Intel’s culture of constructive confrontation (sometimes referred to as “disagree and commit”) exemplifies a pattern of decision making cultivated by Level 5 leaders in our research. They stimulated dialogue, debate, and disagreement as an indispensable ingredient in making supremely good decisions. They also created a climate where evidence, logic, and facts would trump personality, power, and politics. As a member of a Level 5 team, you have not only the opportunity to engage in the dialogue, you have the responsibility to do so. If you fail to advance your argument, if you fail to disagree with the most powerful person in the room, if you fail to bring solid logic and evidence to the debate, if you attack a person rather than the problem, then you’re failing in that responsibility.

And rather than investing in systems and processes to provide a fallback in case our managers are found wanting, it’s far better to invest in helping our team leaders do what we need them to, by 1) getting rid of ratings of “potential,” 2) teaching team leaders what we know about human growth, and 3) prompting them to discuss careers with their people in terms of momentum—in terms of who each team member is, and in terms of how fast each is moving through the world. This is harder, of course, than buying the latest piece of enterprise software and then imploring our people to use it, but it’s the right hard thing to do.

The stories we tell ourselves from a few scant pieces of evidence are often flat-out wrong, especially when we’re in the Pit. Nine times out of ten, the other person is not out to get you. Your coworkers don’t think you’re an idiot. And, yes, you deserve this job.

When a negative story takes hold of you, step back and question whether your interpretation is correct. Are there alternative views you’re not considering? What can you do to seek out the truth?

If you are promoting a culture of candor on your team, you have to get rid of the jerks. Many may think, “This guy is so brilliant, we can’t afford to lose him.” But it doesn’t matter how brilliant your jerk is, if you keep him on the team you can’t benefit from candor. The cost of jerkiness to effective teamwork is too high. Jerks are likely to rip your organization apart from the inside. And their favorite way to do that is often by stabbing their colleagues in the front and then offering, “I was just being candid.

You have to know the people you’re working with. Some people are totally pragmatic about criticism; correct them privately and without emotion, and they’ll receive the reproach in exactly the spirit in which it’s offered. Three minutes later, they’ll have apologized for the mistake, taken the note, and the two of you will have moved on to chatting about last night’s Mets game.

Other folks are sensitive to criticism. This isn’t necessarily a negative characteristic—it’s usually an indication they want to do a good job and feel deeply wounded at any suggestion that they haven’t. But those people are going to react, no matter what you say or how gently and diplomatically you say it, so you’d better spend some time planning exactly how you’re going to deliver the feedback. And you’d be wise to budget time to spend with them afterward, so you can sit with them and let them know that they’re still loved.

Then there are the people who can’t or won’t hear what you’re saying unless it comes with a little thunder. If your reprimand is too mild and conversational, they won’t believe you’re serious. With these people, you’re going to have to get into it a little bit, even if that’s not your usual managerial style.