For me, the key question is what's behind the dangerous idea. If it's simply to stir things up and appear radical, I'm not interested. But if it's done with a quest to learn, evolve, and improve the quality of life for people everywhere, I'm on board.

Clashing expectations are what most consistently derail any team, and especially a culturally diverse team. So if you take the time to "define" the goal carefully upfront, you've addressed one of the most difficult and important parts of the innovative process.

The two most important forms of diversity when it comes to innovation are visible diversity (typically skin color, age, gender, etc.) and underrepresentation (anytime someone is less than 15% of the majority group). Other forms of diversity are also relevant but these are the ones that psychologically play the most role in how someone engages with the innovative process.

Perspective taking is taking on the perspective of others. It's what we do anytime we buy a gift for someone else ("What would they like?"). So it means breaking the golden rule ("Treat others the way you want to be treated") and instead, acknowledges that others may not want what you want.

Most people probably become more jaded the longer they work in the world of work.

Minimization is what happens when we take the "world is flat" idea too far...and act as if people everywhere are the same (and thereby minimizing the differences).

I do think stories are one of the best tools for communicating across any number of cultures. But I also think there are wildly successful leaders who are introverted, disciplined, lead via spreadsheets and goals, and might not "appear" to be a great leader...but in retrospect, made a massive impact.