Developing Leaders

HOW METAPHORS REVEAL WHAT ADVICE MISSES: Borrow this Powerful Tool from a Master Coach

By Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC

Executive Coach | Leadership Development Expert | Author | Speaker | ©2026 | www.leslierohonczy.com

 

Halfway through an executive coaching session with a senior leader, I saw it: that juicy a-ha moment when an insight sparks, and the body responds before the words arrive. My client’s posture shifted as I offered him a metaphor for what he was experiencing. He leaned forward and began nodding, then his hands joined the conversation. “That’s it,” he said. “That’s exactly me. Do you have a camera in my office?”

For the record, I don’t have cameras hidden in my clients’ offices. But what I did have was a metaphor that illustrated something true about how he had learned to operate. It was a unique lens that reflected back to him the strengths he relied on, the pressures he carried, the ways he protected himself, and the costs of those strategies.

And, maybe most importantly, he felt seen. He understood that I ‘got’ him and wasn’t judging him. We now had a safe, shared language for exploring something that had previously been difficult for him to name. That’s one reason I return to metaphor so often in my executive coaching work.

I should clarify what I mean by metaphor. I’m not suggesting that leaders dust off those tired old sports clichés we’ve all heard a thousand times: keep your eye on the ball, step up to the plate, get back in the game. Those expressions may add a bit of colour to a conversation (if you like the colour beige), but they rarely reveal anything new. A developmental metaphor is personal, specific, and rich enough to help someone recognize a pattern in how they operate, then explore its strengths, limitations, and possibilities.

But metaphor isn’t just a powerful coaching tool; leaders can use metaphors when coaching and developing their employees, too. You don’t need to be a professional coach, invent elaborate imagery, or turn every one-on-one into a voyage of symbolic discovery. Sometimes one well-timed image can help an employee describe a challenge they’re having more clearly, so they can examine it with less defensiveness, and imagine a different way of responding.

The metaphor itself is not the point. What matters is what it helps someone recognize about what’s happening now, and the new possibilities that recognition opens.

 

MOVING FROM INSIDE THE PATTERN TO OUTSIDE IT LOOKING IN

When a behavioural pattern is deeply embedded, we don’t typically experience it as a pattern; we just experience it as our reality.

The leader who throws on his cape and flies in to rescue the team may believe, “This is what responsible leadership looks like.” The person who puts on a suit of armour before a difficult conversation may believe, “I need this protection to remain composed.” The executive who moves at jet-boat speed may see the wake she leaves behind her, without fully recognizing how hard it is to bring other people along with her.

Metaphor can help someone gain enough distance to examine what is happening. Instead of saying, “I’m impatient and terrible at bringing people along,” a leader can begin to notice, “I can feel my jet boat accelerating again.” Instead of thinking, “I shut people out,” someone might say, “This suit of armour is getting too heavy.” Instead of thinking, “It’s all up to me,” someone might notice, “I’ve picked up everyone else’s backpacks again.” Instead of thinking, “If I don’t get them engaged and developing, I’m not doing my job,” a leader can begin to notice, “I’m pulling up every seedling to make sure it’s growing.”

That small change in language matters. The behaviour is still theirs to understand and address, but it no longer defines the whole person. They can step back, observe it, and begin making more deliberate choices.

Research on metaphor supports its role in helping people make sense of complex or less tangible experiences by connecting them with something more concrete and familiar. A metaphor will not automatically produce insight or behavioural change. It does, however, create another way to explore an experience and experiment with different responses.

What felt personal and loaded yesterday can become something two people place between them and examine together today. It leads to powerful questions like, “What does the armour protect?” “When did the jet boat become necessary?” “What might you be taking away from your employees by flying in to rescue them?” “What are you trying to prevent by tending the garden so intensely?” These questions invite curiosity into a conversation where judgment, frustration, or defensiveness may have been getting in the way.

 

A LENS, NEVER A LABEL

There is a risk in all of this, of course. A metaphor can become so clever, appealing, or memorable that the person offering it falls in love with it. Once that happens, we may start trying to stuff the other person’s experience into our beautifully shaped metaphor, instead of allowing their experience to shape it.

A metaphor should offer a lens through which someone can examine their experience. It should never become a label that defines them.

When I offer a metaphor to a client, I tell them explicitly that I am not attached to it. Leaders can give an employee the same permission: “This image may not fit. We can play with it, change it, challenge it, or throw it out, and find something else that feels more like it fits your experience.”

I once offered a Labrador Retriever guide dog as a metaphor for a client’s ability to guide a new leadership team through a merger with another group. I thought it fit beautifully. He was terrified of dogs. Needless to say, we found a new metaphor. The person being coached gets the deciding vote. It’s as simple as that.

Even a metaphor that resonates with several people may mean something different to each of them. A gardener might represent patience and trust for one leader. For another, it might reveal a tendency to overwater every plant, pull up the seedlings to check whether they are growing, and take personal responsibility for the weather. Same garden. Entirely different coaching stance.

 

HOW METAPHOR SHAPES MY COACHING

Integral Coaching Canada’s methodology has deeply shaped my use of developmental metaphor.

In my executive coaching work, metaphor can help a client recognize how they currently approach an important challenge and envision a broader, more intentional way of leading. That developmental work is far more extensive than the simple application I am sharing here.

Leaders are often given objectives such as “delegate more,” “become more strategic,” “communicate differently,” or “strengthen executive presence.” These may be worthwhile goals, but they rarely help someone recognize what to do differently when the pressure is on.

A strong metaphor gives the objective shape and texture.

Consider the leader whose approach resembles a jet racing boat. They are fast, responsive, decisive, and highly capable of reaching a destination quickly. Those strengths may have been richly rewarded throughout their career. At the same time, there is very little room in the boat for anyone else, and the leader’s speed may leave a wake of dependency, confusion, or disengagement behind them.

Simply advising this leader to slow down probably won’t create much change. The metaphor opens a richer developmental conversation:

  • When does speed genuinely matter?

  • Who needs to be in the boat with you?

  • When would creating shared ownership matter more than arriving first?

  • How will you retain your decisiveness while making more room for others?

The metaphor makes an abstract objective easier to recognize and work with in real situations.

What follows is a simple way for leaders to experiment with metaphor in developmental conversations. It is not a substitute for professional coach training or a complete coaching methodology. Four clever questions do not make anyone a Master Coach before lunch, but they can help you have more effective developmental conversations with your direct reports.

WHERE USEFUL METAPHORS COME FROM

Often, people hand us their metaphors without realizing it.

An employee may describe themselves as running on a treadmill, carrying everyone else’s load, juggling ten balls, playing every instrument, or wearing armour into important conversations. That language is worth noticing because it may reveal how they already understand their experience.

Imagine an employee saying, “I feel as though I’m juggling ten balls and everyone keeps throwing me another one.”

A leader could move immediately into workload solutions. Or they could become curious about the image:

  • Which balls cannot be dropped?

  • Which ones belong to you?

  • Which were handed to you by someone else?

  • Are any still in the air because you haven’t decided where they belong?

The metaphor does not replace a practical conversation about workload. It helps both people understand the workload more precisely before deciding what to do about it.

Sometimes, the person creates the image. Sometimes, you build it together. Occasionally, you may offer one based on what you’ve observed. However it emerges, the employee needs room to define its meaning, revise it, or reject it.

A rejected metaphor is useful information. It tells you that you have not yet found language that belongs to the person.

 

METAPHOR CAN HELP A TEAM SEE ITSELF

Metaphor can also help a group name how it wants to work together.

In my work with teams, I have seen the value of creating a collective metaphor that captures the team’s strengths, aspirations, relationships, and shared responsibilities. A team might identify itself as a pod of dolphins, for example, and develop its own understanding of what that image represents about how members navigate, communicate, protect one another, and move together.

The power comes from the meaning the team creates, rather than from the leader arriving with a polished image and announcing, “Good news, everyone. We’re dolphins now.”

A shared metaphor can give a team shorthand for conversations that would otherwise be difficult to begin. When the pod of dolphins is functioning well, what’s happening to make it so? When food sources are scarce and the pressure is on to find food, how does the pod adapt? What causes some dolphins to be separated from the pod, and how do the others help them navigate their way back?  

Because the metaphor belongs to everyone, it can become a useful reference point for reflecting on collective behaviour without immediately blaming an individual. The team can then discuss whether it’s living into its chosen image and what may need attention when it’s not.

Used thoughtfully, a collective metaphor can help a team name the culture it wants to create and recognize the everyday behaviours required to make that culture real.

 

USING METAPHOR WITHOUT GETTING IN ITS WAY

If you want to experiment with metaphor in a developmental conversation, a few practices matter:

  • Listen for images already embedded in the person’s language. Their metaphor will often resonate more deeply than one imported from outside.

  • Offer your own images lightly. “I wonder whether this is a little like…” creates more room than “Here is what you are.”

  • Watch what happens before you elaborate. Changes in posture, energy, expression, words, or engagement may tell you whether the image is opening the conversation or closing it down.

  • Let the person define the details. Ask what the metaphor means to them instead of explaining what you believe it ought to mean.

  • Explore both its value and its cost. A jet boat, suit of armour, conductor, gardener, or superhero contains strengths as well as limitations. Development begins with understanding the whole pattern.

  • Remember your authority. An employee may agree with a metaphor because their leader offered it. Make disagreement easy and explicit.

  • Allow the metaphor to evolve. As the person develops, the image may acquire new features, change form, or become unnecessary.

Most importantly, don’t confuse recognition with transformation. A metaphor can create a powerful moment of awareness and insight, but insight is the beginning. Sustainable change still requires practice, reflection, experimentation, and new choices under real pressure.

 

YOUR COACHING CHALLENGE

Think about someone you are coaching or developing who has you feeling stuck. In your next conversation, listen carefully for the images embedded in how they describe their experience.

If none emerges naturally, you might ask:

“If this challenge were a vehicle (or a landscape, object, animal, machine, or character), what might it be?”

Then remain curious: What does the image reveal about how they currently see themselves or the situation? What strengths exist within it? What does the image protect, restrict, overlook, or leave behind? If it evolved to represent how they would like to approach the situation, what would change?

Resist the temptation to interpret the image for them or steer them toward the answer you think they need. The metaphor may help you see where their development could go next. More importantly, it may help them see it for themselves.

If you would like to explore the metaphors shaping how you lead, or create a collective metaphor that helps your team strengthen how it works together, I would love to help. Reach out to arrange a free exploratory executive coaching conversation at leslierohonczy.com.

IF AI SAVES TIME, WHO GETS THE TIME BACK? Leaders Decide If AI Builds Capacity or Creates More Work

By Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC

Executive Coach | Leadership Development Expert | Author | Speaker | ©2026 | www.leslierohonczy.com

  

An employee figures out how to use AI to turn a two-hour daily task into a 20-minute one. On paper, the organization has just gained 100 minutes of capacity every week. In practice, that gain only matters if someone decides what the time is for.

Does it get allocated to deeper thinking, stronger relationships, harder problems? Does the organization reduce staffing? Does the employee just become responsible for producing more, faster? Or does it vanish into the hazy workplace swamp of meetings, messages, and overflowing inboxes?

LinkedIn is filthy with articles either fear-mongering or cheerleading about AI. So many leadership articles seem to focus on how much time AI can save. I'm interested in a different question: what will leaders decide to do with that time?

If every efficiency gain is immediately converted into more volume, we're not improving the system: we're standing in a sinking boat, bucket in hand, while a larger hose pours in work faster than we can bail.

I’m not an AI expert, and I don’t claim to be one. What I do have is a front-row seat to senior leaders trying to make sense of the expectations AI is creating inside their organizations. From that vantage point, recovered time looks less like a technology question and more like a leadership decision.

There's a second question tucked inside this one, and it may matter even more: if AI takes over more of the work people have traditionally used to learn their craft, how will they develop the judgment to know whether that work is any good?

 

RECOVERED TIME GETS CLAIMED, NOT KEPT

I read about a study done just last year that got me thinking. The Harvard Business School working paper studied 78 employees at IG Group, who were asked to use generative AI to produce online investment articles. Across participants, the average time spent coming up with the concepts for an article fell from about 63 minutes to 23. The writing phase fell from 87 minutes to 22.

Those are significant gains, but they tell us nothing about how the recovered time should be used. Workplace capacity rarely sits around waiting to be thoughtfully allocated. Those gains get claimed, or they evaporate.

In 2025, Microsoft analyzed billions of anonymized Microsoft 365 records and found that the average worker receives 117 emails and 153 Teams messages every weekday. It described an “infinite workday” stretching from early-morning email into late-night inbox checks. The warning leaders should sit with is this: AI can accelerate a broken system unless organizations also rethink the rhythm of work.

I've coached enough senior leaders to know that warning is right on the money. Adding a faster tool to an already-overflowing workday and inefficient systems doesn't create breathing room. It just teaches the broken system to run faster while pouring in just as much, if not more.

THE WORK ISN’T JUST OUTPUT, IT’S DEVELOPMENT

Imagine that you’re a junior analyst who spends hours reviewing data and preparing a first draft, only to notice that two numbers don't quite line up. Much of that labor might be ideal for AI assistance, but it’s not ideal for your development. You’re also learning which anomalies deserve attention, developing a feel for what "normal" looks like, encountering your own assumptions, making mistakes, and discovering why those mistakes matter. You’re building judgment because your apprenticeship is built into your everyday work.

According to a 2026 OECD review, generative AI can be a genuine boost to learning, offering personalized help and fast access to information. But it also flagged a real risk: people leaning on AI output without stopping to evaluate it. Whether that hurts critical thinking long term depends on how the technology gets used, whether it becomes a tutor and practice partner that sharpens our thinking, or something that steals the learning opportunity from us by supplying the answer before we've wrestled with the question. Most organizations haven't yet decided which one they're building toward.

 

A POLISHED ANSWER CAN HIDE AN EMPTY TOOLBOX

That same Harvard Business School research also compared three groups doing web-analyst work: 12 experienced web analysts, 26 marketing specialists with adjacent skills, and 40 technology specialists whose day-to-day work had little in common with writing investment articles. With AI assistance, all three groups scored about the same on conceptualization. Then came the writing, and the gap showed up: the technology specialists' articles scored roughly 13 percent lower on quality than the other two groups.

Put simply: AI can give you the map, but you still need experience to navigate the terrain. That matters for leaders because AI-assisted work can look impressively complete while hiding how little the person behind it actually understands.

We can no longer assume that a polished first draft reveals much about someone’s real capability. The risk appears when leaders mistake output for judgment. It usually shows up later: when circumstances change, when the AI gets something wrong, or when the employee has to defend the recommendation under pressure. The question is not just “can they produce it?” It is “can they explain it, challenge it, adapt it, and tell you when it should not be trusted?”

 

RECOVERED CAPACITY NEEDS AN OWNER AND A PURPOSE

Plenty of people have a legitimate claim on recovered capacity. The organization wants output. Employees need relief from unsustainable workloads. Teams need time for learning and collaboration. Customers benefit from more attention. Leaders finally get room for the strategic work that operational urgency keeps crowding out.

So who decides? Leave it undecided, and your existing habits will fill the vacuum for you. Here’s what I’ve noticed: in a volume-driven culture, the time becomes more volume. In a meeting-heavy culture, it becomes more meetings. In an understaffed team, it disappears into the backlog before anyone even notices it existed. "Saving time" isn't a full AI strategy on its own. We still have to decide what the recovered time is for, who benefits, and how we'll explain that decision to our people.

Part of that decision is knowing which friction to protect. Some is worth killing off (nobody needs the character-building experience of reformatting the same information into six different templates). But other effort is developmental, not wasteful. Struggling with a problem before you consult AI builds your reasoning and confidence. Drafting a first recommendation reveals the gaps in your own understanding. Reviewing the source material yourself exposes contradictions that a tidy AI summary would smooth over for readability. Remove the friction, and you create capacity. Remove the developmental effort, and you create dependency.

I'm not suggesting we ban AI from developmental work; that would kill off real learning too. What I am suggesting is designing the process on purpose: have the employee form their own view first, then compare it against the AI's output, identify where they diverge, verify the evidence, and explain the final recommendation in their own words. Sure, this will be slower than just taking the first polished answer, but it builds the judgment they'll actually need when the answer isn't obvious, when the context shifts, or when the technology gets it wrong.

 

PRODUCTIVITY NEEDS TWO SETS OF METRICS

Most organizations are already tracking the usual productivity measures: cycle time, tickets closed, drafts produced, cost per transaction, AI usage rates, error rates, and throughput per employee. And we can all agree these are important. But they don’t tell us whether AI is building a healthier system or merely helping a strained one move faster.

The missing column should track what actually happens to recovered capacity: hours reinvested in learning, manager coaching hours, rework and escalation rates, employee workload scores, after-hours activity, time spent on complex problem-solving, quality-review outcomes, protected learning time, and whether people can still explain, challenge, and defend the work AI helped produce.

Does the AI technology build up our human capability, or just erode the practice that builds it? If experienced employees developed their judgment by doing the reps, how will less-experienced employees develop theirs without them? Are workloads genuinely getting more sustainable, or just expanding to soak up every bit of gain that AI hands you?

If the only thing people can point to after AI adoption is "we process more work, faster," don't be surprised when employees conclude the reward for becoming more efficient is simply more work. That's not a recipe for enthusiastic adoption. It never has been.

 

YOUR COACHING CHALLENGE

Over the next two weeks, pick one area of your team's work where AI is already saving time, or soon will. Work through these questions:

  1. What capacity could realistically be recovered, and how would we know?

  2. If nobody makes an explicit decision, where is that time most likely to go by default?

  3. Ideally, what portion should improve performance, and what portion should strengthen learning, relationships, innovation, or workload sustainability?

  4. What judgment have experienced employees built by doing the work AI may now perform?

  5. How will newer employees build that same judgment without the same reps?

  6. Where should AI assist, and where should employees still be expected to think, attempt, question, wrestle with, and decide for themselves?

  7. What would a fair, transparent conversation with employees about recovered capacity actually sound like?

The future of work will be shaped by what AI becomes capable of doing. It will be shaped just as much by what leaders choose to do with the capacity it creates, and by what they still ask human beings to practice, learn, and own.

If this is showing up in your organization after an AI rollout, a retention concern, a succession pipeline where judgment gaps are surfacing earlier than expected, or a reorg redefining what “senior” means, I’d be glad to help you explore it through an executive coaching lens. Reach out for a free exploratory conversation at www.leslierohonczy.com.

 

For readers who want to explore the research behind this article in more depth, here are the links:

SAVING YOUR DEVELOPMENT BUDGET FOR STRUGGLING EMPLOYEES? Invest in Your Strongest Performers for Real ROI

by Leslie Rohonczy, IMC, PCC, Executive Coach & Author

(LISTEN TO THE NARRATED AUDIOARTICLE VERSION)

Think about the strongest performer on your team. When was the last time you deliberately invested in their growth and development?

If it's been a hot minute, that's understandable. Our attention naturally gravitates toward the people who need us most: the employee who's struggling, the new hire who's still finding their feet, or the people navigating conflict, missing deadlines, and falling short of expectations. Those are the situations that feel urgent, and they deserve our attention.

Our highest performers are usually bright, dependable, consistent, and able to solve problems before they ever reach our desks. They deliver what we need when we need it, and they rarely ask for help. And that's exactly where the opportunity begins.

I've become convinced that one of leadership's greatest missed opportunities is failing to keep developing our strongest people. Every leader understands the cost of poor performance: missed deadlines, quality issues, customer complaints, conflict, and a hundred other visible problems that demand our attention every day.

The cost of under-investing in a high performer is much harder to see because it doesn't show up as an urgent crisis. If it does appear on your radar, it'll probably look like unrealized potential: future executives who plateau before anyone notices; high-performing individual contributors who continue troubleshooting instead of learning how to multiply their impact through others; teams that miss the opportunity to learn from people who could have become exceptional mentors, peer coaches, and role models; and organizations that continue benefiting from what these people already know how to do while investing very little in what they might become capable of next.

Most organizations invest significant time and money in courses, conferences, mentoring programs, leadership programs, executive coaching, stretch assignments, and succession planning. The intention is clearly there. But the challenge is knowing where to invest next.

When someone is struggling, the path usually feels obvious. You can see the gap, identify the missing skill, and work together to close it. High performers are different. They're already succeeding, producing excellent work, and they've earned trust. So, it's no surprise that many leaders find themselves wondering, "What exactly would I coach them on?"

I've heard versions of that question many times. "She's forgotten more about finance than I'll ever know." "He's the smartest engineer in the company." "What could I possibly teach someone who's already better than I am?" Those are common, honest questions that reveal one of the biggest misconceptions about leadership development.

There's often another concern sitting just beneath those questions. You may worry that developmental feedback could demotivate someone, especially a high performer who's already succeeding.

In my experience observing hundreds of one-on-one conversations between leaders and their employees over fifteen years, thoughtful developmental feedback is usually received as a meaningful investment in someone's growth. For many high performers, the message isn't, "I'm not good enough." It's, "My leader sees even more potential in me, and is willing to invest in helping me reach it."

Early in our careers, development is largely about building capability. We learn technical skills, improve our communication, strengthen our presentations, become better at delegation, and learn how to navigate conflict. Progress is easy to recognize because we're continually adding new tools to our toolkit.

As we become more experienced, development changes. The work becomes far more reflective. Instead of asking, "What do I need to learn?", the conversation shifts toward questions like:

  • What strengths have contributed to my success?

  • How do those strengths affect the people around me?

  • Where might those strengths be overused?

  • What assumptions have become so familiar that I no longer notice them?

  • How will the next level of leadership ask something different of me?

Those are leadership conversations. Some of the greatest leadership growth I've seen has come from helping someone see a familiar strength through a completely different lens.

One CEO I worked with realized his decisiveness had gradually begun shutting down healthy debate on the executive team. He wasn't trying to dominate discussions. He was simply moving quickly because that's what had always made him successful. Once he saw the pattern, he began inviting opposing viewpoints before making important decisions. His team became far more engaged, and the quality of their decisions improved.

Another leader discovered she was solving too many problems herself. She genuinely believed she was helping her team. Instead, she was unintentionally preventing them from developing their own judgment. As she experimented with stepping back, her team stepped into greater accountability and performance.

A dependable director prided herself on being indispensable, until she came to realize that she had become the biggest barrier to developing her people. Her greatest contribution was no longer doing more. It was creating opportunities for others to grow. (And bonus, she had more capacity for the strategic work she wanted to do.)

None of these leaders needed fixing. Their strengths simply needed to evolve.

Leadership potential isn't a fixed quantity. Some people are already performing at a remarkably high level, and they still have enormous capacity to grow. They may become your future executives, trusted advisors, exceptional mentors, or the people who elevate the performance of everyone around them, simply because of how they show up.

Current performance tells only part of the story. The more interesting question is how much untapped potential still sits beyond what you're seeing today.

We may know our strongest people still have room to grow, but we aren't sure what to talk about in a one-on-one beyond project updates and performance. If that feels familiar, here are six coaching conversations worth having.

  1. Shift the conversation from performance to perspective. Instead of asking, "How's the project going?", ask, "What are you noticing about yourself as a leader that surprised you recently?" or "Where do you think your strengths have the biggest impact on other people?" High performers rarely need help doing the work. They often benefit from understanding the impact they have while doing it.

  2. Challenge how they think, not simply what they do. Invite them into conversations where there isn't an obvious answer. Ask them to weigh competing priorities, explore trade-offs, or think several years ahead. Stretching judgment often creates more growth than assigning another project.

  3. Help them shift from individual excellence to multiplying others. Ask questions like, "Who else could do this?" or "How could this project become a development opportunity for someone on your team?" Future leaders create results through other people, not just through their own expertise.

  4. Coach the impact they have on others. Ask, "What behaviours do you think your colleagues have started copying from you?" or "If everyone on the team approached work exactly the way you do, what would improve, and what challenges might emerge?" Those questions often reveal blind spots that performance reviews never touch.

  5. Create room for experimentation. High performers often feel enormous pressure to keep getting everything right. Talk openly about where it's safe to test ideas, challenge assumptions, and learn through experience. Continued growth requires space to experiment, not just expectations to deliver.

  6. 6.      Give honest, forward-looking feedback. High performers hear "great job" all the time. What they hear much less often is, "Here's what the next level of leadership will ask of you." Helping someone understand what tomorrow requires can reignite their development in ways praise never will.

If you begin having conversations like these, something important happens: your strongest people continue evolving, your future leaders begin emerging earlier, and your culture becomes stronger because excellence begins multiplying instead of simply performing. And that's an extraordinary return on investment.

Thinking about the recent FIFA World Cup, it strikes me that we don’t ever question why the best players in the world still have coaches. We understand that excellence doesn't maintain itself. It requires continual challenge, fresh perspective, honest feedback, and deliberate development. We see the same pattern in Olympic sport, elite music, aviation, medicine, and business. Brené Brown has spoken openly about the coaches and mentors who've helped her continue growing throughout her career.

Organizations have the same opportunity. Every year, they invest enormous effort closing performance gaps. Far fewer invest the same energy expanding excellence. One protects today's results, and the other builds tomorrow's leaders.

Your next exceptional executive may already be sitting right there on your team. Maybe the next culture influencer is already solving problems just three desks away. Or an extraordinary potential mentor may be excited about an opportunity to help others stretch and grow, too.

The question is no longer whether those people have more potential; it’s: how will you deliberately help them discover it?

 

YOUR COACHING CHALLENGE

Before your next one-on-one with your strongest performer, resist the temptation to spend the hour reviewing projects and priorities. Spend the conversation exploring who they're becoming instead.

Ask them:

  • what they're learning about themselves as a leader

  • which of their strengths they'll eventually need to redefine

  • where they suspect their biggest blind spot might be

  • what future leadership responsibilities will require them to do differently than what made them successful today

Then notice what happens. You may discover you've spent years managing someone's performance, when their greatest opportunity was developing their leadership.

If you're curious about unlocking the next level of leadership potential in your strongest people, I'd love to explore the opportunities with you. Reach out for a free Executive Coaching conversation with me at www.leslierohonczy.com.

WE HIRED ROCK STARS. WHY ARE WE STILL STUCK? How Strong Talent Reveals Weak Systems

By Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC

Executive Coach | Leadership Development Expert | Author | Speaker | ©2026 | www.leslierohonczy.com

 (LISTEN TO NARRATED AUDIOARTICLE VERSION)

On paper, it should be working. You raised the bar on hiring and brought in stronger talent; people who’ve operated at a high level, who aren’t easily rattled, and who get results. You expected lift, and fast!

I've heard versions of the following from leaders through my career: “We upgraded the team… and everything got slower. We need to do a better job recruiting the right people.” That 'diagnosis' sounds reasonable in the moment, especially when results don’t match expectations. But often, it isn’t the recruitment process that’s dropped the ball.

See if any of this sounds familiar: after an infusion of top talent, decisions take longer, time or resources get wasted as work circles back around, and conversations multiply. It can feel like the team got smarter and the work got stuck. This is often the point where the story starts to drift in the wrong direction, as leaders revisit hiring choices or question whether the new talent is as strong as it looked in the interviews. 

How is it possible to have less momentum when there’s more intelligence and experience in the room? Well, intelligence and experience aren’t usually the issue, even though this is the first place most leaders tend to look. In fact, hiring rock star talent doesn’t automatically improve performance; it reveals the limits of the systems that they are stepping into.

When capable people enter an environment where priorities aren’t consistently clear, where decision paths shift depending on who’s involved, and where expectations move midstream, the cracks become visible. They’re strong enough to feel the friction and unwilling to pretend it isn’t there.

Less experienced teams often push through messy systems without questioning them, assuming it’s 'just how things are done around here'. Strong talent does something different; they notice what’s off, they test assumptions, and they slow down when something doesn’t add up. Their hesitation is worth paying attention to, because what you may experience as a slowdown is often a system being exposed, which can feel frustrating until you see what it’s pointing to.

A team isn’t just a group of skilled individuals operating independently; it’s more like a busy airspace. You can have the best pilots in the world flying planes in and out, but without clear signals, defined flight paths, fueling and food service systems that keeps everything moving safely and efficiently, things start to circle, delay, and back up (or worse).

I've observed leadership teams full of smart, seasoned people spend an hour circling a decision that should have taken ten minutes, simply because ownership wasn’t clear and no one was quite sure who had the call. Even with highly capable people in place, an unclear structure will create bottlenecks.

This is where leadership habits begin to show up, especially when things feel messy. The instinct for many leaders is to tighten control by adding another checkpoint, getting more involved in decisions, and increasing oversight. It just feels responsible and accountable in the moment.

But what it often does is force high-performing people to adapt to outdated systems that were never designed for how they think or the high level they're used to operating at. You can almost feel their energy drop when that happens, which is where performance stalls and engagement begins to erode well before it becomes obvious. People still contribute, but with less conviction. They start conserving their energy instead of investing their discretionary effort, and they hold back valuable input and ideas when what's really needed is their best thinking and fresh perspectives.

The better leadership move is to examine the systems and processes those people are working within, rather than managing them more closely. Get curious about:

  • Where work slows down for reasons that no longer make sense

  • Where decisions are delayed because ownership is unclear

  • Where approvals add time without adding value

  • Where caution is rewarded more than thoughtful contribution

  • Where leadership steps in, when stepping back would actually move things forward

High-performing leaders encourage strong talent to question the systems they inherited, even the ones that once worked well, then simplify decision flow so ideas can flow and influence. They remove unnecessary steps instead of layering unnecessary oversight, and they create space for testing and refinement, knowing that good ideas rarely arrive fully formed.

They also invite challenge and stay in those conversations long enough for something better to emerge. This is where alignment actually develops, through people engaging with each other’s thinking and circling back to a shared understanding of what matters. The role of the leader starts to shift as they spend less time evaluating individuals and more time seeing their team as part of a system that is producing the results they’re getting. When different results are needed, the system itself must evolve.

If the environment isn’t set up to leverage the thinking, experience, and judgment of the new people you’ve hired, you aren’t fully leveraging the investment you’ve made in that talent, and you end up carrying the cost of capability without getting the benefit of it, which is a frustrating place to sit when you know how much potential is there.

So if you’ve raised the bar on talent and you're not seeing the lift you expected, look at the system, because that’s where the real leverage sits. If the airspace feels crowded and slow, don’t coach the pilots to fly harder; upgrade the system of signals, communications, and flight paths so air traffic can move efficiently.

 

YOUR COACHING CHALLENGE

Set aside 30 minutes this week and take a close look at how work actually moves through your team. Think of your team like a busy airspace. Your goal isn’t to fly every plane. It’s to make the routes, signals, and handoffs clear so everything moves without circling.

Choose one recent decision or project that felt slower or heavier than it should have, then write out how it unfolded step by step, noticing where it paused, where it looped, and where it required rework.

Then reflect on the following questions in a single sitting so you can see the full pattern rather than isolated moments.

  1. Where did the system make this harder than it needed to be?

  2. Where did I step in, and what impact did that have?

  3. Where did someone hold back when they could have pushed forward?

  4. What would’ve needed to be different for this to move with more clarity and pace?

You aren’t trying to fix everything in one sitting. You’re experimenting with looking for what’s slowing things down, and once you see it, you can clear the path. That’s how you keep the airspace moving the way it should, to create real lift for your rock stars.

 

If you notice this pattern in your own team, reach out for a free exploratory Executive Coaching conversation at www.leslierohonczy.com.

FEEDBACK ISN’T YOUR PROBLEM (But Your Relationship to Feedback Might Be)

By Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC

Executive Coach | Leadership Development Expert | Author | Speaker | ©2026 | www.leslierohonczy.com

(LISTEN TO NARRATED AUDIOARTICLE VERSION)

Most leaders believe they’re open to feedback… right up until the moment they hear something they don’t like. But it’s what happens next that reveals our relationship to it.

I remember sitting across from a senior leader who told me he was "very open to feedback". He wasn’t posturing; he meant it. He regularly asked for input, encouraged it, and even thanked people for it. Technically, he was doing all the right things, right up until that critical moment.

His peer offered him feedback about a client meeting they attended together. Within seconds of hearing her observations, he stepped in with all the context: a bit of background, a quick clarification, a touch of justification, a hint of over-explaining, even a suggestion that she had misread his intentions; then a gentle repositioning of what he meant versus what actually happened. It was a lot. He was articulate, calm, and had been completely effective at shutting the whole thing down. His peer didn't argue or push back, and the conversation just wrapped itself up. From his perspective, it was a good exchange. From hers, it wasn’t worth pushing any further - or doing in the future.

This is where the real issue lies: we each have our own special relationship to feedback, a unique pattern of reactions that show up in the first few seconds after we hear it. That relationship determines whether the conversation opens up or closes down. While we’re looking for clear, useful input, our team and colleagues are asking themselves how much of this is actually safe to say.

Amy Edmondson’s research at Harvard Business School has shown that when people sense even a small interpersonal risk, they adjust by softening their message, rounding off the edges, and removing the parts that might upset or land poorly. The feedback doesn’t disappear, but it loses its teeth, sometimes becoming so neutral and mushy that it's unrecognizable - and unusable as a result.

There’s another layer that shows up before feedback is even given: the way most leaders ask for feedback makes it harder to offer anything useful. “Is there anything I could do differently?” sounds generous, but it leaves the other person with too much space and not enough direction. The brain stalls. There’s nothing concrete to grab onto.

Now compare that to, “What’s one thing I could do differently in our next client meeting?” That question gives the other person somewhere to start. It’s specific, focused, and much easier to answer. This small shift can create a big difference.

Now layer that with what happens after the feedback lands, because this is where our relationship to feedback shows up in full colour. We rarely receive feedback as 'neutral data'. Most often, we see it as someone's interpretation of something they saw us say or do. It brushes up against our identity, competence, and reputation, and it pokes the part of us that wants to be seen as credible, valued, and in control. That means we're not just hearing the feedback; we're reacting to what we think it says about us as a person.

Our brains are wired to react fast. Research in social neuroscience by Matthew Lieberman at UCLA shows that perceived social threats, including criticism, can activate the same neural pathways as physical pain. Think about that: our brains interpret both as pain! So the urge to explain, clarify, or straighten the record isn’t a personality flaw; it's a hard-wired reflex. The issue shows up when we're not aware that the reflex has taken us over.

Our teams watch those micro-moments closely. They notice how long we stay with a hard comment, whether we get curious or defensive, and whether the conversation opens up or closes down. Over time, they adjust and bring us the version of feedback that keeps things moving, avoids friction, and sounds useful without creating risk.

And just like that, our access to deeper insights about ourselves narrows. Meetings still happen, conversations still feel productive, and we still believe we’re open to feedback. We just don’t realize how much of it never makes it to us.

Think about the last time someone offered you feedback. What did you do in the first few seconds after you heard it? Was there something that didn’t sit well? Was your instinct to move to resolve it? Did you stay open and curious with it? Did you explain? Did you have the urge to tidy the moment, or did you let it breathe? These are some common reactions to feedback in the moment. What's yours typically?

One leader I worked with ran a simple experiment. Every time he received feedback, he had to ask one more question about their observation. Not a deep dive series of questions that would feel like an interrogation, just one genuine question intended to help him understand what the other person was seeing. At first, it felt awkward and slower than his usual pace, and he worried it made him look unsure.

What actually happened was different. People started giving more details without being asked, offering examples, and staying in genuine conversation longer. The feedback became sharper and more useful because his stance in the moment had changed.

This is where stance matters. In feedback conversations, our job as the receiver is simple (but not easy): receive the feedback, thank the person for offering it, ask a clarifying question if something isn’t clear, and then reflect. Not defend; not explain; reflect. That reflection is where we close blind spots and gaps we can’t see on our own, and it’s the part most of us skip because it can be uncomfortable.

Nothing about the feedback itself had changed. His relationship to it had. We don’t need to agree with every piece of feedback we receive, and we don’t need to suppress our reactions. We do need to notice them and resist acting on them too quickly. Staying in the moment a little longer and asking a genuine question changes what becomes available to us. It also changes how people experience us, and that ultimately determines whether they will tell us what we need to hear.

YOUR COACHING CHALLENGE

Think about the last piece of feedback that stayed with you; the one that lingered, and felt genuinely uncomfortable. What happened in your head in the first few seconds?

Now imagine that moment again, but this time, you take on a deliberate stance as the receiver.

First, receive it fully. No interruption, no correction, no facial gymnastics. Just take it in without judgment or defense.

Second, acknowledge the person. Not just a quick “thanks,” but a genuine appreciation for both the perspective and the courage it took to offer it. Feedback, especially upward or sideways, feels risky. When we recognize that, we create the psychological safety for honesty in the future.

Third, get curious. Ask one question that helps you understand what they saw, heard, or experienced. Stay out of defending your intent and lean into understanding their reality. For example: “Can you say a bit more about what you noticed in that moment?” or “What impact did that have for you?”

Then, thank them for their feedback.

Lastly, and this is the part most people miss: reflect. Take time after the conversation to sit with it. Consider what might be true, even if it’s only partially true. Look for patterns, examples, and evidence of what others might be seeing that you’re not.

Reflect on these questions:

  • What part of this feedback felt most uncomfortable, and why?

  • What story did I start telling myself about what this means about me?

  • What pieces might be valid here, even if I don’t fully agree?

  • Where have I seen a version of this before?

  • If I took this seriously, what would I experiment with doing differently?

After your reflection, take some time to close the loop. Let the person know what you took from the conversation and what you’re thinking about doing with their feedback. This builds trust and reinforces that their voice matters.

Try this once this week. Not perfectly, just deliberately. That’s where the shift starts.

If this surfaced a blind spot, or you want to deepen your relationship to feedback, reach out for a free exploratory Executive Coaching conversation at www.leslierohonczy.com.

THE KNOWING-DOING GAP: When Insight Does Not Create Impact

In my coaching work, I meet many leaders who already have loads of insight. In fact, can’t count the number of times a client has said to me, “I know what I should be doing… I’m just not doing it.” They’ll even rattle off (cue ominous music) “the list”: delegate more, ask better questions, listen to understand, stop over-functioning, have the tough conversation, get out of the weeds, make time for strategy.

They can talk about these things eloquently. They’ve attended the workshops, read the books, or journaled about it on a retreat. But when Monday morning rolls around and their calendars fill with the usual urgent meetings, all that knowing and good intentions get choked out by old habits and urgent priorities. And when one of those priorities starts flaming, it’s hard to remember what we ‘know’ but haven’t quite ‘embodied’ yet. And for many leaders, that’s where progress stalls.

The struggle to turn knowing into consistent behavioural change is real. Researchers Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert Sutton at Stanford call this the knowing–doing gap – the persistent tendency for organizations and individuals to know what to do, but failing to act on it.

 

WHY KNOWING IS NOT ENOUGH

Pfeffer and Sutton’s research showed that the problem isn’t knowledge, it’s follow-through. Leaders nod along in agreement during training, then return to business as usual.

Neuroscience helps explain why. Aha moments have been linked to activity in our reward circuits, which helps to explain why it feels so good when we have an insight. That spike of reward makes us feel like something has shifted, but unless it’s paired with concrete practice, the idea remains an “interesting thought” rather than becoming encoded in us as a new behaviour.

In other words, insight is the spark, but repetition is the fuel.

 

DANIEL’S STORY: FROM INSIGHT TO IMPACT

My client Daniel had been in his VP role for 3 years. During a triangulation meeting at the kick-off of our coaching program, Daniel’s leader told me that he was a brilliant strategist, and deeply respected, but she worried about his pacing because he often seemed exhausted. At our next session, I asked Daniel about that comment, and he told me, “I know I should be delegating more, but when the stakes are high, it just feels faster if I do it myself.” His team had stopped bringing him fully formed solutions because they knew he’d jump in and fix things anyway, so why bother?

We didn’t start with a grand delegation overhaul. Instead, Daniel chose one recurring meeting (a weekly project status update from his team) and agreed to limit his contributions to clarifying questions only. No problem-solving, no swooping in to rescue, no taking the wheel because ‘his way’ was the ‘right way’. Just genuinely curious questions intended to help his team think more deeply about their progress.

The first week of experimenting was painful. “I bit my tongue so hard I thought it might bleed”, he told me in our next session. His team knew something felt different, but didn’t know quite what to make of this different version of Daniel. They presented their updates, looked at him for answers, and the silence made him squirmy – his people too. But he sat in the discomfort of it and managed to stay quiet.

By the third week, something shifted: one of his directors spoke up with a decision Daniel would normally have made. Another shared a bold idea that improved the way they did project oversight. Daniel told me later, “They weren’t perfect, but they were better than I expected them to be. And that’s when I realized that I’ve been underestimating them.”

Shortly after, the team was running the meeting without him stepping in at all. Delegation didn’t happen because Daniel suddenly “knew” he should. It happened because he behaved differently. Daniel had chosen one small, visible experiment and stuck with it long enough for this ‘new way’ to become ‘the way’.

 

THE TRAP OF “GOOD INTENTIONS”

For many leaders, reflection feels like progress, but without action, it isn’t enough. Sure, after a new aha moment, we can sometimes translate “knowing better” into “doing better.” But other times, awareness shakes us to the core, because we can see the gap clearly, yet have no idea how to close it.

Research from Harvard Business School (Gino & Pisano, 2014) shows that reflection paired with practice improves performance, while reflection on its own rarely shifts behaviour.

“I’ve been thinking about how I need to have that tough conversation.”
“I’ve been meaning to make more time for strategy.”
“I know I should stop filling silences in meetings.”

Thinking about it feels productive. But teams only experience behaviours, not intentions. If you intend to empower yet keep jumping in with answers, your impact is still disempowerment, no matter what you “know.”

 

BRIDGING THE GAP: WHAT WORKS

Here are four evidence-backed moves that help close the knowing–doing gap:

1. Tiny Experiments
Start small. Insights stick more reliably when translated into if–then plans and repeated practice. Instead of “be a better listener,” try “count to three before responding.” Instead of “do more strategy,” try “schedule 30 minutes every Friday to explore one strategic idea.”

2. Make It Visible
When people track and publicly share progress, they follow through more often. Tell someone what you’re experimenting with: your team, your coach, your peer, and invite feedback.

3. Tight Review Loops
Don’t wait a quarter to reflect. End the day with a simple check-in: Did I run the experiment? What happened? What behaviour do I need to adjust? What will I try tomorrow? Research shows short, structured reviews enhance learning and later performance.

4. Look For and Celebrate the Micro-Wins
Momentum matters. When you notice even a small improvement, pat yourself on the back. It helps you build the confidence to keep experimenting.

 

Leadership credibility isn’t built only on what you know. It’s built on what people see you do when it counts. So keep seeking out insights and then dare to act on them, letting those actions quietly reshape how you show up. The ripple effects will be visible in your team long before you may even notice them yourself.

Have you been sitting on an insight that hasn’t yet made its way into action? If you’re ready to close your own knowing–doing gap, you don’t have to figure it out alone. If you’re ready to explore, experiment, practice, and see real, lasting results, I’d love to be your coach. Let’s connect at www.leslierohonczy.com.

MENTOR, COACH, TEACHER, OR ADVOCATE: Choose Your Ally Wisely

My first career mentor was a petite powerhouse of a woman named Marie-Lyne. She didn’t hand me a checklist or a script. She encouraged me to get curious about my ‘wiring’, and what makes me tick. She saw my potential before I did. And she held up a mirror that changed how I saw myself and the people I was leading. That single experience transformed my leadership, and it taught me a lesson I return to often: the ally you choose doesn’t just matter; it can shape the leader you become and even change the course of your career.

I know this won’t come as a shock, but not all help is created equal. And if you’ve ever mixed up the role of a mentor with a coach, or a teacher with an advocate, you’re not alone. The lines can blur easily, so let’s get clear on who’s who in the zoo and what they do.

 

THE MENTOR: WISDOM ON LOAN

Mentors are the wise guides who share their lived experience. They’ve walked further down the road you’re on, and they can shine a light on what’s ahead, to help you see the potholes and boulders. The best mentors share their experiences navigating them by giving you their perspective on what worked for them, what didn’t, and what to watch out for.

Mentors can be inside your organization, offering insight into the culture, hidden rules, and landmines, or outside your company, bringing a broader industry or leadership perspective. Either way, the mentoring relationship is usually long-term and fluid, often lasting years.

Context: Let’s say you’re getting ready to deliver your first board presentation, and you’re nervous. A great mentor can tell you about when they were learning how to present in high-stakes situations, and the techniques they used to structure their presentation, and to calm their nerves.

Best moment to seek a mentor: when you’re at an inflection point in your career and need stories and context from someone who has already wrestled with the decisions you’re facing.

 

THE COACH: YOUR UNBIASED MIRROR

Coaching is different from mentoring in that the Coach doesn’t give you their experience or answers; they help you find your own. A qualified coach has a deep understanding of human development, and they use exploratory techniques like deep listening and powerful questions to create a safe, non-judgmental, structured space where you can unpack patterns, blind spots, and assumptions that no longer serve you, and experiment with new ways of approaching your coaching topic.

Where mentors lean on their experience, coaches focus on the process of self-exploration, awareness-building, and identifying limiting beliefs. Coaching is structured, with a well-defined topic, a clear aspirational future state, specific developmental goals, regularly scheduled sessions, and measurable outcomes. Unlike mentors or sponsors, a coach isn’t judging your performance or lobbying for your promotion. They walk alongside you, helping you bridge the gap between how you’re approaching your topic now and the vision you’re aiming for.

Context: One of my executive coaching clients explained our relationship to their leader this way: “My coach doesn’t give me advice. She gives me better questions than I was asking myself.” That’s the essence of coaching. In our board presentation example, a good coach will help you explore the limiting belief that triggers your nerves, and to develop techniques that quiet your inner critic in the moment.

Best moment to seek a coach: when you have a specific topic that you need to address, to shift not only what you’re doing but how you’re showing up.

 

THE TEACHER: BUILDING NEW KNOWLEDGE

When you have a knowledge gap, you need instruction. Teachers, trainers, and facilitators give you structured knowledge, practical tools, frameworks, techniques, and practice, so you can build your skills and capability.

Context: When you’re learning to deliver a board presentation, a teacher can show you the mechanics: how to structure slides, how to pace your delivery, how to manage Q&A. It’s skill-building, plain and simple.

Best moment to seek a teacher: when your gap is tactical and you need proven methods to close it quickly.

 

THE ADVOCATE: YOUR VOICE IN THE ROOM

Advocates, often called sponsors, open doors. They’re the senior leaders who mention your name when promotions or assignments are being discussed. They stake their reputation on your potential, and they make introductions that change the trajectory of your career.

Here’s the catch: you might not even know you HAVE a sponsor. You don’t usually choose an advocate the way you choose a mentor or coach. They choose you, based on what they’ve seen and the trust you’ve built. You can’t force it, but you can improve the odds by doing excellent work, making your contributions visible, and cultivating relationships with leaders who have influence.

Context: Your sponsor may have been tracking your progress for years, and when a board seat or a major assignment comes up, they’re the one who puts your name forward.

Best moment to seek an advocate: when you’re ready for the next level and need someone with power to clear the path.

A SIMPLE DIAGNOSTIC

Most leaders will need all four types of allies at different times in their career journeys. The mistake isn’t choosing the wrong ally once. It’s assuming one ally can fill every role forever.

So when you’re wondering “Who do I need right now?”, ask yourself:

  • Do I need stories from lived experience? Mentors give hindsight.

  • Do I need clarity and self-awareness? Coaches offer foresight and development.

  • Do I need tactical skills? Teachers help you build skills.

  • Do I need doors opened? Earn the trust of an advocate who can create access.

Marie-Lyne was the first person to show me how powerful the right ally can be. Over the years, I’ve had the privilege of learning from some wonderful mentors, coaches, teachers, and advocates. Their impact reminds me daily that the right support, offered at the right time, can transform a leader’s path.

If you’re at a crossroads and wondering what kind of support you need next, I’d be glad to have that conversation. And if it turns out that executive coaching is the ally you’re looking for, I’d love to explore how we can work together to help you move forward with confidence.

LEADING LEADERS FOR THE FIRST TIME? Your Old Leadership Playbook Just Expired

Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC, Executive Coach, Leadership Expert, Speaker, Author

You’ve just been promoted, and you're now leading other leaders. Congratulations!

There’s a moment that comes for every newly minted 'leader of leaders' that’s rarely discussed and seldom taught. Your calendar is fuller, your meetings are longer, and suddenly the job of leading that once felt so natural now feels... oddly slippery.

 You’re still a great leader. But something has shifted. You’ve moved from leading individual contributors to leading other leaders, and that changes everything. It messes with your rhythm, rewrites your role, and forces you to lead in ways that might feel unfamiliar, at least at first.

 Most organizations (even the progressive ones) still treat this promotion like an upward hop, rather than a leadership leap. They assume that the skills that got you here (coaching, prioritizing, and delivering results) will automatically translate to success at the next level.

 But if you're now managing people who manage people, let me be blunt: what got you the promotion is not what will make you successful in the new role.

  

THE JOB YOU HAD IS GONE.

Let’s name the real challenge: the stuff that made you feel competent, effective, and trusted, like knowing the details, solving problems, jumping in to fix things, can now get in the way.

 You can’t be the fixer anymore. That’s no longer your job. Now, your focus is to grow exceptional leaders who can drive results through their people, while creating the kind of culture others want to be part of.

 Let that land.

 Your value isn’t in knowing everything. It’s in building strong people leaders who can both deliver results and foster inspired, healthy, high-performing teams of their own. That requires a specific mindset shift, some new skills and self-awareness, and healthy doses of humility and self-restraint.

  

FIVE THINGS THAT MATTER MORE NOW

Based on years of research, coaching leaders and their teams, and delivering in-the-trenches leadership development training, here are five critical shifts for leading other leaders well:

 1. Coaching Matters More

This isn’t about performance feedback. It’s about capacity-building. You’re no longer coaching for technical skill or task execution; you’re coaching leaders to lead. That means helping them think strategically, build trust, hold others accountable, and develop their teams. It’s a different kind of conversation. And it’s the most powerful tool you have.

 2. Thinking Matters More

You’re no longer paid for how much you do; you’re paid for what you think about. This means carving out space for strategic reflection: What’s coming around the corner? What’s not being said? Where are we leaking energy? And yes, that means letting go of firefighting to make room for longer-range, proactive thinking.

 3. Your Example Matters More

If you’re still checking your team’s work, showing up to meetings you should have delegated, or reacting emotionally in a crisis, your managers are learning the wrong things. People don’t just listen to what you say, they watch what you model. What are you unconsciously teaching?

 4. Conversation Matters More

At this level, there are fewer updates and deeper dialogue. Your one-on-ones are coaching conversations, not status reports. Your team meetings build cross-functional trust, and break down silos. Ask more powerful questions; talk less. Create the space where both ideas and people can grow.

 5. Influence Matters More

At this level, your impact isn’t just vertical. It’s lateral and diagonal. How you show up with peers, the way you manage relationships across the organization, and how you model accountability will ripple outward. The power of your new position doesn’t come from proximity to the work; it comes from the strength of your insight and influence.

 

 COMMON PITFALLS (AND HOW TO AVOID THEM)

From my coaching work and years of delivering leadership development training, here are the five traps newly promoted leaders of leaders fall into most often, and what to do instead:

  • Doing Instead of Delegating: Ask yourself daily, “Should I be doing this, or coaching someone else to own it?”

  • Managing Individual Contributors Instead of Managers: Step back. Let your managers manage. You’re building capability, not substituting for it.

  • Under-Leveraging Your First Team: Treat your leadership team (your peer group) like a team, not a collection of silos. They are your 'first team' now, not your direct reports, and you can leverage the hell out of each other to help you all lead more effectively (see my article on the power of PEER COACHING CIRCLES here).

  • Staying Too Operational: In this new role, you're flying at a higher altitude now, which allows you to see further ahead, and take in a wider horizon line. So look up! Think system. Zoom out before you zoom in.

  • Hiring Mini-Me’s: Resist the urge to hire people who think and act like you. Diversity of style, thought, and experience makes your team stronger.

 

A QUICK CHECK-IN FOR NEW LEADERS OF LEADERS

  • Are you coaching leadership skills or correcting deliverables? If so, what's driving your need to stay in the weeds? What might help you raise your altitude?

  • Do you spend more time on strategy or task triage? How is your natural preference helping or hindering the people leaders reporting to you?

  • How are you creating a true leadership team, and not just a collection of people who report to you?

  • What behaviours will you intentionally model, to let your managers know what great leadership looks like?

  • How might you be helpful, without getting involved in the working level weeds?

 

 THE SELF-MANAGEMENT SHIFT

At the 'leading leaders' level, the biggest development gap isn’t skill; it’s self-management. It's learning to tolerate the discomfort of not knowing, not jumping in, and not being the hero. And it’s also the shift from delivering value to creating value. From knowing the answer to asking the better question.

That’s not just a promotion. That’s a transformation.

 If you're stepping into the new world of leading leaders, here's your invitation to recalibrate. If you're ready to grow your confidence, build your strategy muscles, and develop the leaders below you, reach out for a free consultation conversation. Let’s make sure you’re ready for one of the biggest mindset shifts you'll ever make in your leadership journey.

THE DELEGATION UPGRADE: What Most Over-Functioning Leaders Get Wrong (and a Free Tool!)

Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC, Executive Coach, Leadership Expert, Speaker, Author

APRIL 2025

You don’t need to delegate more. You need to delegate better. Here's a story that'll explain what I mean.

I was working with a senior VP coaching client and during a discussion about her capacity, we shifted our conversation to the topic of delegation. I told her I had noticed that she was quite proud of her ability to empower her team. “I’m great at delegation,” she told me. “I trust my people. I don’t micromanage.”

Having observed her in action over several weeks during her 1:1s and team meetings, I saw something different: her calendar was jammed with back-to-back meetings; she sent out directive emails at all hours; she regularly worked weekends to fix her team's mistakes, and to catch up on her own work. I also noticed the reaction of her employees, and the impact on her team. Her employees didn’t seem to be confident or engaged and were unwilling to take initiative.

That instinct to ‘do it all’ is called over-functioning – doing the thinking, making the decisions, doing the ‘doing’, then re-doing what was done to meet an unreasonably high standard – all the while believing you’ve 'handed it off'.

My client is not alone. Delegation, and over-functioning in particular, is a common leadership coaching topic. And it doesn’t always look like martyrdom or micromanagement – most of the time, it’s a well-intentioned leader jumping in to help, filling in the blanks, or fixing things behind the scenes. And sometimes, it happens because a leader simply loves the 'doing'. But that pattern comes at a cost – to the leader’s capacity, to the team’s development, and to the overall trust within the team.

If you’re doing all the thinking and troubleshooting, you’re unintentionally teaching your team not to.

Leaders often fall into one of two over-functioning patterns:

  • The Martyr: “It’s just easier if I do it myself.”

  • The Micromanager: “I know I handed it over, but the output isn’t perfect, so I’ll fix it.”

Both are understandable. Neither actually works long term. So let’s shift the conversation to explore what's driving that behaviour, below the surface.

DELEGATION ISN’T ABOUT 'LETTING GO' OR 'SETTLING'

Here’s a myth that most leaders have been taught: Delegation means taking something off your to-do list and handing it to someone else.

But delegation is much more than that. Real, purposeful delegation is an act of generosity and trust. It’s not just about removing a task from your plate – it’s about staying involved in the right ways.

Let’s look at three common – and very different – delegation missteps that illustrate the cost of getting it wrong.

The scenario: You ask an employee to lead a project review and create a status update to present to the executive team.

Misstep #1: Hand-Off and Hope: You forward the meeting invite and say, “You’re up. Good luck.” They scramble to prepare, unsure of what matters most to the audience or what success looks like. Their output misses the mark, and you end up rewriting the entire presentation the night before. The result? Frustration on both sides and an employee who feels overwhelmed rather than empowered. What’s missing: the leadership scaffolding of clarity, support, and trust.

Misstep #2: Polisher’s Pitfall: Your employee completes their review, creates the report, and sends it back to you. It’s thoughtful, accurate, and 95 percent there, but not quite how you would have done it. Instead of offering constructive feedback or coaching them to close the gap, you quietly rewrite the whole thing to get it “just right.” It may feel efficient in the moment, but the cost is invisible and cumulative: confidence erodes, trust thins, and motivation takes a hit. Over time, your people stop stretching and start playing small.

Misstep #3: Ego Editor: If you’ve ever thought, “I just want to make a few improvements, to put my mark on it”, your edits aren't about quality control – they're about identity and ego. Many leaders unintentionally use editing as a way to demonstrate their value, showcase expertise, or subtly reassert ownership. But the trade-off is that every time you rewrite instead of coach, you send the message that your team’s work isn’t good enough, or that your version is the only one that counts. What starts as helpful becomes harmful. Over time, initiative fades, people disengage, and the team learns that ‘done’ doesn’t mean ‘trusted.’

Now picture a different version of this same scenario: You spend ten minutes upfront with your employee, walking through the context, clarifying expectations, and defining success. When they deliver the work, you don’t rewrite it or put your personal stamp on it – instead, you offer thoughtful questions and clear, actionable feedback that helps them refine, adjust, and learn. You’re not hovering, rescuing, or reasserting your mark – you’re scaffolding. You’re guiding.

When you delegate well, powerful things happen:

  • You build trust.

  • Your employee gains confidence and capability.

  • Your leadership style evolves as you shift from doing to developing, from directing to empowering.

  • Delegation becomes less about task completion and more about capability-building and culture-shaping.

This kind of leadership isn’t about perfection. It’s about being okay with 90%, if it means your people are getting stronger, faster, and more confident. It’s about holding the line between quality and growth – and having the courage to let your team take real ownership, even if it’s not perfect. Because that’s what builds future-ready teams. That’s what scales leadership.

To be fair, most senior leaders were never formally taught how to delegate. They built their careers on being high performers – solving problems, delivering results, and executing with speed and precision. These strengths earned them promotions, but once they step into leadership, the very habits that made them successful can begin to backfire.

As a leader, your job is no longer to do the work yourself – it’s to get the work done through others. That means shifting from being the expert who executes to the leader who inspires and enables execution. It’s about creating the conditions where your team can stretch, learn, and deliver, effectively and consistently.

When leaders continue doing it all themselves, they don’t just slow things down – they inadvertently block growth, erode trust, and limit team potential. To lead well, delegation isn’t a luxury – it’s a leadership necessity.

THE EMPOWERED DELEGATION MAP: FIVE QUESTIONS THAT CAN CHANGE EVERYTHING

This simple tool can help you plan your delegation moments more thoughtfully. Whether you're assigning a project, handing over a recurring task, or reflecting on something that didn’t quite land – the Empowered Delegation Map invites you to get intentional.

Here are the four reflection questions:

1. What’s the desired outcome? Be specific. What needs to happen? By when? And why does it matter?

2. What context or guardrails make this safe to delegate? What do they need to know? What decisions are theirs to make? What boundaries matter?

3. What would learning look like – even if it’s imperfect? What’s the stretch zone? What are you willing to tolerate in service of their development?

4. What’s the cost if I keep doing this myself? What’s the impact on your energy, focus, or leadership credibility? And what growth opportunity are they missing?

5. What will I do differently, as a result of this reflection? What new move do you want to experiment with? When will you try this? With whom? What criteria will you use to determine your level of success at this new move?

Try walking through the Empowered Delegation Map in advance of a handoff conversation, or even in retrospect. You might be surprised by what gets revealed through this simple but powerful coaching practice.

BE THE LIGHTHOUSE, NOT THE LIFEGUARD

Effective leaders are like lighthouses. They don’t climb into the boat and start bailing water – they shine a focused beam of light for others to find the hole. They broaden their beam and give enough direction to help the team find their way through a challenging strait. They are steady, anchored, and visible, and they trust their people to navigate with increasing confidence.

The challenging part is that most of us were trained to jump in and prove our value by solving and doing. But empowered delegation means resisting that impulse. It means letting others fumble a bit, so they can build awareness, skill, and capability, and learn important lessons that help them develop. It means learning when to shine a focused beam on something specific – and when to widen the light to illuminate the broader path.

When leaders delegate with clarity and purpose, something powerful happens. Their team stops waiting for direction and starts thinking for themselves. They feel trusted, and they step up in response. Ownership grows. Capacity expands. Leaders begin to spend more time where they create the most value – on strategic priorities – and less time putting out fires.

And there’s a bonus ripple effect: when your direct reports experience empowered delegation, they start to model it too, and before you know it, you’ve helped shift the culture toward greater ownership and trust.

TRY THE DELEGATION MAP – AND SEE WHAT SHIFTS

If you’re ready to delegate in a way that supports your people, strengthens your leadership, and frees up your capacity, download the free Empowered Delegation Map and give it a try. Use it before your next 1:1, during team planning, or even to debrief a delegation moment that didn’t land quite the way you hoped.

You might be surprised by how much shifts – not just in your team, but in your own mindset and habits as a leader.

WHAT’S THE BEST PSYCHOMETRIC TEST TO TRANSFORM YOUR LEADERSHIP? (The answer may surprise you.)

Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC, Executive Coach, Leadership Expert, Speaker, Author

As an Executive Coach, I often use psychometric testing to enhance leadership development as part of my 1:1 coaching programs for leaders. Some clients bring past assessment results, while others take advantage of the two that I offer. Last week, one of my clients asked me: “What’s your take on the best psychometric test for leadership?” After years of coaching, and seeing firsthand which assessments create real impact, I have an answer that might surprise you.

Psychometric testing is a billion-dollar industry, promising insights into personality, communication styles, decision-making preferences, and leadership potential. Rather than ‘putting you in a box’, they reveal the box you’re already sitting in, looking at the world. All of these tests offer you more information about the lens you look through to make sense of yourself, and your relationship to others and the world around you. And while each test approaches this from a different angle, they all offer the potential to provide powerful insights, and personalized recommendations for development. But with so many options out there, it can be hard to choose the one best suited to developing your leadership, career, or team cohesion.

Curious to know which one I think is the best? First, let’s look at ten of the most widely used psychometric assessments.

THE TOP 10 CONTENDERS

1. Insights Discovery

Identifies: Leadership style, self-awareness, and communication preferences.

How it’s used: Based on Jungian psychology, Insights Discovery categorizes individuals into four colour energies: Fiery Red, Sunshine Yellow, Earth Green, and Cool Blue – offering a simple, yet powerful, framework for understanding behavior. Leaders and teams use it to adapt their communication styles, enhance collaboration, and build stronger workplace relationships. The model’s accessibility makes it a favorite for leadership coaching and team dynamics.

Benefit: Easy to grasp and apply for immediate team impact.

Limitation: The four colour model can feel simplistic compared to deeper personality models (however I think its simplicity is also a key strength).

2. MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator)

Identifies: Personality preferences, decision-making styles, and work dynamics.

How it’s used: MBTI categorizes individuals into 16 personality types based on four dichotomies (Introvert/Extrovert, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, Judging/Perceiving). Organizations and leaders use it to understand cognitive diversity, improve team interactions, and tailor leadership approaches. Its value comes from exploring how preferences shape leadership tendencies and identifying areas for growth.

Benefit: Provides insight into how people perceive the world and make decisions.

Limitation: Often misused as a rigid label rather than a developmental tool.

3. DISC Personality Assessment

Identifies: Behavioral tendencies in communication and conflict resolution.

How it’s used: DISC categorizes behavior into four types – Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness. Leaders leverage it to understand their natural communication style and adjust for different workplace dynamics. It’s particularly useful in high-pressure leadership roles, sales, and conflict resolution.

Benefit: Straightforward and practical for improving workplace communication.

Limitation: Lacks depth in assessing motivation and underlying personality traits.

4. SuccessFinder

Identifies: Leadership strengths, career fit, and team performance insights.

How it’s used: SuccessFinder provides highly detailed behavioral data to help leaders align their strengths with career aspirations and leadership effectiveness. It’s widely used in executive development, helping leaders optimize decision-making, productivity, and long-term career strategies.

Benefit: Data-driven with strong predictive accuracy for leadership success.

Limitation: Less commonly known, requiring coaching guidance to help clients interpret results effectively.

5. Enneagram

Identifies: Core motivations, fears, and emotional intelligence.

How it’s used: The Enneagram maps individuals into nine personality types, each with distinct worldviews and coping mechanisms. Leaders use it for deep self-reflection, personal growth, and emotional intelligence development. It’s particularly effective for those looking to strengthen empathy and resilience.

Benefit: Encourages profound self-awareness and emotional growth.

Limitation: Requires significant reflection and coaching support to apply effectively.

6. Hogan Personality Inventory

Identifies: Leadership potential, derailers, and risk factors.

How it’s used: The Hogan suite assesses personality traits related to leadership success and risk factors under stress. Organizations use it for executive coaching, talent selection, and succession planning. It’s one of the most research-backed tools for identifying both strengths and possible career-limiting behaviors.

Benefit: Helps leaders recognize and mitigate potential blind spots.

Limitation: Can feel confrontational to participants if not framed as a developmental tool.

7. EQ-i 2.0 (Emotional Intelligence)

Identifies: Self-regulation, interpersonal effectiveness, and leadership resilience.

How it’s used: Emotional intelligence is a critical leadership asset. The EQ-i 2.0 measures self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. Leaders use it to enhance workplace relationships, manage stress, and develop high-performance teams.

Benefit: Strong correlation between EQ and leadership effectiveness.

Limitation: Requires ongoing practice to translate insights into real behavior change.

8. Gallup CliftonStrengths (formerly StrengthsFinder)

Identifies: Core strengths and leadership potential.

How it’s used: CliftonStrengths identifies an individual’s top talents from a list of 34 strengths. Leaders use it to maximize their potential, align with career paths, and build high-performing teams by focusing on strengths rather than weaknesses.

Benefit: Encourages a strengths-based leadership approach.

Limitation: Doesn’t address potential blind spots or growth areas.

9. Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)

Identifies: Conflict-handling styles and negotiation strategies.

How it’s used: The TKI assesses five conflict-handling styles: Competing, Collaborating, Compromising, Avoiding, and Accommodating. Leaders and teams use it to navigate conflict more effectively, improving decision-making and negotiation tactics.

Benefit: Helps teams constructively manage conflict.

Limitation: Focuses on conflict behavior rather than deeper leadership traits.

10. FIRO-B (Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior)

Identifies: Interpersonal needs, leadership compatibility, and team dynamics.

How it’s used: FIRO-B assesses interpersonal needs in three key areas: Inclusion, Control, and Affection. Leaders use it to improve workplace relationships, enhance leadership compatibility, and align their management approach with team expectations.

Benefit: Strengthens understanding of team dynamics and leadership interactions.

Limitation: Less well-known, requiring interpretation for effective use.

SO, WHICH ONE IS THE BEST?

Here’s my take: The best psychometric test is the one you commit to using.

There are abundant and valuable insights and a-has to be had from any well-designed, personalized psychometric test, no matter which instrument is used. But the real value is not inherently in the results themselves. It comes from the reflection, discussion, and application of those results. Pay attention to any resistance you feel when reading your report. Is it truly inaccurate, or does it reveal a blind spot or limiting belief? Often, discomfort or resistance to certain insights arises from something we don’t like about ourselves, a blind spot we’re unaware of, area of growth we haven’t yet explored, or a perceived weakness that we want to protect from being seen by others. But the areas that challenge us most often hold the greatest growth potential – if we’re willing to reflect, practice, and experiment.

Many of my clients are surprised by the accuracy of their assessments. Even the skeptics have joked that it feels like someone must’ve been watching them for weeks. But no matter how precise the results seem, they’re just the starting point. A test won’t transform you – but what you do with it will.

CHOOSE THE RIGHT TOOL FOR YOUR GROWTH

Different tools will resonate with different people and serve different purposes. A skilled coach can help you assess your development needs and recommend the appropriate instrument that will have the greatest impact on your development investment.

If you’re ready to go beyond the assessment and start applying new insights and awareness, let’s talk. I help leaders and teams translate their results into real-world impact.

Which psychometric tool has been most useful for you? Drop a comment below – I’d love to hear your experiences!