Blog, culture and engagement | Ambition In Motion

by Ritika Vijay

Fri 5 September 2025

When Aiden, the Chief People Officer (CPO) of a rapidly scaling tech startup, first joined the leadership team, he was excited to bring structure and strategy to a company that had doubled in headcount in less than two years. But within months, he noticed a troubling pattern: teams were bypassing their functional leaders and going directly to the founder and CEO, Michael.

At first, Aiden assumed this was the natural growing pain of a founder-led organization. But as he looked closer, the issue was more complex. Michael, though visionary and deeply invested in his team’s happiness, had a tendency to be a people-pleaser. When a group of engineers disliked the CFO’s directive requiring partial in-office work for regulatory and financial reasons, they didn’t raise the concern with the CFO. Instead, they went directly to Michael. Wanting to avoid conflict and preserve goodwill, Michael agreed with them on the spot, unintentionally undermining the CFO’s authority.

This cycle repeated across departments. Leaders would establish policies aligned with the company’s strategic needs, only for those decisions to be overturned, sometimes in casual hallway conversations, because Michael wanted to reassure employees. While well-intentioned, the CEO’s overstepping left the leadership team fractured, credibility strained, and employees confused about which rules actually applied.

The Core Challenge: The People-Pleasing CEO

People-pleasing tendencies in CEOs are not uncommon, especially in founder-led organizations where loyalty and culture are prized. But without boundaries, these habits can unintentionally destabilize the very leadership structure designed to support growth.

For business leaders like Aiden, the challenge isn’t just about managing their own function—it’s about managing up. The question becomes: how do you support a CEO who oversteps in the name of employee satisfaction, while ensuring other leaders maintain credibility and the company doesn’t drift into chaos?

Because objectivity diminishes the higher anyone goes in an organizational hierarchy, Aiden wasn’t getting objectivity. Fortunately, Aiden is in an executive mastermind group and those executives encouraged him to pursue the following steps:

Strategies for Managing Up Effectively

Clarify Decision Rights Publicly

High-performing leadership teams thrive on clear ownership. One effective approach is to create a “decision rights map” that makes visible which leader is accountable for which areas. For example, workforce policies might sit under the CFO’s purview, while the CEO provides input only at set review points. Codifying authority in this way helps employees understand where to direct concerns and reduces the temptation to bypass functional leaders.

Reframe Employee Requests

When a CEO agrees too quickly to employee requests, leadership peers can step in to reframe the moment as an opportunity for alignment. A useful response is something along the lines of: “That’s an important concern—let’s make sure the relevant leader is looped in so it fits into the broader plan.” This keeps the CEO connected to employees while reinforcing the authority of the leader responsible for the decision.

Create Feedback Loops

To avoid conflicting directives, organizations can set up systems where employee concerns raised directly with the CEO are logged and routed back to the appropriate leader. This preserves the CEO’s role as approachable and empathetic, while ensuring that input is integrated into structured decision-making rather than creating confusion.

Highlight Long-Term Impact

Sometimes a CEO needs help connecting the dots between short-term reassurance and long-term leadership credibility. Leaders can surface real examples—such as policies being ignored or authority eroding—to show how quick promises can undercut strategic goals. Framing the issue as a trust and alignment challenge, rather than a personal flaw, helps CEOs recognize the importance of consistency.

The Outcome

When these practices are in place, CEOs learn to respond differently: “I hear your concern, and I want you to know we value it. Let’s make sure the right leader is brought into the conversation so we can get this right.”

The result is a healthier leadership dynamic: credibility is preserved, employees know which channels to follow, and the CEO maintains their approachable style without undermining the authority of their team. Ultimately, these guardrails allow fast-growing companies to scale without sacrificing trust or clarity.

The Takeaway for Business Leaders

Fast-growing startups depend on both visionary leadership and operational discipline. When CEOs lean too heavily into people-pleasing, they risk undercutting the very leaders who drive sustainable growth. Business leaders who find themselves in Aiden’s position should remember: managing up isn’t about controlling the CEO—it’s about protecting leadership integrity and creating structures that allow empathy and authority to coexist.

by Garrett Mintz

Fri 29 August 2025

There seems to be one constant in business: change is inevitable.

Whether we are implementing something new with AI, restructuring processes, pursuing a new direction, or any combination of things that would necessitate change - one thing is certain: no industry is safe and most organizations will need to make changes to keep up or risk being left behind.

The question I am pondering is: How can people be at the center of this change?

Peter Drucker once said “Culture eats strategy for breakfast” and I would tend to agree with him.

No matter what promises we made to our board, how rosy a picture could look if we just made this one change, or how dire our situation is, if the people being asked to implement the change are not onboard with the change, it is never going to happen.

Does this mean that we should only change if our people approve of the change? Not necessarily. But it does mean that if we are going to make a change, our people must know what is in it for them and that result must be substantially better than what they currently have.

The purpose of change is typically for one of two reasons. Either:

If we don’t make this change, something really bad will happen to everyone at the company (e.g. potential of going out of business).
If we make this change now, it has the potential of improving the business and everyone involved in the business substantially.

It is typically easier to create a compelling why to the team in the first reason: if we don’t make this change, we all could be out of a job and if we like our lifestyle and the life our jobs currently afford us, then we should all be bought in to make this change. This requires a level of vulnerability from the executive team but is typically pretty compelling. This message does lose its luster if repeated too often as our people will go to a state of emergency with us but they will not live there (e.g. the lifestyle their work affords them won’t be worth it if they are constantly feeling like if they don’t make immediate changes that the company will go under).

For the latter (making a change that has the potential of improving the business substantially), most organizations struggle to create a clear and compelling WIIFM (What’s In It For Me) for everyone. If a CEO says that making this change will increase EBITDA which will help position the company for an exit - if the employees of this company don’t have equity, they don’t care about achieving an exit because there is no upside for them.

The company must create a compelling WIIFM for everyone involved. This takes a lot of time and effort. But it needs to happen for change to occur. Otherwise, the company will have to hire a consulting company who will charge an obscene amount of money to do the exact same thing and then leave once they gave the company the blueprint of everything they need to do to right the ship.

To align purpose when implementing change, everyone must be accounted for with a WIIFM to get the buy-in necessary for the change to be successfully implemented (and the WIIFM should be catered to people on a person by person basis, not a departmental one because what motivates one person could be different from another person, even if they are in the exact same role).

One final note on purpose, especially if it is for a brighter future instead of avoiding business failure, even if an organization successfully implements a change one time, they need to be mindful of stacking changes. Every change creates a cracking of trust that needs time to repair. The more frequent changes you ask of your people, the less receptive they will be to subsequent changes.

When it comes to aligning leadership during change, it is critical that everyone is on the same page. One of the most common hurdles companies have to overcome is misalignment of organizational goals and priorities.

The goal: the CEO sets a direction and everyone follows suit.

The reality: the CEO sets a direction, 25% of the team immediately follows suit, 50% of the team follows the old direction because the new direction wasn’t effectively communicated to them, and 25% are still following the previous direction that hasn’t been the direction for years but because of poor communication and a belief that the new changes will be backtracked and an overall lack of people holding others accountable, they are still following the old and outdated direction.

To align leadership during change, there must be a mechanism for holding people accountable and helping the executive team quickly and effectively understand when there might be a misalignment of priorities.

For example, if the CEO, with the guidance of her board and executive team, decides that the company is going to change the way they operate and transition to a new system that should be more efficient, cheaper, and minimize mistakes - there must be a way for her to know that the rest of the organization is picking up the change. If her VP of Operations says that he understands and to her face shares that he is onboard, and even sets goals in alignment with the new change, but if his team is setting goals not in alignment with the VP of Operations, the team will be working really hard to make very little progress. In this scenario, the VP of Operations thought he did a good enough job communicating the need for change to his team, but obviously he didn’t do that good of a job or else their goals would be in alignment with this new direction.

The VP of Operations reports back to the CEO that he has done an *effective* job of communicating this change and she takes him for his word. The issue with this is that most people, especially middle managers in an organization, believe that their communication skills are far more effective than they actually are. She takes her VP of Operations for his word and then 6-12 months later, some major balls drop, people quit or get fired, the VP of Operations is blaming his people saying they are incompetent and that he needs his CEO’s support to increase headcount for his team and the CEO is left wondering “where did I go wrong?”

At Ambition In Motion, we created a tool called AIM Insights that evaluates the goals of cascading levels of leadership in an organization and reports throughout the layers of leadership, in a one page format, which teams’ goals are in alignment, which are high/medium/low impact, and which are accomplished, and ultimately provide guidance for what each level of leadership in the organization can do to improve the impact, alignment, and achievement of their reporting structures goals.

Whatever tool is used, it must be easy to digest, updated regularly, and those using it must be receptive to the feedback and willing to make adjustments when they discover their are opportunities for improvement.

Ultimately, profit will be achieved when the purpose of change is clear and has accounted for what is in it for me for every person in the organization and leadership has a system for understanding and better holding the team accountable for the goals/expectations being set, their prioritization of those activities, and their willingness to change their leadership style when they discover that their are opportunities for improvement.

by Kayla Ambrose

Fri 22 August 2025

John is a manager of a marketing analytics team within his firm and is highly regarded as a positive and motivating manager. Despite these praises, John has recently noticed that his team has been decreasing in productivity and not implementing changes in response to his routine feedback sessions. With the high morale and weekly one-on-one sessions with each of his team members, John wonders why his team is becoming ineffective.

John’s Diagnosis: Not Communicating Feedback Effectively

While his weekly feedback sessions are a great tool for relaying feedback, the way in which John articulates his feedback is causing his team members to not understand it. Sometimes managers think they are being direct in their feedback, but they are actually masking their feedback with assumptions and indirect hints. Managers may spend entire feedback sessions sharing their insights, but still have their direct reports take nothing away from the meeting due to the communication barriers.

What are examples of communication barriers that cause managers, like John, to give ineffective feedback?

Lack of Clarity & Context

Providing ambiguous messages to direct reports can pose a communication barrier. When managers have unclear expectations or provide incomplete guidance, it may be difficult for team members to understand feedback. Without specific changes or advice, direct reports may be left confused, trying to guess what their managers expect from them

Overloading Information

Actively communicating through multiple messages, emails, or meetings can give managers the sense that they are communicating effectively with their team. Despite these active efforts to provide feedback, the usage of various channels and tons of messages can overwhelm employees. Flooding employees with feedback in addition to their other daily tasks reduces their attention to their feedback.

Emotional Barriers

Stress, defensiveness, and fear can muddle how feedback is delivered as well as how it is received. It is a manager's responsibility to reflect on these personal emotions to ensure their mindset isn’t causing misinterpretation. Additionally, managers should work to ensure the psychological safety of their employees to further reduce these emotional barriers.

Cultural & Language Differences

Teams comprised of individuals from various backgrounds present many strengths due to the diversity of thought. However, when communicating feedback, it is important to be conscious of this diversity. Direct reports from different backgrounds may perceive communication styles differently, causing feedback to land ineffectively.

John’s Remedy: Clearly Communicate Feedback

As John realizes that his methods for communicating feedback are ineffective, he works to implement changes to improve his communication style. Rather than having overly relaxed weekly one-on-one sessions with his direct reports, John implements the following 6 strategies to ensure clearly communicated feedback.

Be Direct

Rather than hinting at what changes direct reports should make, specifically address what actions should be taken and any applicable steps required. Along with communicating direct feedback, acknowledge that the feedback might have been confusing and open the conversation for dialogue.

2. Provide Context

Instead of simply diving into the specific changes that need to be made, create a shared understanding through contextualizing the situation. Leaving direct reports to guess what the feedback applies to can cause them to apply the feedback to incorrect tasks. Specifically address what the feedback applies to and any observations associated with it.

3. Identify Areas of Miscommunication

Reflecting on areas of potential miscommunication is a powerful strategy to prevent miscommunication early on. If there is something that a direct report says that is confusing, or vice versa, have them provide an example to ensure there is a mutual understanding. Strategizing to ensure clarification is provided during the feedback sessions will actively develop stronger communication.

4. Listen Attentively

Throughout the feedback session, make sure to listen attentively to what others share. Allowing silence for the direct report to clarify or expand on their thoughts will create a space for them to feel heard and recognized. Additionally, responding by paraphrasing what they said can help ensure their thoughts are understood.

5. Acknowledge and Clarify

When receiving feedback from direct reports, always recognize their feedback, even if there is disagreement. Further clarifying through follow-up questions and prompting them to ask follow-up questions as well will prevent misinterpretation.

6. Utilize Performance Management Tools

In order to ensure progress towards more effective feedback communication, implement tools or metrics to measure responsiveness to feedback. Utilizing performance management tools, such as AIM Insights, can help managers track their progress to support these communication changes.

John’s Update: An Effectively Functioning Team

After implementing these 6 strategies to improve his feedback sessions, John has noticed a drastic improvement within his team. Direct reports are quickly responding and adjusting their efforts to align with John’s feedback, and John is also able to receive feedback from his team. As he manages his team, John will continue to adapt and strengthen his feedback communication skills in order to best suit the needs of his team.

by Ritika Vijay

Fri 22 August 2025

When Maya Patel took on her new role as team manager at a fast-growing tech firm, everything seemed picture-perfect. The office radiated positivity with green plants adorned every corner, meetings ran smoothly, and her team of high-performing professionals appeared engaged and cheerful. Yet Maya couldn’t shake the feeling that something was missing.

Over time, she began noticing whispers in the hallways and closed-door conversations in small groups. Employees praised the company’s culture in public but privately expressed frustrations about inefficiencies, communication breakdowns, and missed opportunities. The concerns never reached team-wide discussions; instead, they simmered quietly.

Maya’s situation is not unusual. Many business leaders find themselves in organizations where everything looks flawless on the surface, yet undercurrents of dissatisfaction flow beneath. The challenge lies in addressing those undercurrents before they grow into cultural cracks.

The “Two Dogs and a Fence” Problem

Maya described her challenge as “two dogs barking through a fence.” On either side, energy and passion were evident, but the fence prevented resolution. Her team members weren’t voicing issues openly, so frustrations stayed contained within cliques. When she tried to intervene, the discussions quickly escalated into defensiveness rather than collaboration.

This metaphor captures a common leadership dilemma: when teams hesitate to bring up problems directly, managers often step into the role of mediator, sometimes with little success. Without a clear path for open dialogue, teams can appear harmonious while failing to address what truly holds them back.

Lessons for Business Leaders

Maya’s experience highlights strategies any business leader can adopt when facing a seemingly “too perfect” team culture that hides unspoken tensions.

Normalize Transparency

Leaders must create psychological safety where team members can voice concerns without fear of judgment. Regularly reinforcing that constructive criticism is valued, not penalized, opens the gate for dialogue.

Introduce Structured Feedback Loops

Maya implemented monthly “pulse check” sessions where every team member was invited to share one challenge and one improvement idea. Framing this as part of continuous improvement made it clear that speaking up was not only acceptable but expected.

Redirect Energy from Complaining to Problem-Solving

Private grumbling was redirected into collective brainstorming. Maya encouraged employees to bring concerns with at least one suggested solution. This shifted conversations from venting to action-oriented dialogue.

Act on Feedback Publicly

To reinforce trust, Maya prioritized acting on small but meaningful suggestions quickly, whether it was streamlining a reporting process or clarifying project ownership. Demonstrating responsiveness signaled that voicing issues led to results.

Break Down the “Fence”

By facilitating cross-group discussions, Maya ensured concerns were addressed directly rather than passed around in silos. She often played the role of translator, reframing complaints into neutral, solution-focused language that allowed both sides to listen productively.

The Outcome

Within a few months, Maya’s team began shifting from guarded perfection to authentic collaboration. Employees no longer felt the need to whisper frustrations in hallways. Instead, they trusted that their voices would be heard and that their input could shape team practices. The metaphorical fence came down, not by silencing the barking, but by giving both “dogs” a safe yard to meet face-to-face.

The Takeaway for Leaders

For business leaders, the lesson is clear: a team that looks perfect on the outside may be struggling with unspoken tensions underneath. By creating structures for honest feedback, modeling openness, and acting decisively on what is shared, leaders can transform hidden dissatisfaction into shared growth.

Maya’s journey demonstrates that handling complaints isn’t about preventing barking—it’s about opening the gate. When leaders replace silence with structured dialogue, they build teams that are not only high-performing but also resilient, authentic, and ready to innovate together.

by Kayla Ambrose

Fri 25 July 2025

When considering the appropriate number of direct reports to manage within a team, the easier answer would be to follow the rule of seven. While this rule encouraging managers to not exceed 7 direct reports appears to be a simple solution, it isn’t always the right answer. Depending on various factors, such as the complexity of work, experience of team members, and supporting systems in place, managers may be equipped to manage more or fewer numbers of direct reports.

Why does having too many direct reports matter?

When teams are comprised of too many direct reports, both engagement and performance may suffer. Overly large teams may struggle to have enough tasks that allow team members to contribute in a meaningful way. Without stimulating tasks that encourage direct reports to take ownership of their work and observe their own impact, they may feel their work isn’t important and lack motivation.

Other consequences of too many direct reports that a team may encounter include communication complications and missed development opportunities. With a large quantity of direct reports, maintaining clear and effective communication may pose a challenge. The more people there are, the more people that need to be kept in the loop for the team to function properly. Furthermore, more direct reports leads to less opportunities for them to experience direct mentoring and coaching by their manager, thus causing their development to suffer.

Not only does a large number of direct reports negatively impact the team, but it has direct implications for the manager as well. More reports require more time dedicated to oversight and mentoring. Managers with too many direct reports to oversee may experience higher stress levels, ultimately leading to burnout and decreased productivity.

Why does having too few direct reports matter?

Managers with too few direct reports are more susceptible to micromanaging their reports. With fewer people to focus on, these managers may become more compelled to hold unnecessary check-ins and become overly involved in the work of their direct reports. Micromanaging employees will only slow down productivity and create a more stressful work environment.

Another complication for managing too few direct reports is the potential for consolidation. Upper management may perceive managers with few direct reports as nonessential because it creates too many redundancies in the management hierarchy. Organizations looking to make a flatter structure will more likely remove these management positions with few direct reports.

What factors should be considered when evaluating the ideal number of reports?

Complexity of Work: Teams with more complex and varied work will need more guidance from their manager. Given the more involved nature of complex work, managers should have smaller teams to allow for ample time spent on guiding their direct reports.
Employee Experience: Experienced employees with higher skillsets require direct oversight, allowing for more direct reports. Conversely, less experienced employees will require more hands-on management, preventing managers from taking on more direct reports.
Manager Experience: Managers with experience that allows them to effectively manage, lead, and communicate with their teams give them the ability to take on more direct reports.
Support Tools: Managers with access to strong performance management tools and efficient communication software have more streamlined information sharing, allowing them to manage more direct reports.
Type of Work: Highly collaborative teams often benefit from fewer direct reports, since there is more communication within the team and coordination required. Whereas direct reports that work more autonomously may thrive with more direct reports to help divide the work.
Time Constraints: More direct reports equate to more one-on-ones per week. Holding more individual meetings along with team meetings, managers' work, mentoring/ coaching, and other unexpected issues that arise can really limit a manager's time. Consider if the additional time for one-on-ones makes sense in addition to all other time requirements in a given week.
Industry Specific Considerations: Industries that are more labor-heavy may require less oversight when compared to industries requiring more knowledge and expertise. The latter may require managers to be more involved, thus limiting the number of direct reports able to be managed effectively.

What is the best method to apply these considerations?

McKinsey devised a method to determine an ideal range of direct reports depending on 5 categories of manager archetypes: player/coach, coach, supervisor, facilitator, and coordinator.

Here is a short synopsis of the 5 archetypes:

Player/Coach

This managerial archetype requires a considerable amount of individual responsibility as well as extensive expertise.

Recommended amount of direct reports: 3-5 direct reports

2. Coach

A coach archetype requires individual responsibility and leads to self-sufficiency through structured apprenticeship.

Recommended amount of direct reports: 6-7 direct reports

3. Supervisor

A moderate level of individual responsibility while incorporating a standard work process.

Recommended amount of direct reports: 8-10 direct reports

4. Facilitator

A facilitator's main responsibility is managing the day-to-day work of their direct reports, as work is mostly standardized.

Recommended amount of direct reports: 11-15 direct reports

5. Coordinator

The work overseen by coordinators is highly standardized, and direct reports perform similar work.

Recommended amount of direct reports: 15+ direct reports

As the team evolves and new tools are introduced, don’t be afraid to adjust the number of direct reports. Just because a certain number of direct reports is more standard for a specific work style, doesn’t mean managers should be constrained by these recommendations. Continue to evaluate the optimal balance of direct reports that is most appropriate for work responsibilities.

by Ritika Vijay

Fri 25 July 2025

In early March, weeks after a difficult round of layoffs at Finverity, a mid-sized fintech firm based in Austin, Chief Operating Officer Daniel Kim sat quietly in his office, reviewing an email draft for the third time. The company had just let go of 40 employees, nearly 20% of its workforce, as part of a necessary restructuring. On paper, the move secured another 18 months of runway and realigned Finverity toward its most profitable tools. But the human cost was palpable.

The halls were quieter. Slack messages had taken on a colder tone. Managers reported a sharp decline in employee engagement, and HR flagged an uptick in anonymous feedback about "leadership silence" and burnout. For the employees who remained, trust had cracked. Daniel knew the numbers looked better, but culture, morale, and credibility had taken a hit.

This was the moment Daniel decided to stop focusing solely on operational recovery and start leading the emotional one.

Beyond the Layoff:

When layoffs occur, many leaders default to generic statements: “We’re realigning resources,” or “This wasn’t an easy decision.” A short internal memo is sent out, a brief all-hands is held, and then leadership often attempts to return to business as usual.

But “business as usual” rarely exists after a layoff.

The absence left behind isn’t just about empty desks or missing team members, it's about the emotional and psychological aftermath. Employees are left with unanswered questions: Am I safe? Why were certain people let go? Could this happen again? What does this say about our future?

Layoffs fundamentally alter workplace dynamics. They often introduce:

Survivor’s guilt among remaining employees
Distrust in leadership due to limited transparency
Overwork as roles are consolidated without clear communication
Silence and disengagement as fear replaces collaboration

Without open, ongoing communication from leadership, that silence gets filled by speculation, anxiety, and worst-case assumptions. What could have been a moment of unity becomes one of fragmentation.

Step-by-Step: Rebuilding Morale and Regaining Confidence After Layoffs

Don’t rush into “getting back to normal.” After a layoff, what was “normal” no longer exists. The emotional toll is real grief, guilt, anxiety, and distrust often simmer beneath the surface. The worst thing a leader can do is ignore it.

Instead, create intentional space for open dialogue. Host team check-ins where employees are encouraged to share how they're really feeling, and not performatively, but authentically. Acknowledge the loss, validate the discomfort, and resist the urge to pivot too quickly into productivity talk.

Step 1: Acknowledge the Emotional Fallout

Layoffs are not just operational events—they are emotional ones. Leaders must create space to process burnout, fear, and grief. Hold honest conversations, not to fix things immediately, but to listen. This can happen through small-group meetings, anonymous feedback tools, or one-on-one check-ins. Most importantly, leaders should reaffirm their commitment to the remaining team through visible, ongoing action—not just reassuring words.

Step 2: Shift the Narrative to What’s Next

After giving space to reflect, teams need a new direction. Avoid forced optimism and instead focus on building a future grounded in clarity. Reframe the internal message from what was lost to what is now possible. Use forward-looking language like “Here’s where we’re headed,” or “This is how we’ll rebuild together.” A vision workshop or all-hands Q&A can reinforce alignment and give employees a sense of purpose in the new chapter.

Step 3: Empower Teams with Shared Purpose

Buy-in grows when people feel ownership. Invite departments to co-create goals, and connect their work back to the company’s mission. When people can see how their role fits into the bigger picture, engagement follows. Empower team leads to facilitate planning sessions that allow input from all voices—not just top-down directives.

Step 4: Replace Perks with Meaningful Connection

Morale isn’t rebuilt through pizza or ping pong—it’s rebuilt through trust and real conversation. Host “Reconnection Days” or off-site sessions that focus on culture, values, and vision. Drop the presentations. Instead, prompt teams to reflect on what they want their culture to feel like moving forward. These gatherings should prioritize honesty and shared understanding—not performance metrics.

Step 5: Track and Reinforce Progress

Rebuilding trust is a process, not a moment. Leaders must regularly check the pulse of their teams through surveys, anonymous feedback, or town halls. Share progress transparently—what’s improving, what still needs work, and what’s being done about it. Celebrate small wins, especially moments of collaboration or resilience. Progress may be slow, but consistency builds momentum—and that momentum restores belief. Using tools such as AIM Insights can help with tracking and reinforcing progress.

Leading What Comes Next

In the months that followed, Daniel Kim didn’t just regain the confidence of his team, he helped redefine what leadership looked like in a post-layoff workplace. By choosing transparency over distance, dialogue over damage control, and shared purpose over performative perks, he reminded his company that trust isn’t rebuilt through strategy decks, it’s earned through presence, honesty, and follow-through.

For leaders navigating the difficult terrain after a restructuring, the lesson is clear: the business may survive the layoff, but the culture only survives if you lead what comes next with heart.

by Julia Gonzalez

Fri 25 July 2025

Nick was the kind of employee every company dreamed of. Diligent, resourceful, and could anticipate problems before they arose, he was a core member of his department. For years, he’d poured his energy into his role, consistently exceeding expectations and becoming the go-to person for many issues. Consequently, when a senior executive position opened up at his firm, Nick–along with many of his coworkers, believed he was naturally next in line for the position.

After the first month went by, Nick’s COO and boss, Sarah increasingly delegated high-level responsibilities to him. He was doing the work, attending the meetings, and even mentoring staff on tasks that technically fell under the senior executive’s delegation.

The problem, however, was Sarah. She recognized Nick’s unparalleled value. He was her best direct report, the one who ensured everything ran smoothly. The thought of losing him and having to train someone new to fill his shoes was a burden she wanted to put off for as long as she could. Despite Nick clearly operating at a higher level, and the understanding that he was next in line for the promotion, Sarah blocked his advancement. She’d praise his indispensability, reiterate how crucial he was in his current role, and subtly undermine any attempts he made to formally transition into the senior executive position. It was a strange dynamic, akin to a professional Munchausen by proxy, where Sarah was keeping Nick “sick” in his current role to maintain her own comfort and control, denying him the very growth he deserved. Nick was trapped by the idea of being indispensable.

Navigating the Trap of Indispensability

Nick’s situation, while frustrating, is far from uncommon. Many high-performing employees find themselves in a similar bind: so valuable in their current role that their superiors resist promoting them, fearing the void they would leave. This isn't always malicious; sometimes, it's a genuine fear of disruption or a lack of foresight regarding who would fill this position next. Regardless of the intent, the outcome is the same: career stagnation for the high-performing employee. If you find yourself in Nick’s shoes, it’s time to take proactive steps to reclaim your career trajectory.

1. Acknowledge and Assess the Situation

The first step is to honestly assess whether you are indeed in this situation. Are you consistently taking on responsibilities above your pay grade? Have you expressed interest in advancement only to be met with vague responses or praise for your current performance? Is your boss seemingly more focused on your present contributions than your future potential? Once you recognize the pattern, it's easier to strategize. It's crucial to understand that your value is not the problem; the way it's being leveraged (or exploited) is.

2. Document Your Contributions and Growth

Start keeping a record of your accomplishments, especially those that align with the responsibilities of the role you aspire to. This isn't just about your current job description; it's about the additional duties you’ve taken on, the problems you’ve solved, and the initiatives you’ve led that demonstrate your readiness for a higher-level position. Quantify your achievements whenever possible.Using tools such as AIM insights, you can get data regarding your growth for the past months or even years. If you create a sort-of resume, outlining all the qualifications for your promotion, it provides tangible documentation of why you should receive it. This documentation will make your case for promotion much stronger and harder to dismiss.

3. Initiate a Direct Conversation

Once you have your qualifications in writing, It’s time to have an open discussion with your supervisor. This conversation shouldn’t be accusatory, but rather focused on your career development. Schedule a dedicated meeting, not a quick chat in the hallway. Start by expressing your commitment to the company and your desire for growth. Then, present your documented achievements, clearly outlining how you're already performing at the next level.

Frame the conversation around the benefit to the company: "I believe I'm ready to take on the senior executive role, which would allow me to contribute even more strategically to the team's success by doing X, Y, and Z. I've already been handling A, B, and C responsibilities." Be prepared for potential pushback, such as concerns about who would fill your current role. This is where you can proactively offer solutions or highlight the benefits of your advancement.

4. Propose a Transition Plan

Your boss’s hesitation often stems from the fear of losing a high-performing employee without an adequate replacement. Anticipate this and come prepared with a proposed transition plan. This could involve:

Training a successor: Offer to train a junior colleague to take over your current responsibilities. This demonstrates your commitment to the team's continuity and alleviates your boss’s burden.
Phased handover: Suggest a gradual transition of your duties, allowing for a smooth handover over several weeks or months.
Cross-training: If applicable, propose cross-training other team members so that multiple individuals can handle aspects of your current role, reducing single points of failure.

5. Seek Mentorship and Sponsorship

Look for mentors or sponsors within the company, ideally in different departments or at a higher level than your current boss. These individuals can offer advice, advocate for you, and potentially open doors to new opportunities. A sponsor can champion your promotion directly with senior leadership, especially if your direct boss remains resistant. Their perspective might carry more weight and help overcome internal roadblocks.

Additionally, look for peers and mentors outside of your organization who may have experienced similar pushback for a promotion by joining an Executive Mastermind Group. Getting perspectives from peer executives outside of the company can be critical to garnering objectivity and a clearer perspective on the situation.

6. Look Externally if Necessary

If, despite your best efforts, your current employer continues to hold you back, it might be time to consider external opportunities. While it’s frustrating to leave a place where you’ve invested so much, your career growth should be a priority. The experience and skills you’ve gained, even if unacknowledged internally, are highly valuable in the broader job market. Don't let the fear of change prevent you from reaching your full potential. Updating your resume and exploring options can provide a valuable reality check and often reveal that your skills are in high demand elsewhere.

Being indispensable can be a double-edged sword. While it’s a testament to your abilities, it can also become a barrier to advancement. By taking a strategic and proactive approach, documenting your value, communicating effectively, and being prepared to look beyond your current situation, you can break free from the handcuffs and propel your career forward. Your talent deserves to be recognized and rewarded with growth, not stagnation.

by Julia Gonzalez

Fri 11 July 2025

Many business conflicts can stem from conflicting incentive structures between executives. Take Nick, the head of HR in his organization, radiating frustration as he finds himself caught between a critical deadline and an uncompromising finance department. His mandate was clear: implement a new payroll technology by a rapidly approaching date. Yet despite his efforts for a swift and seamless rollout, the company’s finance department opted for a much more meticulous approach.

Burdened by previous failed payroll implementations, the finance department was taking everything through legal, to try and prevent yet another failed technology. To the HR executive, this felt like an unnecessary and infuriating roadblock, jeopardizing his goals. To the finance executive, it was a desperate attempt to mitigate risk and, possibly, save his job. Another flop on his watch could mean a professional reckoning.

This scenario, where individual or departmental incentives clash, is a very real and prevalent challenge for CEOs and executives. It’s a subtle form of internal business conflict that, left unaddressed, can derail critical projects and erode morale. So, how do you navigate these treacherous waters?

Fostering Integrated Teamwork

The first, and perhaps most crucial, step is to recognize that you're not managing an assembly line where each department simply passes work down the line. You're leading an ecosystem where the success of one team is inextricably linked to the success of all.

In the payroll technology example, the HR executive's initial approach, while understandable, was to view finance and legal as cogs in a larger machine, that the plan must go through to be implemented. This perspective, however, overlooks the human element and the underlying motivations. Instead, the focus should shift to fostering a truly integrated team dynamic.

Actionable Insight: The HR leader needs to initiate a proactive, collaborative meeting with both the finance executive and legal counsel. This isn't about assigning blame or demanding speed; it's about genuine understanding and problem-solving.

With Finance: "Help me understand your specific concerns regarding this implementation. Given the past challenges, I want to ensure we address every potential risk. What assurances or information do you need from the vendor or from our internal teams to feel confident moving forward?" By actively seeking out and addressing their anxieties, the HR leader can transform finance from a roadblock into a partner. The vendor will likely be more than willing to provide the necessary documentation, security protocols, or even engage in direct conversations to relieve finance's worries.
With Legal: "We have a critical deadline for this project, and I understand the thoroughness required for legal review. Is there a way we can expedite the process without compromising due diligence? Perhaps we can prioritize certain documents, or even work together on a phased review approach?" By framing it as a shared challenge with a clear objective, legal may be more inclined to speed up their processes. This might involve dedicating specific resources, providing a clearer understanding of their review process, or even offering guidance on how future submissions can be structured to facilitate faster review.

The goal here is to dismantle the "us vs. them" mentality and replace it with one that says "we're in this together". When success for one is success for all, incentives begin to align better organically.

Empathy as a Strategic Tool

The truth of the scenario – that the finance executive was trying to save her job – highlights a critical aspect of executive leadership: empathy. It's easy to get caught up in our own objectives and pressures, but truly effective leaders take the time to understand the priorities, pressures, and incentives of their colleagues.

Before any confrontational or demanding conversations, colleagues should dedicate time to stepping into the other person's shoes. Asking:

What are their biggest fears and anxieties related to this project?
What are the goals they are trying to achieve?
What historical context might be influencing their current behavior?
How does this project impact their success, or potential failure?

In the payroll scenario, the HR executive could have initiated a less formal, one-on-one conversation with the finance executive. "I understand the past implementations have been difficult, and I appreciate your diligence in preventing future issues. My goal is to make this a success for both of our departments. How can I best support you in ensuring a smooth and secure transition?" This approach, grounded in mutual respect and a genuine desire for collaboration, can disarm defensiveness and open the door to productive dialogue.

Collaboration grounded in mutual understanding can turn even the most frustrating roadblocks into shared wins. When colleagues feel heard and understood, they are far more likely to reciprocate that understanding and work towards a common goal. This doesn't mean abandoning your own objectives, but rather seeking common ground that allows both parties to achieve their desired outcomes.

Cultivating a Culture of Shared Accountability

Ultimately, addressing conflicting incentives requires a shift in company culture towards shared accountability. This isn't just about individual interactions; it’s about creating an environment where departmental disagreements are minimized, and cross-functional collaboration is maximized.

CEOs and executives should consider:

Joint Goal Setting: Where appropriate, establish shared goals and KPIs for projects that span multiple departments. If the HR and finance teams were jointly responsible for the successful and timely implementation of the payroll technology, their incentives would naturally align.
Cross-Functional Training: Encourage employees to spend time in other departments to gain a deeper understanding of their operations, challenges, and priorities.
Recognition of Collaborative Success: Publicly acknowledge and reward teams that successfully collaborate on complex projects, highlighting how diverse perspectives contributed to a shared victory. This reinforces the value of integrated teamwork.
Leadership Modeling: Executives must lead by example. When leaders demonstrate a willingness to compromise, understand diverse perspectives, and prioritize organizational success over departmental turf wars, it sends a powerful message throughout the company.
Joining an Executive Mastermind Group: Getting perspectives from peer executives outside of the company can be critical to garnering objectivity and a clearer perspective on the situation.

The conflict between the HR and finance executives is not an anomaly; it's a representation of the challenges many organizations face. By moving beyond a linear, transactional approach to internal projects and embracing empathy, integrated teamwork, and a culture of shared accountability, leaders can transform difficult roadblocks into opportunities for organizational growth and enhanced performance. The goal isn't to eliminate individual incentives, but to strategically align them so that departmental success contributes directly to the overarching success of the entire company.

by Kayla Ambrose

Fri 11 July 2025

As the team leader, managers play an essential role in their teams, guiding and empowering them to reach their fullest potential. Although managers are a critical component of the team they lead, challenges can arise when managers become so integral to workflows that they cannot take time off without bringing productivity to a halt. Effective managers are able to balance their strong leadership capabilities while implementing mechanisms that allow their team to function for short periods autonomously.

Managers Too Involved in Workflows Can Have Harmful Effects:

Burnout: When managers feel they can’t take time off for personal reasons such as important life events, vacations, or health reasons, they will quickly burnout. Fear of slowing down workflows can strongly influence managers not to take personal time off. Without flexibility to develop a work-life balance, managers can become incredibly exhausted within their role, leading to decreased productivity.

Bottlenecks: Workflows that are too reliant on a manager can begin to form a bottleneck, thus slowing progress down. Teams that require their managers’ approval on minor tasks create standstills in processes and potentially huge pile-ups of work when the manager takes time off.

Stunted Employee Growth: Teams with managers incredibly integral to workflows often result in environments that lack autonomy. Employees often won’t feel empowered to make decisions and take ownership of their work. Without this sense of responsibility and an increased reliance on managers, employees are unable to reach their full potential.

Organization-Wide Challenges: In addition to harming managers & their teams, managers overly integral to workflows can also damage the organization as a whole. Organizations with managers who are integral to workflows may encounter challenges if the manager switches roles or leaves unexpectedly, and valuable information regarding processes may be lost. This lack of knowledge dispersed throughout the organization has the potential to drastically impact the functionality of operations or the ability to scale them.

Given all the harmful repercussions stemming from over-reliance on managers for workflow productivity, it’s evident that this creates systemic vulnerabilities. When a manager finds themself too involved in workflows, it often stems from internal and/or external pressures. Many are driven by the fear of disrupting the team, causing deadlines to slip, or quality to decline. Some managers experience external pressure from senior leadership due to strict demands for perfect performance. Other causes may be a lack of trust in oneself, caused by impostor syndrome, or even a lack of trust in their team. Regardless of the source of the pressure, they can trap managers in a cycle of over-involvement, even when the over-involvement is detrimental to the team's long-term success.

The behaviors exhibited by over-involved managers and the pressures that cause them are similarly reflected in PTO culture. When managers feel indispensable, they and their teams will be more resistant to logging off to take personal time. Especially in organizations with “unlimited PTO”, employees may take less time off due to the implicit pressure to keep workflows progressing. Managers' modeling the expectations of constant involvement gets internalized and practiced by staff.

This team norm of manager reliance for workflows creates a cycle: managers are overloaded by workflows and feel pressured not to take time off, which increases team dependency and conveys the message that no one on the team should take time off. As a manager, it is critical to break the feedback loop and create a balanced approach that prioritizes managers’ ability to take time off without causing disruptions.

Managers who develop a more balanced approach positively impact themselves and their team. Dedicating time for personal time off works to limit the effects of burnout while also increasing personal motivation. Additionally, avoiding dependency of workflows on a singular manager can prevent costly disruptions later on for the organization. Most importantly, prioritizing managers’ ability to not overly involve themselves in workflows can foster a culture of trust and responsibility, positively impacting the team's productivity.

Strategies to Prevent Managers From Becoming Too Integral to Workflow Productivity:

Effectively Delegate

Rather than taking on all the responsibility and being involved in all decision-making processes, managers should identify tasks that can be completed by other team members to allow for more efficient progress. Delegating simultaneously distributes the workload more adequately throughout the team and encourages team members to take ownership of new tasks. Managers may be hesitant to delegate tasks; slowly delegating more responsibilities to employees helps to ease managers and direct reports into this new dynamic.

2. Cross-train Employees

Cross-training employees ensures there are multiple team members who can step up and assume some of their managers' responsibilities in their absence. Through additional training and development, team members can become equipped with a wider skillset to prepare them for additional responsibilities. Conducting continuous training works to build confidence in the capabilities of direct reports.

3. Document Procedures

An obstacle for others to assume managers' responsibilities while they take time off may simply be a lack of proper documentation. Managers with specific procedures for processes, but no documentation for said processes, create unnecessary knowledge gaps. Accessibility of proper documentation removes reliance on memory and expertise, allowing other team members to conduct sufficient procedures without constant direct oversight.

4. Effective Management Software

Utilizing performance management software can streamline tasks and promote team collaboration. AIM Insights, a performance management software, utilizes monthly surveys to uncover gaps between team sentiments and managers' perceptions. These monthly surveys, along with AIM’s goal benchmarking capabilities, can transform managers' ability to delegate and better understand their teams' needs.

Teams shouldn’t encounter a scenario in which the team cannot exist if someone takes the day off. Not only does this pressure from extreme team reliance harm managers, but the organization as a whole. Managers who recognize they are so integral to the workflows that they cannot take time off must reevaluate why these sentiments are held and how they can adapt their management style to allow their team to function adequately on its own at times.

by Grace Tripathy

Fri 11 July 2025

Just six months into Mason’s promotion to Chief Marketing Officer at a Fortune 500 company, the company was acquired by a private equity firm looking to expand the brand’s national footprint. Mason, who had been brought in for his sharp eye for digital transformation, was quickly looped into boardroom discussions that questioned the future of the company’s founder and long-time CEO, Greg.

While Greg had built the Fortune 500 company into a beloved regional staple, the board viewed him as resistant to innovation, stuck on past successes. Revenue growth had plateaued. Customer retention was slipping. And internal surveys showed a workforce that, while loyal, was uninspired.

After a series of tense meetings and back-channel conversations, the board made its move: Greg was fired.

And Mason? He stayed.

The Fallout: "If They Fired the CEO, Who's Next?"

The morning after the announcement, the corporate Teams chats were silent. Mason’s calendar filled with 1:1’s, but not the kind you hope for.

From the brand manager in Atlanta to the warehouse supervisor in Colorado, the message was the same: “If Greg wasn’t safe, how do I know I am?”

Suddenly, Mason wasn’t just the CMO tasked with scaling the brand. He was the face of corporate change—and to many, the face of corporate betrayal.

What happened at the Fortune 500 company isn’t uncommon. Founders get pushed out and boards act decisively. But the mistake many leaders make in these moments is assuming that business decisions exist in a vacuum.

Employees don’t clock in just for the pay. They stay because they believe in a mission, trust their leaders, and see themselves as part of something bigger. Rip that foundation out without care, and you’ve created instability—no matter how strong your business case may be.

Mason understood this. And so, instead of retreating to strategy decks and investor calls, he did something unexpected: he got personal.

How to Lead Through the Acquisition Transition

1. Rebuild the Narrative (Before Rebuilding the Brand)

What Mason did:

He gathered the entire team—virtually and in-person—and didn’t lead with a PowerPoint. He led with honesty.

“Greg built something incredible. That doesn’t go away. But for us to grow, we need to evolve. And I want to do that with you, not to you.”

Why it works:

When people understand the “why” behind a decision—and feel like they’re included in the “what next”—they’re far more likely to re-engage. Leaders must humanize transitions, especially when legacy figures are involved.

2. Prioritize 1:1’s with a Purpose

What Mason did:

He scheduled 30+ one-on-one meetings over 3 weeks. Not to give performance feedback, but to listen.

Each meeting included three key questions:

“What do you wish leadership would stop doing?”

“What’s one thing you love about working here?”

“What would make you proud to stay for the next 5 years?”

Why it works:

Top-down change feels threatening unless it’s paired with bottom-up understanding. People don’t need to be coddled—they need to be heard. These conversations help rebuild psychological safety and show that leadership isn’t operating in a silo.

3. Anchor Culture in Something Bigger Than a Person

What Mason did:

After Greg’s exit, morale dipped because the culture was too tied to him. Mason helped the team co-create new guiding principles—ones not reliant on a single figure, but rooted in shared values like “playful excellence” and “growth through curiosity.”

They even introduced a new employee recognition system where peers could reward each other with digital tokens for living those values, redeemable for team experiences.

Why it works:

When identity is built around one person, their departure creates a vacuum. A value-based culture, co-designed by the team, gives people a new anchor—a reason to stay, belong, and contribute.

4. Share the Strategy—But Keep It Simple

What Mason did:

Instead of vague statements like “We’re going to scale,” Mason created a one-pager with clear, actionable priorities. Each team could map their work to one of the three goals:

Increase repeat visits by 20%

2. Launch two new national locations

3. Improve employee engagement scores by 15%

Each goal had a team lead, a monthly update cadence, and an open feedback loop.

Why it works:

In times of uncertainty, clarity is comfort. People need to know where they’re headed and how their role contributes to the mission. A transparent, measurable roadmap builds buy-in and momentum.

5. Celebrate Micro-Wins to Regain Confidence

What Mason did:

He celebrated the first time a regional manager improved customer reviews. He highlighted a tech intern who built a new booking tool. These weren’t PR stunts—they were authentic stories shared across the company’s intranet and weekly all-hands.

Why it works:

Wins rewire the team’s mindset. When a company goes through a shakeup, people assume failure is next. But seeing progress—even in small doses—starts to shift the narrative toward hope.

How Do You Build Culture When Stability Is Uncertain?

When employees don’t know what tomorrow holds, they stop focusing on performance and start scanning for risk. They wonder if they’ll be next to go, whether their work still matters, or if leadership can be trusted. In this fog of doubt, building—or more accurately, rebuilding—culture must become an urgent priority.

Mason realized that creating a healthy, resilient culture in an unstable environment wasn’t about keeping everyone happy. It was about reinstating meaning, rebuilding trust, and creating consistency where there was none. He couldn’t offer long-term guarantees. But he could create an environment where people felt heard, seen, and supported.

Here’s how any leader can build culture even when the ground is still shifting:

Five Ways to Build Culture Without Stability

Practice Transparent Leadership with Curiosity, Not Control
When uncertainty looms, the instinct is to “tighten the reins”—but real leadership starts with curiosity over control. Instead of hiding behind decisions, embrace curious leadership by saying,

“Here’s what we’re trying, here’s what we’re learning, and here’s where we want your ideas.”

Ambition In Motion’s Executive Mastermind Groups emphasizes how asking better questions—not giving more answers—builds trust, especially during change. This transparency makes teams feel invited to shape the future, not just endure it.

2. Foster Meaningful 1:1s—Not Performance Reviews in Disguise
In unstable environments, people need connection, not evaluation. That’s where AIM Insights comes in. It helps leaders create data-informed, emotionally intelligent 1:1s that don’t just measure performance but nurture resilience, motivation, and clarity.

Use these meetings to ask:

“What’s something you’re proud of this month?”
“What’s one thing you’d change if you could?”

Leaders who listen this way make employees feel psychologically safe—even if everything else is shifting.

3. Create Micro-Rituals to Anchor Belonging
Culture isn’t built through big speeches. It’s built through small moments repeated consistently. Small, purpose-driven rituals can reinforce team connection and reinforce values.
Consider:

A weekly “wins” Teams thread
A monthly peer-nominated award for someone who lives the company’s values
A shared moment of gratitude to kick off all-hands
These rituals remind employees: we may be in transition, but we still show up for each other.
Use Peer Feedback to Drive Real-Time Culture Development
During uncertainty, top-down feedback often falls flat. But when feedback flows laterally—peer to peer—it builds trust and agency.

Ambition In Motion’s AIM Insights platform facilitates 360° feedback loops that help leaders and employees understand how they’re perceived, and what behaviors they need to adjust.

It’s not about “scoring” culture—it’s about co-creating it in real time.

5. Tie Every Role Back to Purpose and Personal Development
When the future feels blurry, people look inward. They ask: “What am I learning? Where am I going?” Ambition In Motion’s mentoring programs and leadership tracks help employees develop personal clarity even when the organization is evolving.

Encourage your team to connect their work to their growth goals—not just company metrics. A great place to start:

“What skill do you want to master this quarter?”

“How can we align your role with where you want to be in a year?”

Culture is sustainable when it invests in people’s future—not just the company’s.

The Takeaway for Business Leaders: Lead With People, Not Just Plans

Mason didn’t save the Fortune 500 company with a rebrand or a viral campaign. He rebuilt it through trust, transparency, and human-centered leadership.

For any leader facing instability after an acquisition, a founder's exit, or internal restructuring, here’s the truth: compensation alone won’t motivate your people. In fact, the more uncertain things feel, the more employees crave purpose, connection, and clarity.

Leaders like Mason prove that when you lead with empathy and intention, even the most jarring transitions can become launchpads for something better.

BLOG

How to Manage Up to a CEO Who Oversteps

A people-pleasing CEO can be hard to navigate

People-Centric Growth: Aligning Purpose, Leadership, and Profit

Culture eats strategy for breakfast

6 Strategies to Drive Change Through Feedback

How to ensure feedback is a gift

Breaking the Whisper Network: Building Trust and Transparency in High-Performing Teams

Why we need to communicate clearly when trying to build trust

Adapting Your Number of Direct Reports for Role and Work Type

Here are some tips on how to determine how many direct reports you should have

Leading After the Layoff: How to Rebuild Culture and Trust

Overcoming survivor's guilt and charting a path for the future is critical to getting through a layoff

Six Steps to Escape the Indispensable Employee Trap

How to overcome a boss's overreliance on you is critical to achieving the professional growth you desire

How to Align Executives With Conflicting Incentives

Overcoming conflicting incentives can be hard

The Hidden Harms of Manager Over-Involvement

Micromanagement can take on many forms

5 Ways to Build Culture in a Company Without Stability

In times of chaos, people will turn to a leader for certainty

Recent Keywords

Recent Contributors