SEARCH

Search

Explore

Blog
Podcast
Free Live Event
Self-Assessment
Manifesto
Book

Work with me

Masterclass
Instant Clarity Call
1:1 Coaching
Keynote

Connect

Linkedin Instagram Twitter Facebook

SUBSCRIBE

The Story Hijack

(This post is available as a podcast episode. Click here if you prefer listening.)

You’re in the exec meeting. You finally have the floor and share a story you’ve chosen carefully, something that proves a point, that shows what’s really going on.

But halfway through, a colleague jumps in: “Oh, that reminds me of when we…”

And suddenly, it’s their story. Their airtime.
Your point vanishes into thin air.

So frustrating, isn’t it? “Why do they always have to hijack the story just to make themselves look smart?”

Honestly, it stings. It can feel like they’re trying to undercut you.

But are they?

Here’s what might be going on:
In leadership teams, airtime is currency.
It signals relevance, influence, status.

So when someone hijacks your story, it’s not necessarily to undercut you. Often, it’s a move to prove they belong. It’s insecurity wrapped in performance.

And if we’re honest, it’s not even unusual.
Every one of us has done it at some point.

You hear a story, it triggers one of your own, and you can’t resist. You jump in to contribute, to connect, to show you’ve got something valuable too.

Seen through that lens, the hijack is less about malice and more about need. The need to be heard. The need to be seen.

So what do you do?

You don’t win by fighting for airtime harder. You win by using your airtime to turn the spotlight around.

Instead of keeping it on yourself, you point it forward.
Onto the team. Onto the path ahead.

Making them feel seen. Nurturing a sense of belonging.

As long as airtime feels like it’s about individuals, people will fight for it. But when you turn it toward the group, the fight disappears.

Because when people feel the spotlight includes them, they stop grabbing for it.

Keep lighting the path!

PS: Join us tomorrow for an exclusive live session on How to Lead with Clarity, even when “the system” doesn’t seem to want it.

The room is bright, but the path is dark

Sometimes I wonder why so many meetings feel like a talent show.

Everyone’s waiting for their turn to impress.
With every update trying to sound important.
And every opinion hoping to win the room.

But of course …

The more people try to stand out,
the less the team stands together.

I don’t think this is vanity.
It’s often uncertainty.

There’s no clarity on direction.
→ Where are we headed?
→ Why are we headed there?
→ Why is this journey ours to take?

And if no one knows what really matters,
they fall back on showing that THEY matter.

That’s why the best leaders light the path.
They turn the spotlight outward.
Forward.

So there’s a sense of purpose and belonging.
We’re in this together.
For something that matters.

When everyone is trying to shine in their own light,
you get bright spots everywhere.
But none of them point forward.

That’s where progress lies.

Keep lighting the path!

Making space for people

Something that immediately caught my eye during last week’s trip to southern Sweden:

There’s space.
Not just for cars (like here in Germany).
But for people.

Sidewalks are wide enough to walk side by side and pause without blocking anyone.

Bike lanes let one person stop without slowing the rest.

To me, it felt like the cities were planned with the people in mind, as if someone had asked “What do people need here?”

(Here in Germany, the guiding thought often seems to be where’s the space for buildings and cars.)

Now, what if we applied that thinking to leadership communication?

Instead of how to make the people fit in, how can we make space for them? So they not only can, but want to do their best work.

Some thoughts on this:

Do we allow space to pause?
So often, we overload our messages with urgency and instructions. But not every word has to move people forward. Sometimes, we need to stop and pause to understand better, find the connection, or simply regain some energy.

→ In your conversations, can someone take a moment to reflect?

Do we create space for different angles?
Companies love streamlined thinking and fear losing control. (Did I ever mention that I once lost a client because they were afraid their teams would start thinking too freely?) But not everyone thinks alike. And that’s the point. When you create space for different perspectives, working styles, and priorities, you don’t lose control, you gain depth.

→ In your meetings, can people show up with their unique perspective?

Is our message designed for people, not just performance?
It’s still a common pattern: This is a professional environment, just get over it and get stuff done. But what if the most professional environment was the one where people belong fully, as a human, not just a professional?

→ In your messages, can people (including you) speak from the heart?

Curious for your thoughts …

Keep lighting the path!

The work they do

Does your team love the work they do?

Do they love what they do?

How they do it?

Why they do it?

Have you asked them?

What would make it so for them?

(And, of course, do you love the work you do?)

The team

It’s not “we, the leaders“ and “you, the team.”
It’s “us, together.”

Watch for language that separates you from the team. It can be subtle, but it’s almost always there.

It could be in the way you express what you want, what you expect, what you value, etc. …

… and it separates the team from yourself …

… when, actually, you’re in this together.

How do you create that sense?

Leadership lessons from Germany’s Qatar disaster

Among the many fascinating leadership lessons from Amazon’s “All or Nothing” documentary about Germany’s Qatar football disaster, here’s one that stood out for me:

For Germany’s coaches, it was US and THEM, not WE.
“Us” the coaches and “them” the players, not “we” the team.

The coaches expected them to deliver.
As opposed to being in this together.

When the coaches expect the players to deliver, it delegates the responsibility the wrong way. It frees the coach from the responsibility and puts that burden on the player. Basically, the message is this: “I’ve told you what you need to do. If you fail, it’s on you.”

A leader who lights the path would turn this upside down. They would trust the players to deliver. They would believe in the players to deliver. Because they would figure out a path and light it in a way that the players would see it, believe in it and trust in the path (and themselves), too.

No need to expect anything.

But Germany’s players didn’t trust in the path (or themselves). Head coach Hansi Flick’s words made it sound like he didn’t trust in the journey and in the team’s ability to deliver. And so, the players couldn’t find that trust, either.

Flick used pressure (“We expect X from you”) as a substitute for trust. But that can’t work when the players don’t even trust in themselves.

Worse, when it’s US and THEM, i.e. when the TEAM is missing, then you can’t compensate lack of trust with will power (despite the obvious individual strengths of the players). For will power to surface you’d need a reason – such as belonging to something bigger than yourself. As there was no team, there was nothing bigger. Who would they stretch themselves for? The coaches? But why?

The documentary is a rare glimpse into how professional top-level leadership actually performs (or doesn’t). You’d make a mistake to assume that 1) this example would be the rare exception and 2) businesses would be any different.

Which is not to say that there aren’t businesses that are different or that there aren’t leaders who truly light the path. But it’s certainly not the default.

“Leadership skill” is still largely expected to just somehow come to leaders “naturally”. You’re either born with it or not. Training, coaching and professional advisory around communication is still the exception to the norm – and even when it’s done it’s sometimes just to check the box.

And yet, communication can make or brake leadership – even if you’re highly skilled in other areas.

If you’ve watched the documentary, what was your biggest takeaway?

PS: It was heartbreaking to see the outsized role that PowerPoint played in the team meetings. PowerPoint is no substitute for empathy and trust and the way it’s being used in these meetings is a bitter example of that.

Navigating irrational team behavior

Some useful questions to ponder if you feel like the people in your meeting are acting irrationally:

1. To which group does the person want to belong (in this moment)?

The desire to belong is a deeply rooted human need. So strong, in fact, that it can overpower logic and rational decision making. The range of possible groups people want to belong to is vast. People might want to consider themselves as being innovative. Or one of the cool kids. Perhaps they want to belong to the rich. Or consider themselves pragmatic problem solvers who just get sh*t done. Maybe they value loyalty. Or are seeking connection to a group of “friends” … As I said, the list is practically limitless and can be very personal.

2. Who does the person want to be seen by (in this moment)?

Similar but distinct from the previous aspect. It might be related to career or competition. Romance or friendship. It can lead to people remaining silent when you’d expect them to speak up. Or it can lead them to do silly things when that hasn’t been their mode of operation up until this moment. It can lead them to change loyalty or neglect facts. And again, it’s a very personal list that’s not easy to see when we’re not walking in their shoes.

3. With whom is the person negotiating their status (in this moment)?

It’s a useful shortcut to assume that we’re basically negotiating status in any exchange. It leads people to thinking they can’t give in. Or need to please the boss. That they need to fight back or appease the opponent. Establish that they are the senior person. Or the smarter one. Or sometimes simply that they’re the boss.

The bitter truth is that these social dynamics can lead people to act very differently than we would in the same situation, even when looking at the exact same facts. Sometimes, it can be very hard for us to even understand why anyone would be acting that way. And yet, they do.

What’s sometimes hard to swallow is that these human needs can dominate something like logic. When a strong desire like “belonging” (let alone “love”) takes the driver’s seat, logic isn’t the most important thing anymore.

The good news is that you can learn to see these dynamics. Understanding which group a person wants to belong to or how they’re negotiating status allows us to see their behavior in a different light. And when we do we can work with what we see and adapt how we communicate with them.

Spread the Word

Picture of Dr. Michael Gerharz

Dr. Michael Gerharz