Many leaders are struggling right now with how to lead their teams to be productive with so much financial and regulatory uncertainty. Few would blame them.  After three years of pouring their hearts and souls into developing vehicle safety technology, Jacob’s team suddenly found itself wondering if it was all for nothing. Grants they had already received suddenly had new requirements that were challenging to meet, budgets they’d allocated were frozen by their parent organization fearing a coming recession, and costs for parts were rising so rapidly that profits on existing deals were evaporating. In short, everyone on Jacob’s team had reason to worry each time one of these changes came. They also understood that more major changes could be coming—and without much notice. These employees knew that it was possible that their projects or current roles might not even continue.  Every team member showed signs of being distracted and worried.  Jacob recognized that if they took their eye off the ball, they could be even worse off. Work still needed to get done—failing to do so could harm their careers (and the health of the company).  Jacob was in a bind: he needed to keep the team productive. But he knew that any project he asked them to focus on could be cut, and any efforts could turn out to be wasted time. He couldn’t look into a crystal ball and know his guidance would be right.  In my work training and coaching leaders in Fortune 500 organizations and beyond, regardless of the industry, I’ve seen leaders often take the wrong steps in highly uncertain times—and end up demotivating the team. What doesn’t work is: Optimism Great arguments Big picture vision and purpose There’s a time for those approaches, but leaning on them at the wrong time makes the leader seem out of touch.  Imagine a house sitting on a fault line: then comes an earthquake. After the shaking stops, the house is still standing—but the foundation has visible cracks, and the ground beneath has clearly shifted. Would you trust someone who charged in optimistically and with a cheery tone told you the house will be just fine and to head back in? Or would you trust someone who acknowledges that there could be aftershocks, and who agrees that it makes sense to test the structure of the house before going back? Most people would trust the second person more. They’ve acknowledged your reality. They stand a chance of finding out if the house is safe, and if not, what steps are needed to make it so.  In highly uncertain times at work, there are psychological earthquakes and aftershocks coming regularly. Each time, no matter how much trust you had built up in the past, because reality has shifted, you need to show you understand the new reality to gain trust again.  Motivating teams through tough times I’ve also seen leaders get people to perform in tough times. They start by meeting the people on the team where they are mentally and emotionally before trying to coach them.  They’ll acknowledge that it’s stressful—and perhaps even heartbreaking—to give so much to your work and then learn it could end up in the trash. It’s distracting to believe that your job, or at least your current project or function, might become obsolete. It’s natural to wonder whether you’ll still be valued in the same way. Those leaders ask questions to ensure they really hear the concerns, perspectives, beliefs, and feelings of people on the team. That’s what Jacob did with his team, too, to help them perform and keep adapting as needed.  “I’m here, and I hear you” Here’s why it matters to do so. When people can’t control a situation, they care deeply about whether they can trust the process by which their future will be determined. Research has shown that even when the outcome is outside their control (whether it be a performance review or budget upheaval), if people felt the process was fair, they’re more able to set the past aside and do what needs to be done.  A major part of believing they can trust the process is whether they feel the leaders or authorities have heard and seen them. They want to know if the leaders understand their reality. They want to know the leaders get it. Then the process seems more fair.  Neuroscience has found that peoples’ perception of fairness changes when they focus on a process versus an outcome—say, how leadership took a listening tour before making project cuts, rather than the outcome of the cuts themselves. There’s a big difference in how the brain reacts when we evaluate between the two. When we focus on an outcome seeming fair, we primarily use the areas of the brain that correspond to emotions. But when we focus on the process, we use the regions of the brain that relate to social cognition. That means people are thinking about other people involved—and good leaders meet them there. Psychological research has also tested the importance of making people feel heard specifically