Governance

Over time, I have come to see that many recurring leadership problems are not really solved at the level where they first become visible. Most organizations are used to looking first at tools, processes, structures, and frameworks. And of course, sometimes those things do help. But only sometimes. Across so many organizations, the visible problems

Leaders are trained to do more: speak faster, decide quicker, react sooner, do this, do that, plan-do-check-act. But in my experience, many of the best answers do not come from more doing or from strategic and tactical plans, but from seeing things clearly from a different angle. The so-called eureka moments. To see things differently

Because the purpose of work is to get the work done not to keep doing it endlessly. The same should apply to leadership. A leader is not there to stay necessary forever, but to help complete things: build clarity, strengthen people, create ownership or make the system work. And then to leave. But many leadership

National borders are, in many ways, becoming less important than they used to be, because more and more of the cultures shaping people’s everyday lives are no longer formed within nations, but inside international corporations. In many organizations, people from very different countries, histories and backgrounds enter the same cultural space and learn the same

And yet, if we are honest, much of what has been called “working in business” ironically does not seem to be working that well anymore anyway. Why else are so many leaders exhausted and why are organisations constantly worried about people, pressure, performance and survival after all those “wonderful” tools we have invented and used?

“How to… ” type of leadership development tools can create structure, clarity and a shared language, but they do not fully explain why two leaders can use the same model, follow the same process and still create entirely different cultures around them. This is the part that has interested me more and more over the

Most people think others are against the new idea, but in many cases they are simply loyal to something that came before (the past). Someone might resist a new process because “this is how our founder did it.” Another might question a new leader because they still feel loyal to the previous one or the

Yet this is exactly what most of us do. We stay inside the same perspective, discuss the situation from our position, defend our arguments and push our own solutions. But the system often remains unchanged, because we are trying to solve something on the very level where it was created. A helpful shift is surprisingly

Because then I belong to the system. Belonging to the tribe ensures my survival. In many organizations I see patterns that could be summarized in these sentences:– If I am tired, I prove my commitment.– If I am overloaded, I show how valuable I am.– If I sacrifice myself, I prove my loyalty. Many organizations

We tend to list them as leadership problems, each needing its own tool and framework. But they are often just different expressions of the same underlying issue: fear. Underneath strategy slides and KPIs sits a very human question: am I good enough to belong here and through belonging to feel safe and survive? When that