Group Training Sessions

Ethics isn’t just about grand gestures—it’s about small, consistent actions that reflect integrity. Whether working with peers or engaging with clients, practicing basic ethics fosters trust, credibility, and long-lasting relationships. Here’s how you can make a difference: 1️⃣ Honesty is Non-Negotiable With peers: Share feedback respectfully and avoid gossip. With clients: If you can’t meet a deadline, communicate proactively instead of overpromising. Example: "We’re facing a slight delay, but here’s how we’re addressing it." 2️⃣ Respect Everyone’s Time With peers: Show up to meetings prepared and avoid last-minute delays. With clients: Stick to the agenda and respect their schedules. Example: Wrapping up a meeting with: "I appreciate your time; let me summarize our next steps." 3️⃣ Be Accountable With peers: Own your mistakes and focus on solutions. With clients: Deliver on promises and update them on progress. Example: "I realized I overlooked this detail; here’s how I’m fixing it." 4️⃣ Practice Empathy With peers: Understand workloads and offer help when needed. With clients: Listen actively to their concerns without jumping to conclusions. Example: "I hear your concern; let’s explore a solution together." 5️⃣ Confidentiality is Crucial With peers: Avoid sharing private discussions. With clients: Safeguard their information and respect their trust. Example: Handling sensitive data with utmost care and transparency. 🌟 Ethics isn’t about perfection; it’s about consistency. Small steps lead to big trust. What are the ethical practices you swear by at work? Share your thoughts below! #WorkplaceEthics #IntegrityAtWork #ClientRelationships #Teamwork

When I started out, “professionalism” meant one thing: Polished decks. Formal shirts. Perfect answers to investor questions. But over the years, sitting across 500+ founders and seeing startups rise and fall  I’ve realised professionalism isn’t about polish.  It’s about practice. Here’s what I mean :- 1. Professionalism is keeping promises, not making them. Any founder can promise 10x growth in a deck. Few deliver even 2x with consistency. I’d rather back the one who quietly delivers every month than the one who dazzles in one board meeting. 2. Professionalism is being human. I’ve seen founders who try to act like machines. Never admitting doubt, never showing vulnerability. But here’s the truth: teams don’t trust a robot. They trust a human who says, “I don’t have all the answers, but I’ll figure it out with you.” 3. Professionalism is a process under pressure.:  Markets tank. Customers churn. Competitors undercut. In those moments, you don’t rise to the occasion — you fall to the level of your systems. Clear governance, clean cap tables, transparent communication: that’s what keeps a startup alive when adrenaline fades.  4.. Professionalism is treating everyone with respect. Not just investors. But employees, suppliers, even the chaiwala who delivers to your office daily. Culture isn’t built in all-hands meetings. It’s built in how you behave on ordinary Tuesdays. Founders often ask me: “What do investors really look for?” My answer: I look for professional founders. Not the most polished. Not the loudest. But the ones who: - Deliver consistently - Lead with empathy - Build systems, not chaos - Respect every stakeholder - And can stay resilient without burning out. That’s the new professionalism. It’s what separates hype from longevity. Curious to know — what does professionalism mean to you as a founder?

*** The Little Things That Build (or Break) Professionalism *** What often hurts team culture isn’t big failures — it’s the small lapses: unanswered invites, missing updates, or forgotten acknowledgments. So here’s a simple checklist of basic but powerful habits that reflect good citizenship at work — the kind that builds trust and dependability quietly, every day. 1️⃣ Accept meeting invites promptly. Don’t leave organizers guessing till the last minute. It signals respect for their time. 2️⃣ If you decline, add a reason. A short note like “conflicts with another client call” or “will catch up via notes” builds transparency and accountability. 3️⃣ Show up on time — virtually or in person. Being punctual says “I respect your time as much as mine.” 4️⃣ Keep cameras on when discussions need collaboration. It builds presence, empathy, and focus. (Unless bandwidth or accessibility issues apply.) 5️⃣ Respond to messages and mails — even if it’s a simple acknowledgment. Silence creates uncertainty; acknowledgment creates reliability. 6️⃣ Update shared trackers or project tools regularly. Invisible work creates confusion. Visible updates create alignment. 7️⃣ Give credit publicly; give feedback privately. It strengthens trust and psychological safety. 8️⃣ Don’t multitask when someone is presenting. Active listening is one of the simplest signs of respect. 9️⃣ Volunteer for small, thankless tasks occasionally. Running the deck, taking meeting notes, helping onboard a colleague — these gestures make teams cohesive. 🔟 Keep people informed if you’re running late, missing a deadline, or changing plans. Proactive communication saves others hours of follow-up. 11️⃣ Don’t hoard information. Sharing updates or learnings openly helps everyone move faster. 12️⃣ Celebrate others’ success genuinely. It costs nothing but creates enormous goodwill. 13️⃣ Avoid “that’s not my job.” Sometimes leaning in — even briefly — helps a teammate breathe easier. 14️⃣ Mute when not speaking, and check your audio before joining. Professionalism shows up in small, consistent details. 15️⃣ End meetings with clarity on next steps. It prevents confusion — and builds a culture of accountability. Good citizenship at work isn’t about grand gestures — it’s about micro-habits that make work smoother for others. The most respected colleagues aren’t just brilliant; they’re dependable, responsive, and kind in the basics. #Leadership #TeamCulture #WorkplaceExcellence #ProfessionalEtiquette #Collaboration #OrganizationalBehavior

Multi-party commercial mediation - One mediator. Thirty, forty people in the building. Parties, lawyers, experts, insurers, funders — everyone with an opinion and a role. The temptation? Just manage the people and hope the mediation looks after itself. It doesn't. Years ago, veteran US mediator Michael Landrum sat down and mapped out how he handles it. I came across his thinking recently and it's still as sharp as ever. Here are six of his standout tips: 1. Meet the lawyers before the day in an online process design conference. You get buy-in, you see how people behave under a bit of pressure, and you spot who's going to be difficult. 2. Find your affinity groups. Some defendants have more in common than others. Identify them early. Then let good counsel do the work on the day while you're busy elsewhere — you'll often come back to find things have moved on. 3. Ask the defendants what they think the plaintiff should take. Do this as a group. The number matters less than what you learn from the conversation — who's engaged, who's holding out, and how they read each other. 4. Then take them aside one by one. "Forget the cross-claims for a moment — if you could just walk away, what would you put in?" With no commitment and just a number, its a helpful confidential read. 5. Bring the group back together with the total. It's never enough. That's the point. "Collectively you think the plaintiff should take $X. You can only put together $Y. Something has to give." (update - this maybe the moment to try a Surowiecki ballot (thank you Jeff Kichaven) or pass around a calculator for a second round of real time anonymous bids — both quietly brilliant for a stuck room.) 6. Start running mini-mediations inside the mediation. Work with the claimant on what they'd accept from each defendant individually. Once the spectre of piecemeal settlements enters the room, it tends to do its work. Michael's full ten-point framework from back in 2008 is linked in the first comment. Worth ten minutes of your time.

5 things to say when the group can't agree and the session is stalling. The discussion has been going in circles for 15 minutes. Two people are entrenched. Everyone else has gone quiet. Nothing is getting decided. Most facilitators either let it run and hope it resolves, or force a decision that half the group doesn't support. Both leave you with a decision that won't survive Monday. Here's what to say instead: 1. When two strong opinions are deadlocked: → "You've both made strong cases. We're not going to resolve this by debating further. Each of you: what would need to be true for the other person's approach to work?" This forces each side to engage with the other's position instead of defending their own. The answer often reveals common ground. 2. When everyone's sitting on the fence: → "I'm hearing a lot of 'it depends.' Let's force a choice. If you had to pick one direction right now with the information you have, what would it be? Write it down." Fence-sitting is usually fear of being wrong, not lack of opinion. The written commitment breaks the deadlock because people do have a view. 3. When the group is deferring to the most senior person: → "Before we hear from [senior person], I want everyone else to write their position first. 60 seconds." If the senior person speaks first, everyone adjusts to match. Written answers before the hierarchy kicks in gives you the group's real thinking, not the filtered version. 4. When the argument is going in circles: → "We've been on this for 15 minutes covering the same ground. What's the actual decision right now, and what's the smallest version of it we could all commit to today?" Circular arguments usually mean the question is too big. Shrinking it to the smallest committable decision breaks the loop because people can agree on a first step even when they can't agree on the whole solution. 5. When someone says "we need more data": → "What specific data is missing, and how would it change your decision? If the answer wouldn't change, we have enough to move forward." "We need more data" is the most common stalling move in workshops. Sometimes legitimate. Usually a way to avoid committing. Asking what the data would actually change exposes whether the delay is useful or just comfortable. The pattern across all 5: → Name the stall without blaming anyone → Change the format of the conversation → Make the smallest possible decision Groups don't get stuck because they disagree. They get stuck because the question is too big, the risk feels too high, or the format isn't helping. Change one of those and the room moves again. ___ Save this for later (three dots, top right). Share with friends → ♻️ Repost. Get consultant-grade workshops every Sat → https://lnkd.in/eSfeUapJ

During a recent interview, a candidate told me about how they turned down an offer from a company that demanded they skip their notice period. “It just didn’t feel right,” they said. “I owed my team a proper handover.” That one statement told me more about their character than their entire resume. Honoring a notice period isn’t just a box to check—it’s a reflection of values. It speaks to how someone views commitments, relationships, and even their own professional reputation. And for me, that’s the kind of person I want on my team. These five traits reveal everything about a candidate’s true potential: 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 Candidates who honor their notice period show they respect their commitments and the trust placed in them. Reliability like this is the foundation of a strong team. 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 A smooth handover isn’t just about tasks—it’s about respecting the people they leave behind. This attitude carries over into how they’ll treat your team. 𝐋𝐨𝐧𝐠-𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭 Someone who respects transitions is more likely to approach your organization with loyalty and stability, not as just another stepping stone. 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬 By following workplace protocols, they show respect for policies—critical for fostering a collaborative culture. 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 If they can walk away from their current employer without closure, they could do the same to you. Strong ethics build dependability. It’s tempting to hire quickly when you’re in a crunch, but I’ve learned that choosing someone with strong work ethics and values always pays off in the long run. Would you choose speed over values? Or is building a team rooted in trust worth the wait? #WorkEthic #Professionalism #HiringDecisions #TeamBuilding #Leadership

Leadership: The Art of Doing the Right Thing In professional management, we often focus on "doing things right"—optimizing processes and increasing efficiency. However, true leadership is defined by a higher standard: doing the right thing. To lead effectively in today’s landscape, we must move beyond traditional authority and embrace these three core pillars: 1. Human-Centric Environments A leader’s greatest responsibility is the culture they cultivate. People do not burn out from hard work alone; they burn out from workplaces that feel like constant "war zones". Prioritize Mental Health: A manager often has a more significant impact on a team member's mental health than a therapist. Avoid Micromanagement: Micromanagement is a high-cost strategy that eventually drives your best people away. Empower Authenticity: Never ask your team to "dim their light" to make others comfortable. 2. Radical Respect and Integrity Professionalism is rooted in how we treat others, regardless of their status. Universal Respect: Make it a habit to respect every individual, regardless of their title, qualifications, or position. Embrace Humanity: Remember that employees are not machines; they require connection, joy, and peace to remain sustainable. Integrity in Action: True leadership is found in the pure hearts and good intentions you bring to every decision. 3. The Courage to Pivot Great leadership requires the humility to acknowledge when a path is no longer productive. Growth Over Perfection: Skill does not eliminate mistakes, and failure is simply proof of being human. Knowing When to Leave: If you find yourself on the "wrong train," get off at the nearest station. The most self-respecting act a leader can take is to leave a table where they—or their values—are no longer being "fed". Final Thought: Success is the result of small, consistent efforts made with integrity. Lead in a way that allows you, and your team, to sleep peacefully at night. #Leadership #WorkplaceCulture #Integrity #ProfessionalGrowth #MentalHealth #Management

Yesterday, one of my team members made a small mistake while working on a task. The mistake was easy to correct. What caught my attention was what happened next. Before explaining the issue, another team member immediately pointed out who was responsible. The discussion shifted from solving the problem to focusing on the person behind it. That moment reminded me of something important. In many workplaces, experience is often measured by how much someone knows. But real professionalism is revealed by how someone treats people when things go wrong. Anyone can be respectful when results are good. The real test comes when deadlines are missed, mistakes happen, or expectations are not met. I have noticed that the most respected professionals are rarely the loudest voices in the room. They are usually the people who correct without humiliating, guide without judging, and teach without making others feel inadequate. That is why some leaders build loyalty wherever they go. And others, despite decades of experience, struggle to earn genuine respect from their teams. Because people eventually forget how much you knew. But they remember how you made them feel while working with you. Experience can improve skills. Titles can create authority. But neither automatically creates character. And in today's workplace, character often determines influence more than expertise. “Your experience becomes valuable when it helps others grow, not when it is used to make others feel smaller.” In your experience, what earns more respect in the workplace today, years of experience or the ability to treat people with dignity regardless of their position? #CareerGrowth #Leadership #PersonalBranding

Studies show we waste 7 hours per week dancing around difficult conversations. That's 45 workdays a year of tiptoeing through meetings. That tension isn't invisible 🫥 Everyone feels it 🙄 Everyone avoids it 🫣 And it's costing more than you think. But here's the real cost: Innovation dies where candor fears to speak. 9 counter-intuitive ways to address the elephant 🐘 (without starting a circus): 1. Use the "Empty Chair" technique ↳ Put an empty chair in important meetings ❗️ It represents the unspoken truth ✅ When tension rises, point to it: "What would the empty chair say?" 2. Start with the second problem ↳ Skip the surface issue everyone expects ❗️ Address the deeper concern first ✅ Watch the first problem solve itself 3. Create "Conflict Time Zones" ↳ Schedule tough talks between 10:30-11:30am ❗️ Our emotional regulation peaks then ✅ Drama drops by 40% (Stanford research) 4. Deploy the "Preview-No-Surprise" rule ↳ Text 3 bullet points 30 mins before ❗️ No one likes ambush conversations ✅ Anxiety drops when people can prepare 5. Use the "Both-And" Framework ↳ Replace "but" with "and" ❗️ "You're brilliant AND we're missing deadlines" ✅ It validates both realities 6. Create a "Positive Assumption Contract" ↳ Start with: "I assume we both want what's best" ❗️ Write it down ✅ Reference it when tensions flare 7. Practice "Productive Silence" ↳ After addressing issues, stay quiet for 7 seconds ❗️ Don't fill the space ✅ Let solutions emerge naturally 8. End with "The Future Story" ↳ Paint the picture 3 months from now ❗️ "When we look back, what made this work?" ✅ It shifts focus from problems to possibilities 9. Name the "Hidden Emotional Current" ↳ Label the emotion, not the argument ❗️ "I sense fear about our direction here" ✅ Watch resistance melt Every difficult conversation you avoid today becomes tomorrow's crisis. Your next breakthrough is hiding in the conversation you're afraid to have. How do you tend to address the elephants? ___________ ♻️ Reshare to help others navigate challenging situations. Follow me Ruta Stasiunaite 😎 for leadership and emotional intelligence insights.

I would like to describe a simple method I’ve used to resolve the extreme polarization that can occur in high-intensity conflicts, where people have deeply stereotyped misperceptions of the other that remain frozen in time—and thus inaccessible. This simple method can also raise the empathy of both parties…to spend some time in the shoes of the other… as long as each party has some measure of emotional intelligence and mental health outside that polarized situation. I ask each party to make three lists: (1) This is how I perceive the other party (their needs, motives, biases, goals, concerns, prejudices, blindsides, etc.,, or whatever seems to be relevant to the conflict situation). (2) This is how I perceive myself (my needs, motives, biases, etc.). (3) This is how I think the other party sees me (my best guess of their view of my needs, motives, and so forth). Ideally, these three lists are written on easel pad paper, so they can later be posted on the wall of the room, very visible and readable for all to see. Naturally, it’s important to remind each party to be especially candid and to be as specific as possible in compiling their three lists, not evasive or general. They should also write very legibly. When the three lists are complete, they’re posted on one wall in the room. Each party then takes turns presenting its list to the other. Then there is a brief period of “clarifying questions” (no debate) to make sure that what is written on the lists is understood by all. This part needs to be facilitated, so the “clarifying” questions are asked to understand what is written on paper (regardless if one agrees or disagrees with what had been put into words), but certainly not to attack its meaning or validity. The “fun” begins (yes, laughter finally seeps into the conflict situation) and the “learning” begins (a few “aha” moments are usually experienced) when each party is then asked to compare (1) how each sees itself versus how the other sees it and (2) how each party sees the other versus how the other party sees itself.