EN | FR
Published May 20, 2026
He was good at his job. Really good. In 15 years in IT leadership, he had delivered every project, solved every problem, kept every team on track. He was the person who had the answer. Always.
So when the feedback came — that he was too directive, that his team felt they couldn't contribute, that collaboration wasn't his strong suit — he didn't know what to do with it. Not because he didn't care. Because he had never needed a roadmap for this kind of work before.
He came to coaching a few weeks after a 360 review. The feedback had been direct: his leadership style was shutting people down. Team members didn't feel heard. In meetings, he moved fast to solutions before others had a chance to weigh in. His intentions were good — he wanted results, he wanted efficiency — but the impact didn't match the intent.
He knew it was real. He just didn't know where to start.
The instinct for a lot of high performers in this situation is to try harder. To be more deliberate in meetings. To remind themselves to pause. But vague intention doesn't create lasting change. And for someone whose entire identity was built on competence and certainty, being told to "just listen more" felt both obvious and completely unhelpful.
We started by slowing down the feedback itself. Not to analyse it to death, but to get specific. "Too directive" is a label. It's not a behaviour. So we asked: what does directive actually look like, in his specific context? In which meetings? With which people? In what kinds of decisions?
That specificity mattered. Because once we could name the actual moments, we could build something concrete around them.
He identified three recurring situations where the pattern showed up most: his weekly team stand-up, technical scoping sessions with his direct reports, and cross-functional meetings with stakeholders from outside IT. Each one had a different dynamic. Each one needed a slightly different approach.
From there, we built a simple set of behavioral shifts. Not a personality overhaul, not a new communication framework to memorize. Practical moves he could try, notice, and adjust. He chose one person on his team to check in with regularly, someone he trusted to give him honest, ongoing input. Not a formal feedback loop. Just a real one.
About six weeks in, he said something I hear often at this stage: "I didn't realize how much space I was taking up."
He wasn't beating himself up. He was just seeing it clearly for the first time. And that clarity changed how he walked into a room.
He started holding back his first instinct in meetings — not permanently, not forever, but long enough to see what emerged. His team started contributing more. Not because they suddenly felt empowered by a memo, but because he had actually created space.
Three months later, his manager commented on the shift without being prompted. The team noticed too. He didn't become a different person. He became a more effective version of who he already was.
We identified the specific situations where the pattern showed up, not a general trait to fix.
We built two or three concrete behavioral moves for each situation.
He chose one trusted person to give him real-time, ongoing feedback.
We built in checkpoints every few weeks to review what was working and adjust.
No workshop. No personality test. No vague commitment to "be more collaborative." A real plan, built around his actual context.
Awareness is not the same as change. He already knew something was off before the 360. The feedback confirmed it. But knowing and doing are two different things — especially when you've spent your whole career being rewarded for moving fast and having the answer.
The work wasn't about fixing a flaw. It was about building a skill he had never needed to build before. And like any skill, it got better with practice, feedback, and a clear target.