A recent Randstad-ifo survey reveals clear differences in trust between employees and managers. What companies can learn about successful teams from these findings and Google’s Project Aristotle.
Imagine a typical team meeting. The leader presents a decision and then asks, “Does everyone agree?” Nobody objects. The meeting ends on time, and everyone returns to work. Yet some employees already know that the decision could cause difficulties in practice.
Why did they say nothing? Perhaps they have learned that disagreement is unwelcome. Perhaps they fear negative consequences. Or perhaps they have long since stopped believing that their opinions make a difference. For companies, this silence can be costly.
Trust is not the same as being friendly
The Randstad-ifo HR survey for the third quarter of 2026 shows clear differences in leadership culture among German companies. Only 20 per cent of the large companies surveyed describe the relationship between employees and managers as open and trusting. Among small companies, the figure is 53 per cent.
The figures are based on assessments by company representatives. Even so, they raise an important question: how open is communication in our companies, really?
Being friendly does not automatically mean that employees voice their concerns. A team can appear harmonious while important information remains unspoken. Problems arise, at the latest, when decisions are made without the full picture.
“A friendly atmosphere is pleasant. But it tells us little about whether employees would also disagree with their managers. And that can be crucial for a company,” explains Norman Gräter, keynote speaker and expert in motivation and humane leadership.
What Google discovered about successful teams
Google investigated the importance of an open culture of conversation through its research project Aristotle. The company explored what distinguishes particularly successful teams. One central finding was that individual team members’ abilities are not the only thing that matters. The way people interact matters too.
Psychological safety proved particularly important. It describes a working environment in which employees can ask questions, admit mistakes and express different opinions without being humiliated or punished.
Relatively balanced participation in conversations was also observed in connection with successful team communication. This does not mean that every employee has to speak for exactly the same amount of time in every meeting. The point is that different perspectives are actually heard.
Norman Gräter illustrates this with a simple example: “Imagine a team meeting with ten employees. Three speak; seven listen. At the end, the boss asks, ‘Are we all agreed?’ Everyone nods. But does that really mean all ten support the decision? Or have seven people never contributed their thoughts at all?”
There is an important lesson here for companies. A team does not automatically perform better because everyone agrees. It needs people who think for themselves and feel able to express their thoughts.
Why leaders unintentionally encourage silence
Trust is not created by a mission statement on a company website. It grows through everyday experiences at work. How does a leader respond when an employee admits a mistake? What happens when someone questions a decision? Is critical feedback taken seriously or immediately dismissed? The answers shape how a team behaves.
“If an employee speaks an uncomfortable truth three times and meets resistance every time, they will probably stay silent the fourth time,” Gräter explains.
Yet especially in challenging economic times, companies need employees who take responsibility, recognise problems early and suggest improvements. Leaders do not have to give up making clear decisions. They should create a culture in which different opinions are expressly welcome.
Three questions that can change your leadership culture
A more open culture of conversation often begins with small changes in everyday leadership. These three questions can help:
1. “What are we overlooking right now?”
This question invites employees to discuss risks, weaknesses and other perspectives. It signals that the leader does not have to know everything either.
2. “What would you tell me if you did not have to fear any negative consequences?”
This can help bring unspoken concerns to light. What matters, however, is that the leader then responds with genuine openness and appreciation.
3. “How would you know that I was doing a really good job as your leader?”
This changes the perspective. The leader is no longer the only person defining what good leadership means. The people working with them every day can contribute their expectations and needs too.
None of these questions works through its wording alone. Their effect depends on how leaders handle the answers.
Appreciation contributes to performance
People want to be seen, heard and taken seriously. This is where Norman Gräter’s “Make Me Feel Important” approach comes in. It also plays an important role in the business workshops at the Be Yourself Academy.
Appreciation means much more than occasional praise. It means allowing employees to take responsibility, contribute their experience and see that their opinions count. People who feel taken seriously have a stronger basis for contributing actively to shared goals.
This creates an important leadership responsibility for companies. They do not have to pit performance against humanity. The two can strengthen each other.
“Companies need clear goals, decisions and people who take responsibility. But responsibility only works when employees can name problems before they become major problems,” Gräter says.
The crucial question for companies
A high-performing company culture is not built solely through motivational words, modern workplaces or regular team events. It reveals itself especially in difficult situations: when an employee admits a mistake, when a leader receives criticism, or when someone finds the courage to disagree with a decision.
Companies should therefore ask more than how satisfied their employees are. They should also ask: “Do our employees trust us enough to tell us when something is wrong?”
Sometimes the next major step forward lies not in a new strategy, but in a truth that nobody has dared to express.
LOOK AGAIN. Take another look.
Developing leadership culture together
The Be Yourself Academy supports companies, leaders and teams in strengthening trust, appreciation, motivation and collaboration over the long term. Through practical business workshops, keynotes and tailored development formats, it provides ideas for a company culture in which people take responsibility and can achieve more together.
Find out more about our business workshops.
About Norman Gräter
Norman Gräter is a keynote speaker, author and expert in motivation, mental health and humane, performance-oriented leadership. A three-time European public speaking champion, he spent 24 years within the Würth Group and was responsible for more than 150 events and incentive programmes with a total of over 370,000 participants.
Today, he helps companies and leaders connect appreciation, motivation and business performance. His guiding principle: “Joy in life = success at work.”
Sources
Randstad-ifo HR survey, third quarter of 2026. Randstad Germany, press release of 23 October 2026.
ifo Institute, analysis of 9 October 2026.
Google – Project Aristotle: research into team effectiveness and the importance of psychological safety.
Note: The Randstad-ifo findings are based on assessments by the company representatives surveyed. Google’s Project Aristotle was an internal company study. Its findings cannot automatically be applied to all companies.
Further reading: In his latest press release, keynote speaker Norman Gräter explores why employees often do not disagree with their managers.
