Strategy – thoughtLEADERS, LLC: Leadership Training for the Real World

3 Mistakes to Avoid When Investing Your Leadership Capital

October 7, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Career, Communications, Leadership, Strategy, Training /by Trevor Jones

I’ve seen leaders make three common mistakes when investing in their leadership capital. These mistakes hurt both their efficiency and their effectiveness.

Do you work a 40 hour week or are you working 24/7? How much effort are you putting into your work? How much stress do you experience from the energy you’re putting in? Your time and energy are finite resources. You can squeeze more time out by taking away from other activities in your life but you can’t do that forever. That time isn’t unlimited. If you squeeze out too much, bad things can happen. I’m speaking from experience here. I’ve had two heart attacks because I was spending too much time and energy with my work. Something needs to change.

To reduce the time you spend at work, reduce stress, and improve performance, you need to approach how you spend your time and energy differently. Leadership capital is the time and energy you invest in leading your team. It needs to be invested carefully like any other scarce resource. When’s the last time you assessed where you’re spending your time and energy? Who are you spending it with? How are you spending it? Are you getting the results you want from those investments? These are all questions I want you to consider as you assess how you’re spending the valuable resource of your leadership capital.

3 Leadership Capital Mistakes

I’ve seen leaders make three common mistakes when investing in their leadership capital. These mistakes hurt both their efficiency and their effectiveness.

The Peanut Butter Approach

The first mistake I see is what I call the peanut butter approach. What leaders do is give everyone on their team exactly the same amount of their time and energy. They just spread it around evenly. They do this because it feels fair to everyone. What’s wrong with this approach is not everyone needs the same amount of your time. It’s not fair to those who need less. It feels like micromanagement. It’s not fair to those who need more of your attention. They feel like they’re getting slighted for time.

The Reactive Approach

The second mistake I see is the reactive approach where leaders give people time and attention whenever they ask in the order they ask for it. Just think about a queue of people lined up outside that leader’s door knocking on the door and asking for time and attention and that leader just calls the next number in line. This mistake happens because this approach requires very little thought. What’s wrong with this approach is it fails to prioritize the leader’s time and allocate it to the most important issues. It also encourages team members to constantly take up the leader’s time rather than solving issues for themselves.

The Path of Least Resistance Approach

The third mistake is taking the path of least resistance. Leaders spend more time with people who are easiest or most fun to work with. They avoid team members who give them trouble. Leaders do this because this approach is easy. It avoids conflict. The issues with this approach include not solving issues that need to be resolved and instead dedicating time and energy to low return efforts. Spending excessive time with high performers doesn’t contribute a great deal to delivering outstanding results.

When you look at these mistakes, I’d like you to ask yourself a couple of questions. What would you do if your chief financial officer allocated budget and investment dollars this way? Do you spend your leadership capital this way? Once you know what these common mistakes are, it’s easier to avoid them and instead be more intentional about how you spend your leadership capital to get better results.

Want to learn more about leading effectively? How about taking an entire course on it? Go directly to the course and start learning how to navigate politics as a senior leader. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

4 Ways to Invest Your Leadership Capital

September 30, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Career, Communications, Leadership, Strategy, Training /by Trevor Jones

There are four major activities that will consume your leadership capital. Depending on your team, you’ll have a different mix of these activities.

There are four major activities that will consume your leadership capital. They’re directing work, doing work, delivering work and developing people:

Directing work

Directing including planning where you translate your vision into individual goals and activities. Prioritizing which is turning individual goals into team priorities. And coordinating using your position to provide broader perspective to the members of your team and help them see how their work fits into that broader picture.

Doing work

Doing is comprised of deciding where you as the leader have to make decisions that can’t be made by the members of your team. Motivating, inspiring your team members to do difficult things. And clearing, helping your team members overcome the roadblocks they’re going to face.

Delivering work

Delivering consists of monitoring where you’re tracking team progress against goals and objectives. Correcting where you’re fixing work that wasn’t done right the first time. And repairing where you’re repairing damage when mistakes are made. You’ll have to smooth over some relationships that get damaged when they make those mistakes.

Developing people

Developing includes training where you’re teaching new skills and building the capabilities of your team members. Coaching where you’re building their confidence and their capabilities by helping them understand how they need to grow. And promoting, advancing your team members’ careers by positioning them for growth.

Depending on your team, you’ll have a different mix of these activities but these activities comprise for the most part what’s expected of all good leaders.

Want to learn more about leading effectively? How about taking an entire course on it? Go directly to the course and start learning how to navigate politics as a senior leader. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

Why Leaders Must Know When Something Has Run Its Course

September 28, 2026/0 Comments/in Books, Business Toolkit, Guest Blogger, Leadership, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Learn three signs that a process, commitment, or way of working may have run its course.

Today’s post is by Marc D. Kirshbaum, author of The Eleven Primal Spaces: Awakening Next-Level Leadership By Reconnecting To What Makes Us Human.

Leadership culture has a great deal to say about endurance.

We admire the executive who remains calm when things get difficult. The manager who holds a team together through an uncertain stretch. The founder who keeps going when the odds are no longer friendly. There is good reason for that. Resilience and commitment matter. People look to leaders, especially when conditions are hard, to bring steadiness and perspective.

Still, there is a point at which endurance can become something else.

A leader may continue carrying an initiative because it has been theirs for years. A team may keep a meeting on the calendar because it has always been there. An organization may cling to a process designed for a problem that no longer exists. None of this usually happens because people are careless. More often, it happens because the familiar has a way of becoming invisible.

That is where the Tenth Primal Space, Death, enters the leadership conversation.

The Space for Death is not about being morbid or dramatic. It is about recognizing that endings are part of responsible leadership. It asks us to see when something has served its purpose, to acknowledge what it gave us, and to decide what needs to happen next.

This can be difficult because leaders are often rewarded for holding on. They rescue struggling projects, absorb work that should have been redistributed, preserve traditions long after their original meaning has faded, and postpone decisions that everyone knows are coming.

At first, this may look like strength. Sometimes it is.

But perseverance and prolonging are not the same thing. Loyalty can become avoidance. Protecting what matters can slowly turn into protecting what is merely familiar.

The question is not only, “Can we keep this going?”

It is also, “Should we?”

Here are three signs that a process, commitment, or way of working may have run its course.

1. It survives by habit, not purpose

Most organizational practices began for a good reason. They helped solve a problem, meet a need, or uphold a value. But organizations change, markets change, and people change.

When no one can explain why a meeting exists, why a decision needs six approvals, or why a particular report still gets produced, that practice may be continuing on borrowed purpose.

The issue is not that old practices are inherently bad. Some traditions are worth preserving precisely because they carry memory, trust, or a standard of care. The point is to ask whether the original purpose is still alive.

A useful leadership question is simple:

What is this still in service of?

If the answer is vague, defensive, or based entirely on the fact that “we have always done it this way,” it may be time to take a closer look.

2. It consumes energy without producing meaningful movement

Many leaders know the feeling. A commitment demands more and more attention, generates recurring frustration, and somehow still does not move the work forward.

There may be a great deal of activity, but very little progress.

Capable leaders are especially susceptible to this trap. They can compensate for unclear roles, inefficient systems, and outdated assumptions for a surprisingly long time. Because they are able to carry the burden, others may stop seeing it as a burden at all.

That is why resilience needs a companion: discernment.

The question is not whether we “can” sustain an unsustainable pattern. The question is whether our continued effort serves something meaningful.

Ask yourself:

Are we persisting because this work matters, or because we have become accustomed to carrying it?

Sometimes the most responsible decision is to continue. At other times, the more courageous move is to complete, release, or redesign.

3. No one feels able to question it

Silence can be a signal.

People often know when an approach is failing, when a relationship needs to be reset, or when a commitment no longer fits the organization’s future. They may discuss it privately, but no one brings it into the room.

Why? They may worry about appearing disloyal, negative, impatient, or insufficiently committed. They may not want to disappoint someone who created the initiative. Or they may simply believe that difficult topics are best deferred until a better moment arrives.

That better moment rarely arrives on its own.

A leader cannot make every ending painless. Some endings involve loss, uncertainty, and real consequences. But leaders can create the conditions for honest reflection. They can give people permission to examine what is no longer working without treating that examination as betrayal.

Questions worth bringing into the room include:

What are we carrying because it is familiar?

What have we outgrown?

What needs to be completed, released, or redesigned?

What deserves to be honored before we move on?

What might become possible if we made room for something new?

Letting go is not the same as abandoning responsibility. In fact, a meaningful ending often requires more responsibility, not less.

It asks leaders to preserve what should be carried forward: the learning, the relationships, the values, the stories, and the dignity of the people involved. People deserve to understand what is ending, why it is ending, what mattered about it, and what the ending may now make possible.

Without that meaning, change can feel arbitrary. With it, an ending can become an act of next-level leadership.

The strongest leaders do not chase change for its own sake. Nor do they hold on simply because releasing something feels uncomfortable. They learn to distinguish between what needs protection and what needs completion.

In a world that constantly asks us to add more, do more, and carry more, that distinction may be one of the most courageous forms of leadership we have.

Marc D. Kirshbaum is the author of The Eleven Primal Spaces: Awakening Next-Level Leadership By Reconnecting To What Makes Us Human. He has led and advised global innovators and early-stage disruptors for more than twenty-five years. As a keynote speaker, workshop leader, and board member, he helps leaders reconnect with the human capacities that make meaningful leadership possible.

For more information visit MarcKirshbaum.com.

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

3 Pitfalls to Avoid When Developing Your Team

September 23, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Entrepreneur, Leadership, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Avoid these three common pitfalls when developing your team members.

Some common pitfalls I see leaders fall into revolve around not taking a personalized approach to developing their team members.

This includes spreading your time and energy equally across all your team members. I call this the peanut butter approach. Leaders give everyone exactly the same amount of time and energy. They do this because it feels fair to everyone. What’s wrong with this approach is, not everyone needs the same amount of your time. It’s not fair to people who need less of your time. It can feel like micromanagement. It’s also not fair to people who need more of your time. They’re getting slighted on how much attention they’re getting.

Another mistake I see leaders make is using a reactive approach and dealing with issues as they arise. Leaders give people attention whenever they ask, in the order they ask for it. This happens because the approach requires little thought. What’s wrong with this approach is it fails to prioritize the leader’s time and allocate that time and energy to the most important issues. It also encourages team members to constantly take up the leader’s time rather than solving issues on their own.

The final pitfall I often see is leaders taking the path of least resistance, where they only deal with people who are performing well. They spend more time with people who are easiest or the most fun to work with. They avoid team members who give them trouble. Leaders do this because this approach is easy—it avoids conflict. The problem with this approach includes not resolving big issues. You’re dedicating time to low-return efforts. Excessive time with high performers doesn’t contribute a great deal to improving results.

To see if you’re demonstrating these behaviors, ask yourself the following questions. Are you spreading your time equally across all team members? Are you only working with high performers? Are you reacting to people as issues come up?

Once you recognize these tendencies in yourself, you can be more thoughtful about how and where you spend your time with your team members. This means you’ll get better results from that time with them in a more efficient use of that time.

Want to learn more about developing your team? How about taking an entire course on it? Check out the video below to learn more about the course and get started. Or you can go directly to the course and start learning how to assess and improve your strategic plans. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

How to Identify and Retain Domain Masters on Your Team

September 16, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Leadership, Project Management, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Your domain masters are an invaluable asset—don’t take them for granted. Do everything you can to make them happy and keep them around.

You might be lucky enough at some point to have a domain master on your team. These people are in the upper right quadrant of the leadership matrix. You don’t have to put in a lot of time and energy and you get outstanding results. Your domain masters demonstrate a long track record of consistent, outstanding performance. They’re happy in their current role. They don’t want to take on dramatically different responsibilities. They tend to be your go-to person for information and assistance on specific topics where they have deep expertise. They’re some of the most valuable assets on your team. They require very little leadership capital from you. And they consistently deliver those great results.

There are some easy ways to spot a domain master. They have a quiet confidence. They tend not to complain. They’re not usually very self-promoting about their own work. They’re self-starters. They overcome obstacles on their own. People seek out their expertise, especially when it relates to an area that this person knows a lot about. People seek to work with them. A lot of times they’re highly recruited by other teams in the organization. And most of the domain masters I know tend to have a really good work-life balance.

I had one domain master on my team who knew everything about this business unit. When we had a question, we called George. He knew everything going back 15 years in this entire business unit. He was the true expert in this space. If you’re wondering who your domain masters are and how you can identify them just ask the people on your team, “Hey, when we have a question about this topic, who do we call?” The name you get back is probably your domain master.

How to Retain Domain Masters

With domain masters, your primary goal is to retain them in the organization. Their expertise is invaluable; you don’t want them leaving. The challenge with domain masters is you tend to rely on them for a substantial share of your teams results. It can be very easy to take these people for granted. Your goal with domain masters is to retain and nurture them. Make sure they know they’re valued for their contributions. Remove obstacles that frustrate them. Make their jobs easier to do.

I had a domain master on my team, his name was George. We gave him great performance reviews. We put him up for internal rewards for the awesome job he was doing. We got him out of a noisy call center environment and put him in a much nicer office space. We also increased his autonomy and authority to do his job. I wanted George happy, I wanted to keep him around. I took action to make sure that he was happy and stayed in the organization.

The benefits of effectively leading a domain master include you keep them on your team and producing great results. You retain them for the broader organization. You become a beacon to attract other high performers to your team because they see you treat your people well. This individual can also serve as an example for the rest of your team. They can train other people who come into the team. Your domain masters are an invaluable asset—don’t take them for granted. Do everything you can to make them happy and keep them around.

Want to learn more about developing your team? How about taking an entire course on it? Check out the video below to learn more about the course and get started. Or you can go directly to the course and start learning how to assess and improve your strategic plans. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

Situational Leadership: Leaders Can Adapt Their Leadership Style to Best Suit the Needs of Their Team

September 15, 2026/4 Comments/in Books, Communications, Guest Blogger, Leadership, Strategy, Training /by Trevor Jones

Leaders are continually assessing situations and follower readiness. Situational leadership encourages leaders to be flexible and receptive to their teams’ needs.

Today’s post is by Dr. James Walsh, author of “You’re a Leader – Now What? Build Trust, Inspire Teams, Drive Results.”

My subject today is situational leadership. I have an anecdote from my book, “You’re a Leader – Now What?”(Walsh, 2026) to articulate an application. It is taken from my experience as an Air Force Commander — but is equally applicable in a corporate context.

I found myself as a Commander in charge of 500+ people. A big part of the job was to administer discipline – not a part that I relished, but a reality. My first experience came shortly after assuming Command. The military member reported formally, I put him at ease and we had a discussion about circumstances causing the disciplinary action. I had a senior noncommissioned officer present as well.

When my discussion with the offender concluded, the noncommissioned officer spoke and offered unsolicited advice. He first asked whether this had been my first experience administering discipline. I responded that as a matter of fact it was. He then said that instead of having the discussion, that I should be more directive and belittle the offender: really come on strong.

I responded with a question: “What was the result of the discussion?” He responded that the offender had been severely disciplined. I then told the noncommissioned officer that I respected his view but chose to administer discipline with my (participative) natural leadership style. My chosen leadership style better enabled understanding the offender’s side of the story and reinforced that “the punishment fit the crime.” I then became more directive with the noncommissioned officer as I advised him not to impose his leadership style onto others.

I often use the foregoing anecdote to show that we all have a natural leadership style and that we can change the style according to the situation: hence, situational leadership. Had I chosen to be more directive with the offender, I would probably have not had the understanding that I sought as the offender would probably not be as forthcoming. Yet I had no issue using the directive leadership style to the noncommissioned officer whom I felt was trying to impose his leadership style on me.

Leadership styles were often the subject of class discussions as I transitioned from my military role to university professor. Classes would typically begin with students completing an exercise to measure their natural leadership styles. A discussion of results would be caveated by the fact that leadership style is most often a judgement call. There is no “one size fits all” best leadership style: It’s largely dependent on the situation and judgement of the leader.

Situational leadership (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969) describes four distinct leadership styles: telling, selling, participating, and delegating. Each style can be used according to follower readiness. The leader decides which style is most appropriate in any given situation. If followers are unable and unwilling, the leader can be more directive (telling). Willing and able followers may get a “selling” style where the leaders are convinced that a certain course of action is best for them and in particular for the organization. For example, overtime work is necessary to sustain an organization and employee livelihoods. A participative style can be used when all contribute equally to the “solution.” A delegating style can be used when there are experts who know the job well and can be relied upon to act in the organization’s best interests.

My brief anecdote showed a situation where I chose to be participative to better understand “both sides” before coming to a fair decision based on all facts known. A conversational tone would better serve bringing out the facts. My senior noncommissioned officer disagreed and felt that I should have been more directive (telling) with a focus on intimidation. I felt that the telling style would put the military member on the defensive to his detriment: He would be hesitant to share his side of the story. My senior noncommissioned officers judgement was different from mine. His mistake was trying to impose his leadership style when it was not appropriate as there is no one best leadership style to fit all situations. There is leadership that in the judgement of the leader, most effectively “fits.” I then adapted my leadership style and became more directive with the senior noncommissioned officer.

Dr. James Walsh has held leadership positions in the U.S. Air Force for over 44 years, both in military and civilian capacities at the Pentagon. Concurrently, he has taught leadership and management courses at colleges and universities in the U.S., Europe, and the Far East.

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

How to Identify Rising Stars on Your Team

September 9, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Leadership, Project Management, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Rising stars are quick to understand their roles, they deliver outstanding results, and they require very little guidance.

Your team members who are in the upper right quadrant of the leadership matrix are your exemplars. One type of exemplar is your rising star. Rising stars are your future leaders. They’re eventually going to be taking over your role. These people require very little leadership capital investment, and they deliver great results. They’re typically quick to understand their roles, they deliver outstanding results, and they require very little guidance or assistance from you as they do their work. They actively seek out new growth opportunities.

There are some pretty easy ways to spot a rising star. First, they make a strong early impression. You put them in the role and they’re on their way. They’re dedicated, they have a strong sense of pride of ownership in their work. They quickly master their role and deliver high-quality results. They’re always seeking out new ways to improve their role, as well as pursuing growth opportunities to improve themselves. They volunteer and help out other people, and a lot of times people from other organizations are going to try and recruit these people away from your team.

I was very fortunate to have a rising star on my team at one point. I brought him in to run one of my business units. One of the first things he did was say, “Mike, give me a couple of weeks. I’m going to come back to you with the strategic plan.” Two weeks later, he came back with a very buttoned-up strategic plan that laid out the next three years, the major initiatives he was going to pursue, and the resource allocation for how he was going to get it done. He then went on to build very strong relationships with every member of his team, as well as the external business partners he worked with. I knew for this individual I could step back, not put in a lot of time and energy, and just get out of his way and let him deliver those outstanding results.

If you have a rising star on your team, make sure you spot them early and give them the space to grow and deliver the results that you expect.

Want to learn more about developing your team? How about taking an entire course on it? Check out the video below to learn more about the course and get started. Or you can go directly to the course and start learning how to assess and improve your strategic plans. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

Disciplined Nonprofit Growth Strategies and the Fear of Identity Loss

September 1, 2026/0 Comments/in Books, Guest Blogger, Leadership, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Nonprofits, particularly those in the human services sector, often shy away from expansion. There are several explanations for their hesitation.

Today’s post is by Ryan Dewey Smith, author of Sustaining the Mission: Building a Billion-Dollar Nonprofit Network by Rewriting the Rules of Partnership.

Nonprofits, particularly those in the human services sector, often shy away from expansion. There are several explanations for their hesitation. Likely the biggest reason they are reluctant to grow is because so many are already operating on a wing and a prayer. I spend a great deal of time studying the balance sheets of nonprofits. A frightening number are one crisis away from closing. One lawsuit, one shift in government policy, one loss of a major grant or donor can be enough to bring an undisciplined nonprofit down. When you’re barely making it, it’s not surprising that the idea of growing feels impossible.

In what may seem to be the opposite line of reasoning, another frequent hesitation against growth—or at least one I encounter regularly—is a nonprofit’s fear of losing its identity. Rather than finding growth ludicrous, some find it undesirable, as if they would lose what is familiar, even when the familiar is unsustainable. Essentially the premise is that “We’re so good at what we do, we don’t want to risk the identity we have successfully created.” If an organization has a recognizable identity in the communities they serve, a positive reputation for accomplishing their mission, and a proven record of sustainable revenue, then perhaps they are appropriately sized. Organizations that meet this description are rare, and the leaders of such entities have no reason to be reading this article or others like it. The majority of nonprofits, however, including those with clear identities and solid reputations for successful programs, are small, and that small size is a liability when it comes to long-term sustainability or when facing turbulent economic periods. Yet disciplined growth does not have to risk identity. In fact, the right kind of growth should enhance identity and allow an organization to reach more people.

Which begs the question: What is organizational identity? A lot of identity is wrapped up in perception, both self-perception and the perception of those served and in the larger community. To be healthy, alignment must exist between those inside an organization and those outside of it. Is an entity’s vision of itself accurate? Is it in tune with its current circumstances? If not, then the “identity” we defensively wish to preserve may be a fiction of our own making or one lingering from the past. Too often I encounter legacy organizations that still view themselves through the lens of past accomplishments. The small nonprofit serving a finite niche population fifty years ago now inhabits a nationwide population that has grown by nearly 60 percent. Demand has outstripped supply. Moreover, those nonprofits serving populations like the homeless, the mentally ill, or those seeking help recovering from substance abuse have witnessed significant increases in demand for services with shifting societal and economic patterns. The more frayed the social fabric becomes, the more uncertain the world appears, the more people succumb to forces working against them or break under the strain of anxiety. The world changes, and nonprofits must change with it. What was once a critical community need may no longer exist. Populations move. Solutions arrive. We understand more about root causes.

The result for most nonprofits? Not growing isn’t an option.

When exploring notions of identity, it is imperative that every nonprofit regularly interrogate its motivations. One downside of doing good is that our vision can become myopic. We can become enamored with small successes just as easily as we can become mired in small failures. Too often a sense of organizational identity gets wrapped up in either of those extremes. If a sense of identity becomes the primary goal, then we’ve lost sight of mission. Caring about identity is healthy, and it can help prevent mission creep, but our focus must be steadily on increasing the impact we can have on the lives of those we serve.

When we keep that focus steady, the metrics by which we measure success (and identity for that matter) change. In such a scenario, a starting question is: Are we best positioned to meet the needs of those we serve? When answered honestly, this opens other questions. Are other organizations doing our work better? Can we partner with others and improve lives? Have we learned enough about the population we serve that we should shift the emphasis of our programming? Have we become less efficient? Are we spending limited finances on the wrong things?

When we ask these kinds of questions, it positions us to then see the idea of disciplined growth differently. The key word here is “disciplined.” What’s our strategy? Why are we employing it? Many nonprofit leaders have a reactionary vision of growth, one that is limited to traditional mergers and acquisitions. When that’s the case, it’s easy to understand why they fear losing their organizational identity. But if we think about strategic growth differently and focus on increasing our impact, we can wear entrepreneurial hats and imagine new kinds of relationships where organizations can pool resources or consolidate administrative functions in ways that expand their reach. Organizations that offer support to one another by recognizing their individual strengths. Leaders who turn to one another to find expertise and counsel. This kind of innovation applies the discipline required to grow smartly and effectively. And when an organization sets itself up for sustained continuation of its mission, when it reaches more people in need, well then it has developed an identity for which it should be rightfully proud.

Ryan Dewey Smith is CEO and Founding Executive Chairman of Inperium, a nonprofit platform helping health and human service organizations grow sustainably through affiliation. He has built one of the largest and most innovative affiliation models in the United States, serving thousands across behavioral health, child welfare, and other vital services. His upcoming book (September 22), Sustaining the Mission, shares practical strategies for leaders on how to scale with speed while protecting the mission at the center of their organizations.

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

Solving Business Problems: Make Assertions and Recommendations

August 26, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Career, Communications, Leadership, Sales, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

No matter how good your problem solving is, if you can’t come up with a clear recommendation that’s compelling to your stakeholders, it’s all been for naught.

The last step in the problem solving process is coming up with a clear and concise recommendation. And I like to say you need to make assertions. Assertions are nothing more than facts stated to persuade.

I’ve used this method of making assertions with a telecom replacement project where we were going to replace all of the phone systems across our entire division. It was going to cost $4 million. That’s what I was going to the stakeholders asking for. I needed to make my case, so I put together my set of facts and my set of assertions to make that case and was successful in doing so. And you can do the same thing.

Now with assertions, you’re going to run into resistance. Your task is to overcome that resistance. The key to getting your idea supported is having the right set of facts and articulating them in a manner that’s going to be compelling to your audience. So, the most common types of resistance you’re going to hear, and I bet you’ve heard some of these things already in your past experience, are:

“Well, that’ll never work.” Well, bring assertions and facts that show it has worked somewhere else, perhaps in a different business unit or even one of your competitors.

You may hear, “Well it’s too expensive.” The assertions you need to bring to table are ones around the cost benefit analysis of making your recommendation.

You may find somebody says, “Well our customers won’t buy it.” You can build assertions and facts to support it by going and surveying customers or doing a small pilot in the market and gathering data from that.

Sometimes you’ll hear, “Well we don’t like any of the options that you’ve presented.” That’s my personal favorite, and that one feels like it’s really hard to overcome. The easiest way to overcome it is show them the cost of doing nothing. Show them the cost of letting your competitors continue to penetrate the market while you sit there on your hands. It can be a very compelling set of facts to pull together.

So as you’re thinking about your assertions and your recommendations, I want you to think about the recommendation you’re trying to make and what the right set of facts are that you need to pull together to compel your audience. I want you to think of some of these types of resistance you’re going to encounter and how you’re going to overcome it because there’s always a counterpoint to every point they’re going to make.

The real trick is making sure that you have the right of facts and a powerful assertion to overcome that resistance in front of you.

Want to learn more about solving business problems? How about taking an entire course on it? Go directly to the course and start learning how to solve business problems. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

Flexibility Is the New Office Perk: Why Employees Want Choice More Than Free Coffee

August 24, 2026/0 Comments/in Balanced Lifestyle, Guest Blogger, Innovation, Leadership, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

The organizations that succeed are often not the ones who offer the fanciest offices and biggest benefits. They are the ones that are willing to adapt to the changing needs of their employees.

Today’s post is by Jamie Sieja, Vice President of Marketing, Flex HR

Companies are continuously competing to attract the right talent with office perks. Whether it be catered lunches, gym memberships, or coffee bars these are all symbols of a great workplace. While these perks may be nice to have, they are no longer perks that that employees value the most.

In fact, today’s workforce place value on something a lot more meaningful: flexibility.

Over the past few years, workplace flexibility has changed dramatically, and employees who have experienced diverse ways of working have seen that they can be just as productive while still enjoying a healthy balance between their personal lives and careers.

This has resulted in flexibility being looked at as one of the most important aspects that potential employees consider when deciding whether to join or even stay with a company.

Organizations that recognize this are not just responding to employee demands, but instead building stronger, more engaged, and more resilient teams.

Flexibility Means Different Things to Different People

There is often a misconception that flexible work means only working from home, but in reality, the term “flexibility” looks different for every employee and organization.

Some may see it as starting work earlier so that they can pick their children up from school. For another it may mean working remotely a few days a week to avoid several hours of commuting.

The key is not about creating one universal policy. It is about understanding what flexibility means for your employees.

Employees Want Balance, Not Less Accountability

Many leaders worry that flexibility can turn into lower productivity or less accountability, but the opposite is often true.

Employees who are able to better control their schedules often become more engaged because they have the chance to work around life’s demands instead of feeling like the two are in conflict.

It is important to realize that employees do not stop being professional because they are working somewhere different. In fact, employees are often more productive since they can work in environments that allow them to do their best work.

Commuting Is not Just Inconvenient—It is Exhausting

Employees often regard the elimination of lengthy commutes as one of the most immediate benefits when discussing remote work. In many cases, traveling to and from work is not just an inconvenience, it represents time each week that could be spent with family, exercising, learning new skills, or simply recharging.

This does not mean that all organizations should be fully remote. It simply means that while many roles benefit enormously from face-to-face collaboration, giving employees the chance to work remotely when needed can significantly improve both morale and productivity.

Hybrid Work Offers the Best of Both Worlds

Hybrid work has become a practical solution for many organizations, and when implemented properly, give employees the flexibility that they need, while preserving the collaboration and relationship-building that naturally happens when people spend time together.

Organizations often make the mistake of giving employees unlimited flexibility without giving them clear expectations. This may sound appealing, but it can cause a lot of confusion, especially when employees arrive at the office only to find out that the colleagues they need to collaborate with are not there.

Flexibility works best when it is structured, and successful hybrid workplaces can establish consistent office days so teams know when collaboration will happen. Make sure that you clearly outline your hybrid policy in the Employee Handbook so that this is well documented for your workforce.

Communication Matters More Than Location

Communication is central to whether employees work remotely, in the office, or somewhere in between, as it is the foundation of a successful workplace. Workplace management often assumes that when work is flexible, there will be communication challenges, but more often, flexibility simply highlights communication issues that already existed.

Employees need to be given clear expectations, regular check-ins, and the technology needed to work in flexible environments. This includes virtual office hours, regular online team meetings, collaborative platforms, and recognition programs to make sure that employees stay connected no matter where they are working from.

Perhaps even more importantly, is that leaders must actively listen.

Organizations often assume that employees would prefer additional paid leave, only to discover that what they really need is better flexibility when it comes to managing their schedules.

The solution was not offering more benefits—it was giving employees more choices.

Flexibility Builds Loyalty

While recruiting efforts have become exceptionally competitive, retaining employees can sometimes be even more challenging. This is because employees have more options than ever before.

Salaries will always be important, but there are many professionals who would rather choose to work for an organization what gives greater flexibility and places emphasis on employee wellbeing instead of those offering higher pay with more rigid schedules.

Employees who feel respected, supported, and trusted are far more likely to remain committed to their employer because flexibility communicates trust. Employees know that they are valued for the work that they produce rather than the number of hours that they are physically in the office. And in fact, when given the opportunity to work remotely, we are seeing that individuals are working more hours and checking in more frequently.

That trust often inspires employees to give their best in return.

The Future of Work Is Built Around People

As the workplace continues to change and evolve, organizations that succeed are often not the ones who offer the fanciest offices and biggest benefits. They are the ones that are willing to adapt to the changing needs of their employees.

In essence, flexibility is not about abandoning accountability or lowering standards. It is about understanding that good employees have lives that extend beyond work and the willingness to create an environment in which they can thrive without sacrificing their personal well-being.

Because at the end of the day, the best workplace perk is not free lunch or a games room. It is giving people the flexibility to do great work while living a full life.

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

The Five-Step Business Problem-Solving Process

August 19, 2026/0 Comments/in Business Toolkit, Leadership, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Have you ever had a business problem that you’re not sure how to solve? This five step problem-solving process is a great place to start.

At one point, I worked with a financial services firm, and we had this really cool program that, when we first launched it, was doing really well, both from a customer standpoint and from a financial standpoint. The problem came up when, all of the sudden, the financial numbers started tanking, and everybody started freakin’ out. We didn’t know what was going on, and it was pretty important for me to solve it because it was a program I was responsible for. So given the complexity of that problem, I used the five-step problem-solving process, and the steps of the process are really simple and straightforward.

In the first step, you pin the problem. You define what the issue is, what the goals of the stakeholders are, what previous efforts looked like, and you come out of that first step with a really clear definition of what the problem is. You can’t just rush ahead into solving a problem if you don’t know what the issue is.

Next is identifying all the issues that could be contributing to that problem. A lot of times, at first glance, you may say that’s the issue, but you’ll find, if you go through the process from there, you’re really solving a symptom. So this step of creating a logic map helps you expand what all the possible issues are that are contributing to the problem from the first step, and what that’ll enable you to do is find the real root cause that you’re going to solve for.

The third step of the process is identifying your best guess. So once you have all those issues listed out, starting to identify small solutions that could solve each of those and then prioritizing your efforts because you don’t have time, I don’t have time to go out and chase every single one of these solutions. So this step is really about homing in on that’s the one solution that seems like it could be the biggest, and we’re going to chase that one first.

The fourth step of the process is taking that one idea, that one hypothesized answer, and then doing your analysis. If your organization is anything like the ones I’ve been part of, you need a lot of data and a lot of support to take these big ideas and prove your case. So this fourth step of the process is doing that analysis, getting that in-depth information to say yes, that’s really what’s causing this, and that is the size of the prize.

The fifth step of the problem-solving process is taking that answer, turning it into a recommendation, and pitching it to your stakeholders. You have to convince people that this is the right answer, and the resources I’m asking for to go out and solve it are resources you should give me because I’ve proven my case.

So with that financial services firm, we walked through that five-step problem-solving process. We found the root cause. We found what the issue really was, and it wasn’t what we initially thought, and we were able to prove that case with analysis, make the recommendation to our stakeholders, and make the required changes and financial performance turnaround, and everybody was happy with the result because we used that five-step process.

So as I go through this course, what I recommend is you pick a business problem you’re trying to solve. Pick something you haven’t been able to crack before, something that’s ambiguous and confusing, and then apply the five steps of the problem-solving process to your problem, and hopefully, on the back end, you’ll come out with a clear, concise recommendation that’s really going to be the solution.

Want to learn more about solving business problems? How about taking an entire course on it? Go directly to the course and start learning how to solve business problems. The entire course is available at LinkedIn Learning. Enjoy!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!

The Great Lie: Why Teams Don’t Exist in Business

August 17, 2026/3 Comments/in Books, Business Toolkit, Guest Blogger, Leadership, Strategy /by Trevor Jones

Shared goals are anathema in business. The ultimate individual sport: raises, rankings, promotions, every person for themselves.

Today’s post is by Larry Coval, author of the forthcoming book Misled: Why (Almost) Everything You Learned About Leadership Is Wrong and How to Fix It (Girl Friday Productions, September 2026).

I remember thinking how wrong he was. My boss had just finished an emotionally charged speech about how the team (him, me, my peers) could achieve the bigger goal. “Come on, team! We can do this if we all pull together!” So we’re clear, the bigger goal was his sales target for the quarter. Whether he made or missed his goal had no impact on us. We were all paid on our own performance against individual, quantifiable objectives.

There was a corporate-wide contest for the top 20 salespeople and I was determined to be among that group. Deep down, because we were competing for cash awards, I was kind of hoping that my “teammates” didn’t outperform me. I actually hoped they had some struggles, making my path to the top a bit easier.

Now, I generally liked my peers. But calling us a team? That was not the case at all. In fact, it couldn’t have been further from the truth. And everyone knew it.

Unfortunately, our boss always led that way. Team goals, team development, team performance. As a result, he never gave us any individualized coaching, development or career planning, so it should come as no surprise that people on his “team” struggled, some more than others. His ‘rah rah’ motivational speeches had zero impact on our performance. His egregious error was mischaracterizing what our collective really was. We were more like independent contractors than a team. A group of people who just happened to report to the same person and shared a Wi-Fi password.

So what actually makes a team a team? First, you must have a common goal. For instance, when your local fire department is called to go tackle a house fire, they have one goal. Put out the fire as quickly as possible with minimal loss of life and property. Nothing competes with it. Nothing distracts from it. Simple, clear, unifying. Try finding that kind of clarity in a Tuesday staff meeting.

Another defining characteristic of a team is the interdependency of the work and how each role must be performed successfully so that the other roles can do the same. The best examples of that come from sports. In football, each play has players in distinct roles performing unique functions and, for that play to be successful, each must execute their function adroitly. Even one player’s failure to do what is expected of them, run the wrong route, block the wrong player, deliver the ball late, can cause catastrophe. That’s interdependency. And it’s also another workplace fairy tale. A story leaders tell so you’ll see their goals as though they’re your own.

Maybe the most difficult thing about real teams to replicate in business is the idea of personal sacrifice for the greater good. My brain always goes to the men and women who wear the uniforms of our armed forces. Specifically, those specialized units like SEALs, Rangers, Delta Force. These people go on the most dangerous missions in the most daunting circumstances, and each one of them is prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice to ensure the mission’s success.

These distinctive things that we attribute exclusively to teams weren’t present in any of the business environments that I was exposed to. In almost four decades working at several companies in different roles and levels, I never saw it.

Shared goals are anathema in business. The ultimate individual sport: raises, rankings, promotions, every person for themselves. Interdependency? My success never depended on anyone else’s. It depended on me. Personal sacrifice for a common goal never came up. Not once. Not in a single meeting I ever sat in.

Just admit it. TEAMS DON’T EXIST IN BUSINESS.

And yet, everyone keeps saying we work in teams. It’s deception. Worse still, all the popular business leadership books have been written about teams. Their wisdom, their dysfunctions. The same goes for coaching programs, keynotes, and everything else the Leadership Industrial Complex has been selling for the last 30 years. Using the wrong unit of analysis has only set leaders up for failure.

So, it’s no wonder that the current state of the global workplace is so disheartening. And it certainly helps explain why the workplace survey data is as damning as it is. Gallup’s most recent data puts the global cost of disengagement at $10 trillion. DDI found only 29% of employees trust their manager. It’s because we’ve been taught to broadly lead the collective instead of focusing on each individual, enabling them to reach their performance ceiling. Yes, it’s more difficult. Yes, it means seeing each group member for who they are and what they can accomplish. And yes, it requires a reset on what makes a capable, effective leader. But it also has the benefit of being the right way to lead.

Leaders who coach and develop individuals well don’t get people quietly competing in a vacuum. Their people push each other’s performance bar higher, and real collaboration surfaces exactly when it’s needed, not because they’re told to be. That’s not a team. It’s something sturdier, and far more productive.

But the authors and keynote carnies know that style sells better than substance. So, it’s easy to see why the romanticized idea of ‘teams’ drowns out the fact that we actually work in groups. The word “team” evokes visions of the ‘Miracle on Ice’ or a ‘Band of Brothers (and Sisters).’ Saying “Go Team!” sounds better than “Go Group!” The word “team” just feels better. And even though they know it’s wrong, the Leadership Industrial Complex continues to sell emotionally theatrical words and platitudes instead of the hard, gritty words and skills that business leaders need in the modern workplace.

So maybe “group” doesn’t roll off the tongue like the other word or conjure up visions of your high school sports glory days. So what? When we use the right words and do the right things for our people, they’re significantly more successful. And so is the group. As leaders, what’s more important than that?

Larry Coval is a veteran executive with nearly four decades of experience leading organizations ranging from startups to billion-dollar operations across companies including AT&T, Global Crossing, and Cox Business. Throughout his career, he has transformed underperforming organizations, developed high-performing leaders, and built a reputation for challenging conventional leadership wisdom. He is the author of the forthcoming book Misled: Why (Almost) Everything You Learned About Leadership Is Wrong and How to Fix It (Girl Friday Productions, September 2026).

Did you enjoy this post? If so, I highly encourage you to take about 30 seconds to become a regular subscriber to this blog. It’s free, fun, practical, and only a few emails a week (I promise!). SIGN UP HERE to get the thoughtLEADERS blog conveniently delivered right to your inbox!