About the Unscripted series:
These are fictional coaching conversations — invented scenarios that illustrate patterns I encounter in real work. No real client is depicted. The coaching responses are mine: word for word what I would say in the room.
He came in with a business problem.
His team was sandbagging forecasts. Two senior directors, three quarters in a row, calling 60% and closing at 95%. He’d addressed it in forecast reviews. Called it out directly. Asked them to explain the gap. Nothing changed.
“I know because I can read a pipeline,” he said. “When someone closes at 95% three quarters in a row after calling 60%, that’s not conservatism. That’s hedging.”
I asked him if he’d had one-on-one conversations with either of them about it.
A pause.
“I’ve addressed it in forecast reviews. Called it out directly.”
“One-on-one conversations specifically about the behavior?”
“…Not really, no.”
So I asked him why.
Another pause, longer this time.
“I assumed the message was clear. I said it in the room. They heard it.”
And then, without much prompting: “I guess if I’m being straight with you… I’m not great at conversations where I don’t know how they’re going to go. In a forecast review I control the agenda. In that other conversation I don’t.”
There it was.
Not a forecasting problem. A control problem.
I asked him a simple question: in other relationships — professional or personal — is trust high when control is also high?
He didn’t hesitate.
“No. You can’t really have both. If I’m controlling the conversation, the other person is just performing in it. They’re not actually in it.”
He paused.
“My wife would have a lot to say about this conversation right now.”
By the time we finished, he’d named his own pattern: he substitutes control for trust, and then wonders why people hedge. His directors aren’t sandbagging because they’re weak. They’re sandbagging because the environment rewards self-protection over honesty.
He built that environment. Not maliciously. Rather, as a byproduct of every forecast review: where he controlled the agenda and left no room for a real conversation.
The fix isn’t a better forecast process. It’s a harder conversation: one he can’t prepare for, can’t control, and has been avoiding.
What I noticed in this session:
The presenting problem was external: my team is doing something wrong. The real problem was internal: I don’t trust people enough to let them surprise me.
This is one of the most common patterns I see in high-performing leaders. They’re excellent at execution, at systems, at holding people accountable. They’ve gotten where they are by being the most prepared person in the room. But preparation and control start to look the same after a while. And control, at scale, quietly poisons trust.
The moment that mattered wasn’t when he identified the problem. It was when he stopped pointing outward and pointed the finger back at himself. That’s where the real work begins.
If you’re a leader with a high-performing team that should be performing higher and you keep finding reasons it’s on them, this work might be for you.
Read the Comments +