us off? Sure, I'm happy to. I think, Jason, that last part of what you said is maybe the most critical, that you have to start from an understanding that you are missing something. It's not if. It actually is a certainty for us and a belief that we can't possibly see everything. So if you can embrace that mindset and mentality which to be honest I think can be a little bit counter-cultural right we are sort of societally conditioned sometimes to believe that what we see is right what we know to be true is true that those are synonymous and to be positioned as my job is to convince you of what I see and what you're sort of touching on is an orientation that's about I know that my view is incomplete that others have things I might be missing and that I need to have access to. And so that's, I think the first thing we start with people about is let's look at the mindset, let's consider the orientation you have to the people around you, because everything you do after that is gonna be a reflection of that mindset. But Susan, what would you add? Yes, indeed. The curiosity piece, I would really amp up. What am I missing? Like we often tell our clients, here are the questions. What am I missing? How do you see this differently? If we do have a breakdown, instead of starting from let's talk about what happened, let's actually talk about what was my contribution to the breakdown. Because the minute that we start to revisit backwards, we remember the story differently. We start to blame each other. And so we come from the place of what am I missing? I want to be more curious. I want to learn. What do you see differently? And here was my contribution. And so there's something about vulnerability. The piece that Kim talked about, lowering the threshold. The most important way to lower the threshold is asking more questions and like not because it's the right thing to do, because you genuinely want to learn and be curious and being vulnerable. Because the minute you're vulnerable, it allows the other person to not feel like they have to defend themselves, but to also step into that vulnerability around their contributions to whatever the situation might be. Vulnerability is, it does take courage because there may be anxiety, fear, anger, whatever, but it's to kind of push through that. And with vulnerability comes courage means we're able to open up. But in a lot of cases, you know, teams may be sort of on paper. We are a close team. We're a high performing team. We're closely knit. But when you actually break down and talk to them, you'll find that there are a lot of things that they can openly talk about. But sometimes true vulnerability is very hard to open up and expose ourselves, right? Because we're going to think that, you know, there's going to be some sort of blowback or they're going to use it against me. From your experience, ladies, how do you develop that sense of vulnerability? How do you encourage men and women to move into that space in order to have these frank, candid conversations and to fuel, to kindle the curiosity to figure out how can we use the breakdowns, as you said, and move it into breakthroughs. Yeah, absolutely, Jason. A couple of different things that come to mind to me. And if you want people to be more vulnerable, that happens not in one moment in one time. You have to build the strength of relationship. The more I can get to know you, your story, what you believe, why you believe those things under least like situations that don't feel so high stakes. The more I can give grace to you when something happens, because I know a little bit more about you. I can assume different things about you. I can feel more more able to come and ask you a question around like something happened. Like what was going on there? Because I seek understanding. And so one of the first things that we talk to our executives about is not to underestimate the strength of relationships. And that doing so is not a soft skill. It's a sophisticated skill, because often we're like executives, I don't want to deal with feelings. Like we have to deal with results. And I'm like, if you want to deal with results, you want to deal with the sophistication of creating space for your people to actually get to know each other as people so that that can translate to their ability to navigate working together collectively, being able to integrate their teams. That's what's going to amplify and allow you to move forward faster. So I would say that's the first thing at our firm, because we also understand how hard vulnerability can be, particularly when you've had a breakdown, particularly when you don't have the capabilities to even understand, like, how do I repair this? We do something what we call is discovery, that the first step into being able to really be vulnerable is that sometimes just being able to ask a series of questions of people and just saying, like, we want to just talk to you. We want to ask questions about your experience, what you're saying, why that happened. What are you curious to learn about from your peers? And then playing that back to all of them and saying, you will have a lot more in common than you realize. Let's talk about that. But Kim, I don't know, what would you say to that question? Because I know we talk about relationships as core to teams, as core to vulnerability, and as core to the sophistication of leadership. Yeah, the thing I would add is that I think you have to make the invitation. You've got to say it. If you're in the person that's leading the system, the CEO, the head of the team, whoever it may be, it is the strength of relationships. But the team needs to hear from you that this is the request and expectation for what it means to be part of the team, that you want them to share themselves and you're going to hold yourself to the same bar. So I think there's a bit of an invitation or expectation setting that has to be followed with modeling, signaling and condition setting. Right. This doesn't happen overnight, as Susan said, but the team will respond the more that they see that you are doing it. So it's that combination of they see you do it through the modeling. You are setting the conditions and creating an environment where people feel like they can actually say the thing, which means that when you see people starting to do it, you've got to reinforce it. Right. There is a bit of this. I said that I wanted you all to do this. I'm trying to do it myself. And at every turn, when there are opportunities to recognize that is the behavior and you are living into the culture that we as a team have set forth that I've requested. You've got to really affirm it and lift it up to help people see that you mean it. You are asking them to do a set of things. You're doing it. And you want to say thank you and recognize that they're stepping into it. And that can be hard. So it's oh i'm sorry i just pull on one thing that can said around condition setting which i think is so important um i think you can ask for but if the inputs aren't there the ass will be hollow and what i mean by condition settings i want to hit on the condition setting a bit because my you know one of the things i always caution executive leaders is like they execute on solutions and they're like it didn't work and i'm like well it's that it's both about the mindset and it's also about the inputs and what i mean by that when we're working with our ceos and executive teams, we will say, when's the last time you audited this? So if you want the strength of relationships, if you want a culture where people can be vulnerable, where they can admit to having made a mistake, to having participated in a breakdown, let's look at the way in which you run your meetings. Have you created in a way that creates space for people to connect with each other? Is there space for that? Have you created a way that when you run through your topics at the end of every agenda topic, even if it's just three minutes to just stop and just say, how do we do? How do we do together? Did we leave anything off the table? Is there anything in your brain that you haven't said that you're holding back on? Because if so, we need everything on the table. We need every brilliant brain, every dissenting viewpoint on the table before we move on, because that's going to help us get to the right answers. Like you start to do a set of things and every single move and action that is made, not just the leader, but the collective team to reinforce that. And so I name that because every it's the small and big moments in terms of how time is spent, what questions you're raising that really create the conditions for vulnerability and signal what Kim is talking about. I mean, that sounds like a very sort of healthy culture. If you can establish that way where things, you know, you have divergent thinking, people are throwing, you know, all sorts of ideas onto the table, whether they're dissenting, whether they're supportive. And then you can do the convergent thinking to figure out what we can, what flows and what sinks. But from your experience, if a manager or leader is thinking right now, and they may not be the top of the hierarchy, maybe they're mid-manager and they've got an engineering team or whatever team they're working with. They're thinking, this is brilliant. This is what I need on my team. And they're thinking, how long does this take to establish as a habit? Because we know habits take time, especially cultural habits take time to establish. From your experience, ladies, is there some sort of timeline or a duration that takes to establish this? And what does that do to kick this off? I mean, what are the sort of the baby steps to help managers? managers, if we get a little nuts and bolts here to try to establish such a healthy cultural environment of communication. Yeah, absolutely. One thing I'll say, Jason, so I'm going to answer a non-question that you asked me, which is one of the first things I tell the executives when they're like, this takes too long. This is adaptive stuff. I often tell them, you're already wasting a lot of time. So imagine every single breakdown that happens that you haven't talked about. Imagine every time a person hasn't been vulnerable and you haven't gotten the great innovation idea and you then have to go back and correct and fix. That is time lost. And so that time loss over time actually creates much more of a window than if you would have from the very beginning taken like deliberate steps. And so that's the first thing I'll say. To technically answer your question, we often say at the Elori Network, our experience says that if you're a good team going from good to great, Six to 12 months can get you in the habit and rhythm of... Engaging on the mindsets, talking about the mindsets and how they translate to behaviors, putting those behaviors and unlearning the things that are not serving you and then in constant repeat practice and reflection. If you are a team, perhaps that is in what I would call more of intensity, crisis, need to revert. You might be talking about an 18 to 24 month period of consistency. Of literally doing what Kim said. First, even naming that you see a problem or an opportunity for the team and naming it and making it discussable. We're like, we are here. This is not what's going to translate into results or making this a joyful place to do important, innovative, bold work. And so we need the commitment of the team to want something different. And usually I always say, the will is the very first step. Do we believe that something different can happen? And so oftentimes we take on clients. That's the first question we ask the team members. Say, do you want something different? Because if you don't want something different. It's actually a waste of your time. And why are you wasting your time here? So if you can want something different, do you believe, even if it's really hard to believe, that there may be new capabilities, new skills to learn around how to be this type of, the type of sustainable, strong team that we're talking about. And so I would say like step one is like the belief system and like that I commit, I believe, even if it's hard and I'm skeptical and I'm like sort of looking at you Like, is this possible? Like the experience would say differently. And then you can take the steps of making it discussable and then some new capabilities to learn. Great. I think the thing I would add on to that, when Susan talks about like, do you believe, I mean, we'll talk to people about the concept of you've got to believe in the possibility of this team and not be so anchored on the probability because the probability based on where the group has been probably tells you that this is the way it's going to be. Things won't change. This is just who that person is. But you got to really hold a little bit of space, even just a little, for the possibility of what could be there. And to Susan's point, if not, it's just a waste of time. There's another piece of the equation for us that it really centers on mutuality. So a lot of the work we do with executives, we start with mindset because it's got to be an inward turn about self. We help them see the mutuality and leadership and the way they can be learning and strengthening as a group. But that mutuality piece, when you are trying to change a culture, it's so important to have what we call a two yeses conversation. So if I, as the team leader, have said, we know that we have some challenges, we're going to try and shift our culture. We've talked about it. We've made it discussable as a team. Then I've got to share with you, here's the belief and the destination where we are going to go. This is how we're going to lead and operate together. I believe it's possible. And I'm asking you all to determine if this is something you want to be a part of. And that has to be a yes on both ends of the equation. It's got to be a yes from the team member of, I see enough of evidence of a commitment and a desire and will from you. And you're showing me that you are about the possibility here. And it's got to be for the team member, for them to really inventory what's there for them. And do I have the interest and the desire and the will to move forward? And it's about releasing the judgment if there's not two yeses. Because what I often find is that there are groups and leaders where there's such a desire to, like, we got to move forward. And it's like, actually, sometimes the most powerful thing you can do is decide when it's time to cut ties. And that's all right. No one's bad for it. But what we shouldn't do is try and be forcing something that it's just not there because that undermines the mutuality piece that we believe is so important for teams. I think what you said there, Kim, it's getting the ownership and buy-in from the team members. But sometimes because if there's a lack of vulnerability or people are trying to save face, they may say yes within the group setting because of peer pressure. Yes, I agree to this. But in their heads, when they walk out of that meeting room, again, just to be throwing a wrench here, they're thinking that this is not going to flow. But I'll just say yes to go along with it. I mean, how do you deal with that? Because I've come across that a lot, per se, where people agree on something. But once they walk out away from the peers, they're thinking or they're talking to their closest colleague, yeah, this is not going to flow. This is just, you know, hot air. This is just everything you said is grounded for me. But how do you deal with individuals like that where they don't have the courage just to bow and say, you know what, this is not for me, but they just kind of go along with the flow? I mean, Susan, I'll start us off with a story. I think that I can demonstrate that. And then I think you should jump in to say like how you've addressed this in the past or other thoughts. But Jason, I'll tell you that there is one powerful story of a group we were working with where there was a lot of water under the bridge. And so they went through the process of talking about some of the harder things. And for one team member, even as they were going through the discussions, they had a bit of an aha in realizing that as I heard the team leader talk, I realized that there was nothing that they were going to say that was going to be enough for me. It wasn't going to be sufficient. So they actually ended up tapping themselves out because in the process, they just realized like every single turn, it is not enough. And so I do think that we believe in the possibility that sometimes people actually can get there, whether or not they're ready to say that in a group. That's a different thing. But I do think that sometimes that realization and it can be really freeing for people, actually. But Susan, maybe you can share more about the very real challenge Jason's describing of sometimes people just aren't there yet. And you don't want people sort of saying one thing, but actually feeling something else. Yeah, Jason, I would often say like when we are working with team leaders, we'll say you need to name the destination and all the expectations and get the mutual agreement. But you also have to follow up with one on one conversations. So if it were you, Jason, right, like as an executive, I would come to you and say, like, OK, we were in this group setting. You said yes. But I recognize there's a lot of water under the bridge and I want to make sure that like we have the space to make it discussable. So let's talk about this. How do you understand where we're trying to go? What do you feel hopeful about? What are you most concerned about? What would give you pause? Because it's OK to have pause to say yes. And for those, once you start to get those questions out and if you truly create the conditions for people to say what they really feel, you'll find those who are like, I'm excited about the direction. Let's go. You'll find those who are like, I'm there, but I'm nervous and scared. And you will find those in the way in which they respond, even if they try to hide it, that it is obvious that they're not there with you and normalizing that and saying, I get a sense that you're not all the way there. We need to keep this conversation going because it's going to be so important to the direction and you deserve to be at your best. And I have found either what Kim says, someone gets revealed to them and they're able to share it or it doesn't. They continue to say, yep, I'm in, even though deep down they're not. And what happens is the minute that you can get the mutual commitment from that moment on, the level of tightness and consistency that you have to have in order to ensure that something different happens usually exposes the person who's not there. Because at that point, once you get the mutual commitment, it's mutual commitment equals mutual accountability. So then when I start to see things that are misaligned with who we said we were going to be and how we said we were going to be, then I can call it out and I can come back to you and say, Jason, I know you said you were with us, but there are a set of behaviors that you're doing that are not aligned. It's not aligned in our results. It's not aligned in how you're operating amongst the team. and I can start to hold you accountable to you said yes, but you're not really a yes. You know, and what you're both speaking to is very important. One is to have in the greater form to communicate this, this mutuality, getting yes on both sides, but a genuine, sincere yes on both sides. So there is alignment. But also what you're talking about, Susan, which is so important, is to have the one-to-ones, you know, that communication, because then that peer pressure to save face or to not be vulnerable or whatever, that becomes so much easier when there's the intimacy of a focus room and two professionals talking about what needs to be done, where we can voice our issues and we don't have to worry about someone sort of looking sideways or looking us off. And that really opens, because I think also what one of you had also said is that, you know, communication isn't a soft skill. If I have always been of the school that communication is one of the hardest skills to learn. You know, in my clinical psychology days, we had to learn to communicate in a certain way. And that was the hardest way, especially when someone's going through trauma. Now, I'm not talking in the sphere and space we're talking about. We're not talking about trauma, but irregardless, when people get emotionally entangled in some sort of conflict or misunderstanding or misperception of something, it becomes so important to be able to craft words, to understand the distinction between and the blending of diplomacy and directness, firm but fair, right? Right. To have these conversations. I just wanted to sort of to compliment and to riff on what you were saying, Susan, about the the importance of the one to one. Yes, absolutely. I mean, Jason, you just said something. I'm going to jump all over. It's like this idea of communication. One of the things that we observe with our executives is that they try to make communication everything. And so they're confused when they when when team members operate differently. So I'll tell you a story about an executive of ours who decided, like, I feel like I have the right talent. I have put the group together. And somehow we are not able to get the outcomes that we want to get because we're spending more energy on the relationship breakdowns, the internal dynamics, the departments who are not able to negotiate competing interests. And I have made very clear I've communicated to them over and over again what I expect, where we're going. And I just don't understand what's going on. And one of the things I said is that's because you're making communication everything. And communication to us actually has three strands. Communication. Engagement, alignment. And you're doing one of the three things. Communication is actually making clear in words, in visuals, what it is, what's the destination, what the expectations are. Engagement is not the same thing as communication. Engagement says, I want to talk to you, team. What's your reactions to what you just heard? What am I missing and what's here? What's inspiring about this? What's concerning about this? Like, let's make it discussable. Let's get it all on the table. Let's make this stronger. that's a that's a form of internalization for people creating the space for people to legitimately, all of their questions and all share all of the insights that they would have to build upon and improve upon the idea that's there and then you move to alignment it's like okay i've had a chance to make clear i've had a chance to create space for us to be in conversation with one another with one another which is not the same thing as communication and now we can move to the step of alignment, which is what's the implications of what we now just talked about for your role, for how you're going to act and move in the world, how we're going to lead together for the results. And so I want to say that like, even when you just talked about the one-on-one, the one-on-one is because it's a part of the engagement aspect of communication. So that was engagement, alignment, communication, sort of a triad of very important things. They are together, but distinct. Yes. Yes. Kim, I don't know if you would offer anything from on the clients that I know you've worked with. Yeah, I just would offer maybe a pitfall or two, or we call them movie endings, right? We've seen this movie before. We can see how this plays out. And one of the things that can be so tricky is when leaders believe that things are obvious. And so they take for granted the extent to which they've communicated or the extent to which people are aligned or the extent to which they've actually mutually engaged someone. So we are always, always asking people to inventory and think about how much have you made things, the implicit stuff, explicit. Say it directly. Say it over. Do not take for granted that something might just be very obvious to you. It's worth saying it a time or two or three or four and actually checking to make sure that people have taken away because you can say something, but there's inevitably going to be gaps. And people will fill those in accordingly based on the data and reference points that they have. So that's part of why the engagement piece is so important, because otherwise what ends up happening is that people leave with very different takeaways, very different stories about the current state or what's up ahead. They believe they're like, well, you said this thing. I did it. And it's because there was probably too much gap between what was said, the expectations on alignment and the places where people had a chance to vet and check their understanding. So it is sort of like a three legged stool of communications that without one piece, things can really fall flat and the consequences can be lost dollars. Brain space and energy that is a total waste right and that's some our those are our most precious resources and so what we try to do is help people see you can avoid that spin and swirl by spending more time up front and to Susan's point even when people are sort of bristling at the time that it takes to over communicate the time it takes to really create space for engagement our offering back is just that you are going to spend the time now or later it's just a matter of how you spend it. In the first half of the conversation, Susan and Kim explored how leaders can shift their mindset to view organizational breakdowns as opportunities for learning, rather than sources of conflict or failure. Central to this approach is fostering psychological safety, and that is creating an environment where team members feel safe enough to surface concerns, to share incomplete thinking, and to engage in honest conversations. Susan and Kim underscored the importance of lowering the threshold for addressing issues, encouraging leaders to treat tension and missteps as entry points for curiosity rather than as threats to be avoided. They shared strategies for spotting missing perspectives, asking better questions, and inviting contributions that might otherwise remain unspoken. Now, our conversation also focused on enhancing team vulnerability and leadership integration. They agreed that leaders must model openness and design structures that promote connection. And this could be done in a number of ways. For example, by auditing meeting formats or explicitly inviting contributions or recognizing moments of courage in team dynamics. Now, vulnerability, when reinforced and acknowledged, well, it becomes a powerful catalyst for team cohesion. Now, on the topic of team cultural transformation, Susan A. Kim noted that meaningful change takes time. Typically, 6-12 months for high-functioning teams and up to 18-24 months for teams in distress. Now, success hinges on mutual agreement, what Kim called the need for two yeses. One from the leader and one from each team member. Without shared commitments, progress stalls and at times the difficult decisions to part ways may be necessary. Now, Susan Kim also unpacked and addressed the challenge of surface-level agreements. And that's when team members say yes in meetings, but don't follow through in practice. Susan underscored the value of one-to-one conversations to uncover authentic perspectives and to gain genuine buy-in. She explained that when agreement is real, accountability becomes mutual. And that gives leaders the foundation to address misalignment constructively. And kim well she warned against assuming that clarity is self-evident when communication she stressed the importance of over communication especially when teams are navigating complexity uncertainty and the unknown so now let's slip back to the stream with part two of my fascinating conversation with susan and kim. Susan, you were talking about, you know, after the sort of the group form to have the individual one to ones and the person that you play, per se, was someone who was very confident in themselves. They had thick skin, per se, and they were able to have hard conversations and to move through it, to maybe show more cognitive empathy than emotional empathy. But for those leaders out there, they're thinking, I hate conflict. I don't want to hurt someone. I hate creating social pain. So from my perspective, there's always two hard conversations. The second one is with the other person on the other side of the table. The first one is with themselves to find the confidence to move from self-flagellation to more self-confidence to have that conversation. But what i've experienced and i'd like you to riff on this but what i've experienced is that there's generally two moral imperatives when it comes to uh tough conversations there's benevolence and there's honesty and in the short term because they need to emotionally engage and see someone in the eyes they will choose the short term thinking no i can't be honest i'm going to eviscerate them i i need just to be nice i don't want to hurt this person but in the long term because they thought it was an either or between benevolence and honesty that leader. Themselves him or her their credibility kind of it gets it takes a hit because they they didn't they weren't honest with the person and that person could have performed better if they had received the feedback earlier so just riffing on that on that how do you you yourself and, your organization help people with that first conversation with themselves to kind of, cowboy up or cowgirl up to have that hard conversation to find that fortitude and tenacity and that the courage yeah i actually have a specific ceo in mind in my head right now jason And we just had this very conversation. I'm going to talk both about the mindset piece, but also the action piece on the mindset piece. Oftentimes what I am sharing with this client is the frame around conflict. I'm not going to remove from you that you feel a certain type of way that this is hard. I'm going to eviscerate the person. I don't want to hurt people's feelings. But every time I'm able to help the CEO reframe it as this is an opportunity for learning for that person and for myself, it lowers the stakes for them for some reason, because I'm like, if you can stop seeing it as a I'm going to take them out. Like there's something wrong with them versus a we have a we have a context in the situation and I have something to share and I'm thinking about how can I share this in a way where it's more about the observation so instead of Jason you are wrong for x y and z things you're a bad person it is Jason I want to share with you three different examples of something that I saw you do in a result of that thing so I want to share with that and I want to stop and I want to say do you remember those three examples and you're going to say like yep or like yeah but I would I would frame it as like, great, this is the outcome of those things. Would you, you know, would you agree with those things? I want to share some, like, I want to share some feedback for you and what I would have done alternatively. And I want to be in discussion with you. What's your reaction to that? What would it take? What do you need in order to be like, if I believe in you, then I'm going to say, right, like I'm invested in you and I believe this can be true. And I want to talk about the barriers that make that harder. If I believe that we're at the end of the rope, then I name that like I think there's a lot of capabilities that you have but relative to the role that I have today I don't think it best sets you up to be the best version of what we need and what you can contribute and I want to be honest about that and so I always say like what first of all from a mindset standpoint is there a way that we can shift that into learning and then the second thing if the stakes are just so high what a person's like but I am so conflict averse the next move that we make is talk about dignity. What is it that you would want to be true if the table was flipped and you were the person that someone had to share our feedback with you? And usually every single time you respect things like the terms that come is like, what would that look like to you for a person who has a hard time? What would you want from them? And then we are able to then talk about like, okay, that's dignity. If that's respect, you heard, you said what it would be true for you. Let's take that on in terms of how you might play that forward with another person. And so it's the mindset piece, Jason. It's an action piece in terms of speaking about the observation, factually what happened, what does that lead you to believe, what's the learning in that, and then being in conversation, I find does a lot. I don't know if you would add on. Go ahead, Jason, please. No, I just just quickly. I really like that because there is a dissociation. A person moves from the subjective to the objective. When you're saying, how would you want to be treated if this, you know, how would you want your manager, him or her to step up to have the courage to tell you this, even though it's going to it's going to create some level of social pain. But in the long term, you know, you know, you will improve and that there's not this everyone's talking about Jason's not performing like this, but no one has the guts to tell him. Right. So I really like that dissociative technique where you can shift the reframe or the reattribution from themselves to the more objective. And I just think that's a brilliant, very pragmatic, practical tool that someone can use to help. Themselves if they're conflict-shy. Sorry, Kim, I sort of jumped in. No, I thought you did. Kim, can I make one statement before you pivot? Please. Of course. Jason, you said something about the dissociating by using the term around the observation. What's the observation that you're having? We use that technique even through conflict. So when we find that breakdowns have happened to the point of what's my contribution, we often say, instead of blaming. First say what's my contribution and then second move to what is the observation like literally what just happened like this happened and this is how I made meaning of it what was I missing in that and so I just say that because I just wanted to like really hit home like that is a unique technique that we use and the last thing I would often say is we underestimate the gift of role playing finding a person who knows how to be a productive bystander not to collude with you like You're so right. That person is awful. But someone who can actually really be productive with you where you can literally just say the words to them. This is what I plan to say to Jason, Kim. Can I like try it out? And Kim is able to like play Jason fairly and I can give feedback and say like, oh, Susan, you said this is what you really feel. What you just said does not match the reality of what you told me before you started to role play. And sometimes just being able to get it out a few times can also like make it a bit more natural, even if hard to do so. And a number of my clients, the role plan, I don't need to role play. I got it. I wrote the words down. I'll be fine. And it's like, oh, there is something about the like using your mouth and your body to like practice it a couple of times and get some real life feedback. So I wouldn't underestimate that as well. Kim, thank you for letting me jump in. No, no, I'm so glad you did. I mean, there's one other piece that, Jason, you initially offered the question or posed this this binary between benevolence and honesty. And I think what Susan has offered and described is a third way that we believe starts with a bit of a reframe or a mindset shift about giving feedback to offering something that that person deserves in the spirit of their learning. The one thing that I found myself sharing with leaders who are really struggling with it and they're having a really hard time leaning towards the honesty or the third way here is to help them understand the implications when you lean towards benevolence or when what you're effectively doing is prizing or privileging your own comfort in some ways, right? Because if I don't know how to give the hard feedback to someone and it is causing all sorts of stress for me, am I going to be saying things too harshly? Do I feel equipped to have this conversation? And eventually, if I dilute it down and don't actually share with them the thing that could further their learning, what I've done is prize my experience ahead of theirs in some ways, right? And I just want to name that this gets really tricky and important to think about through the lens of identity, because especially if you are struggling to give someone feedback across lines of difference, whether it's racial, gender or otherwise. I can understand and appreciate how hard it is to do that and how thoughtful people are trying to be in light of those differing factors. But I think it's actually even more important in those instances to really find the third way, because holding back on sharing something with someone else's learning because of a discomfort around identity is actually much more damaging and has some more profound consequences if it happens over time. So that to me, I think people can have a different posture when they realize the stakes and totality of doing that in moments like that. Because i think one one thing that's very important here too because there may be listeners right now thinking yes i i want to move towards the direction that they're talking about right now in the conversation and one of the most powerful motivators is pain uh to get us to change for the better so i was wondering from your experience ladies and what is the cost personally or organizationally when leaders skip over conflict or they avoid tough conversations what are some of the sort of downsides or disadvantages you've seen you know through your works with different organizations and corporations when they avoid conflict constructive conflict we speak of. Susan, I'm happy to start us off and please build. One of the biggest things, so let's think about an executive team or a group. We have a really strong belief that one of the biggest challenges for leaders is to figure out how do you maximize the strength of a group and build strength and capability for the group, which is very different than building the strength and capability of the individuals who comprise the group, right? So if you are not tackling the hardest things, talking about the conflicts or breakdowns or really leaning into dissenting points of view at the executive levels, it has profound impact because then you've got silos and fractures that maybe started as cracks at the top, but now they are ravines further out. And so that amounts to wasted dollars, wasted time, confusion, frustration, misalignment. And so the practical impact or result downstream is you're leaving money on the table. You're leaving impact on the table. And so we try to help people see that. Never underestimate the importance of addressing those harder things at the top or wherever the group sits. Because the group as a whole, their ability to take those things on, that in some ways, that's the whole ballgame for impact across the org. But Susan, please, what would you add? Yeah, absolutely. Two things I would add. One is my master coach, Diana McClain-Smith, used to always tell me, Susan, when in conflict, it's the work of helping put everyone's differences to work. And so that's the thing that's left off the table, which is your innovative spirit, your best ideas. You haven't actually like maximize and squeeze all the juice out of the conflict in order to actually get to better ideas, in order to get the learning so that people know what to do differently the next time. In order to increase the odds that because we had the breakdown this time, we actually the learning was the breakthrough to minimize how many times you have to learn this lesson over and over and over again. And that's what creates the energy and the sustainable impact. So that's the first thing I would say, which is the let's put the conflict and the differences. They're going to happen. You cannot escape them. But you have the opportunity to use them for good, to use them for results, to use them for outcomes, to use them for innovation. Quite honestly, to use them to ensure you don't have turnover, because after some time that weighs on people. People want to do great work. They want to be with great people where I can do challenging work. I can have conflict. But when I leave, it's like, well, that was a rigorous meeting. That was productive. Like my mind blown. I learned something from someone else. Someone actually influenced me in a way I didn't I didn't think about like and I can't wait to like bring it the next time. And so like that's the type of environments that people want. And I'm going to say if you're listening to this and say, but how do I get there so hard? you heard all the things that we talked about, but I'm going to go back to the strength of relationships piece that I was talking about before. If you're like, all those things seem good, but they seem very high level. There's one basic thing that you can do, which is just ask. Jason, how do you like to receive feedback? Because Jason will tell me what he needs. And that might be different for Kim. Kim might say, I want to direct. Please don't hold anything back for me? Jason might say, actually, I'm a processor. I do better with examples and some space to come back. And sometimes like if you're struggling to know what to do, use the strength of relationships. And if you don't have the strength of relationship, ask the question and use what they give you as your entry point. Jason, you shared with me that this is how you best receive feedback. I have something to share and then go from there. I think that's so important because, you know, a lot of managers and leaders that think, okay, how do I motivate people? How do I do this? How do I do this? And they're grinding. It's such a cognitive load on their resources, their mental resources, that what I hear you're saying is quite. It's simple, but there's a deep eloquence and profound because just go to the source, ask Jason how he wants to receive feedback, go to Jason, ask him what motivates him, what floats his boat or what have you, what lights his fire. And I think what you said, it's the strength of relationships because it's not a light switch, it's a dimmer switch. And slowly you brighten up and sometimes it gets darker, but slowly over time it gets brighter. But what I hear you saying, Susan, and also Kim, is that the strength of relationships is foundational. If you want anything we've talked about, you can't see investing in relationships as a cost. You will want to see it as an investment that has returns and dividends in the sense of psychological safety. And conflict in those cases as i understand from my own experience conflict usually has a negative connotation but in this case conflict is no we're learning and developing but i need to have hard conversations from you and you need to have hard conversations for me so we can find alignment engagement better communication the triad of things you're talking about in order to move forward I've said a lot. Have I kind of captured what you guys are saying? Absolutely. Absolutely. I would say it's like the analogy of the like, we always say with clients, you know, we put the problem on a table and we sit on the same side of the table. And if we can see ourselves sitting on the same side of the table versus the problem is the person on the other side of the table, that's when you start to build the strength of relationships. And that's when we can start to problem solve and like dig opportunities together. So absolutely, you're right on it. Yeah. And Jason said it another way. I mean, I think you nailed it with the relationships. It's that mutuality because the relationships, they involve two people. Like you actually have a fundamental belief that you need the person that's also part of this and that they see something that you don't. So for us, it does all come back to the mindset that what you see and what you have is incomplete. It might be true, but it could be incomplete and that you need the other people around you and that that's part of the ecosystem of a team, right? Where there is an interdependence and it doesn't sit just at the top. It's not held by one person. It truly is about harvesting or harnessing the true power and contribution from every person. And that is not a soft skill. It's a really sophisticated one. And unfortunately, I think there can be sometimes an impulse to see it as additive, extra, nice to have, soft or fluffy. And we just couldn't believe that is further from the truth. Yes, absolutely. I'd like to shift the conversation, segue into something that may be a little more controversial, if that's OK with the two of you. So in Canada, and I'm sure it's the same in the States, and it's starting to creep over here into Northern Europe, where you have, for lack of better terms, you have sort of the woke, the cancel culture, where certain people feel if I say something. Say from one gender or another gender from one race to another race or whatever we however we want to characterize it that they will be pigeonholed into some sort of ism right chauvinism or racism or whatever ism and these are legitimate fears that male female whatever age may feel when having to speak about something controversial or having a hard conversation now this is a very general question so please interpret it as you will how do you help leaders who are intentionally want to build something but because of certain hidden rules to think if i say this i can't speak about this but if we don't speak about it then there's a fragility there's an underlying animosity that is not addressed what do you recommend or from your experience how do we get over this. Crippling hurdle that many of us feel yeah oh gosh jason i don't know kim i jumped over you no please i'm happy to start off or susan you can because we have a lot of thoughts on this because it's part of that gray area or tricky territory that every leader will will wrestle with and i think it's it's all starts off from susan jump in first of all it's so hard it's really really hard to do what you're describing so i just have a lot of empathy and i think for people Well, it can also just be important to start there. Like, this is difficult. I'm trying to do the best that I can. And we will not get it right the first time. I think actually people should free themselves of that, that you will not get it right the first time. But what you can do is... Build from that, right? You can actually say, what I was trying to do was this. I realized the impact of that might have been something different. So I think there's a little bit of an orientation to not perfection. I think some of what you're describing, it involves a lot of grace, right? There is self-work that every person's got to do, and that is the responsibility that we all have. There's always things that because of our own identities, upbringings, or experiences that we truly will not be able to understand because we haven't lived in other people's shoes. So we've got to have some grace for ourselves, grace for each other, and a commitment to actually share how things are landing and experiencing. But Susan, build on that, because this is something that is really tricky. Yes, yes. I want to first echo what Kim said in terms of the empathy and the humility to know that whatever we are saying right now is not to suggest that, like, if you just do these things, all will be better, especially with the type of high stakes nature of what you're talking about, Jason. But what I will say is that I still believe what you're talking about goes back to the strength of relationships, that is actually in those moments where things are much more sensitive, much more political, much more personal, that the more we can be in relationship to one another, to learn, to share, to be curious, the more that we can create the conditions for us to be able to share and not to share from a place of attack. But to share from a place of perspective. There's a perspective I have. And let me share with you the observations of the experience I've been through that gives me that perspective. And when you hear what I'm saying, what's your reaction to that? And what do you think that I am missing? And over time, how we're able to, we may not change each other's minds, we might, but we might be able to see a greater data set. So that's the first thing I would say. And then the second thing I would say for leaders who are leading teams where, you know, this is the context, oftentimes I say, how many times on your team are you stopping to simply say, I'm going to do some checks along the way? What are the undiscussables? And letting people name that. These are the topics I feel are undiscussable in our culture, in this in this office, in order for us to be able to do shared work and lead together. And then once you're able to get all the discussables to say which of those discussables are necessary for us to be able to effectively get to know each other, learn each other, lead together. And then from there, how might we have the conversation in a way that enables us knowing how personal, specific conflict, like conflict, the strength of conflict that might be in there? How might we do this? And again, to the spirit of mutuality. Seeking the group's mutual interest of like, what's the space that we need to create to make it more possible for us to have conversations like this, recognizing how challenging, how hard, how emotional it might be. And when I've seen leaders do that, like you'd be surprised at the group's lack of awareness of we are trying to do something that is oftentimes not done well in our society. And we're making a choice to have the undiscussables be discussable. We're all going to lean into pushing against the grain in those moments when we want to shut down, when we want to attack. Like we're really going to lean into curiosity. And so to the point of like, what might you do is like create the conditions to just ask what are the undiscussables and then how might we start to bit by bit take them on. And then once we take it on, zoom out, give it some space. What do we learn about that? What do we learn about ourselves? What do we learn about having these conversations? Okay, let's dig back in and try again. I think that's so important what you're saying. Again, it's the manager or the leader. He or she doesn't have to think, how am I going to do this? Open it up to the team. Talk about it, right? Manage expectations, but manage expectations laterally, vertically, diagonally, whatever. Let's talk about the undiscussables, right? And maybe name the elephant in the room. Guys, we are unfortunately in a culture of wokeism or cancel culture or whatever it is. We are different people coming from different sectors. And as you said, Kim, we all bring our experiences. And there's no way on earth that I will ever understand Stacey's story or Kim's story or Jason's story because I've never lived in it. And it's impossible. But we can have a discussion. And through what I hear by naming the undiscussables, over time, we create a sense of rules of engagement of how we want to engage each other. And we can actually identify maybe the very sensitive mind feels and find a much more diplomatic, graceful way of dealing with the issue without skirting around the issue. Again, super complicated. And what we're discussing today is not the panacea of how you do everything. No, it's just ideas that can complement maybe what you're already doing. I just want to riff on that because I think it's so fundamental. Coming back to what you're saying, it's the strength of relationships, which is foundational. And that takes time and investment to build that richness, that depth of the relationships. And what you find over time that you can have frank, candid conversations almost on everything. Yeah. Yes. And then, oh, Kim, you go, you go. The one thing I was going to add is that, yes, Jason, it is the strength of relationship. But I want to I think we should be clear that there is a line. And part of your responsibility as the leader of the team is to be clear that if the undiscussable or the stuff that's going on is actually just not acceptable. Like there is an important overlay of accountability here. Right. Because relationships are so foundational, but there's a spectrum. Right. It's like sometimes it might be someone makes a comment and they didn't, you know, it signaled something they didn't intend. That's very different than there is a pattern of breaches or singular acts that are actually not okay. So I think for a leader, you do have to have a point of view on what is the culture, what's the acceptable, what's the learning posture, what's the grace you expect. And we've had some really powerful conversations with team members who are looking upward at leadership and thinking, you know, they're so problematic. They're doing these things. They said this in a meeting. And I'm like, and yet there is progress. Right. And so what we can't do is pigeonhole each other into a very narrow box of perfection, whereby if I'm a team leader, I'm not going to try and live into the thing that you want because the penalties, the stakes are too high because there's no grace. So, to the point around mutuality, it's got to go in every direction. There is sort of a final or like a line or things that are not acceptable, but you have to actually be willing to let people try to do better and have some grace for when they're going to miss the mark. But if you want them to get better, the way to signal or reinforce the behaviors you're looking for is not by tearing them down when they miss the mark. Absolutely. Absolutely. And I think, Jason, it requires as a leader and as a team member, first of all, clarity. We have to have clarity about who we are, what we are trying to do and go after. And what is the expectation around the values in a culture about how we're going to do that? You have to have a learning and curious orientation. We will make mistakes. That is actually normal and natural, depending on what we do with it. And so there's got to be an orientation. I'm going to be learning. I'm going to be curious. And that is the work that we are about doing. And then there's got to be mutual. That it's not just about what is the team leader doing is that like culture is built by every single person and all of our inputs and our contributions, big and small, that reflects our values. It reflects what we value. And so the clarity, the learning, curiosity, the mutuality, all of those things matter. And for a team leader who's listening to this, the prerequisite before that is the who. So I often say, are you doing the work to be clear on what you're trying to get at? And then who do you need? What's the talent that you need? The talent at the right time, the strength of the talent for what work, and that you're constantly making clear that this is not a solo act of leadership that we lead as a collective. We're clear on what that means. And that is constantly being re-evaluated for the moment in time and the life stage of an organization and company. Well, Susan, Kim, you've been very generous to share concrete, tangible, usable skills in order to create more robust and resilient teams. We've addressed conflict. We've addressed a number of very sensitive issues that everyone will experience at some point if they are a leader or manager. Sure. As we come close, and I'm very respectful of your time, are there any last tips or suggestions or advice, both Susan, you would like to leave with our listeners and Kim? If I had to leave the biggest piece of advice, it would be learning. If we can frame everything and the possibility that everything that we're trying to do, the ability to have bold impact, the ability to give feedback to each other. The ability to get through a breakdown so that it becomes the breakthrough. Learning has to be at the heart of it. Like learning is leadership. And so if we can embrace each other, if we can embrace our collective leadership through the lens of learning, how much farther we will get as a collective. Thanks, Susan. Kim? The one that I might offer is start with self. Turn inward. That's the very first thing. It's something you can do right now. You don't need other people for it. But if you are not in a regular practice of reflecting on your leadership, your contributions, what you might be missing, it's actually very it's harder to go from there if you're not doing that regularly. I think the strongest leaders that we've worked with and what we've studied when we look at strong leaders in systems and teams is that they are constantly searching for their role because they understand that they lead the system, they set the tone, they set the pace. And so they've got to be right with themselves first. They have to have a point of view and they have to know their leadership and what's required in the moment. Thank you for that. Susan Kim is being a brilliant, insightful and a conversation. I've learned a lot. So thank you very much. If a listener wanted to reach out to you, what would be the easiest way to reach you both? Absolutely. We will make sure that Jason gets our information so he gets posted with the podcast. But you can also go to our website at elorinetwork.com. And there's a place there that if you reach out to the contact us, we will literally immediately within 24 hours get back to you. Quick question. And I'm sure a lot of people are curious. Is a Lori, can you define that for us and just give us a short background of that, that, that word? Oh, that is a question I often get in terms of like, where did a Lori come from? And so just to share a little bit more about it. Lori comes from the Yoruba language. It means leader. It's not just by title. It's about presence and influence and the way you show up to get things done. And so I've always actually been wired to lead. As a kid, when I used to visit my parents who are immigrants in Nigeria, I noticed a lot of things others naturally didn't. And so I would consistently be in the spirit of curiosity, asking questions. Why is that expected? Why isn't anyone questioning this? My siblings would consistently be like, just go with it, Susan, just go with it. And I just couldn't. So I was always observing, asking questions, trying to understand what was beneath the surface of the culture. And that set out. Even as a young girl in that culture, people would say to my parents, she's so different. You got an Elorio on your hands. And at the time, I was little, so I didn't quite understand what that meant. But I certainly did carry it with me. And eventually elders who told my parents that board members, CEOs I started to work with start to tell me similar things. You lead differently. You get to results. You do it with humanity and people in mind. And you must codify and share that type of leadership, the type of leadership where people can be the best versions of themselves and do that collectively with others. So it's why we founded the Alori Network, because we believe that there is a certain type of leadership that exists where all of us can lead and succeed. And be curious and learn, and that we want to codify those insights and make it more possible for people to get those results and do it in a way that's aligned to the mutuality and mutual way of being together. Well, Susan, Kim, thank you very much again for a brilliant and insightful conversation. Thanks, Jason, for having us. In my conversation with susan and kim today we've explored how leadership isn't just about managing performance or solving problems it's about building the conditions where people can contribute fully discreet productively and grow together from reframing breakdowns as learning moments to creating genuine team alignment susan and kim offered a toolkit for leaders ready to lead with more intention, clarity, and courage. Now, we've talked about fostering psychological safety by lowering the threshold for speaking up, making space for vulnerability and modeling it as a leadership strength, the practical realities of transforming team culture and how it starts with mutual agreement, the importance of honest one-to-one conversations to surface real commitment, and the need to over-communicate expectations and role clarity to avoid misalignment. But here's the key takeaway, the insight I teased at the beginning of this episode. The most effective leaders aren't just skilled communicators or sharp strategists, they're pattern breakers. They challenge the unspoken rules like avoiding discomfort, prioritizing harmony over honesty, or equating leadership with having all the answers. Instead, leaders lean into hard conversations, they get curious about resistance, and they use tension as a source of momentum. And most importantly, they recognize that breakdowns aren't signs of failure. They're invitations to pause, reflect, and recalibrate together. Now, this kind of leadership isn't always comfortable, far from it. But it's what builds lasting trust, team resilience, and authentic alignment. Susan, Kim, thank you very much for such a great and insightful conversation. And folks, I will leave all the contact information for Susan Asiambi and Kim Reynolds-Williams in the show notes if you wish to reach out to them. Well, folks, whether it's building clarity or trust or courageous leadership, it's all an inside job. And until I see you Friday for Bite Size Fridays, keep well, keep strong, and we'll speak soon. Music.
