As you grow your business, you’ll need to develop effective teams to succeed. In this week’s episode leadership expert Patrick Veroneau speaks to us about the five dysfunctions of poorly performing teams, and how to build a work team that will grow your business.
Yury: Our guest today is the president of Emery Leadership Group, and works with organizations and individuals in identifying and developing evidence based leadership behaviors that work in the real world. He has developed models and assessments he utilizes with the several signature workshops called Lead Like No Other, Sell Like No Other, and A Team Like No Other. He’s also the host of a podcast called Leap Like No Other, available on Apple Podcasts or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. We are very excited to have on the show with us, Patrick Veroneau.
Patrick: Thank you guys so much for being here. I’ve been looking forward to this. I know Rich and I spoke earlier last week about doing something around teams and that’s a space that I love, so thanks for having me here.
Rich: Well, thanks for finally getting off the boat and coming in to talk to us today.
Patrick: Then going back on the boat.
Rich: Today, as you mentioned Patrick, we’re going to be talking about teams. Why do you feel the teams are so important?
Patrick: Teams really are your greatest competitive advantage in any environment. If you think about it. If you look at the data that’s out there around why people leave companies, it’s not generally because of finances. It’s oftentimes because of who that person reports to directly. That’s the number one reason. So if we look at it, especially in this environment that’s very competitive as a job market, what’s probably going to drive somebody to stay within an organization if they say, “You know what, I’ve been approached by six other companies or three other companies, but the team that I’m on or who I work with is so great right now. I don’t want to leave that environment.” That to me is why a team is so important. And if you don’t have a good team, I think it really puts you at a significant disadvantage.
Yury: So team cohesion and the time on the job with the team is critical to the success of any business.
Patrick: Without question. So there’s a model that I’ve used for about a year now, and it’s based off of a book that was written by a gentleman, Pat Lencioni. The book that he wrote was called The Five Dysfunctions Of A Team. Most people have read this. He actually, in conjunction with Disc, which is a widely publishing company that owns Disc Personalities, developed an assessment that develops teams based on the five dysfunctions that Lencioni mentioned in his book, and I leverage a lot of that work in the work that I do with teams. And then I combine it with the model that I developed a little less than 10 years ago called CABLES.
Rich: So before we get to CABLES, talk to us a little bit about those five dysfunctions.
Patrick: Yeah. So when I go into an organization, we’re talking about teams, I will give sort of a three minute overview of what that looks like. And I’ll say, “When we think about this, the five dysfunctions of a team, we talk with the first dysfunction is around lack of trust. And lack of trust is not I can’t leave the room right now because somebody is going to take my stuff. It’s lack of trust in that maybe I can’t say what I want to say on this team because if I do I’m going to be maybe ridiculed for saying it or maybe I’ll be dismissed. There’ll be retaliation for what I said. So what I do is I say nothing.
Patrick: And if we don’t have that first foundational level of trust, then we don’t have conflict, real conflict. And when we think of organizations and we think of the word conflict, immediately people think, well that can’t be good, right? You don’t want conflict. And actually we need conflict within organizations. We need to be able to argue about issues or certainly be able to get passionate about our direction of what we want to do.
Patrick: But if we don’t trust that we can say what we want to say, then we’re never really going to have real conflict. So when that happens, we go to the third dysfunction, which is lack of commitment that says that, “I’m just going to go along with this because it’s safer to do that. I know I can’t trust that I can say what I want to say. I really didn’t weigh into this conversation, so I’m certainly not going to put my neck on the line. I’ll just go along with it.”
Patrick: And then when that happens, we don’t have accountability, which is the fourth dysfunction, lack of accountability. And again, that’s one of those words that when you hear accountability, people think oftentimes it’s negative, right? Well, they’re going to be held accountable. There’s a punitive effect to that. I would suggest that people look at it more like ownership.
Patrick: When you have accountability, you have ownership from a team. But if you don’t have trust, if you don’t conflict, you don’t have commitment, then we don’t hold each other to anything accountable. So Rich, if two weeks from now we agreed to go in a certain direction and I don’t see you doing what we agreed to in this group, but I didn’t buy into this in the first place, the likelihood of me coming to you and saying, “You know what, Rich? Two weeks ago we talked about what we were going to do on this team and you’re not doing what you said you were going to do.” I’m not going to do that.
Patrick: So then we go to the last dysfunction, which is around lack of results, which means I’m just going to show up. I’ll work my shift, I’ll take care of my team, but I’m not going to get involved in any of the other stuff that goes on, any of the other drama. So those really are how that pyramid works. When we look at those five dysfunctions. I would say 95% of the time when I go in and tell that story, I immediately start seeing people’s heads bobbing up and down as I’m discussing these because they’re thinking we’re dealing with that right now.
Yury: Sounds like a widespread disease to me, right? If that’s what you face in the interaction with the customers and clients.
Patrick: It is. And most of the organizations that I go into that really… That narrative tells the story of what’s going on.
Yury: Is there a particular way to identify when a companies need to kind of use you as a resource to help them identify that? What would be the red flags for people to consider?
Patrick: So anytime that your inability to gain agreement on projects is not happening, that potentially is an opportunity where you have people that might be complaining about each other outside of the meeting about what’s not happening within the meeting. Or there’s just no consensus, or no agreement, in terms of where things are going to go.
Patrick: What’s important to realize here is you can have what’s called artificial harmony, which means that people just go along with it. We think the organization is great, there are no problems, but that’s only because nobody dares to say anything, But you don’t have any real results. Then that’s an opportunity to say, “Look at, we need to take a look. We’ve got a project that just can’t seem to get off the ground here. And it’s probably because of this dynamic or lack of dynamic in regards to team.”
Rich: So now that we’ve kind of talked about these dysfunctions, these five dysfunctions, you have a model that you call CABLES.
Patrick: I do.
Rich: Would you break that one down for us?
Patrick: Sure. So when I will go in and do these workshops, and they’re half day, full day workshops, CABLES is a model that I developed myself about eight years ago. And it’s all based on evidence research theory as well, but it’s also rooted in real world. And what it looks at, or how I develop this, was to say in regards to teams, what are we trying to do? And if you think about this like a bridge, and I use the golden gate as an example, is if you think of the Golden Gate or you look at it, it looks like one major cable that runs from tower to tower. Yet if you were actually to get a cross section of it, you’d see it’s about 30,000 individually wrapped CABLES.
Patrick: And to me that’s no different than our relationships in a work setting is that the strength of our relationships is built on additional behaviors, over behaviors. And the importance of that is to say that if I make a mistake, or do the wrong thing, or violate somebody’s trust; If I’ve done things all along the way that have developed trust, I can cut a hundred of those CABLES on that bridge and nothing’s going to happen to it, right? We’re going to be able to repair. There’s plenty of time. But if I’ve been in a relationship or in a team that we just continually take, then the image that I have next to the golden gate is one of those rickety old, if you remember Indiana Jones, the the rope bridge that he tries to cross. It’s similar to that. We’ve just deteriorated this thing to the point where you can’t cross it anymore.
Patrick: And that’s really what this is about. So I looked and said, “What are the behaviors that create that bridge?” And for me, the work that I do around learning is to say, “How can you chunk this in a way that it relates back to what we’re trying to do?” So when you think of CABLES and bridges, it’s easy to start thinking about really that we’re the engineer, the architect, and the builder of the relationships that we have. It’s in our power.
Patrick: It’s easy for us to blame somebody else for what they’re not doing. But if we look at the CABLES behaviors that are developed here, and there are six of them, because that’s the acronym for CABLES, that’s really what it’s doing. It’s developing really that first layer of trust as well through these behaviors.
Yury: So that sounds very intriguing. So could you give us the specifics of the CABLES?
Patrick: Sure. So the first behavior that we talk about, the C cable is around congruence. And this really is as simple as walking the talk. When we’re with an organization is what I say and what I do, are they in alignment? Oftentimes we can think of organizations that have these grand mission statements and value statements and vision statements, yet most of the employees within the organization don’t see those being played out. And when that happens, you have a lack of congruence, right? The disfunction or the disengagement comes because people say, “We say that we value our employees or this organization, our employees are our most valuable asset. Yet, that’s not how we feel.” There’s an incongruence. And when that happens, you don’t have a strong team because people say, “We say this, but we don’t really do it.”
Patrick: So the next one is around appreciation. And appreciation here really has two different components to it. The first part is appreciation from the standpoint of what are called unconscious biases. These are really important, especially on teams where the three of us, if we don’t understand each other’s backgrounds in some way, then we don’t understand where we come from in terms of… My personality sound might be different than yours, but it’s not better or worse. But if I just see you, you’re somebody that’s direct and to the point, I might take that offensively saying, “You really don’t care about my perspective.”
Patrick: And Rich, if I’m somebody that is saying, “I need more time to think about these decisions, but you don’t give me that time,” then again, I’m thinking, you don’t really care about where I’m going with this. We don’t do enough of really appreciating where other people’s perspectives are in the room. And when we don’t do that, what do we do? We come to our own judgments as to who the other person is. And when that happens we create oftentimes the problems that we don’t want to see within an organization because of how we expect somebody else to show up.
Rich: And do you think it’s a matter of just getting to know people on our team better in a personal way, or is this still something that takes place primarily within the office?
Patrick: I think it’s both. I think you need to be able to try and get a better understanding of other people. You can do it through things like personality assessments where people take like a Disc assessment and that’s only one. Another would be Myers-Briggs, where people start to get an understanding of how people operate differently. And this isn’t to say that we pry into people’s backgrounds and their personal histories and who they are, but it certainly, it provides a lot of context and we can start to say, based on how I grew up or where I was from, this is why I behave the way that I do.
Patrick: And in workshops that I will do, in terms of groups, we will do what’s called a personal history. It doesn’t get really deep, but it allows people to start talking about like what was the child who challenged that has shaped who you’ve been coming as an adult? And all of a sudden you have people that are sitting around the room and think, I never knew that about you, but now that I know it changes how I look at you. It doesn’t make everything go away, but it certainly changes that. So that’s an important one. This idea of appreciating other people and the impact that things like unconscious bias has having that.
Patrick: The other part of this is is appreciation from a standpoint of recognizing the contributions that people make on a team. Oftentimes we don’t do that because we might say, “Well, why am I going to recognize somebody? That’s their job. That’s what we pay them to do. Why should I have to then tell them that they’re doing a good job?” And that’s just not how we’re wired. We need that.
Patrick: Now, what often happens is people will think, well, if I do that, I’m going to be setting this up so that the person’s always going to need to be recognized for just silly stuff. That’s not what this is about. The way that I use it is what I call RPMs. Recognize positive moments. Those are your RPMs. Recognize positive moments. And just like in a vehicle, if you think about your RPMs in a vehicle, if the RPMs run too low, what happens? The vehicle stalls out. To me, that’s disengagement with an organization or on a team because there’s not enough recognition toward each other. If we go the other way and we red line this from an RPM standpoint, the engine burns up.
Patrick: That really is around when we have insincere recognition. Employee of the month that has no real value to it or we just sort of give people recognition or accolades, but there’s nothing really of substance behind it. And we can probably all think about that, when somebody has done that to us and what are we thinking? What are they going to ask me for next? They’re doing this just to ask me for something. But there’s a sweet spot, just like in your vehicle that is just right where there’s enough recognition being applied that people feel as though they’re appreciated for what they’re doing. It’s that simple.
Rich: All right, well let’s say it’s congruence appreciation. I think we’re onto B at this point.
Patrick: Yeah, being for others. For those that are familiar with Gary Vaynerchuk, this to me, I sort of pulled in some of what he talks about. He oftentimes will mention the 51% rule. Being for others really, if you think about it from a standpoint of the 51% rule, if I go into any environment trying to provide 51% of the value, I’m always giving just a little bit more than I’m expecting. And from a standpoint of influence we know that does is it activates reciprocity. When people do things for us, we generally want to give back.
Patrick: So if I come into a team setting and I’m always trying to contribute to where we’re going in a positive way, it provides a sense of trust, I would say, as well as, because I’m not looking at I’m a taker in this group. What can I get out of this? It’s about what can I provide? How can I make this better? So that’s the being for others.
Patrick: When we move on to the L cable that’s around listening, and this is one of those ones that we all have difficulty in terms of really listening, especially when we think we are right. We don’t really hear what else is going on. So it’s about listening in a few different ways. One is with our ears, tone of voice, the words that somebody uses. Those are really important things. Body language is the next one in terms of listening with our eyes. Is their face and what they say congruent, right? And we can all think of the person we’ve been around that says, “No, I’m not angry.”
Rich: Right. Why you looking at me?
Patrick: You guys brought it up. We didn’t. Why are you so guilty? So those are important things. The other one is listening with our mind and this really is about taking a pause. Somebody says something and my initial reaction may be defensive on it as opposed to saying, “Did they really mean what they said?” And maybe I need to clarify it first. Before I just attack on them maybe I need to say, “You know what Rich, this is what I heard you just say. I’m just curious, is this what you meant?”
Rich: One of my favorite questions to ask somebody is how do you mean? Because it gets them to come at it from another angle and maybe I’m like, oh it’s a good thing I asked because I decide not to be offended right now. And actually that’s some pretty good feedback.
Patrick: Totally. But to do that, you need to practice the pause. You need to be able to take a step back and say, my initial is to maybe get offended, especially if it’s somebody that that’s been their MO, so to speak, all along. It’s harder to be able to stop.
Yury: How do you gauge that type of behavior through digital channels when you don’t really have a chance to interact face to face, or hear, or see the posture and all you have is just an email or a text message?
Patrick: Yeah, especially emails. I use what’s called the rule of one where if we’re in a disagreement on an email, if we don’t resolve this thing within one exchange, then we need to go to something else. Either I need to come to your desk or I need to call you say, “Rich I’m reading this email. Here’s what I think it says. Is this really what you mean?” And oftentimes what do we do? Especially if I feel as though he can be snarky when he sends stuff out, then I can get pretty creative in regards to my emails back to get snarky, too. And all of a sudden we’ve wasted two days and maybe we don’t even remember what the argument was in the first place. But boy, we had a slew of creative emails back and forth toward each other, digging at each other. Doesn’t work.
Yury: Snark contest.
Patrick: Yeah, exactly.
Rich: I just usually try and find the best animated gif to explain how I feel in any situation.
Patrick: So even then I’d say, “Rich, I just saw that gif. Is this really what you meant in this gif? Or tell me about this.”
Patrick: And then the last one in that is listening with the heart. And I know that for some seems kind of woo woo and fluffy, but really it’s about trying to put yourself in the other person’s shoes in terms of if I was the one that was having this conversation, how would I want to be listened to right now? Which is really important.
Rich: So practice empathy, is that what you suggest?
Patrick: Yeah, which actually segues right into the E and this model, is empathy.
Patrick: Which is so important. And again, I think it’s another one of those that oftentimes is sort of a woo woo or we think is a soft… It’s one of the strongest behaviors you can demonstrate. When you can really demonstrate empathy towards somebody else, it puts you in a different level. It takes much more courage to do that than a weakness.
Rich: It is tough for empathy. And whenever you’re watching a movie and one of the characters is like just… You’re like, all you have to do is apologize to her and everything will be great. But then you find yourself in that situation, you’re like, but I’m right.
Rich: It’s very tough to do that in, especially in the business world.
Patrick: But and the other person’s thinking the same thing. I mean, that’s what we have to look at and say you think you’re right. The other person thinks they’re right as well. So when we’re talking… And I’ll speak to the last one here, which is around specifics. And again, I think this is where we can stumble the most at times where we don’t have clear expectations. We think we know what we want from each other, but all of a sudden we show up with the deliverable and you might say, “Well, that’s not what I wanted at all.” And I think, well that’s exactly what I heard that you wanted. And both of us walk away frustrated because we didn’t take enough time to understand what do we really need from each other on this in terms of what our roles are and what the expectations are?
Patrick: And to me, that gets into this area of artificial harmony that oftentimes it’s easier to not really push the envelope to say, what are we really going to commit to here? And we walk away sort of let’s be ambiguous about it because now we don’t have to get into a… go in an area that I don’t want to go. So the other part of that specifics or clear expectations is the accountability again, of the ownership that if we have clear expectations, it’s very easy then to say, hey, listen, we agreed to doing X, Y, and Z. We both agreed to that. Right now I don’t see that happening. Or I’m not living up to what I said I’m going to do. That sort of closes the loop on this.
Patrick: And when I use this within an organization, I will go down this list first. We’ll talk about this, but I will say everybody then take a look at this from your own inventory. Not Looking at this saying somebody else at the table isn’t being for others right now. It’s to say look at yourself and figure out which one of these behaviors are you violating right now? Because as easy as it is to blame somebody else at the table. we all have ownership in this. There’s something that I’m not doing here that either I haven’t set clear expectations, or I haven’t been congruent in my own actions, or I haven’t really listened to where you’re coming from. Something is in my ownership, and the faster I can figure that out and bring that to the table, the faster we’re all going to get to more cohesion.
Rich: So as I’m listening to all of this, there are challenges I think depending on where you are in the pecking order. And I’m just thinking like you might have some advantages and disadvantages if you’re the boss, and you might have some advantages and disadvantages if you’re new to the team. How do you take your position in the team into something like CABLES, or into any of the team dynamics?
Patrick: That’s a great question. And what I… If you think about this from a standpoint back to values or back to mission statements, well oftentimes I will peel it back to that to say, well one of the values that you’ll often run into with an organization will again be around we respect each other, or all of our opinions are equally weighted. Something along those lines.
Patrick: So for me, the work, especially when we’re dealing with that pecking order, if you’ve got a director in a room with an employee, how do you get everybody to feel safe that they can really say what they need to say? And when I peel it back to the values, it’s very hard for a senior leader to sit there when that gets highlighted out in regards to respect and not agree to that. Right? Because they’re saying, “No, I want everybody to do the same thing here. We all need to be able to respect where each other’s going.”
Yury: Is there a particular way to be respectful and purposeful without, not necessarily offending, but attacking people? You know, sometimes you have a very objective point that you want to make but when you make that point a few people may feel like you’re throwing them under the business. Any particular recommendations on how we can avoid that when we start practicing these type of behaviors?
Patrick: So another workshop that I will do around conflict management deals directly with that is, if you think about this in terms of being hard on the problem and soft on the individuals, that is how you can start to do that. It’s about being focused on the problem and not the individuals. And too oftentimes when we get into conflict, why is it? It’s because the argument has become personal. It’s not about the issue anymore. It’s about the individuals involved in dealing with the issue, and until we can pause, as I would say, and realize we’re going down a road that this is becoming personal and we’re losing sight of what the real issue is that we need to resolve here, we’re not going to get to that place, right? Because if my ego gets involved and I feel like I’m being threatened now or dismissed or ridiculed because of my approach to this, then we’re not focused on the problem that’s sitting on the table.
Yury: So would it be fair to say that we’re trying to bypass the conflict and actually focus on creative tensions that lead to the opportunity as well. We’re trying to resolve an issue or come up with like a new thing?
Patrick: Yeah. So I’m dealing with this just last week with a group of very high level individuals in a health care setting. And I think at times that can be more difficult when you deal with people that are cerebrally at a much higher level. That’s where they live. This sort of… They’re taking a cognitive approach to non cognitive issues is how I would say that is, is they’re thinking, well, if we just think about this a little more and come up with the right solution so to speak, or tactics, then we’re going to get there. And they’ve missed the foundational part of this that this is about behaviors that’s causing the problem, not about their cognitive abilities. And that almost gets in their way because I think I’m smarter than everybody else at the table here. I’ve got the right answer. You’re dumb.
Yury: The smartest person in the room, right?
Rich: So we’ve talked about teams. We’ve talked about the dysfunctions that keep them from working well. We’ve talked about CABLES, which gives us a little bit of a roadmap I think of how to improve our teams, get better results out of them. If we put this into work, how do we know in six months or a year if we’ve made progress? Are there measurable things that you can point us to where it’s like, yes, the team has gotten stronger? Is it only based on the results? Or are there other things we should be looking at and taking into consideration as well?
Patrick: Well, there are a couple of answers to that. One is as it relates to the five dysfunctions of a team, there’s an assessment that we actually do and the model is actually when we go in and do that work, it’s called the five behaviors of a cohesive team. So it sort of flips that upside down. And what happens in that is that the team fills out an assessment based on each of those five dysfunctions. How are we doing on trust, conflict, commitment, accountability and results? So now you have a baseline based on how that team felt the organization was doing.
Patrick: And then what can happen is three months later we can do a followup assessment to gauge where are we now? Have we moved the needle on trust as a team? Have we moved the needle on accountability or results? So that you can have a measurable impact.
Patrick: But I would also say that we can all think of environments we’ve been in where we don’t need an assessment to tell us that things are getting better. Like our working relationships, how we behave toward each other. There’s more respect. We’re able to have disagreements without things blowing up. We know that that happens. So we can really live in the best of both worlds here. We can do the measurable to see where are we three months, six months, a year out, but also we can start to see, once we start to develop these behaviors and model them on a more regular basis, then things can essentially start to change.
Patrick: What I think is important to recognize here though is, these are no different than any other habits that we have. And we know that it takes us at least 66 days to develop a habit. And we always hear 21 days being thrown around there and there’s no legitimacy to that. There’s no research that backs up 21 days. There is research that backs up that on average it takes about 66 days to develop a new habit. And what’s important to recognize there is that’s only if you demonstrate and actively practice that behavior.
Patrick: So it’s not like we wave a wand in 66 days and think, voila, now I’ve got the behavior. Isn’t that great? We need to do the work all the way along the way. And to me that’s where something like looking at CABLES, and there are certainly other behaviors that you could think about, but thinking about it in a standpoint of to do’s versus to be’s. To do’s are your from nine to 11 tomorrow I’ve got meetings or I’ve gotta do the books, whatever it is. This is about to be’s. This would be to wake up in the morning and think, how can I be a better listener today? How can I work today just on being more empathetic in terms of those people that I work with? Or how can I be more conscious of making sure that the direction that I set is clear? Or that I will test for clarity by asking people, are we all set?
Patrick: That’s the difference here. Because that can oftentimes be a cop out for people where they say, “I just… I’m too busy. We’re too busy right now to do this.” And this is not about a to do list. This is about it to be list. And we all have the ability to do that.
Yury: Is there a way to improve or increase the chances of our success if we’re talking about behaviors? How do I need to practice a behavior and how can I keep consistent with that new behavior that I’m trying to develop?
Patrick: Do it.
Yury: Just do it?
Patrick: Yeah, just do it. Just like Nike says, just do it. And I think what you’re going to find is there are things that you will do, you will practice behaviors and you’ll think, boy, that didn’t work out the way I thought it was going to. That’s not the signal to go back to what you were doing before. It’s like anything else. It’s to say if I’m in the gym and there’s a new exercise that I try and do and I’m like, I didn’t really get the results. Well, maybe my form wasn’t right. Maybe I’ve got to mix something else up. It’s not the model that’s probably wrong. It’s how I tried to apply it, and I just need to shift things up a little more.
Patrick: And oftentimes we can all probably think of great workshops that we’ve gone to and we have the best of intentions, right? And then nothing happens after that. The materials, everything goes to the desk, right to the bookshelf, and then into a file or a box somewhere. And the only reason that happens is because, to me it’s like reading about pushups versus doing pushups. Intellectually, we’ll look at this and say, makes perfect sense. I get it. Intellectually, we get this. That’s not where we need to be with this.
Patrick: It’s not until you actually do the pushups that you actually build the muscle. You’ve got to do this. And it hurts sometimes. That to me, I think in the world that we live in today, is oftentimes the challenge that we run into. People looking for the quick fix. How do I do this without dealing with the pain? You don’t. You don’t.
Rich: If you could… Just to shift gears a bit here. So I want to seem like I’m just pulling out the transmission here. But this is a fast forward main podcast. We’re always looking for ways to improve the business ecosystem here in Maine. If you could wave your magic wand, change one thing that would improve the business ecosystem here in the state, what would it be?
Patrick: Wow. That is the transmission getting pulled out. I think one of… The thing that, if I’m looking at that, would be listening. If I were to sort of focus on one thing is to say, how do we do a better job listening, really listening? Again where we can with empathy or with slowing down our mind to think what else is going on here and start doing a better job of reading people’s body language or their tone of voice. Think about what that does when we really are able to listen to somebody and when we’re listened to. We can probably all think of those people who have been around where when we really feel like they’re listening to us, intently listening to us, even if they have a different point of view, we tend to be less defensive because we’re thinking they’re genuinely trying to see things from my perspective.
Patrick: Now think about this from a standpoint of whether it’s with employees or a manager, if we’re really trying to understand and listen to each other more closely or anywhere else in the environment that we’re truly trying to do that. What does that do for us when… Because I might not have even thought of what your perspective is. And if I was only locked into where I was coming from, I’m going to miss an opportunity to say, “You know what, Rich, I got to be honest with you. I never even thought about that. But now that you mentioned that it makes more sense.”
Yury: Patrick, you provide us with a lot of incredible resources, information that we’re super delighted that you find the time to visit us today. But, for the listeners who are not in the studio or don’t know you personally, what’s the best way to find you online? How people can get in touch with you?
Patrick: So they can go to my website, which is emeryleadership.com and that’s E-M-E-R-Y leadership group.com. They can get me on LinkedIn. It’s Patrick Veroneu, so it’s V as in Victor, E-R-O-N-E-A-U. They can listen to the podcast, which is Lead Like No Other. Those are probably the three best ways. I’m also on Twitter, coachpatrickv, or @coachpatrickv.
Rich: Sounds good. So as soon as this episode wraps up, people could just head back to their favorite podcasting listening apparatus and check out your podcast.
Patrick: That’s right. That’s right.
Rich: Awesome. Patrick, thanks so much for coming by today.
Patrick: Hey, thank you. I think it’s such an important topic. Always room for growth and I truly believe it’s our best competitive advantage is to have strong teams.
Rich: I love it. What a closing.
Yury: Awesome. Nailed it.
Patrick: Thanks guys.
Rich: Great stuff from Patrick. We shared a stage with him awhile back at one of the fast forward mean workshops that we do and he delivered there just as he did in this podcast.