When Incentives Kill Collaboration: The Hidden Design Flaw in Performance Mgmt. (Performance Management Series 2/7)

Most organizations say they value collaboration. Many include it in leadership principles and town halls. And then they design performance systems that reward individual heroics and short-term output.

The result is predictable. People do not become poor collaborators because they lack character. They become rational actors inside a misaligned system.

Heidi Gardner has written extensively about this tension in professional services firms. Her core message is simple: if collaboration is treated as a soft value but performance is measured as hard individual metrics, people will prioritize what is most rewarded and least ambiguous. Over time, collaboration turns into theater.

I’ve seen this play out with my clients in consulting environments structured around siloed metrics. Each practice group owned its number. Bonuses were tied to that number. Publicly, the firm celebrated “full-service collaboration.” Practically, people filled their own bucket first. Only after hitting the target did they consider how other capabilities might serve the client. Collaboration became an afterthought rather than a design principle.

The shift came when performance metrics were redesigned around key client teams. Revenue volume was no longer sufficient. Leaders began measuring revenue quality, the sustainability of client relationships, and the account’s overall health. Cross-functional coordination mattered. Long-term value mattered. The question changed from “How much did you sell?” to “What value did we create — and is it durable?”

Engagement improved almost immediately. When people are rewarded for enterprise contribution rather than internal competition, energy shifts. Patty McCord has made a related point in her work on talent density: high performance isn’t just about keeping strong people — it’s about removing structural conditions that make strong people want to leave. Misaligned incentives are one of those conditions.

This is why multi-level scorecards matter. A single metric is easy to manage but rarely strategically correct. If you want an enterprise to behave like an enterprise, performance must be evaluated at three levels: the broader organizational outcome, the team’s contribution to that outcome, and the individual’s results and capabilities. The weighting matters. If individual output dominates, self-optimization wins. If enterprise goals dominate without line of sight, people feel powerless. The executive task is to balance influence with impact.

Sales environments often illustrate this tension clearly. Incentivize pure revenue growth, and you may get deals that operations cannot fulfill, promises customer success cannot sustain, and documentation that is thin because the next deal is already in motion. Revenue rises. Customer satisfaction declines. Leaders call it an execution issue. In reality, the system paid for speed and volume — and got exactly that.

True collaboration is not cross-selling disguised as partnership. Sophisticated clients can often detect compensation shifts simply by observing behavior. When introductions and referrals increase suddenly in January, clients notice. Collaboration should begin with a different question: is this in the client’s long-term interest? If you cannot articulate the value created, it is likely not collaboration.

A more strategic tension also plays out: short-term versus long-term value. Organizations often speak aspirationally about sustainability, innovation, and multi-year initiatives while over-weighting short-term, easily measurable metrics. People are not ignoring long-term priorities because they are shortsighted. They are responding to what the system reinforces. Incentives guide decision-making and resource allocation. If long-term thinking matters, it must be visible and rewarded.

Tony Hsieh famously offered employees money to quit as a way to protect culture. While extreme, the principle is instructive: incentives shape behavior. When incentives and stated values conflict, incentives win.

The strongest performance systems align what leaders say they value with what they actually reward. They measure collaboration in meaningful ways, protect against the distortions of narrow metrics, and make enterprise contribution visible. When alignment is present, people stop gaming the system and start building the business.

Reflection Question: Where are your incentives quietly encouraging siloed behavior, even while you publicly advocate collaboration?  Comment and share below; we’d love to hear from you.

Quote of the Day: “Show me the incentives, and I’ll show you the outcome.” — Charlie Munger

As an Executive Coach, I partner with leadership teams to help them performance manage with both excellence and compassion. If you’d like to strengthen how your leaders hold standards and develop people, let’s connect.

The next blog in this series 3/7 will focus on designing the infrastructure.

How do you align incentives?

Emotional Instability: When Reactions Undermine Leadership Presence (Leadership Limitations Series 4/4)

Leadership isn't tested in calm moments. It's tested when things go sideways — and how leaders manage that test shapes everything about the culture around them.

A deadline slips. A strategy is challenged in a meeting. A colleague misrepresents a proposal and frames objections based on a misunderstanding. A decision the leader championed gets reversed. In these moments, emotions naturally rise. Frustration, defensiveness, and irritation surface quickly — especially in leaders who care deeply about their work and the stakes involved.

The issue isn't having those emotions. Every leader does. The issue is what happens next: how those emotions are managed in the moment, and what the people in the room take away from watching that unfold.

What feels like a small moment of visible frustration to the leader can create a lasting impression for everyone else. The memory of a leader's reactive moment often outlasts the substance of what was discussed. And over time, a pattern of emotional instability doesn't just damage credibility — it shapes what people are willing to bring forward, which shapes what the leader gets to know, which shapes the quality of every decision they make.

Why Emotional Regulation Is a Leadership Capability

Daniel Goleman's foundational research on emotional intelligence identified self-regulation as one of its core components — and one of the most differentiating in senior leaders. Leaders who manage their reactions effectively create environments where teams feel more confident, more psychologically safe, and more willing to engage honestly in difficult conversations.

When leaders react impulsively, the opposite takes hold. People become cautious. Conversations become guarded. The room starts focusing on the leader's reaction rather than the issue at hand. The important dialogue — the kind that surfaces problems early and generates genuine solutions — starts to disappear, not because people don't want to have it, but because they've calculated the cost.

Senior leaders operate under constant observation. Their behavior under pressure sets the tone for how everyone else responds. That's not a burden; it's leverage. Leaders who understand this use it deliberately.

How Emotional Instability Actually Shows Up

Susan David's work on emotional agility is useful here. She distinguishes between being driven by emotions—reacting to them automatically—and recognizing emotions without being controlled by them. Most leadership derailments in this area aren't dramatic. They're cumulative. They look like:

•  Visible frustration in meetings when challenged or interrupted — even briefly

•  Tone shifts that signal irritation without naming it directly

•  Defensive responses to feedback that close the door on further input

•  Shutting down opposing views, either sharply or through sustained dismissiveness

•  Withdrawal or disengagement when tension rises — which teams experience as withholding

These moments pass quickly for the leader. They rarely pass unnoticed by everyone else. And in a culture shaped by those patterns, people learn to manage the leader's emotional state as a primary variable in how they communicate — filtering, softening, timing — rather than simply bringing what they know.

What This Looks Like in Practice

A senior leader is presenting a strategic initiative to the executive team. During the discussion, another executive summarizes the proposal incorrectly and raises concerns based on that misunderstanding. The presenting leader knows the concerns aren't relevant to what was actually proposed — and feels the frustration of being misheard after significant preparation.

Reactive response: A sharp interruption, visible irritation, a correction that carries an edge. The conversation shifts from the strategic issue to the tension in the room. Others pull back. The misunderstanding gets addressed, but something more valuable gets lost: others' willingness to engage honestly in future discussions.

Regulated response: A brief pause. Then: "Let me clarify the point I was making so we're all working from the same understanding." The conversation resets, the issue gets addressed constructively, and the leader's credibility remains intact — or grows, because composure under that kind of frustration is noticed and respected.

The difference between these two moments isn't about suppressing the feeling. It's about the space between stimulus and response — and what the leader chooses to do in that space.

The Leadership Discipline of Emotional Regulation

Bill George's work on authentic leadership frames emotional self-awareness and control as foundational to leading with integrity. Leaders who develop this discipline aren't performing calm — they're genuinely grounded. They've built practices that create the space between trigger and response where conscious choice becomes possible.

Several practices help leaders strengthen this over time:

•  Pause before responding in tense moments — even two or three seconds creates meaningful distance from the initial emotional hit

•  Name the issue calmly and specifically, rather than reacting to the emotional charge around it

•  Ask clarifying questions before drawing conclusions — it slows the conversation and often changes it entirely

•  Return the room to shared objectives: "Let's come back to what we're trying to solve together" reorients without dismissing

•  Develop a post-meeting debrief practice — noticing where emotions hijacked your intentions, and what you'd do differently

These aren't techniques for suppressing authenticity. They're tools to ensure the leader's impact in the room matches their intent — which is often not the case when emotions drive the response.

Emotional Steadiness as a Cultural Signal

One of the most underappreciated dimensions of executive presence is emotional steadiness. Not emotional flatness — that's different, and creates its own problems. Steadiness: the quality of remaining grounded and thoughtful even when the situation pulls hard toward reaction.

When leaders consistently demonstrate this quality under pressure, they create something invaluable in the culture: safety to raise difficult issues. Teams become more willing to surface problems early, challenge assumptions, and engage honestly in the conversations that actually matter — because they trust that the leader will respond to what's being said rather than react to how it feels.

Over time, that consistency becomes organizational capital. People know what to expect. Disagreements stay productive. Problems don't get managed around the leader — they get brought to them. And that information flow is what allows good leaders to become great ones.

Closing the Series: What These Four Patterns Share

The need to be right. Winning too much. Arrogance. Emotional instability. None of these are character flaws. Each began as a strength — conviction, drive, confidence, intensity. Each helped someone become the leader they are.

What they share is this: at a certain level of leadership, they stop serving the leader and begin serving the leader's ego. And the gap between those two things is exactly where leadership impact gets lost.

The leaders who grow the most aren't immune to these patterns. They're the ones who develop the awareness to see them clearly, the honesty to name them, and the discipline to make a different choice — consistently, imperfectly, over time.

That's the work. And in my experience, it's some of the most important work a leader can do.

Reflection Question. What situations tend to trigger the strongest emotional reactions in your leadership—and how might greater emotional regulation strengthen your presence in those moments?  Comment and share below; I’d love to hear your perspective.

Quote of the Day. “Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space lies our power to choose our response.” — Viktor Frankl

As an executive leadership coach, I help leaders become more effective. Often that means helping them recognize subtle habits that once fueled their success but now quietly limit their impact. If you’d like to explore this topic further, feel free to reach out.

How do you remain calm under pressure?

Arrogance: When Confidence Crosses the Line (Leadership Limitations Series 3/4)

Confidence is a leadership asset. Left unchecked, it quietly becomes something else — and the shift is rarely visible to the person making it.

Confidence is essential to leadership. Leaders are expected to make decisions, set direction, and communicate a clear point of view. Teams look to them for conviction — especially when navigating uncertainty, change, or competing priorities. Confidence signals competence. It establishes credibility. It gives people something to orient around when the path isn't obvious.

And yet, like most leadership strengths, confidence has a shadow side. What begins as earned self-assurance can gradually evolve into something more limiting — not in a single dramatic moment, but in the slow accumulation of small patterns that eventually shape how a leader learns, listens, and decides. The issue is not confidence. The issue is when confidence hardens into arrogance: the assumption that your perspective is already correct before you've fully heard anyone else's.

When that shift occurs, the consequences aren't just interpersonal. They're organizational. Leaders stop testing assumptions as rigorously. Input narrows. Challenges get minimized. And the organization receives a less accurate picture of what's actually true — precisely when it needs that picture most.

The Subtle Shift

Arrogance rarely arrives suddenly. It tends to develop after a run of success — which is part of what makes it so difficult to catch. Jim Collins, in his research on organizational decline, identified what he called "hubris born of success": a pattern in which leaders who have been right many times begin to assume they will continue to be right — and stop doing the work of checking.

The leader's experience becomes not just a guide, but a verdict. Their intuition substitutes for inquiry. Their track record becomes a reason to stop questioning, not a foundation to build on. And the people around them — sensing the shift, even if it's never named — begin to self-censor.

How Arrogance Actually Shows Up

It rarely looks like overt ego or loud bravado. In high-performing leaders, it often shows up in subtler patterns that shape interactions over time. Amy Edmondson's research is instructive here: when leaders consistently signal that they already know the answer, team members become significantly less likely to raise concerns, challenge assumptions, or surface the early signals that could change the outcome. Information flow narrows—not because people lack useful perspectives, but because they've learned not to offer them.

Arrogance often looks like:

•  Speaking with certainty before hearing other perspectives — signaling the conclusion before the conversation has begun

•  Absorbing others' ideas and reframing them as refinements of your own

•  Dismissing dissent too quickly — not with hostility, but with confidence

•  Explaining rather than inquiring, even in situations where the leader doesn't have full context

•  Assuming that experience and pattern-recognition outweigh fresh perspective

None of these are dramatic. All of them accumulate. Over time, they don't just affect how the leader is perceived—they affect what the leader actually knows and how well the organization performs.

What This Looks Like in Practice

An executive team is reviewing early results from a major initiative. The data shows meaningful challenges in several markets. A senior leader who championed the initiative speaks quickly: the issues are temporary, the strategy is sound, the team needs to stay the course.

Operating from arrogance: The discussion closes early. Concerns get minimized. Others in the room — who may have been tracking signals for weeks — sense that questioning the strategy won't be welcomed. The leader leaves believing they've provided steadiness. The team leaves carrying questions they couldn't ask.

Operating with confident humility: The leader says: "These results aren't what we expected. What are we learning from the markets that are struggling?" The tone shifts. The team examines the data more closely, surfaces what they've been observing, and adjusts the strategy accordingly. The leader's credibility grows — because they demonstrated confidence without closing the door to new information.

The Distinction That Matters

Edgar Schein captured this distinction in his concept of humble inquiry — the practice of asking genuine questions from a place of authentic curiosity, rather than questions designed to steer toward a predetermined answer. Leaders who adopt this approach create better information flow, stronger relationships, and more effective decisions. Not because they're less confident, but because they pair their confidence with genuine openness.

The most precise way to describe the difference:

•  Confident leaders believe in their perspective — and remain genuinely curious about what they might be missing

•  Arrogant leaders assume their perspective is already the best available — and engage with others primarily to confirm it

Confidence establishes direction. Humility keeps learning alive. Together, they create durable, high-trust executive leadership.

Practices for Confident Humility

These behaviors are simple. They require practice to become consistent.

•  Invite challenge directly: "What risks or blind spots might we be missing here?"

•  When a colleague's input strengthens the outcome, name it — in the room, not just privately

•  Maintain a small group of trusted advisors who will tell you the truth, and create explicit permission for them to do so

•  When new information emerges that contradicts your position, adjust publicly — and without defensiveness

•  Distinguish between conviction (which should be high) and certainty (which should remain proportional to what you actually know)

Leaders who practice these habits send a signal that strength and humility are not opposites. They reinforce one another. Organizations led by people who hold both tend to make better decisions, surface problems earlier, and build the kind of trust that sustains performance through difficulty.

Reflection Question. Where in your leadership might confidence be unintentionally limiting your openness to other perspectives?  Comment and share below; I’d love to hear your perspective.

Quote of the Day.  Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance. — Confucius

 As an executive leadership coach, I work with leaders to become more effective. Often that means helping them recognize subtle habits that once fueled their success but now quietly limit their impact. If you’d like to explore this topic further, feel free to reach out.

 The final blog in this series (4/4) will explore another leadership limitation: emotional instability, and how leaders can regulate emotions to strengthen trust and presence.

How does your confidence & arrogance show up?

Winning Too Much: When Competition Becomes a Leadership Limitation (Leadership Limitations Series 2/4)

A competitive drive is one of leadership's great fuels. At senior levels, it can quietly become one of its greatest liabilities.

Many leaders build their careers on an uncommon drive to win. They push hard, advocate forcefully, and compete for the opportunities and resources that move things forward. That competitive edge creates real momentum — it fuels achievement, generates visibility, and produces results.

But at senior levels of leadership, the rules change. What helped someone rise through an organization can become a constraint once they're responsible not just for their own success, but for the success of the enterprise. The issue is not wanting to win. The issue is needing to win — in meetings, in debates, in decisions, in credit.

When that shift happens, the focus drifts from collective success to personal victory. Conversations become competitive rather than collaborative. Leaders start protecting territory instead of solving problems together. And the organization quietly begins to lose something it can't afford to lose: alignment.

How Competition Gets Hardwired

For most high-performing leaders, competition has been reinforced from early on. Academic environments reward top performance. Athletic cultures celebrate winning. Early career advancement often favors those who advocate most strongly for their ideas and demonstrate a drive others can see. Over time, these experiences solidify a belief: success is closely tied to outperforming others.

That instinct can be a powerful engine. But executive leadership requires a different orientation. Sally Helgesen notes that as leaders rise, the work shifts fundamentally — from individual achievement to enabling the success of others and the organization as a whole. That transition requires trading the need to win every individual debate for the discipline of building collective wins.

The leaders who make that trade tend to gain more influence over time, not less. The ones who don't often wonder why the room stopped engaging with them.

The Cost of a Win-Lose Mindset

When leaders consistently approach conversations through a win-lose lens, the dynamic of the leadership team begins to shift — gradually, and often below the surface. Colleagues start preparing their positions rather than exploring possibilities together. Meetings begin to feel more like negotiations than collaborative problem-solving. Several patterns emerge over time:

•  Leaders advocate primarily for their own function or agenda, even when enterprise priorities point elsewhere

•  Discussions become exercises in persuasion rather than exploration

•  Colleagues become cautious about challenging ideas — not because they lack insight, but because they've read the room

•  Credit becomes a contested resource rather than something shared generously

Instead of functioning as a unified executive team, leaders begin operating as strong individuals with competing priorities. The organization pays the price for that fragmentation in slower decisions, reduced trust, and missed opportunities.

What This Looks Like in Practice

Consider an executive team debating resource allocation across several major initiatives. The head of product presents a compelling case for accelerating a new launch and argues for the majority of next quarter's investment. The head of operations raises concerns about readiness and supply chain risk.

Win-lose mindset: The product leader defends the proposal. Data is deployed primarily to reinforce the existing position. Counterpoints are reframed as overly cautious. The conversation becomes a contest, and the team makes a decision that hasn't been fully examined.

Collective mindset: The product leader responds differently: "Those operational risks are real. What would need to be true for us to launch successfully?" The conversation broadens, additional perspectives emerge, and the team makes a stronger decision — one they can actually execute together.

The leader didn't lose influence in that second scenario. They deepened it. By shifting the focus from winning the argument to solving the problem, they demonstrated something that matters enormously at senior levels: that their commitment is to the organization, not their own position.

A Different Orientation

The most effective executives make a subtle but consequential shift. They stop asking: How do I win this discussion? They start asking: How do we reach the best outcome together?

That shift changes how they show up — in meetings, in decision-making conversations, in the moments after a decision is made. Instead of protecting ideas, they test them. Instead of competing for influence, they use their influence to elevate the collective thinking of the group.

Practices that support this shift:

•  Enter meetings genuinely curious about what others' perspectives will add — not just prepared to defend your own

•  Publicly support strong ideas from colleagues, even when they differ from your initial view

•  Once alignment is reached, advocate for the team's decision as your own — even if your proposal wasn't selected

•  Ask what success looks like from other functions' perspectives before making the case for yours

•  When you catch yourself trying to win an argument, pause and ask: what's the best outcome here, regardless of who proposed it?

Ironically, leaders who stop trying to win every conversation tend to gain more influence over time. Their credibility grows precisely because colleagues trust that their contributions are oriented toward advancing the organization — not scoring personal victories.

Leadership is not about proving your idea is the strongest. It's about ensuring the organization arrives at the strongest answer — and then getting behind it fully.

Reflection Question.  Where in your leadership might the desire to win be limiting your ability to collaborate more effectively with other leaders?  Comment and share below; I’d love to hear your perspective.

Quote of the Day.  “Leadership is not about being the best. It’s about making everyone else better.” — Sheryl Sandberg

As an executive leadership coach, I work with leaders to increase their effectiveness. Often that means helping them recognize subtle habits that once fueled their success but now quietly limit their impact. If you’d like to explore this topic further, feel free to reach out.

The next blog in this series (3/4) will explore another leadership limitation: arrogance, and how confidence can quietly cross the line into a barrier to learning and growth.

When does winning become a liability?

The Need to Be Right: A Hidden Leadership Limitation (Leadership Limitations Series 1/4)

Leadership often develops through strengths — conviction, competitive drive, confidence, and decisive action. These qualities help leaders rise, deliver results, and earn credibility. But the same traits that fuel a leader's ascent can quietly begin to limit it. This four-part series examines four of the most common patterns I see in coaching senior executives: the need to be right, winning too much, arrogance, and emotional instability. None are character flaws — they're strengths that have outgrown their usefulness. And with awareness, all of them can be recalibrated.

Leaders often rise because they are right. They make sound calls, anticipate risk, and identify opportunities others miss. Over time, their judgment becomes a trusted organizational resource — and being right becomes closely associated with credibility, competence, and authority.

That pattern is worth examining carefully. Because while being right is a strength, needing to be right is something different — and it operates as a limitation in ways that aren't always visible to the leader themselves.

When leaders become overly attached to their perspective, the focus subtly shifts from discovering the best answer to defending the current one. Conversations narrow. Curiosity declines. The organization begins to lose access to the full intelligence of the room — not because people stop thinking, but because they stop sharing.

When the Ego Enters the Room

For many leaders, the desire to be right is tied directly to identity. The internal calculus can sound like: If I'm wrong, will people question my judgment? Will my credibility diminish? Will I lose influence? These are natural concerns in high-stakes environments — and the ego, doing exactly what it was designed to do, moves to protect them.

But leadership is rarely about proving you are right. It is about creating the conditions where the best thinking can emerge. Amy Edmondson's research on psychological safety makes this unambiguous: teams perform best when leaders create an environment where people feel comfortable raising concerns, challenging ideas, and sharing perspectives without fear of judgment. When leaders become overly attached to their position, that safety begins to erode — and with it, the quality of the thinking in the room.

Above the Line and Below the Line

The Conscious Leadership framework developed by Jim Dethmer and colleagues offers a precise and useful lens here. Leaders operate in two primary states.

•  Above the line: Open, curious, and committed to learning. Taking ownership, inviting different viewpoints, genuinely interested in what is true.

•  Below the line: Defensive, reactive, and focused on protecting position. The conversation shifts from exploration to justification.

Every leader moves between these two states — including the best ones. The difference is how quickly they notice the shift and return to curiosity. That awareness alone can transform the tone of a conversation and the quality of what follows.

What This Looks Like in Practice

Consider an executive team discussing whether to expand into a new market. The head of strategy presents a recommendation, and the CEO signals early support. A few minutes in, the CFO raises concerns about the financial assumptions underlying the projections.

Below the line: "We've already reviewed those numbers. The model is solid." The conversation tightens. Others who may have questions choose not to push further.

Above the line: "That's helpful. Walk us through what assumptions you think we should pressure-test." The tone shifts. The CFO elaborates, others weigh in, and the discussion becomes more rigorous.

The leader hasn't lost authority in that second scenario. They've strengthened it — by demonstrating that their commitment is to the best outcome, not the first one they endorsed.

The Cost to Teams

When leaders are consistently committed to being right, teams feel it quickly — even when nothing is said explicitly. Ideas get filtered before they're shared. Disagreement softens. Debate becomes less candid. People don't stop thinking; they start protecting themselves.

Over time, this creates an information gap at the top. The leader's perspective dominates not because it's the best one in the room, but because the room has quietly stopped offering alternatives. Innovation slows. Decisions narrow. And the organization loses the diversity of thought that drives better outcomes.

The inverse is also true. Leaders who demonstrate genuine curiosity create a very different environment. Their questions signal openness. Their willingness to reconsider reinforces that thinking out loud is safe. The room becomes sharper because everyone participates fully.

A Different Commitment

The most effective leaders I work with have replaced the need to be right with a different commitment: the commitment to learn. Ronald Heifetz describes this as the work of adaptive leadership — mobilizing people to tackle complex challenges where no single leader has the complete answer.

Alan Mulally's turnaround at Ford offers one of the most compelling examples of this in practice. His "Working Together" system explicitly made it safe for leaders to surface bad news and flag problems without fear of blame or career consequence. In a culture where admitting difficulty had previously been career-limiting, Mulally reframed honesty as a leadership strength. The result was faster problem-solving, stronger trust across the executive team, and a company that found its way back. His role was not to arrive with all the answers — it was to create the conditions where the organization could surface them together.

Practices to Shift from Being Right to Learning

These aren't dramatic changes. They're small, consistent behaviors that signal to everyone in the room what you actually value.

•  Ask one genuine question before offering your opinion

•  Invite a dissenting perspective: "Who sees this differently?"

•  Pause before responding when you feel defensive — and ask what you might be missing

•  Treat disagreement as information, not resistance

•  When someone's pushback improves the outcome, say so

Ultimately, leadership is less about having the right answer and more about creating the conditions where the best answers can emerge. When leaders release the need to be right, they invite stronger thinking, deeper dialogue, and better decisions. The shift from certainty to curiosity doesn't weaken leadership authority. It deepens it — because the most effective leaders aren't those who are right the most often. They're the ones who help the organization learn the fastest.

Reflection Question.  Where in your leadership might the desire to be right be limiting your ability to learn from others?  Comment and share below; I’d love to hear your perspective.

Quote of the Day.  “The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking

As an executive leadership coach, I work with leaders to increase their effectiveness. Often that means helping them recognize the subtle habits that once fueled their success but now quietly limit their impact. If you’d like to explore this topic further, feel free to reach out.

The next blog in this series 2/4 will focus on winning too much.

What is the cost of being right?

Building a Culture That Embraces Progress Over Perfection (Perfectionism Series 3/3)

Individual leaders can shift their own relationship with perfectionism. But the real leadership work is building a culture where the whole team can, too.

The first two articles in this series explored what perfectionism is, what it costs, and how individual leaders can begin to move beyond it. This final installment takes the lens from self to system: How do you, as a leader, build a culture where people feel safe enough to experiment, honest enough to surface problems early, and resilient enough to grow through setbacks rather than hide from them?

This is one of the most important things leaders do — and one of the most under-examined. Culture doesn't emerge from policy documents or values posters. It emerges from what leaders consistently model, reward, and reinforce. When it comes to perfectionism, that means being intentional about five things.  Let’s explore these strategies:

1. Champion a Growth Mindset — Starting with Yourself. Carol Dweck's research on growth mindset has reshaped how the best organizations think about learning and performance. The core insight is simple and powerful: in cultures where intelligence and ability are treated as fixed, people avoid challenges that might expose their limits. In cultures where they're treated as developable, people lean into challenge — because effort and iteration are signs of commitment, not inadequacy.

For leaders navigating perfectionist cultures, this framing is essential. And the most powerful way to shift a team's mindset is not to post a growth mindset infographic on Slack. It's to visibly practice it yourself.

What does that look like in practice? It means openly discussing a project that didn't go as planned and naming what you learned. It means recognizing team members who take calculated risks — even when those risks don't pan out — because the thinking was sound and the attempt was valuable. It means asking in a debrief, "What did we learn?" before asking "What went wrong?" Small, consistent moves like these signal to your team what you actually value — and people will follow that signal far faster than any formal initiative.

2. Set Expectations That Make Progress Visible. One of the quietest ways perfectionism spreads through a team is through ambiguous standards. When people don't know exactly what "good" looks like, they often default to a standard of "perfect" — because that feels like the safest bet. Clear, realistic goal-setting is one of the most effective antidotes.

This means defining success at the outset of a project in concrete terms — not as a flawless outcome, but as a specific level of quality, a set of key criteria met, or a measurable step forward. It means building milestones that mark progress rather than just measuring the gap from a finished ideal. And it means communicating explicitly: "First draft doesn't mean final draft. I want to see your thinking, not a polished product."

When people understand exactly what you're asking for — and when "good enough for this stage" is named and normalized — you reduce the anxiety that drives perfectionism, and you accelerate the iteration that drives improvement.

3. Design for Collaboration, Not Competition. Perfectionism tends to thrive in environments where people feel they're being compared and ranked against each other — where admitting a mistake or asking for help feels like surrendering ground. Leaders who want to build progress-oriented cultures must deliberately create the conditions where collaboration is both structurally supported and culturally rewarded.

This can take the form of cross-functional projects that require people to bring diverse expertise to a shared problem. It can look like brainstorming sessions where generating a high volume of ideas is explicitly valued over the quality of any single one. It can look like a team norm where "I don't know — let's figure it out together" is treated as a sign of intellectual honesty rather than incompetence.

When teams understand that their collective success is the measure — not individual flawlessness — the pressure that perfectionism feeds on begins to ease. And in that space, something more valuable than perfection becomes possible: genuine collaboration in the service of real results.

4. Model Vulnerability — Especially at the Top. Brené Brown's research is unambiguous on this point: psychological safety is the foundation of high-performing teams, and leaders are its primary architects. The most powerful thing a leader can do to build that safety is to go first — to be the first one in the room to admit they don't have all the answers, to name a mistake and what they're doing about it, to ask for feedback and then visibly act on what they hear.

This isn't about performing vulnerability as a leadership technique. It's about being genuinely honest about the reality that leadership, like all of human endeavor, involves uncertainty, iteration, and imperfection. When leaders model that honesty, they give their teams permission to be human, too — and that permission unlocks the kind of trust that high-performing teams run on.

One of my clients — a senior leader at a Fortune 100 company — began opening quarterly team meetings by sharing one thing she had gotten wrong in the previous quarter and one thing she was learning from it. Within two months, she told me the quality of the conversations in her team had transformed. People started showing up more honestly. Problems surfaced earlier. The culture shifted — not because she'd rolled out an initiative, but because she'd gone first.

5. Make Feedback a Norm, Not an Event.  In perfectionist cultures, feedback is often rare, high-stakes, and dreaded — delivered in annual reviews or in moments of crisis. Progress-oriented cultures treat feedback as part of the operating system: frequent, specific, forward-looking, and two-directional.

 The most effective feedback leaders give is grounded in observable behavior and oriented toward future action. Not "that presentation wasn't detailed enough," but "in your next presentation, try adding two or three concrete examples to anchor your key points — I think that would make your case significantly stronger." The difference isn't just tonal. It's practical: one closes a door, the other opens it.

Equally important is the feedback leaders invite. When leaders regularly and genuinely ask their teams, "What's one thing I could do differently that would make your work easier?" and then demonstrate that the input mattered, they build a feedback culture that flows in every direction. That bidirectionality is both a signal of psychological safety and a driver of organizational learning.

The Multiplier Effect of Progress-Oriented Leadership

The leaders I work with who have made this shift — from perfectionism to a genuine culture of progress — consistently report the same changes. Their teams take smarter risks because they're not terrified of getting it wrong. Problems surface earlier because people feel safe enough to raise them. Creativity increases because experimentation is rewarded. And the leader's own experience of their work changes: less exhausting, more energizing, more connected to what they're actually trying to build.

This isn't about lowering standards. The most progress-oriented cultures I've seen are also among the highest-performing. What they've discovered is that excellence doesn't require perfectionism — it only requires the right conditions for people to do their best work and keep growing.

That's what great leaders build. Not flawless teams. Flourishing ones.

Reflection Question: What is one visible shift you could make — in how you respond to mistakes, set expectations, or model learning — that would signal to your team that progress matters more than perfection?  Comment and share below — we'd love to hear from you.

Quote of the day: "The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing."  — Henry Ford

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to work on any derailing behaviors that are not serving them, contact me to explore this topic further. 

How do you measure progress over perfection?

The Hidden Costs of Perfectionism in Leadership (Perfection Series 1/3)

Perfectionism gets mistaken for excellence. For leaders, that confusion has a price — and it's rarely paid by them alone.

 Many leaders wear perfectionism like a badge of honor. The relentless attention to detail, the impossibly high bar, the staying late to get it just right — these are often celebrated as signs of commitment and care. But after nearly a decade of coaching senior executives across industries, I've come to see perfectionism for what it most often is: not a strength in disguise, but a pattern that quietly limits leaders, their teams, and the cultures they build.

This three-part series examines perfectionism with clear eyes — its roots, its costs, and ultimately, the practical path beyond it.

What Is Perfectionism, Really?

Dr. David Burns defines perfectionism as striving for "standards beyond reach or reason," in which self-worth becomes inextricably tied to flawless productivity and achievement.

That's a clinical description, but in the coaching room, it looks like this: the leader who can't delegate because no one else will do it right. The executive who rewrites every team deliverable before it goes out. The VP who spent the weekend redoing a presentation that was already 90% there. The one who hasn't celebrated a win in months because the next goal is always already more important.

Brené Brown describes perfectionism as a shield — not a path to excellence, but a form of armor that traps leaders in self-doubt and quietly erodes the trust of the people around them. Julia Cameron frames it as a fixation on flaws, a relentless voice that whispers nothing is ever good enough.

The result, in the workplace, is a leadership style that can't adapt — because adaptation requires tolerance for imperfection, and perfectionism won't allow it.

Where Does It Come From?

1. Early Messaging About Worth and Achievement.  Perfectionism often takes root long before someone enters the workforce. When children are raised in environments that equate love, approval, or belonging with flawless performance — where effort matters less than outcome — they internalize a belief that persists into adulthood: I am only as valuable as my last result. For leaders, that early conditioning doesn't disappear at promotion. It scales.

2. The Curated World of Social Media.  Social media has given perfectionism a modern accelerant. The constant stream of polished lives, LinkedIn announcements, and highlight reels creates an invisible leaderboard — one that's impossible to top because it isn't real. The more leaders compare their behind-the-scenes to everyone else's highlight reel, the more the gap between where they are and where they "should" be seems unbridgeable. Perfectionism thrives in that gap.

3. Fear of Failure.  For most leaders, some fear of failure is adaptive. But the perfectionist's relationship with failure is of a different kind. Mistakes don't feel like information — they feel like indictments. Setbacks aren't data points — they're evidence of inadequacy. This all-or-nothing relationship with failure leads to an all-or-nothing approach to work: either it's perfect, or it doesn't count.

4. Fear of Difficult Emotions.  Underneath perfectionism, there's often an aversion to discomfort itself. Perfectionists frequently operate under an implicit belief that they should feel confident, clear, and competent at all times. Disappointment, uncertainty, anxiety — these become signs that something is wrong, rather than natural signals of growth. The effort to avoid those feelings is enormous, and it comes at a cost.

The Real Costs — For Leaders and Their Teams

1. Creativity Gets Crowded Out. Perfectionism enforces standards that leave no room for experimentation. And without experimentation, there's no innovation — just optimization of what already exists. Brené Brown's research is clear on this: creativity requires the willingness to fail, and perfectionists will do almost anything to avoid that. In environments that demand adaptability and fresh thinking, a perfectionist leader becomes a ceiling rather than a catalyst.

2. Failure Becomes Catastrophic. When a leader treats every setback as a referendum on their worth, mistakes stop being learning opportunities and become threats. Teams notice this. They begin to manage up, protecting the leader from bad news rather than surfacing it early. The information leaders most need — the early signals, the honest assessments, the uncomfortable truths — starts to disappear from the room.

3. Feedback Becomes a Battle. David Burns observed that when self-worth is built on achievement, feedback feels less like input and more like an attack. Perfectionist leaders often experience constructive critique as a personal affront — not because they lack intelligence, but because their internal architecture has tied their identity to their output. The resulting defensiveness stifles the very collaboration that strong leadership requires.

4. Burnout Becomes Inevitable. The perfectionist's work is never done, because perfection is never reached. There's always another revision to make, another standard to raise, another task that isn't quite finished. Over time, the relentless investment of energy in impossibly high standards depletes the very reserves on which good leadership depends. Exhausted leaders don't make great decisions. They don't inspire their teams. And they don't model the kind of sustainable high performance that organizations actually need.

5. Progress Stalls in the Planning Stage. Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, famously said: "If you're not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you've launched too late." Perfectionist leaders often never launch at all. They plan, revise, reconsider, and rework — caught in an endless loop of "not quite ready" that substitutes the illusion of preparation for the reality of progress. In fast-moving environments, that's not caution. It's a competitive disadvantage.

The Leadership Distinction That Changes Everything

Perfectionism and excellence are not the same thing. Excellence is high standards in service of meaningful goals, with room for iteration, feedback, and growth. Perfectionism is high standards in service of never being wrong — and those two orientations produce very different cultures.

Leaders who operate from perfectionism — even with the best intentions — create teams that are afraid to take risks, reluctant to surface problems, and quietly burning out. Leaders who pursue excellence with healthy striving create teams that take smart risks, learn fast, and bring their best work because they feel safe enough to do so.

Letting go of perfectionism doesn't mean lowering the bar. It means raising your capacity to achieve what actually matters, by freeing yourself — and your team — from what doesn't.

Reflection Question: How might perfectionism be limiting your impact — not just in your own work, but in the environment you're creating for others?  Comment and share below — we'd love to hear from you.

Quote of the day: "Done is better than perfect."  — Sheryl Sandberg

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to work on any derailing behaviors that are not serving them, contact me to explore this topic further.

The next blog in this series (2/3)  will focus on strategies to help leaders deal with perfectionism.

What perfectionism tendencies do you have?

From Vice President → C-Level: From Leading the Business to Leading the Future (Next Level Series 5/5)

A newly appointed Chief People Officer once told me, three months into her role: "I kept waiting for someone to tell me what to do. Then I realized — I'm the one who's supposed to know." That moment of reckoning is one almost every C-suite leader faces, usually alone, usually quietly. The title changes. The expectations multiply. But no one hands you a new playbook.

The C-suite demands a different kind of intelligence — part strategist, part storyteller, part system steward. You move from managing performance to managing meaning: helping people see not just what they’re doing, but why it matters. Peter Drucker once said, “The leader’s first task is to define reality; the last is to say thank you.” Everything in between, he noted, is about building trust and clarity so others can deliver at scale.

At this level, your influence extends beyond your direct span of control. The tone you set — in words, actions, and even silence — ripples across thousands of people. You become the cultural barometer of the organization. As Scott Eblin often reminds leaders, “You control the weather.” Your presence either fuels focus and alignment or creates confusion and drift.

The C-level leader’s time horizon also stretches dramatically. You’re thinking not just about this quarter or next year, but about how the organization will thrive five or ten years from now. That means stewarding resources, talent, and reputation in ways that balance performance today with relevance tomorrow. You’re no longer optimizing for speed — you’re optimizing for sustainability.

It also means widening your field of responsibility. Your stakeholders now include customers, investors, partners, communities, and regulators. Leadership becomes as much about diplomacy and credibility as it is about strategy. Every conversation — whether with the board, the media, or your employees — shapes how the world experiences your organization’s integrity.

To thrive at this altitude, focus on amplifying clarity, culture, and capacity:
• Communicate for alignment. Every message should reinforce purpose, priorities, and progress — clarity compounds trust.
• Shape culture through repetition. Define three non-negotiable behaviors and model them relentlessly.
• Build your inner circle. Surround yourself with truth-tellers who challenge your assumptions and surface blind spots early.
• Think in decades, act in quarters. Balance long-term direction with short-term momentum.
• Prepare successors early. Create the conditions for others to lead before they’re ready so they can carry the vision forward when you are gone.

These aren't abstract ideals — they're active choices that show up in your calendar, your conversations, and your culture. If you're ready to move from principle to practice, start here:

How to begin leveling up immediately:
• Redesign your calendar. Audit your past month: how much time builds the future versus maintains the present? Shift the ratio.
• Refine the narrative. Anchor your next board update or company message in three parts: purpose, priorities, proof.
• Pressure-test succession. Ask, “If I stepped away for three months, what would still run smoothly?” Strengthen what wouldn’t.
• Expand your horizon. Build external awareness through quarterly touchpoints with investors, peers, or industry partners.
• Model legacy in action. Identify three visible ways to live the culture you want others to inherit.

The best C-suite leaders balance ambition with humility. They know they can't know everything, so they cultivate curiosity, surround themselves with trusted counsel, and stay grounded in purpose — while giving others the space to grow into theirs. At this level, success isn't about proving yourself. It's about ensuring the organization can keep succeeding without you. That's not a soft idea — it's the hardest, most disciplined work of leadership. Legacy isn't a destination you arrive at. It's a practice you choose every day, in how you show up, what you protect, and what you're willing to let go of.

With this, we close the Next Level Series. From doing the work to enabling others, from leading teams to leading systems, and from driving results to defining direction — every stage of leadership requires a new kind of presence.

Reflection Question: What are you building that will outlast you — and who are you building it with? Comment and share below; we’d love to hear from you.

Quote of the Day: “The best way to predict the future is to create it.” — Peter Drucker

If you’re navigating your own next level, I’d love to help you design it — with clarity, confidence, and purpose, contact me to explore this topic further.

What legacy are you building>?

From Individual Contributor → Manager: From Doing the Work to Enabling the Work (Next Level Series 2/5)

If the first chapter of your career was about mastering your craft, this next one is about mastering the art of multiplying others. Your success is no longer defined by what you accomplish alone but by what you make possible for your team.

This shift can be exhilarating — and disorienting. Yesterday, you were the go-to expert. Today, you’re leading the people who used to come to you for answers. The instinct is to keep jumping in, solving problems, and showing how it’s done. It feels faster and safer. But as Marshall Goldsmith reminds us, the habits that built your credibility as an individual contributor can quietly limit you as a manager.

Your new job is to create clarity and confidence for others. That means setting direction, defining what success looks like, and building trust strong enough that people bring you problems — not panic. Great managers trade control for curiosity. They ask more, tell less, and coach their team into ownership.

It also means accepting that progress may feel slower at first. Delegation is a long-term investment; it pays dividends when your team can deliver without you hovering. Instead of measuring your worth by the speed of your output, measure it by the growth of your people. When someone you’ve developed nails a presentation or solves a tough issue on their own, that’s your new definition of winning.

The hardest part of this transition is psychological. You’re not just managing others — you’re redefining your professional identity. You move from expert to enabler, from doing the work to shaping the environment where great work happens. As Scott Eblin would say, leadership at this level is about “getting results through others while staying connected to purpose and presence.”

To thrive, build a few steady habits that strengthen your team and mindset:

·       Set a weekly “clarity rhythm. Every Monday, align priorities and ownership with your team; every Friday, debrief on what worked and what didn’t.

·       Coach, don’t correct. When something goes off track, ask: “What’s your thinking here?” before giving advice. It builds capability, not compliance.

·       Run shorter, smarter check-ins. Ten focused minutes on wins, blockers, and next steps is worth more than an hour of updates.

·       Track growth, not just output. Once a month, name one skill each team member is developing — and how you’re supporting it.

·       Protect your own focus. Model healthy boundaries and recovery; people will follow your example faster than your instructions.

How to begin leveling up immediately:
• Audit your time.  Block one hour this week to audit your time. How much is spent in the work vs. on the work?
• Refine Your habits. Identify one habit that’s outlived its usefulness — and one new behavior that aligns with where you’re headed.
• See honest mirrors.  Ask three trusted colleagues what impact they see you having at your best. Use that as your north star for the next chapter.

Stepping into management isn’t about proving yourself all over again. It’s about proving that others can thrive under your leadership. You’ll still get things done — just differently. Instead of being the one in the spotlight, you’re now building the stage, lighting, and sound system so others can perform at their best.

Reflection Question:  What would change if your success this quarter were measured only by your team’s growth? Comment and share below; We’d love to hear from you!

Quote of the Day: “Before you are a leader, success is all about growing yourself. When you become a leader, success is all about growing others.” — Jack Welch

The article article in this series (3/5) will focus on the transition from Manager to Director.

If you’re stepping into management or supporting new leaders on your team, I’d love to help you navigate this transition with clarity and confidence. Let’s talk about what your next level of effectiveness looks like, contact me to explore this topic further.

How do you intentionally move to the next level?

Redefining Success: Crafting a Life on Your Own Terms (Leadership Brand Series 4/6)

Success is a word that often evokes images of wealth, recognition, and social status—ideas we’ve absorbed over the years from society, media, and education. But while these definitions are pervasive, they can also be restrictive, confining us to a narrow view of what it means to live a fulfilling life. When we look deeper, success becomes something far more personal and multifaceted. Real success lies in achieving goals that resonate with our core values and in building a life aligned with our unique aspirations.  

Moving from an "Outside-In" to an "Inside-Out" Definition of Success

Many of us adopt an “outside-in” definition of success early on, focusing on what society deems valuable—status, money, admiration. This can lead us to pursue goals that fulfill others’ expectations rather than our desires. When we define success for ourselves, we create an “inside-out” perspective based on our values, passions, and aspirations.

Here are some steps to help you explore your unique definition of success: 

1. Reflect on Your Core Values.  The first article in this series covers this topic.  Start by identifying your core values. Is integrity, kindness, creativity, or growth important to you? When success aligns with these values, it brings lasting fulfillment. For instance, if your core value is growth, success might involve learning and self-improvement rather than reaching a specific career title.

2. Think About the Impact You Want to Make.  Success isn’t only about what you gain but what you give. Consider the impact you’d like to make in your community, industry, or family. Impact does not have to mean major world changes—it could be as simple as supporting others, raising a loving family, or fostering a positive work environment.

3. Imagine the Lifestyle You Envision.  Envision the lifestyle that would make you feel successful. Would it involve travel, a slower pace, or a high-energy, entrepreneurial drive?  Success can be about having time for hobbies, enjoying meaningful relationships, or maintaining a healthy balance between work and personal life.

4. Explore Both Personal and Professional Goals.  It’s important to view success holistically, incorporating personal and professional aspirations. While your career might bring professional success, a fulfilling personal life is equally valuable. Tennis star Roger Federer, for example, balanced a high-achieving athletic career with being a committed husband and father, showing that success encompasses multiple facets of life.

5. Embrace Daily Progress Over Perfection.  Darren Hardy’s perspective on success as “rent that’s due every day” reminds us that success is not a static end goal. It’s a continuous process of growth and improvement. Success is not about flawless achievement but relatively steady, meaningful progress towards what matters most to you. 

A New, Sustainable Model for Success can incorporate these 3 elements:

• Well-Being: True success includes physical and mental health. If achieving your goals means neglecting your health, it’s unlikely to feel fulfilling in the long run.

• Wisdom and Wonder: Success is also about lifelong learning and a sense of curiosity. When you appreciate life’s small moments, you create joy in the journey itself.

• Contribution: Meaningful success involves making a positive impact. Whether it’s helping others in your community or contributing positively to your work environment, contribution adds a layer of purpose to your achievements.

Success and Happiness: The Connection

The relationship between success and happiness is often misunderstood. Some view success as a pathway to happiness, while others find it in the process.  Adam Grant’s research suggests that when we prioritize internal goals, like personal growth, kindness, and health, we experience greater happiness and well-being than when we focus on external rewards like fame or wealth. In other words, happiness and success are closely linked when we define success in a way that aligns with our values.

Success isn’t solely about accomplishments; it’s also about the quality of the journey. Finding happiness in everyday progress, connecting with others, and pursuing work that resonates with us creates a richer, more fulfilling version of success.  As Phil Jackson wisely noted, “You’re only successful at the moment when you perform a successful act.”

Success is not a single, universal measure. It’s a highly personal journey, one that should be aligned with your own values, passions, and goals. Real success is about crafting a life that resonates deeply with who you are and what you care about. Define it for yourself, live it each day, and find fulfillment in the journey—not just the destination.

Reflection Question: What does success mean to you today, and how can you begin to live by that definition more fully?  Comment and share below; we’d love to hear from you!

Quote: "Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful." — Albert Schweitzer

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to develop their leadership brand and define success, contact me to explore this topic further.

The next blog in this series, 5/6, will focus on defining your leadership style.

How do you define success?

The Journey Within: Overcoming Challenges and Enhancing Self-Awareness for Better Outcomes (Self-Awareness Series 2/3)

In the previous article, we explored the concept of self-awareness and its core dimensions. But understanding the idea of self-awareness and actually developing it are very different things.

The reality is that self-awareness is difficult to cultivate. Psychological biases, social dynamics, and our own defenses often prevent us from seeing ourselves clearly.

In this article, we’ll explore some of the biggest challenges that make self-awareness difficult—and why developing it is still one of the most valuable investments a leader can make.

Challenges of Self-Awareness

1. Ignorance and discomfort.  Plato’s Allegory of the Cave illustrates how difficult self-awareness can be: ignorance limits awareness, while knowledge liberates. In the allegory, prisoners are chained inside a cave where they see only shadows projected on a wall. Because that is all they have ever seen, they assume the shadows represent reality. When one prisoner is freed and sees the outside world, the experience is overwhelming. Gradually, he realizes the shadows were merely reflections of a deeper reality. But when he returns to share this insight with the other prisoners, he is met with disbelief and hostility. This story captures an important truth about self-awareness: seeing ourselves more clearly can be uncomfortable. Sometimes, the most difficult part of self-awareness is confronting truths about ourselves we would rather not see. It’s why, for many, ignorance feels easier than awareness.

2. Our Backgrounds Shape Our Perspective.  Our experiences shape how we interpret the world.  Generational differences, upbringing, economic circumstances, education, culture, and career experiences all influence how we think about risk, opportunity, and success.  For example, someone who grew up in poverty may think very differently about risk and stability than someone who grew up with financial security.  President John F. Kennedy once acknowledged that he could never fully understand the impact of the Great Depression because he grew up wealthy.  Each of us experiences only a small slice of the world, and that slice shapes our assumptions.  Self-awareness requires recognizing that our perspective, while valid, is also limited.

3. Dunning-Kruger Effect.  This cognitive bias is one of the most well-known barriers to self-awareness.  Psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger discovered that people with lower ability in a domain often overestimate their competence. Because they lack expertise, they also cannot accurately evaluate their own performance.  For example, someone new to software may believe they have mastered it after a brief introduction—while more experienced users recognize how much deeper the skill actually goes.  The overestimation can lead to mistakes and oversights.  As people gain expertise, their confidence often becomes more calibrated and realistic. 

4. Ego.  An inaccurate self-view can hinder leadership growth. For instance, a leader I was working with had a Direct Report submit a self-assessment on his performance review, and wrote “n/a” for what to improve.  When pressed, my client suggested to the Direct the topic of delegation to achieve results through others, rather than doing it all himself.  The Direct dismissed the feedback because he is so talented at getting his work done.  His progress is hampered because he cannot scale by doing all the work himself; he has to get results through his team.  To increase his awareness, the leader then provided a competency framework and clear expectations to get to the next level and help align his self-perception with reality.

5. Defensiveness.  When receiving feedback, we might disagree, believing we’re better than assessed.  For example, someone might think they’re a great listener despite feedback suggesting otherwise. In this case, asking for specific data points and providing evidence from peers, directs, and other stakeholders through anonymous 360 feedback is helpful. Seeing the negative impact can motivate change.  Another form of defensiveness is dismissal.  Some might say, "This is just how I am," or "I've been successful with these behaviors so far, why change?" Marshall Goldsmith says, "What got you here won’t get you there," highlighting that success often comes despite derailing tendencies, not because of them. Past successes do not guarantee future effectiveness.

6.  Lack of feedback.  Many people lack self-awareness because they seldom receive feedback, especially negative.  People avoid giving bad news or lack the skills to deliver it constructively.  This issue is more pronounced for senior leaders, who receive less accurate self-assessments as they climb higher, mainly due to a shortage of honest feedback and being limited to what they might be able to share with others.  One study showed a leader frequently interrupting others was unaware of it, illustrating the loneliness at the top, where they are often surrounded by yes-people.

Benefits of Self-Awareness 

Despite these challenges, developing self-awareness provides powerful advantages.

1. Reduces Stress & Regulates Emotions.  Self-awareness helps us understand and manage our emotional responses. Research in cognitive psychology shows that when individuals reflect on their values and interpret stress as a challenge rather than a threat, they experience lower stress levels and greater resilience. Reflecting on our core values, goals, and principles helps us regulate stress and respond more deliberately. By recognizing our emotional triggers, we can choose thoughtful responses rather than reacting impulsively.

2. Greater performance and Focus.  Research suggests that high performers tend to be more self-aware.  Visionary leaders know what they want to achieve and how their actions affect others.  Self-awareness allows us to focus on the right opportunities and keep emotions from holding us back.

3. Stronger leadership.  Tasha Eurich’s book "Insight" found that internal self-awareness is critical for successful leaders.  They know their strengths, weaknesses, needs, goals, and how they come across.  This is in contrast to clueless leaders who tend to be ineffective.  Great leaders continuously ask questions to diagnose their needs and goals and wonder what blind spots they may have.  Maslow said, “What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.”

4. Enhances Authenticity.  Nancy McKinstry, CEO of Wolters Kluwer said, “You can’t be authentic if you are not self-aware.  How can you be transparent and open, talk about your goals, or share how you influence change without self-awareness?”  It enables transparency, openness, and the ability to influence change. 

5. Increases humility.   Self-aware individuals know what they are good at and what they are not.  Even confident individuals can acknowledge their ignorance in certain areas, fostering curiosity and humility.  Steve Jobs, for example, was aware of his limitations and welcomed disagreements.   He held strong convictions but was willing to change his mind when presented with better information.   Ed Catmull shared a story about Jobs, who wanted Apple to make the iPad before the iPhone.  However, his team convinced him otherwise, and he agreed.  He insisted that Apple provide the app despite his team’s disagreement.   When the iPhone launched, Jobs quickly realized his team was right and changed his mind, demonstrating his ability to adapt and embrace humility.   

Developing self-awareness is crucial for overcoming personal and professional challenges. It allows us to break free from ignorance, understand our unique backgrounds, manage cognitive biases, and receive constructive feedback. By fostering self-awareness, we can reduce stress, improve performance, enhance leadership, and cultivate authenticity and humility.  Embrace these practices to unlock your full potential and achieve greater success

Quote of the day: “If we think of this existence of the individual as a larger or smaller room, it appears evident that most people learn to know only a corner of their room, a place by the window, a strip of floor on which they walk up and down.”  – Rainer Maria Rilke

Question: What do you see as the biggest challenges of self-awareness?  When is ignorance bliss, or is it not?  Comment and share your experiences below; we’d love to hear.

The next blog in this series 3/3 will focus on ways to develop your self-awareness.

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to raise their awareness to increase their performance, contact me to explore this topic further

What benefits have you experienced?

The Self-Awareness Gap: Are You As Insightful As You Think? (Self-awareness series 1/3)

Self-awareness is one of the most underrated yet foundational capabilities for navigating complexity and achieving meaningful success. Despite its importance, Author Tasha Eurich in Insight asserts that about 95% of people believe they are self-aware, but only 10-15% are, meaning around 80% are deceiving themselves.

This gap matters. Leaders make decisions based on how they interpret situations, how they perceive others, and how they understand their own motivations and reactions. If our self-perception is inaccurate, the consequences ripple through every decision we make. The real question is, how accurate is your understanding of yourself?

The Long Tradition of Self-Awareness

The pursuit of self-knowledge is not a modern concept. More than 2,000 years ago, Socrates urged people to “Know thyself.”  His message was simple but profound: understanding ourselves is essential to living wisely and intentionally. Similarly, Confucius emphasized the importance of reflection and aligning one's actions with deeply held values. Insight without action, he argued, was incomplete. Across cultures and centuries, the message has remained consistent: Understanding ourselves is a prerequisite for meaningful growth.

Dimensions of Self-Awareness

1 Internal Self-Awareness: Understanding Ourselves. Involves understanding who we are, what drives us, and how we operate. It includes recognizing our motivations, abilities, and emotional patterns.  Several elements shape this internal awareness.  

·      1A. Desires and motives.  Do we know what drives us when we are really honest with ourselves?  We may often think it is one thing, the aspirational motives (e.g., having an impact), and share that with others, but in reality, it could be something else or something in addition that we conceal (like status, power, belonging, or money).

·      1B. Strengths, weaknesses, and capabilities.  Do we fully understand our abilities and articulate them clearly? Are we aware of our strengths and leveraging them to achieve desired results?  Do we know our weaknesses and have a plan to address them?

A relevant story involves a businessman seeking help from a guru. The businessman frequently interrupts the monk, so the monk fills the businessman’s cup of water and lets it overflow. The businessman reacts angrily, calling the monk crazy. The monk explains that the overflowing cup represents the businessman’s mind, which is full of information, preventing him from listening.  This illustrates a weakness the businessman may not have been aware of - his propensity to talk rather than listen, hindering his ability to receive wise counsel.

Many leaders face a similar challenge. Without awareness of our habits, even our strengths can become blind spots.

·      1C. Recognizing, understanding, and managing emotions.  Can we accurately identify what we are feeling in the moment? Are we able to distinguish between frustration, disappointment, or feeling disrespected?   Do we understand the causes of these emotions and how they drive our behaviors?  Are we in command of our emotions, choosing our response rather than reacting automatically or ruminating on past events that leave us powerless?

Aristotle recognized this long ago when he wrote that emotional skill lies not in eliminating emotions but in expressing them at the right time, toward the right person, in the right way. That level of emotional discipline begins with awareness.

2. External awareness: Understanding Our Impact. Self-awareness does not stop with understanding ourselves. Leadership happens in relation to others. As a result, self-awareness also involves understanding how others experience us and how accurately we interpret their behavior.

·      2A. Reading Others.  How good are we at reading the room?  Do we have the social competence to understand others’ moods, behaviors, and motives? You may read somebody as being an excellent team player for 1-2 things you noticed they have done to help the team, but really, the consensus is that this person is way more self-serving, and only when you are around do they act as a team player.  The team dislikes working with this person because they take credit and share none.  

Accurate assessments of others involve recognizing the difference between the golden rule (treat others the way you want to be treated) and the platinum rule (treat others the way they want to be treated). The latter requires greater awareness and adaptability.

·      2B. Understanding Our Impact. Perhaps the most difficult form of self-awareness involves understanding how others experience us. Our intentions may be positive, but our impact may tell a different story. A leader might believe they run efficient meetings, while their team experiences those meetings as rushed or dominated by the leader’s voice. This gap between intent and impact is one of the most common sources of leadership blind spots.

Organizational psychologist Adam Grant provides a helpful example. Because he recognized his natural tendency toward high agreeableness on the Big Five personality scale, he realized he might avoid challenging others' ideas. Instead of just nodding and smiling when students spoke, he would have a neutral expression, especially if what they were sharing was not correct.  He asked his students if they were comfortable being challenged. By recognizing how his personality shaped his behavior, he was able to adjust his approach—an example of self-awareness in action.

The challenge, of course, is that developing self-awareness is not easy.

Closing the Self-Awareness Gap

Developing self-awareness is not a one-time insight. It is an ongoing process of reflection, feedback, and adjustment. It requires asking ourselves difficult questions: What truly drives me? What patterns shape my behavior? How might others experience my leadership differently from how I intend? When we begin asking these questions honestly, we start to close the self-awareness gap.

Self-awareness is vital for both personal and professional success. By understanding ourselves—and how others experience us—we navigate life’s complexity more effectively and lead with greater intention.

The journey of self-awareness is never finished—one reason I named my practice Next Levels Coaching, with an “s” to reflect that leadership growth is continuous.

Quote of the day: “People overestimate what they can do one year and underestimate what they can do in ten years.”  -Bill Gates

Reflection Question: How aware are you?  How do you know? Comment and share your experiences below; we’d love to hear.

The next blog in this series 2/3 will focus on the challenges and benefits of self-awareness.

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to raise their awareness to increase their performance, contact me to explore this topic further.

How Self-Aware Are You?

Why Asking for Help Matters (leadership vulnerabilities 3/5)

In our professional journeys, we inevitably encounter moments of uncertainty and challenge.  Though asking for help may initially feel daunting, it unveils many personal and organizational benefits.  Let’s explore the concerns, rewards, and strategies associated with seeking assistance in the workplace.

Concerns with Asking for Help:

1. We can Feel Self-Reliant.  If we are used to being self-sufficient, figuring things out, and getting all things done, suddenly feeling like we want or need assistance from others can be hard and feel humbling, challenging our sense of autonomy and competence.

2. It’s Uncomfortable.  There are social risks we can encounter in asking for help, we may fear rejection, and if we do need help and others do not help us, we can feel disappointed or even resentful if we have assisted in the past.  We also worry about our perception; we want to look good and competent.

The fear of rejection and concerns about perception may deter us from reaching out for support, fostering discomfort and reluctance.

3. We View it as a Sign of Weakness.  We want to put our best foot forward.  If we are starting a new job, we want to ensure they hire us for a reason.  When we ask for help, it is a failure because we should know what to do and how to do it.  We can feel like we have a diminished status because they know something we don’t know.   

4. Worried about Getting the Wrong Kind of Help.  Sometimes, you can ask somebody, and they can offer help in their particular and rigid way rather than in the way you prefer to the point where it does not even feel like help anymore.  It can create more work and stress in the process and have us regret asking in the first place.

5. Don’t Want to Owe Anybody Anything.  If we ask for help, we may feel like we must return the favor or will have something held over our heads.

6. Uncertainty in Seeking Guidance.  You may not know where to start with your help and you do not want to ask the wrong person, thereby exposing your incompetence if you do not have to, so we feel it is better to remain silent than foolish for speaking up in the first place. 

Benefits of Asking for Help

1. Acquisition of New Skills.  Seeking assistance fosters learning and skill development, enabling individuals to expand their knowledge base and enhance proficiency.  By asking, you learn expectations and processes that will allow you to do your job more effectively.

2. Facilitation of Career Progression.  It’s virtually impossible to advance in modern organizations without assistance from others.  Cross-functional teams, fragile project management techniques, matrixed or hierarchy-minimizing structures, and increasingly collaborative office cultures require you to constantly push for the cooperation and support of your managers, peers, and Directs.  Your performance, development, and career progression depend more than ever on seeking the advice, referrals, and resources you need.  Rhonda Morris, Head of Human Resources at Chevron, said that asking for help is a sign of strength because it shows that you are engaged, taking ownership, and signaling that you can deliver the work asked of you.

3. Effective Workload Management.  Sometimes, when you ask for help, you can learn the cause of the overload and overwhelm and redesign your work for more efficient scheduling.  You may also find that some of your coworkers handle tasks better than others, which can lead to a more even distribution of work.

4. Enhanced Productivity and Efficiency.  Asking for help allows your coworkers to recognize your limitations and build most robust workflows for the team, which can improve productivity for the overall company when they are managing resources efficiently.

5. Strengthen Relationships with your Coworkers and Supervisors.  You build camaraderie by acknowledging your colleagues' specializations and expertise while working toward a common goal.  Many enjoy helping their peers; asking for help can build those relationships.  By not asking others for help, you are depriving them of the good feeling they get from helping.  Also, it benefits the person providing help.  When we request help, we allow others to share their knowledge and expertise, which can be incredibly fulfilling for them.  It strengthens relationships and builds trust, creating a culture of reciprocity and collaboration.

6. Build Psychological Safety & A Collaborative Work Environment.  Psychological safety pertains to the belief that one can take interpersonal risks, such as asking questions or for help, or admitting mistakes, without facing negative consequences.  When employees feel safe, they are more likely to seek assistance, enhancing team collaboration and problem-solving.  Recent studies have demonstrated that teams with high levels of psychological safety tend to outperform those with lower levels.  Moreover, employees in these environments experience lower stress levels and greater job satisfaction, leading to increased productivity and overall organizational success.  The process can build goodwill between you and your coworkers as you recognize their expertise and reinforce that your team is working toward the same goals.  In this environment, asking for help becomes a natural part of the learning process rather than something to be feared or avoided.  When people are invested in each other’s success, creativity and innovation blossoms.

Embracing the art of asking for help is not a sign of weakness but a testament to strength, resilience, and a commitment to continuous growth.  We unlock our full potential and foster a culture of collaboration and excellence by harnessing the collective expertise and support within our professional networks.

Quote of the day: "The strong individual is the one who asks for help when they need it." - Rona Barrett

Question:  How do you like to ask for help?  Comment and share below; we’d love to hear from you!

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to strengthen their communication, contact me to explore this topic further.

The next blog in this series 4/5 will focus on tactics for asking for help.

The Importance of Help - When do you Ask?

Effective Strategies for Handling ‘I Don’t Know’ Moments (leadership vulnerabilities 2/5)

In the previous blog, we delved into the concerns and benefits of embracing the phrase “I don’t know.” This article will explore practical strategies and scripts for employing those words confidently and gracefully in various scenarios.

Common Scenarios and Responses:

1. When Asked a Factual Question in a Meeting.  It happens to us all, we may be behind on our research, our minds may go blank, or we simply don’t know.  Here are some approaches to take and scripts to use:

·      “That’s exactly what I’m seeking to answer.”  This shows your boss that you are with them, and the information will be forthcoming.

·      “Let me find out” or “Let me look into that and get back to you with what I discover.”  Or “Great question; let me prioritize a response and circle back.”  When expressed in a supportive and self-assured way, you say you are willing to work to locate the answer.  You show yourself as cooperative, valuable, and a resourceful team player.

·      “I want to ensure I have the most updated information, let me confirm with you by 5 pm today,” or “That’s a good question, and I want to give you an accurate response; let me get back to you by the end of day.”   This shows that you are on top of this work, and it is fast moving, so you want to return with all the correct information.

·      If you have a general idea, you can respond at a high level and avoid specifics. 

o   For example, if somebody asks how the campaign went you can say, “Initial numbers showed it went well, but let me dig into it more, run some reports, and send exact figures to you by the end of the day/week.”  This shows you as somebody who airs on the side of providing accurate information.

·      As a leader, you may not know the ins and outs of every project in your department, let alone your function, that’s ok, you can redirect your response to another.

o   “I’m not sure I’m the best person to answer that.”  Then you follow up with the person you think is most appropriate.  If the person is in the meeting, you can turn to them, “Jill, I know you are running lead on this project; what information do you have now that you might share?”  Or you can say, “My information suggests that Jill would have better insights on this topic; let me turn it over to him.” 

o   If the person is not at the meeting, you can say, “let me connect you to Bill.  He has been doing a great job leading this project, and I want him to provide the most updated information.”

2. When Asked an Opinion Question.  For example, “What is your take on remote work,” and you do not have an established perspective yet:

·      If you have no idea, you can say: “That is an interesting and complex question.  I want to ensure I give it the full attention it deserves; let me ponder it a little more and follow up with my thoughts.”  Or “let me flush out my thoughts once I have the headspace to give this more direct consideration.”

·      If you have a vague idea, you can say, “That is a good question, I can briefly share my preliminary thoughts, but I want to reflect on this question longer and get back to you when I organize my ideas even more.”  Or, “I have a vague idea but want to reflect on this question longer to provide a detailed perspective.”

·      If you want to enlist others’ perspectives or if you simply are unsure where to look, you can say, “Thank you for the question; I appreciate you bringing it up.  I do not have a strong perspective on the topic right now, but I’m curious to learn what others think?”  Or “I have that same question, what thoughts do you or the rest of you have?”

·      When you know of the best person to answer, “Why don’t we ask Bob, this is a topic they have been living and breathing so it would be helpful to start with their perspective.

3. When Asked a Question Adjacent to the Topic.  If you are presenting on a topic and know everything about it but get asked a question about something tangential.  For example, “How does the program you’re proposing for one target group impact another?”

·      “We haven’t studied working parents, but here’s what I can tell you / what I know: Seniors, whom the grant designated as the target audience, responded favorably in our initial studies.” This strategy brings the discussion back on topic and ensures that all your hard work and research are not wasted.

·      “My best guess would be this…” You can offer an explanation based on what you know, a working hypothesis or a few ideas that can be a launching point for a brainstorming session.

·      I’ll note this for further investigation; let’s return to our main topic.

4. When You Want to Empower the Team to Find the Answer.  You can ask probing questions to get a clearer picture or guide them toward finding solutions.  Your actions will also have demonstrated your commitment to finding an answer, and your team will respect this.  Such questions include:

·      “What else have they read or been told about the issue?”  

·      “What have you tried to do, and how did it go?”  

·      “How important is the issue and its connection to our key priorities?  

·      “Who is impacted by this the most, and what is the cost if nothing changes?”

·      That’s an interesting concept; how would you go about testing the idea?

·      I’m curious to learn what others think.

5. When Asked a Question that Sort of Makes Sense.  Don’t assume you should know the answer, ask them questions to get more information to possibly react to or you can refer them to another team.  You can say,

·       “Can you provide more context?”

·       “That’s an interesting question.  What’s driving it?”

·       "I'm not entirely sure.  Can you point me in the right direction, or do you know someone who might have the answer?"

·       "I'm not familiar with this topic, but there are experts in our team/department who will likely be able to assist you."

6. If You Already Responded and Were Unhappy with It.

·      You can say, “I tend to be a deeper processor, I do not like to fire off my first thoughts, but instead take my time with concepts to think about.  Let me ponder this more and offer my revised thoughts next time we connect.

·      “Let me take some additional time; my best ideas usually emerge on the drive home or while I’m making dinner, let me get back to you on my point of view a little later.”

·      “My best ideas happen with reflection.  Let me get back to you once I’ve had the time to do that.”

7. When Asks a Question that Does Not Deserve a Response.  Some people ask questions just to derail the agenda, embarrass, or trap you.  They pose absurd hypothetical questions that are unrelated, so do not feel like you have to play their game and answer them.  You can say:

·      “That question will take us in a different direction, I’m happy to meet with you later to discuss this topic or focus on your specific interest.”

·      “Thank you for the question, let’s connect offline to address it in detail, or I want to be mindful of time and stick to the agenda topics for this meeting.”

8. When you Do Not Know an Answer and Should not be Expected to Know.  You can say.

·      This is out of my purview; I’d recommend consulting with John in Finance for the best response.”

When you say ‘I don’t’ know’ with honesty and confidence, without sacrificing integrity, you seize the opportunity to showcase humility and earn respect from others.

Quote of the day: "The more I know, the more I realize I don't know." - Albert Einstein

Question:  How have you seen others respond in similar situations that might be helpful to you?  Comment and share below; we’d love to hear from you! 

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to strengthen their communication, contact me to explore this topic further.

The next blog in this series 3/5 will focus on the concerns and benefits of asking for help.

The Power of ‘I Don’t Know’

Embracing the Power of ‘I Don’t Know’ in Leadership (leadership vulnerability 1/5)

Why do we find it challenging to utter the phrase, ‘I don't know?’ In leadership roles, there's often a pressure to have all the answers, as if uncertainty is a sign of weakness.  However, hiding our lack of knowledge can lead to hastily provided, potentially inaccurate responses.  Let's explore the challenges and concerns of admitting ignorance and the remarkable benefits of embracing this vulnerability.

Challenges and Concerns with Using the Phase.

1. Overcoming the Fear of Incompetence.  Admitting not knowing can make us feel vulnerable, especially when we think we should have the answers.  Some of us carry childhood experiences of being shamed for not knowing; a fellow classmate or teacher who made an example of us, so we may have a reluctance to appear unprepared or inexperienced.

2. Dealing with Vulnerability.  It's uncomfortable to operate from ignorance, as we often prefer to showcase our strengths.  Acknowledging gaps in our knowledge can sting our pride and challenge our sense of competence. 

Despite these genuine concerns, the upsides of saying "I don't know" far outweigh the downsides.  Let’s explore the benefits of embracing uncertainty:

1. Casts a Perception of Being Genuine and Trustworthy.  Admitting uncertainty comes across as sincere.  Conversely, pretending to know when we do not erode trust.  Some people speak so much and show an abundance of confidence, but that should not be confused with competence.  The babble hypothesis proposes that people who talk more in groups, no matter what they say, are more likely to be considered leaders by group members.  So extroverted people will talk more and consequently be considered leaders, but it is only a matter of time before people are on to their empty assurances.  To gain respect, it is better to show yourself as a straight shooter and not someone who makes things up along the way.

2. Increases Credibility and Relationships.  People tend to trust individuals who are honest about their limitations.  Saying ‘I don't know’ can strengthen trust with colleagues, clients, and superiors.  When you pretend, you can harm relationships.  Wharton Professor and Author Adam Grant tells a story of when he was in his mid-20s and was asked to teach a class on motivation to about 50 Air Force Generals. At the end of the first session, he got harsh feedback.  One person said, “There was more knowledge in the audience than on the podium.”  Another added, “I got nothing from this session, but I trust the instructor got useful insights.”  Grant was devastated and wanted to quit but already committed to a second session with another group a week later.  He asked around to find out the one thing he could change in the next session, and they all said how he introduced himself.   Instead of pretending he knew everything in a room full of experts, he showed himself as somebody trying to establish his credentials.  So, when he introduced himself, he opened with, “I know what you are thinking: what can I learn from this professor who is 12 years old.”   After a long silence, somebody broke the ice and said, “You got to be at least 13.”  The room laughed and created a much better beginning, which led to higher ratings the second time.  It is because it is better to admit what he did not know than to claim he knows a lot of stuff or provide speculative information because that would damage his credibility. 

3. Empowers Others.  By recognizing boundaries, we invite others to step up and contribute their expertise.  It encourages others to think critically and share their knowledge, which leads to more robust discussions and better decision-making.  Also, when we feel like we do not need to have all the answers and our team is taking on more of the work, we can be freed to focus on unblocking and engaging in more strategic work that only we can do, and that pushes the organization forward.  Alan Mullaly, CEO of Ford Motor Company and Former President of Boeing, said that the job of a leader is not to come in with all the answers.  It is to find the people in the organization who have the answers and make a path clearer so they can excel.

4. Cultivates Teamwork.  Acknowledging we lack answers creates an environment where colleagues feel comfortable doing the same.  This open environment invites various people to share and be free with their disclosures, even if they are unorthodox or outlandish, which usually leads to the most creative and innovative ideas.  A culture of teamwork is created, where individuals support each other and collectively seek solutions, ultimately enhancing organizational effectiveness. 

5. Avoids Giving Wrong Information.  Offering inaccurate information can lead to misunderstandings, miscommunications, and costly mistakes.  Saying ‘I don't know’ prevents the spread of incorrect information.  Most people are not expecting immediate answers, so we can take that pressure off ourselves and trade fast answers with sound decision-making and more accurate ones, which will build credibility.

6. Alleviates Stress. Pretending to know something when we do not can lead to unnecessary stress. We can worry ourselves with these questions: Are they going to ask a follow-up question? Are they going to offer contradictory information? When am I going to get exposed, and what will be the consequences? Admitting uncertainty relieves this pressure, allowing us to focus on finding accurate solutions rather than maintaining a facade. 

7. Fosters Learning and Humility.  Admitting your limitations can be a catalyst for personal and professional growth.  It creates opportunities to seek answers, learn from others, and improve your skills and knowledge.  The truth is, no matter how knowledgeable we are, the business world is too complex and nuanced to know it all.   Acknowledging your lack of knowledge reflects humility and garners respect from colleagues and superiors who appreciate your openness to new information.  We show others that we are building more of a culture of knowledge seekers than a know-it-all culture.

While admitting ‘I don't know’ may initially feel uncomfortable, it offers numerous benefits for effective leadership and organizational success.  By embracing vulnerability and prioritizing honesty, leaders can foster trust, collaboration, and innovation within their teams.

Quote of the day: “I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.” ―Socrates

Question:  Tell us about a time when you shared how you didn’t know something; how did it impact the situation?  Comment and share below; we’d love to hear from you!

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to strengthen their communication, contact me to explore this topic further.

The following blog in this series 2/5 will focus on practical strategies for sharing when you don’t know.

How do you say, ‘I don’t know?’

Dispelling Myths of Authenticity (Authenticity series 4/4)

In this final installment of our authenticity series, we confront prevalent misconceptions that often color our understanding of authenticity. Let’s unravel the truth behind these myths.

Myth #1 – Authetncity means never changing your personality

A misunderstanding with being authentic is thinking that we must always be true to ourselves and display that version.  But, which true self is that?  Walt Whitman said, “Do I contract myself?  Very well then, I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes.”  To be authentically human is to exercise all our mini-selves, it does not mean resisting the evolution that occurs with personal growth.

New managers struggle when they define authenticity in strict terms.  When asked to make changes they may feel it is a stretch from their natural personality, and they equate that with inauthentic.  For example, a humble manager who values others’ ideas is told by their boss to be more assertive and sell their concept more aggressively.  That can feel fake.  Going against our natural inclinations can make us feel like impostors, so we tend to latch on to authenticity as an excuse for sticking with what’s familiar.  But as we advance in our careers, demands and expectations change, and we need to expand and develop new muscles and add more tools.   By viewing ourselves as works-in-progress and evolving our professional identities through trial and error, we can create a personal style that feels right to us and suits our organizations’ changing needs.  If we adhere too much to what we think and feel, it may counter what the situation demands, and we deprive ourselves of tremendous growth.  The aspects that are most challenging for us can teach us the most about leading effectively.  In an interview with Adam Grant, Indra Nooyi, Former CEO of PepsiCo shared advice that while you maintain your authenticity, do not expect others to accept 100% of who you are.  She talked about being the only female on executive calls, and all the men would talk about sports she did not follow.  The one sport she did follow, Cricket, nobody else was interested.  She decided to flex her authenticity and learn about other sports and get involved with sports talk with her coworkers before the meetings. She found that these efforts went a long way to building rapport and doing better business. Being able to bend to have stronger connections was quite valuable to her.

Myth #2: Authenticity gives you a free pass to behave however you want

Being authentic does not justify hurtful or self-centered and irresponsible behavior.  Some chronically uncivil people or those with disagreeable personalities like to say they are just being their authentic selves.  For example, you may yell at a teammate because you view yourself as prone to anger, but you do not have the right to unload your feelings on others whenever you want and in the way you want.  Family and friends may be able to handle that and will be there for us after sharing our short tantrums and emotional speedbumps.  You may be somebody who curses a lot and will want that same right in the workplace to express your authenticity.  But, we can be both authentic and respectful or agreeable to create harmony in the workplace.  Authentic leadership is about mastering the skill of being a shapeshifter.  Somebody can change styles depending on what the situation demands, without straying from core values and goals or relinquishing their genuineness.  It is not about the person who expresses themselves regardless of the impact they may have on others.  You must be mindful and emotionally aware of how your energy is radiating and how others are experiencing you.  

Myth #3: Authenticity means behaving the same way in every situation

We have a kaleidoscope of personalities and may activate specific personas under different conditions.  For example, when we are in performance mode, we present our most polished selves, showcasing our leadership prowess.  In learning mode, we experiment and accept failure as part of our growth journey. Authenticity can manifest differently in these varied contexts, and that’s perfectly normal.  Shakespeare’s famous words: “All the world’s a stage …and one man in his time plays many parts,” captures this reality.  Adapting your behavior to fit the situation does not make you fake or insincere; it demonstrates versatility.   Common sense says that we do not reveal every side of ourselves in every situation, but understand the context we are in and the style we can adapt because we have versatility.  You do not show up the same way in the board room when you give a briefing as you do with your family at a dinner party or the gym with your friends.  We have many facets, and while we are adapting to others, we are still always staying true to our values which is what authenticity is all about.

How do we know when you’re being inauthentic?  It happens when your actions diverge from your professed beliefs and values.  Like chameleons, leaders can adjust to better serve their teams while staying true to their authentic identities.

Quote of the day: "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."  - Dr. Seuss (Theodor Seuss Geisel) (alternatively attributed to Sir Mark Young and/or Bernard Baruch)

Q: How do you adapt your style to fit the context you are in but are still authentic?  Comment and share below; we would love to hear from you!

As a leadership development and executive coach, I work with leaders to explore what authentic leadership means to them and develop their style, contact me to explore this topic further.

Which myths do you want to dispel?