By the way, you can keep the leftover “juice” from an Israeli salad and use it in a martini.
A few years ago, a family member asked for our “normal salad.” I immediately thought they meant Israeli salad—a salad we had regularly, made with diced tomatoes, cucumbers, and onion as the base, dressed simply with olive oil and salt. You can add whatever you have around: capsicum, avocado, corn, legumes, nuts, tuna, and chicken. This salad appears at breakfast, lunch, and dinner in Israeli households, almost daily, much like kimchi in Korea or gallo pinto in Nicaragua.
I thought I knew exactly what they wanted. I was wrong.
They were talking about Caprese salad—the Italian classic of fresh mozzarella, tomatoes, and sweet basil leaves, seasoned with salt and olive oil. My favourite version features heirloom tomatoes and fresh burrata, pulled apart by hand into creamy chunks. This salad also graces our table almost weekly, so no wonder it was considered our “normal” salad.
Two completely different dishes. Both “normal” to us. Both correct, depending on your frame of reference.
The “common sense” that isn’t common
This small domestic misunderstanding mirrors a much larger challenge in today’s workplaces. A few years ago, I worked with a remarkably diverse team. Members hailed from the USA, Australia, India, China, Canada, England, Poland, and Rwanda, among other places, each bringing not just different national origins but distinct ethnic and cultural backgrounds as well.
One day, a conflict arose. Not surprising. It happens in even the best teams. What struck me was when one team member exclaimed in frustration: “I don’t understand how Bob doesn’t get it. It’s just common sense!”
But for such a diverse group, with people who grew up in different countries, spoke different languages at home, and learned different unwritten rules about everything from communication styles to decision-making processes, what does “common sense” even mean? Whose common sense are we talking about?
The reality of distributed and diverse teams
Today’s teams are more diverse than ever and, despite some return-to-office mandates, remain highly distributed. According to recent workplace research, distributed teams now make up a significant portion of the modern workforce, with members collaborating across time zones, continents, and cultures. This brings tremendous benefits: diverse perspectives drive innovation, broader talent pools strengthen capabilities, and round-the-clock coverage can accelerate project timelines.
But it also amplifies the challenge of unspoken assumptions. When team members can’t rely on casual hallway conversations or shared cultural touchstones, the things we leave unsaid become obstacles. In distributed environments, you can’t easily read body language, pop by someone’s desk to clarify a misunderstanding, or pick up on local norms through osmosis.
The gap between what we assume is “normal” and what others experience as “normal” widens considerably.
Making the implicit explicit
This is where team working agreements, sometimes called social contracts or team charters, become invaluable. These are documented understandings about how a team wants to work together. Rather than assuming everyone shares the same “common sense,” working agreements make assumptions explicit and create shared norms.
What team working agreements typically include:
- Communication norms: How quickly should we respond to messages? Which channels are for what purposes? Is it okay to message outside working hours?
- Meeting practices: Do we use cameras in video calls? How do we signal we want to speak? What does punctuality mean to us?
- Decision-making processes: Who has the final say? How do we handle disagreements? When do we need consensus versus individual judgment?
- Work styles: What are our core working hours for overlap? How do we respect different time zones? When is async communication preferred?
- Team values: What behaviours do we want to encourage? What won’t we tolerate?
Working agreements level the playing field. They give everyone, regardless of background, seniority, or communication style, a shared reference point. When someone new joins, they don’t have to guess at the unwritten rules. When conflict arises, there’s a framework for resolving it. When the team evolves, there’s a document to update rather than assumptions to unlearn.
For distributed teams specifically, these agreements become even more critical. They bridge the gap that physical distance creates, turning potential misunderstandings into opportunities for clarity.
Creating your team’s agreement
The process matters as much as the product. Involve everyone in creating your working agreement. Ask questions like:
- What does good teamwork look like to you?
- What past team experiences were frustrating? What made others successful?
- What do you need from teammates to do your best work?
Revisit and revise regularly. Teams change, circumstances shift, and what worked six months ago might need adjustment.
So, what’s your “normal” salad?
We all carry invisible assumptions—about salads, about “common sense,” about how teams should function. The question isn’t whether these assumptions exist but whether we’re willing to make them visible.
In a world where teams span continents and cultures, the most successful groups aren’t those whose members happen to share the same “normal.” They’re the ones who’ve taken the time to define what “normal” means for them, together.
What assumptions might you be making about your team today? What would happen if you made them explicit?
What team working agreements have made the biggest difference in your experience?