Latest / The Start, Scale & Succeed Podcast / Teaching Your Team to Talk to Each Other with Salvatore Manzi (stage 4) - Ep. 412

Transcript

Teaching Your Team to Talk to Each Other with Salvatore Manzi (stage 4) - Ep. 412 · The Start, Scale & Succeed Podcast

0:00
Scott Ritzheimer: Hello, hello, and welcome, welcome once again
0:03
to the Start Scale and Succeed podcast, the only podcast that
0:06
grows with you through all seven levels of your journey as a
0:09
founder. I'm your host, Scott Retzheimer, and one of the most
0:13
frustrating things about reaching level four as a founder
0:18
is discovering that the people on your team have no idea how to
0:24
actually talk to each other, because for years you've been
0:27
the one holding it all together, you've had this conversation
0:30
here, this conversation there, and you've been able to hold it
0:32
all together yourself. But now that things have gotten as big
0:35
as they are, as successful as they are, and let's face it, as
0:38
complex as they are, something needs to change. We've got to
0:42
figure out how to get these folks to talk to each other, but
0:45
that is like herding cats. One, you can't get them in the same
0:49
room, but even when you do, they just seem to talk at each other
0:52
and not to each other, let alone listen to one another. So, here
0:56
to help us figure out how to get out of babysitting mode and into
0:59
leading a team that can not only talk together but perform
1:02
together is the one and only Salvatore Manzi, who is a
1:06
leadership communications coach who helps turn complexity into
1:10
clarity. His book, Clear and Compelling, which was released
1:14
in 2026 combines research in neuroscience, psychology, and
1:18
organizational behavior with years of communication coaching
1:22
to deliver practical strategies for turning insights into
1:26
influence, he helps leaders communicate clearly, lead with
1:29
authenticity, and navigate complexity with confidence. With
1:33
over 20 years of experience, he brings a unique blend of
1:36
strategic insight, real-world leadership, and human-centered
1:40
communication to every engagement. He's here with us
1:42
today. Salvatore, so glad to have you on the show. Welcome.
1:46
You open up with this scene that a lot of founders will
1:49
recognize, and there's this feeling of like being the
1:54
smartest person in the room, but they're just kind of tired of..
1:58
is kind of a nuance that founders feel, and one of the
2:03
challenges I think that they start to see at this stage, when
2:05
they realize, "Hey, I can't do all of this myself, I need other
2:09
people to, is that some folks they realize talk way too much,
2:14
some folks don't talk even close to enough, and you find yourself
2:18
actually wanting more and more from the smart but silent types
2:22
to speak up. How do you get the team to operate on that same
2:27
wavelength, that same waveform to communicate effectively?
2:31
Unknown: Well, thank you for inviting me on the show, Scott.
2:33
And the question of how do you get your team to start
2:37
communicating with each other when there are both different
2:40
personality types and different thinking times is critical in
2:44
order to make that leap and the stage and growth. What I've
2:48
noticed and what I build my practice around is thinking
2:53
about the different thinking types in the room, and I'll just
2:56
go through this quickly. Bernice McCarthy did a lot of research
3:00
on the learning styles of people, and her work led to a
3:05
lot of instructional design, but I'll break down into there are
3:08
four thinking types. Any room you go into on your leadership
3:12
team, you have four thinking types: why, what, how, and what
3:19
if. If you can speak to all four types, the room will start
3:24
communicating with each other, and I'll break it down. The why
3:28
is the CEO, typically, why are we here? Why are we talking
3:31
about this? Why are we talking about this right now? The what
3:34
is the more analytical, technical, the CTO. Well, what's
3:39
the background? What's the history? What has been tried?
3:42
What worked before? The how is the COO, the operations, or how
3:48
are we going to implement this? How is this going to unfold? How
3:51
do we do this from where we did last time? And then the what if
3:55
is bifurcated into the realist and the optimist, right? The
3:59
realist is more the CFO. What if we go off schedule? What if we
4:03
go over budget? What if it collides with this, and the what
4:06
if optimist is the well, what if we try this? What if we get this
4:11
going? What if we do this instead? And anybody out there
4:14
that's listening is probably like I'm a what if, I'm the
4:17
founder who has the idea I started it with the what if. Now
4:20
I've got it rolling, and the what if personality and thinking
4:25
type has to move up to the why to become the CEO. Otherwise,
4:29
they get stuck in the weeds answering all the questions.
4:32
Now, here's the thing that I didn't know until I studied
4:34
deeper. Everybody has a dominant thinking type. Everybody can do
4:40
all of the thinking types, but everybody has a dominant one. If
4:43
we only speak from our dominant speaking type, we're losing the
4:48
other types of the room. So, what I train leader teams to do
4:52
is I train them how to speak to all of the thinking types in the
4:56
room, so that everybody understands. Now, you mentioned
4:59
consider. Engine, we can go into that if I'm a what, if I'm a
5:03
what thinking type. I like the engineering, I like the data. I
5:06
created this incredible technical product, and I want to
5:10
take it forward. I've got to switch and speak to the other
5:13
types in order for the entire table to voice their opinions,
5:17
get involved, keep going. How's this landing so far?
5:20
Scott Ritzheimer: This is so good, it's so good, and folks
5:21
will recognize we use slightly different language for some of
5:25
it, this challenge exactly, and and I love this idea of a
5:29
thinking type, because we've always talked about them more in
5:31
terms of leadership style, which brings some of this into play,
5:35
but for this conversation in particular, and this challenge
5:38
in particular, tell me a little, and maybe this, maybe this is
5:42
there, maybe it's not, but I would imagine that there's a
5:44
different cadence of each of these thinking types. Is that
5:47
accurate?
5:48
Unknown: It's a yes. And, here's the challenge: if I'm in a
5:51
dominant thinking type, I'm going to go deep on that
5:54
thinking type. If I'm a what thinking type, I'm going to give
5:56
you the entire background of how we got from there to here.
5:59
Nobody else in the room actually needs that, but because that's
6:03
the way my brain thinks, it becomes a challenge. Your
6:06
question again was, how do we..
6:08
Scott Ritzheimer: Yeah! my experience in the room is I'm
6:10
thinking through some of these different what I would imagine
6:12
is their type, not that it is or isn't, but some of the more
6:16
stereotypical ones, the kind of how, and maybe the one side of
6:20
the what if they might take a little longer to process a new
6:23
piece of information, they feel a little bit more comfortable if
6:26
maybe they get data before the meeting than after, where as the
6:30
what if you know positive optimist side or even the why
6:33
side is just kind of like new ideas squirrel and they're often
6:37
and after it. Do you see that is that part of this thinking type,
6:41
where some folks like to process a little bit more deeply before
6:44
they make a comment or a decision.
6:47
Unknown: I love this question. I wouldn't put it in the same
6:49
categorization. I offer two things: one, a good leader is
6:54
going to require everybody in the room wait 10 seconds before
6:58
responding to give everybody in the room, a chance to get up to
7:01
speed. It takes an introverted leader, an analytical,
7:04
data-driven thinker, up to 10 seconds to formulate the perfect
7:10
response. Now, those on the more extroverted are going to jump in
7:15
with the first response, because they will find their way to
7:18
their point, whereas the more introverted leader is going to
7:21
think through, and then give you the concrete. There's a both and
7:25
here the extroverted is taking us on a journey that's getting
7:29
our brains thinking creatively, is helping us, we start to
7:32
brainstorm, we get to it, but it can sometimes silence the more
7:37
analytical thinker that is considering all of the
7:39
variables, and then we'll just hit you with the punchline with
7:42
the point. The problem here, giving me just the answer,
7:47
doesn't bring me on the journey. So I am starting to think, well,
7:51
how did you get to there? And then that person starts talking,
7:53
and then the whole room goes into chaos, and we don't move
7:56
forward. So provide that as an opportunity for everybody to
8:01
stop and think about what it is they want to say and elicit
8:05
responses from the ones that you see, personality types might be
8:09
more reserved and hold back the ones that might be more quick on
8:14
their feet to speak.
8:16
Scott Ritzheimer: Yeah, I'm tempted to just pause for 10
8:18
seconds, so everyone can feel how painstakingly long that is.
8:22
It sounds so easy, but that's an eternity, that's forever. You
8:27
might use, like, the cows have come home. How well, let's
8:32
just.. I think that's really practical, is really helpful. I
8:34
don't hear you saying every time anyone talks, there's a 10
8:36
second gap every time. So, walk us through, how does that
8:39
actually play out in the leadership team room,
8:42
Unknown: you have a challenge. You want to present the
8:44
challenge to the team, set them up for success. If you set them
8:49
up for success by sending them the topic, the talking points,
8:52
the agenda of the meeting, it helps the more analytical
8:55
thinkers prepare. It helps the more extroverted thinkers have
8:59
an overview, a vision of where it's going, then when you get
9:03
into the meeting, you're not going to do the 10 second rule
9:06
every time, but if you have that one key question, we're going to
9:10
start with this. I need to get everybody in the room to give me
9:14
their insights on this challenge that we're facing, and you don't
9:19
have to keep silent. Silence is not necessarily during that 10
9:23
seconds. You can reframe the question. So, again, we're
9:26
looking at the scope and the longevity. How is this going to
9:30
affect the budget? What's going to happen to the team? I'm going
9:32
to go around the room, and I'd like to get everybody's
9:35
impressions and find out what your take is on this. Set them
9:40
up for success one step further by saying we're going to start
9:44
with Mitra over here, and we'll go around to the right, so
9:48
everybody think about what is it, and I'm doing this language
9:51
thing as a leader guiding the room. I just gave Mitra an
9:55
opportunity to think about their response, and everybody else has
9:59
had that 10 seconds. It window to begin thinking about theirs.
10:02
The one challenge I would offer: give them a constraint, keep
10:08
your insight to one sentence, that way we don't get somebody
10:12
monologuing, taking over, and then we don't get to everybody
10:15
else. So that's that's the practicality of how you play
10:17
that out in a team meeting.
10:19
Scott Ritzheimer: Here's, here's the what I think is a principle
10:22
behind this that I want to touch on, and then talk about how to
10:26
help each of our team members get the most out of their time,
10:28
and what they say, but your job at this stage shifts from it's
10:34
shifting from being the one to make all the decisions and
10:37
knowing all the answers to cultivating an environment for
10:41
those answers to come out, and I love again the practicality of
10:46
the approach here. Now, one of the, the other challenges to
10:50
doing that is you may not have prepared them to take on that
10:56
responsibility, because oftentimes we hire like the best
10:58
salesperson to become the sales leader, and then we put them in
11:01
the room with the ops person, and it's, it's chaos. So, how do
11:05
you help folks when they, they even with some of these ground
11:09
rules, still seem like they're talking at each other instead of
11:13
being able to talk with each other?
11:14
Unknown: I love this, because this is the work that I go into.
11:17
Do I work with a lot of startups when they're making that pivot
11:21
from startup to growth, and they have to pivot the team to get
11:25
all wrapped around, and we'll have an offsite where we go
11:28
through frameworks. The number one framework to practice is Q
11:32
and A. How do you answer somebody's question? How do you
11:36
respond to them? Because this is where most intelligent, smart
11:40
people miss because that person asked a question on your team
11:45
because they pose this idea to you, it doesn't mean they want
11:49
an answer, what they want is a connection to start building
11:53
something together, and I'm not going to go into listening 101
11:57
here, but there is a fundamental gold to responding to their
12:05
question by first saying this is what I heard you're asking, is
12:08
do I have that right? Great, I think you're answering this
12:12
because of this and this, and I can tell in your department
12:15
you're probably overseeing this, and you might be looking at that
12:17
as well. Am I right? Boom, at the end of those two points,
12:22
your two team you just described, the two people on the
12:26
team that aren't listening to each other, now they've started
12:28
to understand each other. People cannot listen until they feel
12:34
heard. So, those first and second steps, if you practice
12:38
this, get it ingrained, especially in a leadership team
12:41
to first make sure you understand the question, second
12:45
validate why that person is asking the question, and then
12:49
from that place you can get to an answer. Otherwise, you just
12:52
have smart people popping answers to each other, and
12:55
there's no resonance in the room, because it's just a bunch
12:57
of good ideas that aren't going forward. There's no
13:00
collaboration.
13:01
Scott Ritzheimer: Yeah, what last question on this thread,
13:03
and then I've got another question I like to ask all my
13:07
guests. I'm very interested to see what you have to say, but
13:11
let's say, let's say the founder has laid this out, maybe they're
13:15
even doing a decent job at modeling it, and someon e else
13:19
breaks one of those rules.
13:21
you find that it's most effective to like to call it out
13:24
there in the moment, or is that an offline conversation
13:27
afterwards?
13:28
Unknown: Well, there is the call-in-call-out dichotomy,
13:30
right? Do I call them in, tell them afterwards, 'Hey, this is
13:34
what happened, I saw you do this, and you might want to try
13:37
better. I think that's good for the first pass, but if I were
13:40
leading the meeting, I would call it out in a gentle and a
13:43
kind way, because it sets the tone of these are rules, and
13:47
we're all going to play by them. Accounta bility, if it's broken
13:50
once, it's going to be broken all the way down.
13:53
Scott Ritzheimer: So good, so good. Salvatore. There's a
13:55
question, like I mentioned, that I asked them, I guess. And here
14:00
it is. The question is, what is the biggest secret you wish
14:03
wasn't a secret at all? What's that one thing you wish every
14:07
founder watching or listening today knew?
14:10
Unknown: Metaphors move minds. You have a brilliant idea, and
14:16
you can explain it conceptually. You can explain the complexity
14:21
of it, and they won't get it. What they will get is the
14:25
metaphor. If you, as a leader leading a team, or just a small
14:30
unit, can start practicing using a metaphor, find a metaphor that
14:34
works for you, and play it all the way through. I have a
14:36
financial advisor that uses tennis every time he's talking
14:41
to a client or to his colleagues, tennis is getting
14:45
played out in that meeting to explain the theory, to explain
14:49
the complexity of what he's saying, and now his teammates
14:53
and clients get him as a leader. The secret that not enough
14:57
people use is to practice you. Using metaphors to explain your
15:02
thinking, and then you can move things faster.
15:06
Scott Ritzheimer: So, good, so good. I love that, and I'm so
15:09
bad at it. But it's a great reminder, as a great reminder.
15:14
Salvatore, there are some folks listening who would love, love,
15:18
love, love to get a copy of your book, we really haven't talked
15:22
enough about that so far, but they'd also love to have you
15:25
come in and work with their team. Where can they find more
15:27
out about you and the work that you
15:29
Unknown: Oh, Thank you. I would say to anybody out there, if you
15:32
are sharing ideas and the energy isn't moving forward, I would
15:36
love to talk to you about what's going on there. The easiest way
15:40
is to join my newsletter, you can go to Salvator manzi.com
15:43
It's a communication strategy every couple of weeks. My book,
15:47
Clear and Compelling, will be out in October, and you can
15:51
pre-order now on whatever, wherever you buy books.
15:54
Scott Ritzheimer: Fantastic, fantastic. Get the links to
15:56
those in the show notes for you all, and highly recommend
16:00
checking it out. I got to read an early version, and it's
16:03
fantastic. Salvatore, thank you so much for being on the show.
16:07
Really was a privilege and honor, and a very fun
16:10
conversation. So, thanks for being here, and for those of you
16:14
watching and listening, you know your time and attention mean the
16:18
world to us. I hope you got as much out of this conversation as
16:22
I know I did, and I cannot wait to see you next time. Take care.
16:26
Hey everyone, Scott Retimer here. Thank you so much for
16:29
listening to the Start Scale and Succeed podcast. I hope this
16:33
episode gave you exactly what you need for the level you're in
16:37
right now. If you want to discover what level you're in,
16:41
take our 10 question founders evolution quiz for
16:44
free@foundersquiz.com that's foundersquiz.com It'll pinpoint
16:48
exactly where you are and give you tailored tips to move
16:51
forward and reach that next level in your journey as a
16:54
founder. If you got something out of today's episode, don't
16:58
forget to subscribe, rate, or review. It helps us reach more
17:02
founders like you, and let's be honest, it means a ton to me, my
17:06
team, and all our incredible guests. So, keep starting,
17:09
scaling, and succeeding, and I'll see you in the next episode.