A senior leadership team (SLT) in a small-to-medium-sized organisation was struggling. On the surface, there were signs of strain: underperformance, absenteeism, low morale, and a lack of clear delegation or decision-making authority. The Board had begun to raise concerns—not just about outcomes, but about the leadership team’s ability to function as a cohesive unit. Despite earlier attempts at leadership development, the team remained stuck. They had grown used to working around the dysfunction, but it was now affecting service delivery and organisational stability.
What became clear was that the presenting problems—poor performance, ineffective management, and individual disengagement—were symptoms of something deeper. There was a fragmentation in how the leadership team operated, with a lack of psychological safety to name difficult issues. there was also little shared understanding of the purpose or strategy of the SLT, low accountability and poor follow-through, and gaps in foundational leadership skills and confidence. This left unspoken dynamics festering beneath the surface. The Board wanted to understand what was really going on—and how to make informed decisions about how to support or restructure the team.
We introduced a systemic team coaching process that brought together both behavioural insights and system-level diagnosis. Key steps included an initial Team RQ diagnostic with the team to explore strengths, tensions, and patterns of interaction and development of a relational map to understand how the leadership team functioned within its wider organisational context. Team coaching sessions included a combination of facilitated conversations to surface “stuck points” in communication, performance, and alignment; development that focused on rebuilding trust, clarifying roles, and developing basic management capabilities. The team took time to reflect on how wider organisational dynamics—including historical relationships and unspoken assumptions—were shaping the team’s behaviours. Importantly, the process created a psychologically safe container for the team and its stakeholders to have more honest, useful conversations—without blame or scapegoating.
This systemic approach helped to move the conversation from individual blame to collective responsibility. The Board gained a clearer, more grounded understanding of:
- The interlocking causes of dysfunction (not just symptoms)
- What was realistic to expect from the current SLT
- Where to focus future development and structural changes
The team itself began to name previously unspoken patterns, work more collaboratively, and take steps towards more functional leadership behaviours. While not all team members remained in place long term, the organisation was able to make leadership decisions from a place of greater insight, compassion, and clarity.