Coyle introduces the concept of 'belonging cues'. These are verbal and non-verbal signals which we can send to create the feeling of safety and belonging in a group, e.g. your product team, your co-founder or even your company at large. I'm sure we've all come across organisations where, as employees, these belonging cues are often lacking - resulting in us or our team feeling disconnected from the rest of the organisation.
Consider this though...
"A sense of belonging is easy to destroy, but hard to build."
We humans have evolved to be obsessed with wanting to be a 'part of the tribe', yet we're accutely tuned to anything that could pose a danger to us - even if these dangers don't actually exist. Pain from social isolation is considered to use the same neural pathways as physical pain, so it's no wonder we're often so vigilant.
We often have some sort of a shield up when dealing with new people, which is exacerbated in work settings as we feel the need to be 'professional' or 'high-performing', so we fear saying or doing anything that could damage this perception of us. Unfortunately, closing up in this way also limits our ability to connect with the people around us, and so our goal to be a part of the tribe can be hampered.
However, Coyle suggests that if a company repeatedly sends out clear, steady and positive belonging cues, this can help create psychological safety which shifts people's brains from danger mode into connection mode. Reading this reminded me a lot of building psychological safety with romantic partners or our friends and family, where we may often tell these people we love them which builds psychological safety.
Of course, we wouldn't necessarily go around telling people at work that we love them to create psychological safety (or should we?). In any case, there are other, less awkward, ways to send belonging cues in a work setting:
- having an open office policy
- accepting challenge from reports
- asking for honest feedback with no repercussions
- stating if we've made a mistake (especially powerful if this comes from a senior leader e.g. CEO, as it makes it 'safe' to admit mistakes)
- asking for advice
- setting up team games where there's no hierarchy
- telling everyone how much you genuinely appreciate their work
- making the time to genuinely listen to people and understand where they're coming from
- celebrating failure where lessons have been learned
- ad infinitum
Coyle gives the example of basketball coach Gregg Popovich of the San Antonio Spurs, who sends out belonging cues that encourage honest, two-way feedback and consequently foster deep belonging. His cues have these tenets as underlying themes:
- You are a part of this group
- This group is special and we have high standards
- I believe you can meet those standards
A few belonging cues require us to be a little more vulnerable. Vulnerability can encourage more cooperation and collaboration in teams. Some companies do this formally through:
- AARs (After Action Reviews) - a type of post-mortem typically used by military, emergency response, and other high-stress environments, where an event or action's effectiveness is reviewed and honest feedback is shared among the team around what can be learned from it.
- Brain trusts - popularised by Pixar who assemble a group of veteran filmmakers and storytellers to provide candid feedback early on in the movie development process
- Red teams - a team of knowledgeable, trusted individuals who are asked to provide direct, and honest challenge
I also believe that a classic example of vulnerability is in the form of the good ol' fashioned retrospective (I love retros).
It should be noted that none of these forums are intended as a way of providing 'brutal' feedback that attacks the recipient's very soul. That doesn't quite yell 'psychological safety'. Instead, these forums are best set up in a way that's judgement-free and where learning is highly encouraged. I imagine this won't be easy for many companies, where 'one neck to wring' is the overriding philosophy. All of that talent potential wasted because of archaic management practices...
Coyle reminds us that vulnerability does not come after trust is established. Rather, exchanges of vulnerability are how trust is built - especially powerful when done repeatedly. This applies in both professional and personal contexts. In a way, this reminds me of the touted Franklin effect - where asking for help can often lead to more trust being formed between two parties.
One final point that stood out for me was the fact that when new employees join a company, their entire being is hell-bent on deciding whether this company will make them feel welcome or not. Coyle calls out that successful cultures capitalise on these 'threshold moments' to send powerful belonging cues that foster feelings of 'togetherness' which results in psychological safety - thus maximising usage of that employee's talent potential and their collaboration with other members of the organisation.
This can result in a network effect where each new employee boosts the organisation's effectiveness as a whole (within reason - don't get me started on the dangers of over-staffing). It's therefore worth noting that these threshold moments aren't just for the new employee only, but simultaneously for the rest of the organisation as well. When someone joins, how can the rest of the organisation be sent belonging cues to remind them that we're all in this together?
In any case, this was a fascinating read. Highly recommended.