Good Apples vs Bad Apples

In The Culture Code, Daniel Coyle wrote about a guy named Nick whose job was to go into different groups and sabotage their performance.

To do so, Nick had to be one of three types of bad apples:

1 - The Jerk who was overly aggressive and defiant

2 - The Slacker who gave little to no effort

3 - The Downer who was depressed and saw the glass as half-empty

Nick took turns playing these three roles in 40 different, 4-person teams in what was called, "The Bad Apple Experience."

In almost every group, Nick's behavior reduced the quality of the team's performance (he was really good at being a bad apple).

When Nick was The Downer, everybody came on to the team super energized, but when he would act quiet and tired and put his head down. Eventually, the team started to behave tired, quiet, and with low energy as well.

When Nick was The Slacker, something similar happened. The group quickly picked up on his vibe and started slacking too.

The interesting part of the experiment is that when they asked the teams about their experience and performance after they were finished, the teams thought that they did a good job and said that they enjoyed it, but observations and the results said something different.

Nobody got upset with The Slacker or The Downer when he was a part of the team; they just became slackers and downers too.

But then Nick joined Jonathan's team, and Jonathan nearly infuriated Nick because Nick's negative moves wouldn't work like they had on the other teams. Jonathan was able to flip Nick's negative behavior and engage everyone and keep the team moving in a positive direction.

What was different?

Despite Nick and his effort at being the baddest apple he could be, Johnathan and his team stayed attentive and energetic, and they produced great results. 

When Nick would start being a jerk, Johnathan would lean forward, use body language, laugh and smile and diffuse the situation; that pattern continued. Nick would be a jerk, and Johnathan would react immediately with warmth, deflect, and deescalate.

Johnathan made a potentially unstable situation feel solid and safe. Johnathan asked simple questions that kept the team on task, listened intently, and he responded. The energy levels of the group increased, the team members opened up and shared ideas, and they continued steadily toward their goal. Johnathan even engaged Nick by asking him questions.

Johnathan's simple behaviors made all the difference, and he wasn't the typical, strong leader that we would expect to difuse a bad apple like Nick. Johnathan didn't take care or tell anyone what to do. He didn't strategize, motivate, or layout a vision. He created a safe environment where people could work together, learn from each other, and share with each other. Johnathan kept everyone connected and his team succeeded - not because they were smarter or better than the other teams - but because they were safe to keep their positive energy.

Coyle wrote, "Safety is not mere emotional weather but rather the foundation on which strong culture is built."

Johnathan changed the game because of his ability to connect with others and deflect away from negative behavior. He wasn't loud about it, and if he was on a basketball team, he probably wouldn't be the best player on the team. He was the Glue Guy who kept everyone (even bad apple Nick) together, and he showed that having a good Glue Guy could be just as, if not more effective, than having a super talented guy. Anybody can be a bad apple, and anybody can be a Johnathan.

Reflect:

1 - Are you a good apple or a bad apple?

2 - If you are a bad apple, which one of the three bad apples are you (you can have traits of more than one bad apple)?

3 - If you are a bad apple, what do you need to do to become a good apple?

4 - If you are a good apple, what do you do - or can you do - to help turn bad apples good?

References

Coyle, Daniel. The Culture Code. Batam Books, 2018,