How Do I Co-Lead with a Challenging Partner?

Summary

Podcast Summary: "How Do I Co-Lead with a Challenging Partner?"

Podcast Information:

• Title: Coaching Real Leaders
• Host: Muriel Wilkins, Harvard Business Review
• Episode: How Do I Co-Lead with a Challenging Partner?
• Release Date: June 2, 2025

---

Introduction to Stefan's Challenge

[00:48] Muriel Wilkins:
Muriel introduces Stefan, a pseudonymous guest, who occupies a leadership role that he finds both engaging and challenging. Stefan reaches out for coaching to navigate the complexities of co-leading a project with an external partner.

Defining Dual Leadership

[02:35] Stefan:
Stefan describes his situation as a "dual leadership challenge," where he and an external agency's product lead share leadership responsibilities. This arrangement has led to "misunderstandings" and a "conflict of authority," questioning "who actually rides the car, right? Who wears pants in this relationship?" (02:35)

[04:10] Muriel Wilkins:
Muriel acknowledges Stefan's framing of the issue under dual leadership, identifying the primary pain points:

1. Conflict of Authority: Unclear leadership hierarchy.
2. Design Tensions: Constant criticism without substantive feedback.
3. Personality Clashes: Different leadership styles—Stefan as an influencer versus his partner's direct approach.

Identifying Pain Points

[04:02] Stefan:
He elaborates on the negative feedback from stakeholders and the frustration of "people never like stuff," leading to challenges in decision making.

[07:03] Muriel Wilkins:
Muriel probes further, rating the severity of these issues as a collective 5. Something like 5.5 out of 10. (06:57)

[08:01] Stefan:
He clarifies that the main issue lies in decision-making responsibilities and accountability, emphasizing that "78 or 85% of decisions are made by him." (11:53)

Analyzing Misalignment

[21:33] Stefan:
Stefan identifies that the misalignment primarily resides in the "how"—the process by which decisions are made—accounting for 70-30% of the issue. (21:33)

[22:37] Muriel Wilkins:
She delves into whether there is a true alignment on the "what"—the project goals—and highlights Stefan’s perception of differing organizational goals: Stefan's team aims to phase out the external partner due to cost concerns, while the partner's organization aims to maintain the relationship.

[23:48] Stefan:
Stefan confirms the misalignment in long-term goals, stating, "their goal is to be as long as possible with us because we support them," versus the need to eliminate them due to costs. (23:48)

Exploring Solutions

[26:28] Stefan:
Muriel identifies trust as the foundation for effective dual leadership. Stefan reflects on trust, noting insights from the book Collaborating with the Enemy, and acknowledges the need to focus on common goals rather than conflict.

[34:23] Stefan:
He admits that his initial approach was reactive—"I did nothing." He recognizes the absence of a structured strategy to define roles and decision rights. (34:23)

[36:18] Muriel Wilkins:
She suggests practical tools like RACI charts (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) to clarify decision-making processes and responsibilities. (36:18)

[41:48] Stefan:
Stefan plans to take ownership by introducing new ideas and projects to shift the dynamic from reactive to proactive. He aims to "invent whatever a new idea, like new project, new tool," to demonstrate his contribution beyond mere opinions. (41:48)

[44:22] Stefan:
Muriel encourages Stefan to reconsider his reluctance to initiate a reset conversation with his partner, posing the question: "What would make that comfortable for you?" (44:22)

Insights and Action Steps

[51:08] Stefan:
Through the coaching session, Stefan experiences an "aha moment" by recognizing that collaboration and conflict resolution can coexist, transforming his approach to leadership dynamics. (51:08)

[53:49] Muriel Wilkins:
Muriel emphasizes turning Stefan's newfound awareness into action, advising him to schedule and practice the reset conversation. She highlights that action, combined with awareness, is "unstoppable." (53:49)

Conclusion

[55:04] Stefan:
Stefan reflects on his transformation, feeling both "dumb" for not recognizing these strategies earlier and "grateful" for the clarity and actionable steps provided. He commits to scheduling the reset meeting and practicing the conversation as tangible next steps. (55:04)

[56:58] Muriel Wilkins:
Muriel concludes by reinforcing Stefan’s takeaways:

• Understanding Misalignment: Recognizing where and why the breakdown occurs.
• Taking Responsibility: Owning his part in the dynamic.
• Action Plans: Implementing structured conversations and collaborative tools.

She underscores the importance of personal accountability in leadership, stating, "You can't control the other person, but you can always control how you show up."

[56:58] Final Remarks:
Muriel wraps up the episode by highlighting Stefan's journey from confusion to clarity, emphasizing the significance of owning one's role in co-leading dynamics.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Stefan at [02:35]:
  "Who actually rides the car, right? Who wears pants in this relationship?"

• Muriel at [53:49]:
  "Awareness plus action is unstoppable."

• Stefan at [55:04]:
  "I feel like a complete dumb idiot. It was actually, these are simple things, but I don't know, not accessible, hidden, whatever."

---

Key Takeaways:

• Clear Role Definition: Establishing who is responsible and accountable using structured tools like RACI charts.
• Building Trust: Focusing on common goals to create a foundation for collaboration.
• Proactive Communication: Initiating reset conversations to align leadership dynamics.
• Personal Accountability: Recognizing and owning one's contributions to leadership challenges.

Stefan's coaching session serves as a powerful example of how leaders can navigate and resolve the complexities of dual leadership through self-awareness, structured strategies, and proactive communication.

Transcript

[Advertiser]

How can you find amazing candidates fast?

[Stefan]

Easy.

[Advertiser]

Just use Indeed and listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility@ Indeed.com RealLeaders Indeed.com RealLeaders Terms and Conditions apply. Imagine a state where you can get from big cities to big nature in less than half an hour with some of the best quality of life in the nation. Welcome to Minnesota, America's least stressed state. Learn [e-mail] live.

[Muriel Wilkins]

I'm Muriel Wilkins and this is Coaching Real Leaders, part of the HBR Podcast Network. I'm a longtime executive coach who works with highly successful leaders who've hit a bump in the road. My job is to help them get over that bump by clarifying their goals and figuring out a way to reach them so that hopefully they can lead with a little more ease. I typically work with clients over the course of several months, but on this show we have a one time coaching meeting focusing on a specific leadership challenge they're facing. Today's guest is someone we'll call Stefan tomorrow. Protect his confidentiality. He's in a leadership role that he finds both interesting and challenging.

[Stefan]

It's dealing with people ultimately, it's resolving problems. It's making impact on completely different area, not solving clients internal or external problems with whatever kind of design, but with dealing with people, with emotions, with conflicts and trying to resolve it, trying to find common grounds, contributing in a really different way. This is my, I would say first serious. Not that previous leading roles were not serious, but this one is like most serious. Like more serious. Let's say the team is bigger and the challenges are bigger.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Stefan reached out because while he likes many aspects of his position, he's having trouble co leading a project with a partner who happens to be external to the company. We'll start by getting a bit more of the lay of the land to better understand the issue he's facing.

[Stefan]

I am experiencing something that I would call like dual leadership challenge. I am internal manager at my company and this company has an external agency that is asked to complete a project. This agency has a very skilled and really great product lead who is basically in the same role as I am. So we have the situation of literally dual leadership and in some moments this leads to misunderstandings. It's a little bit, you know, conflict of authority, like who actually, you know, rides the car, right? Who wears pants in this relationship? It's been really difficult to me to navigate and additional flavor to it is what you usually meet from stakeholders is just constant criticism because, yeah, people never like stuff. I mean, they say, yeah, it's nice, but if we make this button green. Yeah. Or if we make this button red, what do you think? And part of you has to be made of stone that you are just, you know, you deal with this negative feedback.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Right.

[Stefan]

And it's often like, just negative for being negative. But they cannot give you actual argument. Then you give them 20 arguments, and then they say, ah, okay. Yeah, you're right. So that's like, additional challenge to it. And there is yet another layer. I would say my counterpart, he is very, very strong personality. I believe I am a strong personality too, but in a different way. I am more influencer. So that's, you know, in span of time, I can build coalition and convince people to my view while my partner is just saying what he thinks. And that's the right idea, that's the right direction, and here we go. Which is not my approach to life in general. So that's another layer of challenge.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. I like the way that you framed us in terms of under the umbrella of dual leadership. And under that umbrella, there's a couple of components, or what I'm hearing as, you know, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sort of hearing them as pain points for you. Yeah, right.

[Stefan]

Yeah. Yes.

[Muriel Wilkins]

One being, as you put it, you know, who wears the pants in this relationship. Right. There's a little bit of conflict of authority, like who's in charge. The second being the notion of just design and the tension that's held there in terms of it being a place where everybody sort of has an opinion. And how do you get through those? And by the way, you know, I'm probably very guilty of being the person who's like, oh, I don't like that color. Can you turn it green? Because I think I know something about design. So you just, like, literally, I feel seen when you said that, and I will try better next time.

[Stefan]

But it's nothing bad in that. You know, it's nothing bad, but I'm.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Holding empathy for the person who just redesigned my website because literally they went through weeks of me being that way. So thank you for that.

[Stefan]

We have first success of this session.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And then the other part that I'm hearing as a pain point is just a difference in two different types of strong personality. I sort of see it as two different approaches that the two of you have. Okay. Does that sort of describe what you are experiencing?

[Stefan]

Yes. Yes, exactly. That's it. Yeah.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. And like, on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being, you know, I sort of feel it a little bit. You know, like when you go to the doctor, they're like, how bad does it hurt? Right. One is, you know, I kind of feel it, but it's not a big deal. 10 is like, oh, my gosh, like, excruciating. We need to operate now, doctor. Right. Where are you on these pain points? Collectively, what does it feel like right now?

[Stefan]

Yeah, collectively, five point something. So not really that bad.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. All right. Is there one pain point that is.

[Stefan]

Sorer than the other one and three are the drivers.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. So the conflict of authority and the difference in personality approaches. Okay.

[Stefan]

Yes.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. And where would you put those?

[Stefan]

I would say, who's in charge? It's Atish and personalities. You may be a little less for like, seven, but also it is. Maybe we don't need to operate now, but certainly we need antibiotics.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah, you need antibiotics. I hear you. Okay. Okay. And I'm just asking because I sort of want to gauge, you know, I'm not in your body, I'm not sitting in your chair. I don't know how you're experiencing this, but it gives me a level of sort of how you're experiencing it. Right. What it feels like to you. So help me understand what dual leadership means to you.

[Stefan]

So on the one hand, is who makes the final decision? Actually, what we do if we have three competing ideas, like who makes the final decision, who is accountable, who takes the responsibility. Or maybe these are two different things. Who makes decision and who is responsible. Because from people who are internal in our organization, I'm hearing that I am accountable for this design stuff, which is right at a certain point. But on the other hand, sometimes, and very often, yeah, these decisions are not taken by myself. And these decisions still happen, which sometimes I am informed. Sometimes I have to dig very deep to learn that decisions were made. So the level of actual execution for one and two, I would say for responsibility.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And when you talk about execution and responsibility, help me clarify the difference between the two. You said execution, and you said responsibility. When you're talking about responsibility, it's responsibility for what? And how is that different than being responsible for the execution?

[Stefan]

In execution, I mean that who makes the actual decision that this button should be blue or green? Of course, everyone has opinion, but which opinion is the major one? Yeah, which opinion we use? What's the right solution? And as you may imagine in the design, I mean, there are better solutions and worse solutions, but there is no Bible that says, do this, don't do that, and the other thing is actual responsibility. So taking responsibility for the entire product that is happening, whether this will work or not, in longer perspective. So if we will lose 20% customers over three years because of these little bricks of these decisions that were made beyond my control, I would be accountable that we lose these customers because of these, you know, pain points.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah.

[Stefan]

Is this clearer?

[Muriel Wilkins]

It was clear from the beginning. It was just more having to me understand it. Right. Yeah, I'm positive. You were being very clear. So, you know, when I asked you what does dual leadership mean to you, you pointed out this notion of, you know, who makes the final decision, who's responsible, who's accountable, and you were very quick, which I think is important to discern between maybe there's a difference between responsibility and accountability and even decision making and accountability, the level of execution we just spoke about. And these are all parameters around the different scopes of leadership, particularly around a project or a deliverable. To what extent is the person that you're co leading with? And I know you know, he's not here, so I want to be fair. So this is more from your perspective, to what extent? If he were here, if I asked him what his definition of dual leadership is, would it be similar or different than yours?

[Stefan]

I think there is no dual leadership in his world. Okay, so officially he's the leader, end.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Of the story, according to him.

[Stefan]

Yeah.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Is how you experience it.

[Stefan]

Yeah.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. And so what gives you that sense, using the same frame that you gave me around decision making, accountability, responsibility, et.

[Stefan]

Cetera, it's because of simply of the amount of decisions taken. So like 78 or 85% of decisions are made by him, sometimes including my view, sometimes not, which is fine.

[Muriel Wilkins]

What makes it fine?

[Stefan]

Having different opinions. I mean, that's what I mean. Only on this very exclusive. Meaning that having different opinions is fine.

[Muriel Wilkins]

I mean, I'm asking because on the one hand you said, oh, like he's making decisions on his own, and that's not dual leadership. But then as you explained it, you said, oh, but, you know, I guess it's fine. So I'm just asking sort of, what are you fine with and what are you not fine with?

[Stefan]

Sorry, Sorry. So, no, yeah, I'm fine with having different views and having my advice being taken into account or not, because that's the nature of the job. What is not okay, is these decisions are made without me. Like I was not there. And at first, yes, some time ago I thought it's maybe only the case of communication, but it's not the case of communication. It's for me the statement of power, like who really leads the project. So this is just one project that I am responsible for. There are other projects where I take my decisions, where I am leading, and that's fine.

[Muriel Wilkins]

You know, Stefan, what I'm, what I'm sitting with right now is you. You again. There was a reason I sort of latched onto dual leadership. Right. Which I'm imagining dual is like co leading. You know, there's two people leading and that's the intent or the way this project is structured. And you said, you know, the issue is that the power seems to only lie with one in terms of making the decision.

[Stefan]

Yep.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So what are we solving for here? Okay, and let me give you a couple of options. Are we solving for who should make the decision? It has to be one or the other. Or are we solving for what does decision making look like in a dual leadership structure?

[Stefan]

0.2.

[Muriel Wilkins]

0.2. Okay. Why do you say, and I'm not saying one is better than the other, I'm just saying there's different ways of approaching it. So, so tell me, why point two for you?

[Stefan]

Because I think that what we have, you know, what is given is the situation as it is. And of course we can, you know, spend energy and time to try to get rid of him. We, I mean, that's valid option too. Right. But it's really not what I would, you know, like to do. So if that's the structure that organization thinks works, fine. I have my opinion on that. That it's not the best option which has been voiced, which has been heard and that's it. So I feel that I have to just deal with that. That's the given situation and either I give up and everything is in his hands and then I am accountable for whatever errors or successes happen, or I just, you know, pull myself together and just try to do something and contribute to this decision making process in dual leadership situation.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So I think I have a picture of what it would look like to just say, you know what, I'm just going to let this person make the decisions. I'll deal with the impact down the line. You know, let me say a prayer and hope that it all works out for the best. Right. Inshallah. Right. Or. And the other scenario that you're proposing is okay, like, is there a way that I can actually try to contribute to these decisions?

[Stefan]

Yes.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So if you follow the way of trying to contribute to the decisions, what have you tried so far before? We try to figure out what you could do and if you should, right. What have you tried so far on that realm? What does the future hold for business? Can someone invent a crystal ball? Until then, over 40,000 businesses have future proofed their business with NetSuite by Oracle. The the One Cloud ERP, bringing accounting, financial management, inventory and HR into one platform. With real time insights and forecasting, you're able to peer into the future and seize new opportunities. Download the CFO's guide to AI and machine learning for free at netsuite.com coachingrealeaders that's netsuite.com coachingreaineaders I've got some big news to share. I've got a new book coming out. Leadership Unblocked is launching this October with HBR Press, and I can't wait for you to read it. It's filled with insights from my years of coaching executives and a roadmap to help you break free from the mindsets that hold you back from being the leader you want to be. You can pre order it now. Just search for Leadership Unblocked wherever you order your favorite books and you'll be among the first to receive a copy.

[Stefan]

Make an opinion. To have an opinion. To have an opinion, that's one thing. What have I tried? Yeah, I. That's the question, you know.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah.

[Stefan]

Because on the one hand I feel I tried everything, but when you tell me so give me five items on this list of everything, the sheet is empty.

[Muriel Wilkins]

You know, I appreciate the honesty here.

[Stefan]

What I've done literally everything, basically. So my strategy, it seems. Yeah, it was just not having any strategy. Right. Just trying to like, be just yet another person who comes and says, change this button to red.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah. Okay, so you are meeting it by saying, hey, let me. Let me just make sure my voice is heard.

[Stefan]

Mm.

[Muriel Wilkins]

All right, let's pause for a moment. We've heard Stefan lay out his dual leadership dilemma. Sharing the reins of a design project with an outside partner, never quite knowing who's steering. He's grappling with unclear decision rights, feeling the pull of two different personalities, and wondering where he fits in when the authority feels uneven. What I'm noticing is how these elements weave foggy accountability, imbalanced power, and overlapping styles. It's like watching two voices trying to harmonize without a written score. Things get noisy and the melody falters. And Stefan is also realizing that he's gotten bogged down by the frustration of working in this way and as a result, hasn't done much to try to resolve it, and that it was now time to try Something different. But before he can do that, we have to further identify where the breakdown is happening between him and his co lead. Otherwise his actions may be misdirected. That's where we pick things up. Back up. Taking a closer look at where Stefan and his partner are out of sync. There's a couple of things here, right? Like, I think whenever there's a breakdown in a partnership or in a team, or like a relational work, relational piece, there are many variables to look at. But two of the ones that I think are helpful to look at to start with, to try to understand where the breakdown is. Is, is it a content breakdown, meaning there's misalignment around what we're dealing with. Right. And. Or is it a process breakdown? And the process breakdown is the how? Like, yes, we both understand that this is the deliverable that needs to be met. That's the content. There's other parts of content that we can talk about. And then the process breakdown is. But there is dissonance, misalignment on the how, how we're going to get there. And when it comes to decision making, decision making does consist of both of those variables. What are we making a decision on? That's the content. And how are we getting to that decision? That's the process. And so whenever, whenever, by the way, I face this all the time. It doesn't even have work. Like, think about every time there's, like, you know, I can think about my own life. I think I live this every single day with some of the people in my household. Right. Like, but I thought this was gonna happen. No, that was gonna happen. You can peel back the onion and say, well, where was the misalignment? And so when you look at this particular co leadership structure, or co leadership, whatever we want to call it, where is the misalignment?

[Stefan]

So basically the misalignment is more, I would say, in the how.

[Muriel Wilkins]

In the how.

[Stefan]

More in the process.

[Muriel Wilkins]

More in the process. Okay.

[Stefan]

Whatever happens, his position has and so like his contractor. So whatever happens, in one year, two years, five years, four years, he'll be gone because the contract is done.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Right.

[Stefan]

So the problem will just cease to exist on its own. But I certainly don't want to wait to this moment. Yeah, I just want to do something about it. But within this framework, what and how, it's, I would say 70 to 30% on the how.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So we'll talk a little bit about that. Right? So there's. So you're feeling it in the how. I also sense, based on what you just said that there is that 20 to 30% on the what? Because as you put it in, you know, when the contract is over for the contractor, they're out of here, right?

[Stefan]

Yes.

[Muriel Wilkins]

They're not held accountable for what happens, as you put it, you know, three to four years from now. And so there's a question for me around, is there true alignment around what success looks like for the project? Right. Not just in the short term, but in the long term, which is a content question.

[Stefan]

That's really, really the point. Because I perceive it that this is maybe not the conflict of interest, but his organization has its goals and my organization has its own goals.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Mm.

[Stefan]

And in this project, I feel we have different goals. So there is this misalignment, but it's like three steps back. So their goal is to be as long as possible with us because we support them and we want to get rid of them as soon as possible because they are pure cost. Yeah. I mean, investment in a sense, but at this point today, huge cost. So. Yes, let me Change it to 3,000, 540.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah. It's a little bit of both. Right. And then it often is, but I think.

[Stefan]

But still more of how. I would say still a little more of how.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And I think what you pointed out around, like the green button, and it's really multi layers down where the dissonance is. What's interesting is when there is that misalignment, whether it's around the goals, as you put it, the long term goals, the how, the way that it manifests itself is in the green buttons. Instead of talking about, oh, my goodness, we're actually not aligned around the goals or we're not aligned around process. We talk about should it be a green or a blue button. Right. Because it's easier to grasp on.

[Stefan]

Or.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Or we boil it down to. I'm gonna go back to the beginning of our conversation. We boil it down to, it's a difference in personalities.

[Stefan]

Yeah.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. Because that's easier to point to. All right. So I think really the question here is, is there any opportunity to get greater alignment with this individual so that it increases the score of dual leadership? Okay. Because one thing I know for sure, when you are dealing with dual leadership, co leadership, alignment is paramount. And alignment does not mean that there cannot be differences. There can be differences. All it means is that there is some intersection. So when you point out, you know, their organizational goals are to keep the job, your organizational goals is to put them out of a job. Right. Okay. Those are the differences. But Then where's the intersection? Where's the commonality? And can we find common ground there? Right. If it exists. Because as long as there is not something that exists that anchors the two of you together where you can actually build the foundation of trust, that, hey, at the end of the day, I know that we are both working towards this common goal and we have that common goal in the best interest. There's always going to be this feeling of divergent leadership rather than dual leadership. So I just said a lot. Let me pause there and see how that sits with you.

[Stefan]

To be completely honest, you know, that's the moment that, that I desired from this conversation that you, you really framed it as the case of trust that is behind everything and is the foundation of everything. So trust, yeah, it's one thing I, you know, try to, you know, read some books on it and just to also try to think of it from like, from my perspective, what actually can I do? And I came across a book collaborating with Enemy, not that he is Enemy. Yeah. And it's super insightful that yeah, you can have a conflict. I mean, you don't have to resolve conflict. You can, you can just have different views and that's fine. And even if that's the way to collaborate with Enemy, that's okay. And that was really eye opening experience because I realized it really doesn't have to be the actual driver. I mean, that's fine. And now what you said, having this, this fundamental alignment based on trust is something that would really allow to have this dual and not divergent approach to it because ultimately we have a common goal. So actually maybe a solution would be really to focus on just delivering this. I know it sounds cliche, but that's the point. Just to deliver this thing. And maybe when we deliver and the project is finished, then we just seize the conflict.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah, I mean, that's certainly one way to go about it. Right. In terms of what do you need to have trust on? Right. What does the range of the common goal need to be? I mean, we're not asking. You're not, you know, you're not making lifelong vows with this person that corrects. It's not about that. But I do think there's a question around. What are you contracting around? And that's not clear to me. Right. And it's okay. It doesn't matter. I don't judge it. It could be, hey, all I need, I just need enough trust to get through this project. Right. Or these contracts are going to be around for a while. There's Going to be the next project. Next project. I want to make sure that we are building a relationship, a rapport, working relationship where we can continue to get through without all these pain points that I'm feeling. But you have to scope it out. What's the scope? And then you have to ensure that this individual who's working not even on the other side, but side by side with you also understands that that's the scope, that's the alignment.

[Stefan]

That's exactly. That's right. Yeah, that's right. And only now this thought that run away from me came back. So this just additional background information that he is like almost two years longer in the project than myself. So he's like organically more knowledgeable about all the kitchen of the project, of all people working. They are his colleagues. Yeah. From previous projects. So I was new in the situation. Yeah. So it took me some time to really pave my way into this society.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And just for context, Stefan, was he leading on his own before you arriving or did he have. He was.

[Stefan]

Okay, yeah. I mean my post was empty.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. So I wanna. Because I think this is helpful in terms of figuring out alignment. Right. I want you to put yourself in his shoes right now. Put yourself in his shoes. What do you think is driving? Why he's operating the way he is at first?

[Stefan]

I would say just very strong directive personality approach to everything. By everything, I mean, whenever we go to whatever team building events that he has the right opinion on what should we do when and how, I mean, I just follow. I don't care really that much. So that's fine. But I think it's just construction of personality at first. What's to be smartest person in the room to be sure that you are recognized for doing the best stuff like that.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So those are all possibilities of what might be driving it. Right. And I'm going to add one more, which is he was the sole leader. So he was the sole decision maker. He was the one who was responsible and I would assume to a certain extent accountable. He was the only one who had to decide whether it was the green button or the blue button. Right. And all of a sudden, you know, here you come on board.

[Stefan]

Correct.

[Muriel Wilkins]

It reminds me of my sister who is four years older than me and I love her. We get along greatly. I have to preface this before I tell this story, but she tells a story about when I was born. She was like, this is the worst day of my life. Right. Because up until then, guess what? She held that place of being the youngest in the Family and all the things that come with that. And that position was then taken away. Right.

[Stefan]

That might hurt. Indeed.

[Muriel Wilkins]

It might. It might not. But here's the thing I'm curious about whether he ever redefined what his position is in a dual leadership role. Okay. And whether you defined what yours is in a dual leadership role. Did you all ever sit and define and maybe you have, I don't know.

[Stefan]

No, we haven't.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. So when we don't. When we don't define what the future needs to look like, what do we do? What do we tend to do?

[Stefan]

I think the basic idea was that I am also. But as I said, it's one of the projects, so I am responsible, accountable for everything else. And this one. And just he sits on this one, I think, because I also don't know. Yeah, I really feel like exposed.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Exposed. We both are together. How about that? Right? You exposed me on my, you know, my design choices earlier. Okay, so what now, let's just take a pause here because I just want to hear sort of from what you're hearing, because I think you're having some new level of awareness. What are some things that are in your control that you think you could. I don't want to talk about the future just yet. That you think you could have done when you became co lead, when it took this new structure? What are some of the things that are in your control that you think you could have done to try to increase the chances of there being a improved dual leadership experience? Not guarantee, just increase the chances.

[Stefan]

So now I'm thinking that, in fact, I just, basically, I did nothing. Yeah. There was no one single meeting with my leadership, his leadership, him and me, just to sit and just, you know, write on piece of paper, basically. Who does what, for instance? Yeah, it was just we dived into stuff, into doing, doing, doing, doing, doing things. So that was really this first sin committed by Adam and Eve. So I think that could have been the issue that has never been defined.

[Muriel Wilkins]

But, you know, in the spirit of the first sin committed by Adam and Eve, there was such a thing as grace and reconciliation. So, yes, I know enough. My mother would be very proud of me right now. So with that in mind, I mean, look, I think, you know, if we want to get tactical here, I think you've pinned it right. Like you went straight into doing without pulling back and saying, okay, what's the plan? Right. What's the goal? What are the expectations here? That's the content part. And then what's the how? And the how are Things like, what's our decision making process? You can use a tool like. And you can, you know, look that up after our session, but use a tool like Raci. Right. Mapping out who's responsible, accountable, who needs to be consulted, who needs to be informed. Okay. And what those types of conversations, and as you said, putting pen to paper does, is it helps make the assumptions explicit so that then it can be discussed. If the assumptions are not the same, at least then you know what you're disagreeing on. Right?

[Stefan]

Correct. I mean, that's the point.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And you have guardrails. And here's the thing. Yes. You could just wait this person out. Right. You could say, you know what? There'll be. Whatever the time period is, they'll be gone and pain points will be relieved. I guarantee you, Stefan, it will be a temporary relief. Because this notion of getting alignment with others is part of leadership. It's just showing up in this particular contractor right now. But you will have other moments in your career where alignment is necessary, whether it be with your team, whether it be with peers, whether it be with your boss, whether it be with clients, whether it be with one other contractor.

[Stefan]

If you'd ask me at the beginning of our conversation, on the scale 1 to 10, what I think about alignment, I would say 12. So on theoretical level, that's. I would put it as a, you know, really. The motto. Yeah. The tagline, the. The first, most important thing. But when it actually came to do actual alignments, when we started collaboration, it didn't happen.

[Advertiser]

Unlike any class book or podcast, Strawberry Me personal coaching gives you something unique. A professional partner who's 100% focused on. On your success. It's not about advice. Your coach will ask the right questions, helping you uncover hidden strengths, breakthrough obstacles, and move forward with confidence. If you're ready to unlock your full potential, Visit Strawberry Me HBR for a $50 credit. That's Strawberry Me H.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Now that we've unpacked Stefan's story, a few things have come into focus. First, his frustration over who really calls the shots isn't just a clash of styles. It's a signal of deeper misalignment. And that misalignment, it traces back to the moment he first stepped into this role. It's an important detail that we only got to once the conversation was well on its way. And it's a dynamic that happens often, because when teams reshuffle or new leaders come on board, we rarely hit the pause button to redefine who owns what. Instead, we expect the productive dynamic to magically take shape. But the reality is, without an explicit conversation about decision rights, those tensions quietly simmer and the same issues keep resurfacing and even get worse over time. Now it's time to explore how Stefan can move forward. Yes, he could simply wait and hope things improve on their own, but that feels unsustainable in the long run. Instead, we'll look at the choices he now has to reshape this dual leadership dynamic into one that's more functional than it is today. So what do you think, again, going back to kind of your lane and what you can be 100% responsible for. Right? Because somebody could say, well, nobody else did it, but they're not sitting here, you're sitting here. And so I want to sort of focus on what you contribute and can contribute moving forward to this dynamic, acknowledging that you're not 100% responsible for the dynamic, but you are 50% responsible. And so with your 50%, where does this leave you in terms of what you think you can do moving forward?

[Stefan]

So what I'm thinking now is like the first thing I will not do or I would not like to do. So, like to say, hi, man, let's sit together, let's make a new start. So just let's maybe not forget about the past or whatever. Just let's sit and do it. So I would not like to do it because that would really look, like, fake. I mean, like, not honest and also not in accordance with my true north compass. So that wouldn't be my goal. Just to think of some gradual tactics, how to smuggle these ideas into daily collaboration. And I think like 80% of success would be to have the structure in mind that it's about what, how, and this trust that anchors both of us. And just I think having this in mind is really 80% of the solution. And knowing what is my 50% of influence of power in this. And 50% is actually a lot.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Right.

[Stefan]

So basically the knowledge, the awareness. Awareness, yeah. Is the key to it.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah. And awareness is important. Awareness plus action is unstoppable. Okay, so how do you envision your awareness will turn into action as a result of this awareness? What action do you think you'll take?

[Stefan]

I'm thinking maybe what I just cannot resist is just to think operationally in actionable items, meaning I invent whatever a new idea, like new project, new tool, or a new approach to things we do, and just go to him and. And say, hey, here is my idea. Let's. But I mean, like, bigger idea, come on, let's do it and I will be the owner of this whatever idea that would certainly satisfy this appetite for ownership and responsibility. Maybe this would show that my contribution is not only opinion, but actual action. This would also be like opportunity to kind of reverse this situation so that he would be kind of, you know, forced, would be exposed to react to what is happening. Because currently I am the one kind of, you know, reacting to what is happening. I mean, in most cases. Yeah. So this flipping the coin, maybe.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah, flipping the coin. I mean, in the way that you're describing it, Stefan, what's coming up for me is the approach that you're suggesting. It's almost like a dance, right? Where you basically switch positions with him and so. But that doesn't mean the dance changes.

[Stefan]

Okay, yes.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Like the waltz is the waltz. Is the waltz. Okay, but that's the question is, do both of you think you're doing the waltz? We still haven't gotten that. And what you're not describing to me in the way that I'm understanding it. So again, check me if I'm off here. What you're not describing to me is the spirit of the book that you refer to, which the underlying word for me that I wrote down was collaboration. Because if you're going to come up and say, hey, here's my idea, and I'm doing. You're basically saying, okay, now I'm switching roles in the dance. I take the lead, you take the other. Okay, but that's not necessarily collaboration. If you want to continue down the sort of individual, you know, I'm going to stand my ground, or he stands his ground. It has to be one or the other. It's a zero sum game. Then that is an approach, but it's not an alignment and collaboration approach.

[Stefan]

So we changed the dance room. But maybe just first ask what we dance actually.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And I hear your hesitation around. Not even hesitation. You flat out said you're not gonna do it. Right. You don't want to sit down and have a come like, you know, as they call it sometimes a come to Jesus conversation where it's like, oh, and, you know, let's wipe the slate clean. Da, da, da.

[Stefan]

I mean, maybe, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

[Muriel Wilkins]

I mean, what's your hesitation there? What would make that type of conversation, let's call it a clearing, a reset conversation is what it is. Okay. What would make that comfortable for you? Because you said it wouldn't feel normal to you.

[Stefan]

Actually, to put it the way, what harm could it do? Yeah. What would be the Worst scenario. If we have this conversation in next.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Week, what would be the worst scenario?

[Stefan]

Yeah, I. I'm just trying to figure it out. But no, there is not another thing that comes to my mind. Yeah, what?

[Muriel Wilkins]

I. I think you'd end up right where you already are.

[Stefan]

Yeah, exactly. So just make exactly full U turn. But maybe having this, you know, full U turn. It's not U turn, it's just full circle. Maybe during this conversation we would be able to actually stop at some point and not come back to the point of departure.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Well, you certainly wouldn't come back to the point of departure. Because even if you have that and he does nothing, he's like, no, no, thank you. What you will then have that you don't have now is more evidence or less evidence or information. You will be more informed around what is the possibility of getting closer to a dual leadership. You will have made the effort versus what you said happened at the beginning, which is you said you didn't. Nothing was done. Right.

[Stefan]

Yeah.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So now you will have put in the effort. Some effort.

[Stefan]

Because now I'm wondering why I just immediately said I don't want to do it. I mean, that's interesting. Why? This came as a first idea to me, because it also, you know, stands like in real opposition to collaboration, spirit and alignment. Because that's the actual tool to achieve this goal. And I just thought it's not the best way. So what's the best way? Yeah, what's the cost of it? Like one hour or two hours of time and. Yeah, a little bit of this, you know, stress, tension, whatever.

[Muriel Wilkins]

I mean, the risk is. Right. I'm going to just call it out or what I think, what's my hypothesis? Right. The risk is that. That part of you who said, this is what I don't want to do. I'm not going to have that conversation because it doesn't feel natural to me. The risk is, if it doesn't work out, that part of you comes back and says, I told you so. Stefan, you know, you wasted our damn time doing this. I told you it wasn't going to work out. Okay, so the question is, if that were to happen, if whatever risk happens, would you be able to handle it?

[Stefan]

That's the point. I'm just really trying to process everything, my internal GPT, how to. Yeah, I mean, and really, you know, that's the point when. When you're really confronted with the picture of yourself, with the image of yourself, that you are. Collaborative, whatever. Yeah. That you value these things. And when you really On a silver plate. Yeah. You are given the tool to do it. The first thing is resistance. And then after resistance comes hesitation. Because, I mean, I still. Although intellectually at this point, I'm sure we have to do it next week. That's just when we finish, I'll schedule a meeting. But that's. Yeah, I think it's just coming back to personality traits. Personality issues. I think that's it. I think that's it. So that's just personal preference. Slash, avoidance, slash whatever. A part of me thinks this will be confrontation, which just by principle, I'm usually trying to avoid confrontation. Unless it's really about super core values, like justice. Yeah. So then I really fight. But when it's not like super core value, then, I mean, I'm flexible.

[Muriel Wilkins]

I mean, and I'm glad you named it as personality preferences versus. You know, this is just who I am. Right. Because personality preference. And I'm honing in on the word preference. Preference is subjective. Right. Like preference is what you choose today, you know?

[Stefan]

Correct.

[Muriel Wilkins]

I don't know about you, but you know, there are times when, I mean, recently, like if you had asked me for years, what's my favorite ice cream? My preference is butter pecan. Right. And then the other day I had some chocolate ice cream and I was like, ooh, maybe this is my preference now. And in fact, maybe sometimes I can have both. Okay. There is no rule that I have to just have one flavor of ice cream. There's a reason why there are multiple flavors. You as a personality are not monolithic. You have these different aspects. And the preference is the one that we choose to lean on, or we not even choose. We just do it. Cause it's habitual. And I think what's happening now in at least the conversation today, what I'm see seeing is you're recognizing that, yes, one preference is to not address conflict, or as you put it, avoid conflict. And there's this other emerging desire for collaboration. Now the question to me, and that you have to actualize is how do you enter this relationship or reset or bring a different energy to it when where you are holding both collaboration and how to deal with conflict, the two can coexist, but that's really.

[Stefan]

If you, when you just wrote it on a paper, you have to address conflict and then to collaborate. I mean, that's same goal, right? To collaborate means. Yeah. To address conflicts.

[Muriel Wilkins]

That's right. So there's a fundamental leadership belief that you just articulated for yourself that will enable you to then approach this differently versus the belief that if there is conflict, there cannot be collaboration.

[Stefan]

Yeah.

[Muriel Wilkins]

It's not a right or wrong belief. It just will lead to different results.

[Stefan]

Correct. I mean, that's this really, you know, aha moment that you. But you just discover something that was all the time just in front of you. Yeah, but for some reason it was blurred just behind some preferences or assumptions, prejudgments, whatever, for sure.

[Muriel Wilkins]

And it's just a matter of readiness. I mean, everything's always right in front of us till we're ready to see it. There's one of my favorite quotes. I might butcher it, but it's like, when the student is ready, the teacher appears. And I think in this situation, Stefan, you are both student and teacher. And so when it's right in front of you. Yeah. You know, you're ready to learn from yourself when you're ready. I want to kind of bring this as a landing for you. Sort of picking up on something you said earlier, which is intellectually, you're getting it right. Intellectually, it's making sense. And you're going to schedule something with this colleague of yours. I think part of this is now not just intellectualizing it, but actually feeling it. Which was why I've kind of been pushing a little bit to action. How do you actually put this into reality? So from up here, and I'm pointing to my head to out there. Right. And so what I would encourage you to do, I mean, your homework is to schedule this. But what I would encourage you to do is between now and that meeting is to actually practice having this conversation. Okay. Write it out. What are you gonna say? Then actually say it. The practice is not so that you get it right. The practice is so that it warms up in yourself. You're doing a warmup, you're feeling what it feels like before it's actually happening. Okay. So I just wanna make sure you get that distinction. It's not about. So that the conversation is perfect and the skies open up and all of a sudden you guys are like the best collaborators in the world. And it's so that you can see that you can actually say those words, et cetera. And then that next stage is actually having the conversation with him.

[Stefan]

Yeah, I'm using this tool, but in, like, different contexts of difficult conversations, meaning asking supervisors, your boss for something that's. I mean, until you ask, the answer is no. But sometimes to actually ask takes things really a lot. So these are the situations. When I'm practicing it, it's slightly different, but that's. That's Excellent practice. That's. That's excellent approach. Yeah. Just to, to try to. To say it and when you hear yourself. Yeah. So there is this different channel of experience than you. What. How did I say it? How is it possible?

[Muriel Wilkins]

And if you have anyone, you know, this is extra credit. If you have anyone that you trust, one of your colleagues who knows this person and they would be willing to kind of role play it a little bit with you. That's the extra punch, right? Oh, yeah, that would be level. Level three. Before you actually have the conversation, okay?

[Stefan]

Oh, totally.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Okay. So I would love to hear as we close, how you're feeling now versus how you did when we first got started.

[Stefan]

This dual feeling. So on the one hand, I'm feeling like complete dumb idiot. It was actually, these are simple things, but I don't know, not accessible, hidden, whatever. On the other hand, what I feel is gratitude for this meeting that it's really unveiled, like uncovered these frameworks of understanding the process and what is going on. So that gives me a really great, I don't know, anchor, maybe to navigate or not anchor, lighthouse to navigate. And of course, finally this meeting gives me the actual action points with scheduling the meeting and practicing the conversation. So these three areas, that's. Wow.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Yeah, that's amazing, Stefan. And I would say, you know, when you find yourself in a similar sort of situation, whether it's this one or a different one where there are pain points. Okay. Take yourself back up to that lighthouse, right. And spend the time as you're doing now just looking at. Okay, let me sort of look around and try to get an understanding of what is actually happening. Because if you can understand what's happening, then you can determine how do I move forward, how do I respond?

[Stefan]

Okay, totally.

[Muriel Wilkins]

So thank you, thank you for your level of engagement in this.

[Stefan]

Thank you very much.

[Muriel Wilkins]

Stefan came into his coaching session unsure about the dual leadership setup he was in. But he left with clarity on steps he can take to turn it around and crucially, a commitment to own his part of the dynamic. He committed to set up that reset meeting and practices approach, turning awareness into action. Stefan's decision to take responsibility for his part is exactly what's needed to make co leading work. You can't control the other person, but you can always control how you show up. When you own your part, whether that's speaking up clearly, sharing expectations or clarifying roles, you're no longer just reacting to something someone else's moves. You're actively shaping the conversation and relationship. When you take responsibility for your share of any conflict or collaboration, you shift the whole dynamic and that's where real progress starts. That's it for this episode of Coaching Real Leaders. Next time I became aware of a need to change and I realized I was like, wait. I'm doing everything for everyone. Like me leading this company more looks like me cleaning up everyone's stuff. If you'd like to join my community for exclusive live discussions, apply to be on the show or sign up for email updates, head over to murielwilkins.com youm can also pre order my new book Leadership Unblocked. Wherever you get your favorite books, you can follow me on LinkedIn, Muriel Wilkins, and Instagram oachmurielwilkins before you go though, I have a really important ask of you. If you love the coaching conversations on Coaching Real Leaders, it would mean the world to me if you could go to Apple, Spotify or wherever you listen to, subscribe to the show and leave a five star review. And of course, if you think others would learn from these episodes, please share it with them. Thanks to my producer Mary Dew, Sound Editor Nick Krinko, Music Composer Brian Campbell, my Director of Operations Emily Sofa, and the entire team at hbr. Much gratitude to the leaders who join me in these coaching conversations and to you, our listeners who share in their journeys. From HBR Podcast Network, I'm Yairel Wilkins. Until next time, be well.