Latest news with #trust
Fast Company
4 hours ago
- Business
- Fast Company
Why emotional intelligence is key to developing powerful teams
In our fast, interconnected world, the success of organizations depends not only on sound strategy and technical ability, but on the strength of the human dynamics behind everything. Humans need emotional intelligence to work together successfully. It's the social lubricant that helps individuals operate more effectively in adverse situations and also helps members of teams understand each other better and work more cohesively as a unit. The key components of emotional intelligence are self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. These all factor into helping individuals overcome and navigate social complexities and build strong relationships with diverse groups of people, which facilitates stronger collaboration in the workplace. Emotional intelligence complements and supports cognitive intelligence, enabling team members to work together more smoothly and cooperatively. It's what allows team members to build trust and cohesion, without which even the smartest, most skilled teams will struggle to be effective. I delve into this in Emotional Intelligence Game Changers: 101 Simple Ways to Win at Work + Life. Here are five emotional intelligence game changers that influence a team's performance. Enhanced communication Without effective communication, all teams will struggle to build and maintain momentum. Emotional intelligence helps teams build clarity, openness, and the ability to work with varying ideas from individual team members without divisiveness and conflict. By building two-way open communication, team members can focus on their tasks without getting bogged down in misunderstandings and one-upmanship. Team members can freely share their ideas without fear of being judged or misunderstood. 'Emotional intelligence is the catalyst for psychological safety in teams,' according to Debbie Muno, who is the managing director of Genos North America. Building trust and camaraderie Teams work best when members feel a sense of deep connection with each other. It makes them identify and feel pride for being part of the group. Instead of competing with one another, members support and help strengthen each other's skills and abilities. This leads to mutual respect and feelings. Emotional intelligence breaks down barriers and supports team members in reaching a place where they feel this way. 'Expressing feelings in the right place and time and encouraging others to express themselves leads to authentic, trusted communications and team cohesion,' Muno says. Increased engagement and motivation Emotional intelligence is crucial in helping team members build enthusiasm and interdependence with each other. When team members feel a sense of pride for what they achieve, they have the drive to achieve beyond their present level, building increasing momentum. This builds a strong understanding of and belief in the ability of the team to rise above and overcome challenges. Preventing and resolving conflict Differences and conflict are inevitable in any group setting where there are diverse viewpoints and personalities. But if members of the team possess a high level of emotional intelligence, they're better equipped to navigate past all the ego-driven issues and look for solutions. This requires transparency, open dialogue, and a focus on solutions instead of getting hung up on personal power struggles. If everyone on the team knows how to actively listen, they're more likely to have empathy and respect for viewpoints that differ from their own. They also know how to make other team members feel heard and respected, even if they don't end up implementing their ideas. Emotionally intelligent teams are also more likely to move past issues at hand; as they do so, their respect for each other increases, solidifying the belief that they can resolve disagreements positively. Improved resilience and adaptability In a rapidly changing workplace environment, being adaptable and flexible is crucial for success. 'Responding effectively in stressful situations enables team members to engage and communicate with each other productively,' Muno says. Teams that are highly emotionally intelligent are confident in their ability to adapt and change rapidly to new situations and environments that arise. They've proven their ability to overcome personality issues and bruised egos that are damaging to a team's effectiveness, so they can focus their attention and energy on the task at hand. And rather than engaging in one-upmanship that occurs in a dysfunctional team, they know how to get the best out of one another to maximize support and collaboration.
Forbes
18 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
Why Smart Leaders Fail: The Missing Link Between Trust And Execution
Leadership Under Pressure: The Missing Link Between Trust and Execution Research from the Corporate Executive Board (now part of Gartner) and Harvard Business Review estimates that 50 to 70 percent of new executives fail within their first 18 months, regardless of whether they are hired externally or promoted from within. With good intentions, these leaders double down on execution while neglecting the relational work and organizational acumen that enables lasting change. In doing so, they underestimate the importance of political acumen, stakeholder alignment, employee mindset shift, and relational equity. As a result, they struggle to realize the cultural shifts required for their strategic and operational agendas to succeed. What's missing is not often a better strategy or execution—it's trust. And without it, even the most innovative leaders and well-designed plans fall short. Chris Zook and James Allen, authors of The Founder's Mentality, and leadership expert Patrick Lencioni have emphasized that organizations rarely fail because of the technical aspects of the business, like strategy, innovation, and marketing; they fail because of people-related issues. Zook and Allen found that 85% of executives attribute stunted growth to internal factors rather than external market forces. Lencioni's work in his book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, makes a compelling case that trust is the foundation of high-performing teams and the lack of it derails team and organizational performance. At its core, leadership is not only about direction but also about connection. As John Maxwell puts it, 'People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care.' Contrary to corporate opinion, caring sells. It accelerates the translation of vision into tangible outcomes. Trust is not built through an impressive slide deck or a bold strategic plan; it is created in everyday interactions and shared experiences. Investing in these experiences is vital for leaders whose abilities are still being evaluated and whose trust-based relationships have yet to be formed. Chip and Dan Heath, authors of The Power of Moments, said shared experiences create connection, deepen trust, and build relational memory. These moments are not limited to off-sites or milestone celebrations; they occur when teams navigate challenges, reflect after wins and losses, brainstorm under pressure, or listen to each other. Shared experiences don't need to be grand, but they must be authentic. Feelings are rarely discussed in organizations because their impact on performance is difficult to quantify. However, shared experiences are shaped by how people feel after interacting with you. Maya Angelou wisely said, 'People will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.' The emotions that leaders evoke in their teams influence engagement, trust, and execution. If that's true, the question becomes: Are you filling your team's emotional tank with confidence, clarity, and respect or draining it with fear, defensiveness, and detachment? To win over your team, you must connect with their heads and hearts to move their hands to action. Otherwise, they will drag their feet and ultimately head towards the door. In my experience, a clear pattern emerges across industries and leadership teams: when shared experiences are missing, people disengage. They may appear aligned, nodding in meetings and following direction, but they withhold honest feedback, compete with each other, avoid challenging assumptions, and are reluctant to take ownership. What begins as quiet compliance often evolves into costly silence. Even innovative leaders would make poor decisions when they lack input from those closest to the work. It's no surprise that 70 percent of organizational change efforts fail. I once coached a leader who had just been appointed to a senior role. He was driven, visionary, and eager to make an impact. However, frustration set in quickly. He sensed passive resistance from team members and, instead of engaging, dismissed their feedback and sidelined their input. The real problem? He believed he got the job because he was the most competent, so he skipped the relational groundwork that could have provided insight, revealed context, and built trust. As a result, the organization stalled. This is the missing link between trust and execution: shared experiences. It turns direction into alignment, compliance into commitment, and talent into a unified team. Without shared experiences, even the most compelling strategies fail because people don't just follow your credentials; they follow who they trust. How do you regain confidence when trust is low, silence sets in, and momentum stalls? In my work coaching and helping executives and leadership teams through high-stakes transitions, results are a lagging indicator, and when leaders fixate on this, they struggle. Instead, focusing on a shared purpose and cultivating relationships helps restore alignment and drive results. To help leaders transition from disconnection to energized, I developed The Trust-Shared Experience Matrix. It's a practical framework grounded in two critical dimensions: trust and shared experience. When represented on a 2x2 matrix, relationships typically fall into one of four zones: Trust-Shared Experience Matrix The goal isn't to just diagnose where a relationship stands, but to help leaders identify the relational barriers that block execution and offer paths to move each relationship forward. Below are tips to help you get started: At every transition, a shared purpose acts as a catalyst for progress. Without it, people lose direction, but with it, they progress. Take a moment to reflect on the vital relationships in your leadership circle: peers, direct reports, cross-functional partners, and customers. Ask the following: Next, categorize each name into one of the four zones of the Trust-Shared Experience 2x2 matrix. Now ask: Camaraderie brings people together. When you navigate tough times, share laughter, or spend late nights working with someone, your trust in them deepens. Caroline Santiago, a global executive leadership advisor and Navy SEALs coach, emphasized that camaraderie is one of the most underutilized superpowers in high-performing teams. It is the driving force behind success, moving people from co-workers to co-owners. It fosters a sense of 'we are in this together,' not 'I am on my own.' It produces the emotional glue that binds teams together through uncertainty, conflict, and rapid change. The true power of shared experiences lies in the results and connections built among people. Strategy doesn't fail in isolation; it fails due to a lack of trust, common purpose, and co-ownership. When leaders invest in shared experiences, they restore alignment and ignite commitment, creativity, and execution at scale. That's the missing link between trust and execution, and it's what separates smart leaders who fail from those who thrive.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Health
- Yahoo
This is how we do it: ‘In my 50s I want to be 'monogam-ish' – to have to have my cake and eat it'
There was some sexual frustration in our early years together, and that led us to discover that we were both ethically non-monogamous Ever since I was young, I've looked up to strong men. I remember being really interested in my gym teacher when I was at school. So when I saw Gavin's profile on a dating site, I instantly liked the stats. He's athletic, pays attention to self-care, and right from the get go we found lots to talk about. It was an easy match. We're both into kissing and we love passionate embraces, but at the beginning we weren't connecting very well physically. It took us time to really develop a strong chemistry in bed. And then one day it just clicked, and we've never looked back. Gavin's retired so he has opportunities to meet people online and host them during the day, which I can't because I'm working There was some sexual frustration in our early years together, and that led us to discover that we were both ethically non-monogamous. It all started when I told him that one of his ex-partners made me a little bit horny. I was apprehensive to tell him because it's a sensitive topic. But Gavin was receptive. He said, 'Well, maybe one day we could explore bringing in other people.' It took time to build a relationship before we were willing to entertain going elsewhere, but it was a natural progression. It changed the dynamic for the better and brought us closer. We call it a 'monogam-ish' relationship. We got here by mutual trust and respect – the idea that we're sexual beings and our relationship shouldn't stop us from exercising those tendencies from time to time. Gavin's retired so he has opportunities to meet people online and host them during the day, which I can't because I'm working. That's happened a couple of times and I've felt a little bit uneasy about it – I was worried about his safety more than anything. But on the flip side, he's mentioned that the pool starts to shrink the older you get. So if there's an opportunity, he believes it's fleeting and has to take it. Though being engaged sexually with Gavin is paramount to me, we're not daily sex people – we do it about once a week. Most evenings we tidy up in the kitchen, go to bed and live like an old married couple. Jimmy was very much in favour of trying to meet a third person, with the understanding that if one of us was uncomfortable, that would be the end of it Despite our age difference, we're both very sexually active – it's continued to thrive and grow through our 11 years together. I was more conscious of the generational difference than Jimmy, and we took it very slowly, not wanting to rush into anything. Jimmy had always dated older guys, but this was new territory for me. We have a very open attitude to sex, and in about our third year we set up a joint dating profile and began introducing other people into our experience. It was my idea, but Jimmy was very much in favour of trying to meet a third person, with the understanding that if one of us was uncomfortable, that would be the end of it. It took a lot of conversations about what the expectations were and it was a new experience for both of us. As the older person in the relationship, I'm probably not quite as interested in sex as Jimmy When you hit your 50s, you realise what you really want out of life. For me that was to be happy, to have freedom, to have a loving partner but to not feel restricted. To have my cake and eat it. As I'm older than Jimmy, I'm not quite as interested in sex. I don't feel any guilt about that, because if he wanted to have sex with someone else, he could do that. It brings us closer together as we find it exciting to hear about each other's fun times outside our relationship. Obviously there are people who Jimmy finds attractive and I don't, and vice versa. He is a very attractive young man and when we're out you can see people flirt with him. It's fun to watch and makes me appreciate him and all he has to offer. We have an active sex life together but I think having sex with outsiders is a realistic expectation of a 20-year age gap. When a person gets older they don't give up on sex, but a younger person definitely has a higher drive, so to have this freedom keeps it interesting for both of us. It keeps things sexy.
Forbes
2 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
The Rise Of Agentic AI—3 Big Barriers Enterprises Must Overcome
Key Barriers to Agentic AI Adoption getty In the race to stay competitive, agentic AI could be your smartest hire — yet many companies are still stuck at the starting line. As this next-generation AI enters mainstream enterprise operations, it promises not just automation, but autonomous collaboration, contextual reasoning and task orchestration. Still, businesses have been slow to adopt it. Why? Three challenges stand in the way: trust, training and technical integration. And if organizations fail to address these in time, the cost isn't just delay — it's disruption. More than half (55%) of enterprises cite trust-related concerns, such as data privacy (13%), reliability (13%) and accuracy (8%), as key barriers to deploying AI agents, according to a 2024 survey by Forum Ventures. Industry Example: IBM's Watson for Oncology was once hailed as a game-changer in healthcare, but its opaque decision-making and inconsistent recommendations eroded user trust, causing hospitals to scale back use. Risk of Inaction: Failing to build trust not only undermines adoption but also exposes companies to reputational and regulatory risks. In sensitive sectors like healthcare, finance and law, a breach of confidence can be costly, legally and operationally. How to Overcome the Barrier: Enterprises must prioritize data privacy, ethics and bias mitigation. Complying with standards like GDPR and CCPA is non-negotiable. Equally vital is transparency — embedding human oversight into high-stakes workflows and ensuring AI decisions can be explained and audited. Lucid's recent survey shows that 33% of workers believe ongoing training is the top hurdle to successfully implementing AI. Among entry-level employees, 41% reported feeling unprepared to use AI features, compared to just 10% of executives. The Marketing AI Institute found that 67% of marketers see lack of training as the primary obstacle to AI adoption. Industry Example: In Italy, only 8% of enterprises used AI tools in 2024. Why? Most cited digital illiteracy within their workforce as the core barrier, highlighting a widespread gap between potential and readiness. Risk of Inaction: Without training, AI agents risk becoming underused or misused, leading to low ROI, internal resistance and stagnation in innovation pipelines. How to Overcome the Barrier: AI agents aren't plug-and-play tools — they're adaptive systems. Enterprises must invest in dynamic training programs and customize models continuously to align with shifting goals. Monitoring performance and fine-tuning agents should be a standard operating procedure, not an afterthought. Bain & Company reports that 75% of organizations lack the in-house expertise to scale generative AI efforts. These hurdles are compounded by legacy systems and fragmented architectures. Industry Example: Banks are struggling to implement AI effectively due to outdated, fragmented data systems that prevent the consistent, accurate and timely data AI requires. Despite investing heavily in modernization, these legacy systems pose a major obstacle. Risk of Inaction: Fragmented infrastructure can delay deployment, inflate costs and bottleneck the flow of insights, rendering agentic AI ineffective or incomplete. How to Overcome the Barrier: Enterprises must embrace proactive risk management when integrating AI. This includes stress-testing systems, anticipating failure points and building fallback mechanisms. Particularly in early-stage deployments, constant output monitoring is essential to detect and mitigate unexpected behavior. By proactively addressing these barriers, enterprises can pave the way for the successful integration of agentic AI, unlocking its full potential to enhance efficiency and innovation.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
U of I researchers looking back at COVID protocols to see what they can learn
URBANA, Ill. (WCIA) — The COVID-19 pandemic came into focus around five years ago — causing shutdowns across the country. Now, public health researchers at the University of Illinois are trying to figure out what lessons they can learn — and how they can be used in the future. Becky Smith is a professor of epidemiology. She said the shutdowns were successful in keeping hospitals from being flooded with patients. But — she thinks the federal government could have used that time to build a better test for the virus– and understand its transmission quicker. Urbana man charged with hate crime on U of I campus following erratic behavior Smith's biggest takeaway was the erosion of trust between public health officials — and the general public. 'There were a lot of miscommunications that were made early on, especially with masks that early on people said, 'no, you don't need masks.'' Smith said. 'And then we when we came out and said, 'yes, you do need masks. Okay, you need better masks,' people were a little bit uncertain because, 'were you lying to me before that?'' Smith said there's always a chance for another pandemic. She hopes trust can be built back with the community before then so credible information can be passed along. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
