Five Connection Myths Holding Your Team Back
Note: This piece is part of my ongoing exploration of Ties, one of the five elements within the SHIFT model. In our SHIFT courses, we explore each element through two lenses: the micro (individual leader) level and the macro (organizational and systems) level.
This piece focuses on the macro level: What persistent myths about connection continue to shape our organizational practices? As workplaces evolve into increasingly complex arrangements, our approaches to fostering meaningful ties must evolve as well. By challenging outdated assumptions, we can design more effective systems for connection that work across distances and differences.
On Wednesday, we examined the micro level: How individual leaders can design intentional gatherings that foster genuine connection through structure, purpose, and presence. Together, these perspectives offer a more complete view of what it takes to build meaningful connection at work—one interaction, one team, one system at a time.
The past four years have taught a lot about connection in the workplace. The organizations struggling most with distributed teams aren't necessarily doing the "wrong" things—they're often following outdated myths about human connection. Let's examine five myths that need revisiting:
Myth #1: "More Communication = Better Connection"
The Myth: Flooding calendars with check-ins and filling Slack channels with updates naturally builds stronger relationships.
The Reality: Quality trumps quantity every time. Teams with strong connections often communicate less frequently but with more intention than struggling teams.
What Works Instead: Create deliberate connection points with clear purpose. One manufacturing company reduced meetings by 40% while increasing connection scores by focusing on designing fewer, more meaningful interactions.
Myth #2: "You Can't Build Trust Through Screens"
The Myth: Real trust requires physical presence and can't develop in digital environments.
The Reality: Trust emerges from psychological safety, not proximity. Teams that implement structured practices for building safety consistently develop strong trust regardless of location.
What Works Instead: Design interactions that create safety through structured vulnerability. GitLab's check-in practices have measurably increased trust across their fully distributed organization. This book has a lot of creative and effective practices to build trust.
Myth #3: "Connection Happens Naturally When People Are Together"
The Myth: Simply bringing people into shared spaces (virtual or physical) naturally creates connection.
The Reality: Proximity without purpose creates presence, not connection. Many in-person teams experience deep disconnection despite sharing physical space every day.
What Works Instead: Approach every gathering with clear intention about the connection you're trying to create. One technology company designs every interaction—from project kickoffs to performance conversations—around specific outcomes, not just task deliverables.
Myth #4: "Social Events Build Workplace Connection"
The Myth: Virtual happy hours, team games, and social events create the relationships teams need to collaborate effectively.
The Reality: Social events create familiarity, not necessarily the trust and understanding teams need for complex work. Many "fun" team activities actually increase disconnection for those who find them draining or inauthentic.
What Works Instead: Create connection through meaningful work and shared challenges. One professional services firm replaced their monthly social events with "challenge sessions" where cross-functional teams tackle real business problems together, reporting dramatically stronger relationships as a result.
Myth #5: "Everyone Connects the Same Way"
The Myth: One connection approach works for everyone on your team.
The Reality: Connection preferences vary dramatically based on work style, role, and personal circumstances. What creates meaningful connection for one team member may actively disconnect another.
What Works Instead: Offer multiple pathways for building relationships. A healthcare organization I’ve worked with provides three different connection tracks for team members—some focused on shared learning, others on collaborative problem-solving, and others on personal story exchange—allowing people to connect through channels that align with their preferences.
Moving Forward
The organizations succeeding at distributed connection aren't following generic best practices. They're questioning what we’ve always done, experimenting with new approaches, and treating connection as a priority that deserves deliberate design and attention.
Start by examining which myths might be prevalent in your organization. Challenge one assumption this week through a small experiment. Gather feedback, iterate, and build a connection practice that truly works for your specific team.
A Question for Reflection:
Which of these myths feels most embedded in your organization's connection practices? What small experiment could you run this week to test a different approach?
