alignment Archive - The Art of Communicating

Why your best people leave (and what would make them stay)

You’ve built a great place to work. What more do they want?

With your bold purpose the company should inspire them. They should appreciate the stability, the freedom, the growth paths. They should see how many extra miles leadership goes to “create belonging.”

It’s super unfair, isn’t it? On paper, your team really should love working here.

Plus, in the end, it’s also a professional agreement.

Which it is. But professional agreements don’t override human nature.

The thing is, loyalty is not persuaded. It’s felt. It needs to resonate.

And yet, most companies do exactly that: they try to persuade people to stay. With ever more shoulds.

But how does resonance look like?

Patagonia is a great example. Their founder, Yvon Chouinard knew that if the surf is up, a surfer cannot focus on a spreadsheet. No matter how fair the salary is, their mind is out in the water.

That’s why he didn’t come with ever more good reasons why being in the company should be what employees want. Instead, he leaned into the reality of who his people actually were.

He wrote the policy that became a legend: “Let my people go surfing.”

He realized that if people can live the life they love, you don’t have to bargain for their attention. They would bring that energy back to the work. They would get the job done, not because they should, but because the work allowed them to be themselves.

Loyalty doesn’t follow should. It follows would.

Especially if you ask it like this: Why would they never want to work anywhere else?

That question isn’t answered by a checklist of everything your company does right. It requires understanding what kind of people your employees are.

But don’t get distracted by Patagonia’s mission of saving the planet. It draws people. But my point is independent of their mission: It draws the kind of people who would feel out of place anywhere else.

They wouldn’t want to work for a company with lower environmental standards.

Your people might be different. Maybe they wouldn’t want to work for a place with lower quality standards. Or with lower ambition. Or with lower pay.

It may not be your people, but these people are who they are and they stay where they don’t have to compromise.

Now, this is not about bending backwards. It’s about knowing who you’re unmistakably right for. The clearer you can articulate what kind of person will want to do their best work for you, the stronger you can resonate with them.

And when they come, they will likely stay.

Do you know who is the perfect fit for your company?
Why they wouldn’t want to work anywhere else?

And can you articulate it?

Keep lighting the path,
Michael

PS: My newest essay on “What the Best Leaders Say” digs much deeper on this and explores how to shift from “How do we keep them?” to “Who are we built for?” and why that single question changes the entire game.

What matters today

If your team works hard but it never seems to add up to real progress, chances are you’re skipping one small but crucial step.

Before your first meeting, write down in one sentence what truly matters today.

Just one.

Then, when the meeting starts, say it out loud.

“Here’s what matters most today…”

That’s it. That’s the whole move.

It sounds naive. But it’s a true game changer.

Most teams drift because everyone assumes they know what matters, but no one actually says it out loud. They dive straight into tasks and updates, and everyone leaves with a slightly different picture in their head.

But the moment you name the point, you align attention. You give people a direction to aim for. You make the next step obvious.

This is not about inspiring speeches or grand visions. It’s simply about a clear direction, spoken out loud, before the debates begin.

Try that this week. Start each meeting by reminding everyone of the PATH you’re on.

It will change how people show up for the work.

Keep lighting the path,
Michael

What if they’re just flat-out wrong?

Not kind of wrong. Not “we see things differently” wrong.
Flat-out, factually, objectively wrong.

Do you still have to listen? Do you still have to “align”?

This is where most people dig in.

When you know you’re right, and the facts are on your side, it feels ridiculous, almost irresponsible, to entertain their perspective.

So you push harder. You stack up logic, dismantle their argument, walk them, step by step, to the only reasonable conclusion.

And yet…

They still don’t budge.

Because here’s what we get wrong about being right:
If logic won arguments, you wouldn’t be having this one.

People don’t accept the truth just because it’s true.
They accept it when it stops feeling like a threat.

When you make them feel like they’re losing, even if you’re right, they’ll hold on even tighter.

So, what do you do?

Do you just let them be wrong? Do you sit there and nod along?

Not at all. But you do something counterintuitive:

You remove the need for them to defend themselves.

Because when you put someone in a position where admitting they’re wrong feels like a loss, they won’t do it.

Instead, you light them a path that doesn’t feel like surrender.

Instead of “That’s incorrect.” → Try “How did you come to that conclusion?”
Instead of “The data shows otherwise.” → Try “What would need to be true for that to work?”
Instead of “You need to change your mind.” → Try “What part of this doesn’t sit right with you?”

Because the moment it feels like a battle, they stop thinking.

But when you give them a door instead of a wall, they might just walk through.

What started as a fight about who is right is now a path to getting it right.

And when that happens?
You don’t have to win the argument.

Because now, there is no argument.
There’s a conversation.

Keep lighting the path.

Why the wrong approach feels so right (until it fails)

When people push back on your idea, what do you do?
You try harder. At least I did. But it backfired …

When my message wasn’t landing, I explained it again, added another detail, tweaked the wording once more.

And it felt good. Like I was in control of who’s right and who’s wrong. My effort meant I was making progress in proving it. Only that I wasn’t. I often made it worse.

Like so many others, I fell for the illusion of control:
(Over-)explaining → felt like clarity, but drowned out the point.
(Over-)crafting → felt like sharpening, but smoothed out what made it real.
(Over-)persuading → felt like getting closer to winning them over, but created distance.

The more I tried to control the conversation, the less control I actually had:
More detail = less convincing.
More refinement = less authentic.
More persuasion = more resistance.

And so, instead of making progress, I brought up people’s defenses. No one likes to be proved wrong, let alone being wrong.

Once I saw this, I saw it everywhere: By trying to force my angle, I was actually making it harder to align with.

Instead of, you know, making it easy to align with.

For example, instead of
… perfecting your words, you could listen for the ones they use.
… persuading, you could connect to what already makes sense to them.
… saying more, you could make what you say unmistakably clear.

All of this invites people to bring down their defenses. Which means you can stop persuading because you resonate.

How do you handle it when people resist your angle?

Keep lighting the path!

__
PS: My new workbook “How to Say It So It Matters” contains powerful prompts to guide you there. Free for owners of “The PATH to Strategic Impact”, or just $5 for everyone else.

That was almost too easy

When meetings go smoothly, it’s a strong hint they’re a waste of time.

I mean, smooth meetings feel great.

Thanks to your polished arguments decisions are made in record time and you walk out thinking, “That went well.”

Until nothing happens and you realize that this was perhaps a little too easy.

It took a fair amount of frustration until I realized that the meetings that actually lead to progress mostly don’t feel smooth.

They feel awkward.

→ Like that heavy silence after someone asks a question no one wants to answer.
→ Like the tension when two people disagree, and you’re not sure how to get things back on track.
→ Like the frustration of circling around an issue that just won’t click into place.

It’s messy.
And it feels like a problem.

But it’s not.
It’s the work.

Uncomfortable? Yes. But that’s the work.

I often call it the trap of eloquence: When your communication is so polished that it silences the dissent. It might get you a convenient quick “yes”.

But it’s often the slow “yes”, the common alignment that provides the breakthrough.

Clarity isn’t born from convenience.
It comes from wrestling with ideas.
From tension that forces people to thoroughly think it through, not just quickly agree.

In short: from questions that don’t have neat answers.

That’s why I get suspicious when everything goes too smoothly.
When that happens, I like to ask: “Did we really align or did we just avoid the mess?”

If it felt a little too easy, chances are you’ve still got work to do. That’s not a failure. It’s an opportunity to dig deeper, ask better questions, go to the messy places. It’s perhaps less convenient, but far more likely that this is where we find what really matters.

What’s your experience with meetings that went suspiciously smooth?

Keep lighting the path.

PS: Of course, sometimes it is that easy. But it’s the exception, not the norm.

The slow “yes”

If no one pushes back, your idea might be in trouble.
I didn’t realize this for a long time.

When people nod, say “yes,” and don’t push back, it feels like you’ve done your job.

“They get it.”

Except… they don’t.
(Because if they did, you wouldn’t need to keep checking.)

I’ve been in meetings where everyone agreed.
And then nothing happened.
No follow-through.
No real commitment.
Just polite nods collecting dust.

The problem is that agreement is cheap.

It’s an easy way out.
People agree to be polite.
To avoid conflict.
Or simply to move the meeting along.

It often happens when you’ve done all the talking.
You’ve explained. Reasoned. Persuaded. Until people got tired.

Alignment is different.
It happens when you create space.

Space for others to engage.
To question. Reflect. Challenge.
To make the idea their own.

Which is what transforms “your” idea into a shared idea.

It might be the slower “yes”.
But at least it’s one that people actually mean –
and carry forward even when you’re not in the room.

Keep lighting the path

How the Macintosh team became unstoppable

When a team aligns on a PATH they passionately believe in, they become unstoppable.

That’s the whole premise of “The PATH to Strategic Impact”. And the Macintosh team proves it beautifully. Here are some quotes from an old documentary:

“Everybody just wanted to work, not because it was work that had to be done, but it was because something that we really believed in” – Rony Sebok

“We all wanted exactly the same thing. And instead of spending our time arguing about [it] we just went and did it.” – Andy Hertzfeld

“I’m certainly not doing it for Steve Jobs. I’m doing it for something that I think is a much greater good than that. And that’s the chance to change something, really, honestly, truly, for the better.” – Michael Murray

Most employees would feel lucky if their business had a concise strategy at all. Let alone one that’s so clearly articulated that the entire team wholeheartedly embraces it.

But that’s exactly what Steve Jobs managed to do.

He found words that laid out the path for everyone to see very clearly:
→ Where are we headed?
→ Why does this matter?

Words that were deeply heartfelt and transformative to the team.

And then?
He stepped back and trusted his team to figure it out.
(A terrifying thought for many managers.)

Lighting the PATH isn’t about persuading people to do the work.

It’s about resonating so strongly that they can’t help but travel it – because it’s fully aligned with their passion and dedication.

Keep lighting the path!

Why some teams make a bigger impact

This might be the single biggest reason why some teams make a bigger impact than others:

They align on the one thing that truly matters.

They have a Core Credo that works much like the refrain of a beloved song,
→ often shared,
→ everyone likes to sing it, and
→ captures the essence of the strategy in just a few words.

Not a replacement of the strategy, but its anchor.

Present in everyday situations.

Acting like a trigger that, when faced with a choice, helps individuals recall and align with the organizational principles.

And, most importantly, reminding everyone of the path they’re on.

I’d even go so far as to say …
→ If the essence of a strategy can’t be captured in a Core Credo, it’s quite likely not a strategy, but a mess.

PS: In the book “The PATH to Strategic Impact“ I explain how to find one.

Your definition of success

As the CEO, if you and one or more board members disagree on the definition of success, you need to have the hard conversations to reach alignment.

If you don’t, you’re going to have to constantly battle it out.

It will slow everything down and consume energy that’s better spent elsewhere.

It will confuse the team and have a toll on their confidence.

It may cause frustration as projects are shut down over disagreement but with unsatisfactory justification.

In other words, if you and (parts of) the board are not on the same path, figuring the path out becomes your prime concern.

If you shy away from that conversation, it will become your only concern.

Until it becomes the exit.

Have you had difficult conversation with the board?
How did you approach it?

—

PS: If you need support, reach out!

SEARCH

Explore

Work with me

Connect

SUBSCRIBE