Experts have also struggled with this question and some have come up with different leadership models. Trait based models explored whether there are personal traits that leads to effective leadership.

Characteristics such as self confidence, ability to regulate stress, ambition, drive are some of the traits common in good leaders.

However, a lot of great leaders do not have all these traits and these characteristics were not found to be reliably predict work performance. Behavioural models aimed to identify types of behaviours that effective leaders use to influence their staff. A similar issue arose with trait based model, that behaviours could not predict effective leadership.

I found that the situational model of change by Dunphy and Stace most helpful in answering this question. The model suggest that there are different sets of leadership attributes, style and behaviours depending on the situation at hand. Businesses experience various stages of change during its life cycle and face unique challenges.

During developmental transitions organisations face constant incremental change. Organisations in this type of transition usually pursue stable and continuous improvements in their service quality. Employees are usually aligned with the vision and need to cooperate with each other to achieve their goals.

A collaborative style led by ‘coaches’ is desirable during a developmental transitions phase. This style engages employees to participate in the change and direction.

The buy-in from employees gained from using this style helps the organisation to continue to carry out incremental changes it needs to grow.

During task focused transitions, the organisation also face incremental change but there is high importance placed on compliance and conformity to achieve its goals. Organisations in this type of transition may be ones that needs to adopt new systems of work or use new techniques to produce its goods. For example: in order to survive intense competition, a company may need to adopt new technologies to increase their efficiency that is not possible by using the old technology. In this phase, full adoption of the technology is more important than trying to achieve consensus.

During task focused transitions a combination of directive and consultative style led by ‘captains’ is most desirable.

The captain has to be assertive and directive in ensuring everyone is on board with the change in direction. The captain also consults and ensures employees have some involvement in the change process.

Charismatic transformations may also be required where drastic, frame breaking changes need to happen. Organisations in this phase are usually at risk of strategic misalignment with the environment. It may be under threat and need radical changes to happen in order to survive.

Charismatic transformation phases require speed of decision making and execution as the risk of delays or no change threatens its existence. The rapid pace of change require leaders to inspire, communicate and present compelling reasons for change in order for employees to accept and come along for the journey.

The ‘charismatic’ and inspirational leader is desirable during this phase as their effective communication skills, ability to quickly gain trust and credibility can garner the support of all stakeholders.

Lastly, turnarounds are phases where organisations need to radically change its strategy. Organisations in this phase usually have to execute difficult decision such as laying off staff or conducting massive restructures.

Turnaround phases prioritise achieving the strategic gains for its survival. Due to the difficult nature of the decisions it has to make and resistance it will face, effective leaders during this phase are usually the ‘commanders’ who can use coercive styles.

These leaders need to be ‘thick skinned’, be able to stand strong amidst intense opposition and have trust and confidence that the process will lead to better outcomes for the organisation and its people.

In my personal experience as a healthcare director, I have experienced leading in different phases. I found that matching leadership styles to the situation leads to effective strategy execution and (in most instances) support employees to trust and come along in the change journey.

What do you think? Can you relate to any of these phases of change? What leadership style are you using and do you find it to be effective? Please contact Optimal Minds today for a confidential discussion with our skilled coaches if you wish to develop your leadership skills.

Written by Rheza Tan, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post What makes good leaders? appeared first on Optimal Minds.

The Challenge of Disclosure

For many adults with ADHD, autism, or dyslexia, the decision to disclose their neurodiversity at work is fraught with anxiety. Fear of stigma, misunderstanding, and potential career repercussions often deter individuals from sharing their diagnosis. As a result, these employees might not receive the accommodations and support that could significantly enhance their productivity and job satisfaction.

The Challenge of Inclusion

However, here’s the rub: it is not the simple presence of neurodiverse employees  in the workforce, with their diverse points of view and problem solving strategies, that  improves productivity. True gains can only be achieved with neurodiversity through  inclusion.

The Role of Leadership in Creating Psychologically Safe Environments

Good leadership is central to developing psychologically safe environments that promote disclosure. Leaders who understand and value neurodiversity can create a culture of acceptance and support which demonstrates that it is safe for employees to disclose their neurodiversity without fear. However, it’s important to note that increases in productivity can still be achieved without employees needing to disclose their neurodiversity. By optimising the workplace experience with small, thoughtful neurodiverse aware changes, organisations can support their neurodiverse workforce effectively.

Practical Steps Towards an Inclusive Workplace

Offering education about neurodiversity and embracing principles of universally accessible design (UD) can benefit neurodiverse and non-neurodiverse employees alike. UD principles involve creating environments that are inherently inclusive, such as establishing quiet spaces, using multiple modalities for communication, and offering flexible work schedules. These changes not only support neurodiverse employees but also enhance the workplace for everyone. In more detail inclusivity can include:

• Education and Awareness Training

Conduct training programs to educate all employees about ADHD, autism, and dyslexia. This can help challenge stereotypes, reduce stigma, and create a more inclusive culture. A greater awareness can lead to a more supportive environment where employees feel safe to disclose their neurodiversity and seek accommodations, thus creating the conditions for an increase in staff retention and performance.

• Flexible Work Arrangements

Offer flexible work hours, remote work opportunities, clearly communicated tasks and processes, and adjustable deadlines. Effective communication and flexibility aids neurodiverse employees to free up their mental resources to focus on expressing their talents, leading to improved productivity and job satisfaction.

• Revised Performance Review Processes

Tailor performance reviews to maximise awareness of individual strengths and talent development. Consider that under-performance could be a result of neurodiversity when providing constructive, supportive feedback and goal setting.This talent-valuing approach aims to enhance the engagement, performance and retention of neurodiverse employees.

• Mindful Workspace Design

Be mindful of the impact of hot-desking, movement of people, environmental sounds and smells. Provide quiet areas and personalised workspaces where possible. Creating an environment that reduces unproductive sensory stress can significantly enhance functioning, well being and productivity for neurodiverse employees.

• Individualised Environmental Optimisation

Be curious about the environment each team member may require in order that they can perform at their full potential. Simple changes, such as seating arrangements, effective ventilation, revising the usability and readability of websites and written materials, or access to noise-cancelling headphones, can make a big difference. Personalised adjustments provide employees with equal and equitable access to the resources they require to perform well in their role and help them feel they are a respected and valued employee.

• Specialist Coaching

Leadership coaching from a neurodiversity specialist can aid productivity  whether the leader or their team members are neurodiverse. Specialised coaching aligns education, strategies and development goals to the unique strengths and challenges of neurodiverse individuals, improving self-awareness, communication processes, and problem-solving. Additionally, coaching aims to enhance individual and team resilience and foster inclusive leadership that empowers teams and drives innovation.

What are the Benefits?

Neuro-inclusive practices offer substantial productivity gains by harnessing the unique strengths and perspectives of neurodiverse employees. By creating an environment that includes, supports and values neurodiversity, employers can drive innovation, improve employee engagement and retention, enhance efficiency and work quality, foster better team dynamics, and build a stronger reputation. Embracing neuro-inclusivity is not just a moral and ethical imperative, but also a strategic advantage that can lead to sustained business success.

What About the Cost?

Concerns about cost blowouts are understandable, but it’s important to recognise that these are incremental processes. Implementing accommodations doesn’t require a significant upfront investment but rather a commitment to continuous, small improvements. Providing equitable, but not necessarily equal, access to support, ensures that all employees have what they need to succeed without imposing undue financial strain on the organisation.

Conclusion

By broadening inclusion practices from a focus from recruiting a neurodiverse workforce to recognising and supporting the neurodiverse individuals already present, businesses can unlock potential. Employees with ADHD, autism, and dyslexia who are often “hiding in plain sight,” possess unique strengths that, when properly supported through neuro-inclusive practices, offer substantial productivity gains by harnessing their unique talents and perspectives.

Investing in education, flexible arrangements, personalised accommodations, open communication, and thoughtful workspace design not only enhances productivity but also fosters a more inclusive and supportive workplace culture. Let’s rethink our approach to neurodiversity in the workplace, recognising the hidden talents within and creating an environment where everyone has the opportunity to excel.

Businesses have a relatively low cost opportunity to transform their workplaces into spaces where all employees, including neurodiverse employees, are actively supported and celebrated for their contributions. By doing so, we ensure a more dynamic, innovative, and successful future for all.

Written by Dr Ian Cameron, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post Neurodiversity: Potential Hiding in Plain Sight appeared first on Optimal Minds.

Interestingly, the reasons for people leaving their jobs are more complex than the quote suggests. As a ‘boss’, I also feel that this oversimplification unnecessarily stigmatises leaders, likening them  to the ‘evil stepmother’ stereotype perpetuated in children’s fairy tales.

I would like to discuss some of the nuances surrounding why people who have negative experiences at work resign from their jobs.

1. The job was actually bad

Some jobs are just poorly designed. We have all heard of jobs where employees rarely stay more than a few months. These jobs can be those that are: repetitive, mundane, where employees have low control over their work or have unrealistic performance expectations. While it’s true that a senior leader would have designed these jobs, there are also leaders who have no authority or control over approved work tasks and performance expectations.

What can you do? 

If you lead employees where the job is poorly designed, consider conducting a review of roles, responsibilities and work tasks. It is possible to redesign jobs with a focus on both the goals of the organisation and the needs of employees. Advances in technology also allow for greater automation of simple tasks which then frees the employees to focus on tasks requiring higher level skills that  provide greater satisfaction and motivation.

2. Work is unfulfilling 

Sometimes there is a mismatch between an employee’s goals and the work role. While it’s easy to blame the leader or the company, employees can also stay in jobs they hate for various reasons. For example, some employees may not have other viable job options at the time, other employees may be too anxious to leave a comfortable role. No amount of great leadership can cause these employees to be happy and fulfilled in their roles.

What can you do? 

If you notice unhappy employees in the absence of other workplace issues, engaging them in a coaching conversation may help them become unstuck. This may mean spending regular weekly coaching sessions with individual employees to identify their goals and help them think about whether these goals  align with  their current work roles. You may also consider transferring employees to another available work role that better matches their goals and aspirations. This change may help them stay longer and experience better job satisfaction. You can also engage external coaches to provide more specialised services.  

3. They leave ‘bad bosses’

A ‘bad boss’ does not mean that they are an evil person  hell-bent on causing their employees  misery and suffering. Most people try to do well in their jobs, including leaders. Good leaders are also prone to make mistakes and these mistakes usually impact their staff. Inexperienced and untrained leaders tend to make more mistakes than leaders who have completed formal leadership training and have experience in their roles. However, no matter what their level of skill and expertise, disgruntled employees tend to label leaders as ‘bad bosses’ as a result of their leadership mishaps.

What can you do? 

If you are a well-intentioned leader who is feeling ‘out of your depth’, engage in intentional learning to develop your leadership competencies. There are many workshops, courses and degrees that can be useful in developing your leadership competencies. Use workplace situations to apply the knowledge in practice and be open to continuous learning and professional development.

I hope this article helps to demystify the overused quote: “People don’t leave bad jobs, they leave bad bosses.” Leaders can improve themselves, their workplace environment and work roles in order to retain their employees and reduce staff turnover. Optimal Minds have skilled leadership coaches, trainers and consultants who can help you and your organisation to implement solutions that will develop and create an engaging and satisfied workforce.

Written by Rheza Tan, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post “People don’t leave bad jobs, they leave bad bosses”. Fact or Myth? appeared first on Optimal Minds.

‘No one cares,’

and observations that the workforce is ‘disengaged’ and ‘burnt out’. Leaders experience their staff to be wary of workplace change which, in the wake of the pandemic, is necessary to continue to transform, adapt and respond to the changed ways in which we do business.

When COVID-19 hit, society was faced with uncertainty, fear and danger. Unlike other natural disasters where we come together to respond to the threat,  we were encouraged, and then compelled, to isolate ourselves from others. As our usual in-person relating was greatly disrupted, the social connectivity of society was significantly altered. No longer could we interact in person at businesses, schools, shops, restaurants, cafes, clubs, or sporting facilities. We suffered grocery shortages and the media revelled in publishing footage of divided shoppers fighting it out for toilet paper, reinforcing the image of every person for themselves.

Overnight workforces were sent home and companies scrambled to connect with staff in order that they find new ways to keep doing business. Suddenly we all had to flex to working through video calls, solving our own  IT issues, negotiating for quiet work space and for many, becoming a home-school teacher as well.

For most of us during the pandemic we related to the world through our devices. We logged on, Zoomed, emailed, shopped, binged and zoned out, and for many, our devices began to keep us up late and disrupted our biological sleep rhythms. The boundaries between off-line and on-line, and work and home, were blurred and while some welcomed this new flexibility,  others struggled to find their new tempo and establish workable systems and routines.

Following the lifting of lockdowns and the opening of the state and international borders, life has not returned to pre-COVID days. Our way of life and ways of working have developed and changed, and continue to change. Most workers have a hybrid mode of working between the office and home and parents have more complex lives juggling work and child care, with women doing an even greater share of the caring. Many businesses such as cafes located within business hubs struggle to be profitable, and many office blocks are near to empty. At the same time interest rates on home loans have risen dramatically, while house prices on average continue to rise.  A recent university study of over 300 post pandemic work-life research articles identified three themes in

post-pandemic work-life changes: The boundaries between work and personal life have become increasingly permeable, leading to the rise of behaviour and time based conflicts between these two domains. Second, there has been a noticeable escalation in the demands of technical work, characterised by challenges such as technological intrusion, overload, and complexity. Third, work has become more psychologically and emotionally demanding.

When we operate for extended periods of time under increased uncertainty, pressure and strain, to manage our fatigue we seek to conserve energy, find shortcuts and switch to autopilot. Our emails can become shorter and less nuanced, we don’t put in the work preparing for meetings, we leave our video off during meetings, we don’t check out misunderstandings with others, or perhaps we spend more time consulting ChatGPT than our colleagues. While this all feels like it makes sense from a conserving energy point of view, in reality, it is just kicking the can down the road and creating problems for our future selves.

To find a way forward let’s take a quick detour into the science of the mind. Humans have two systems of thinking; one is like the hare and the other is like the tortoise. The Hare thinking system is quick and efficient, it operates automatically with little or no effort, and is the intuitive, emotional, and unconscious mode of thinking. It handles tasks like recognizing faces, driving on familiar roads, and making quick judgments. For efficiency this style of thinking relies on its first impressions from a glance, but accuracy is the tradeoff and it is vulnerable to biases, distortions, inflexibility and overconfidence. The Tortoise cognitive system is slower and more deliberate and requires conscious effort, which makes it more accurate. In this mode we are conscious of our thinking and can be analytical and logical to solve complex and difficult problems.

It makes sense that during a time of higher stress stemming from an increase in complexity, diffuse work-life boundaries and increased emotional pressures, our minds default to the reactive Hare mode of thinking and emotionality. However for most work roles, we need our teams to be operating in Tortoise mode: analytical, accurate, and responsive. A concrete example of the outcomes of thinking fast or thinking slow comes from a friend of mine, who is a highly experienced paramedic. He said whenever he arrives at a critical incident he feels a great deal of pressure from people at the scene to rush to the patient. He said if paramedics react to the urgency, run into the scene and begin to speak to the patient too quickly, their rushed speech and behaviour becomes contagious to those around them. Thinking becomes rushed and important details are omitted, leading to poor decision making.  As leaders, there are three influential strategies we can use to help ourselves and our teams to shift into the Tortoise mode of thinking.

Settle self to settle others

In the presence of threat we will collectively move into emotionally activated states to protect ourselves and others, and conversely, being calm and settled in ourselves prompts others to become more settled. Humans have thrived and adapted through cooperating in groups and co-regulating each other’s emotional states. As leaders, when we are emotionally settled and open to others, we send a powerful non-verbal communication to those around us that they are also safe in this moment. From this safe state, their minds are more able to be curious, creative and logical. From this state of mind, collectively we are most able to solve complex problems.

Listen to understand. 

When we are under pressure it is difficult to slow down and listen. We become impatient for the other to finish speaking so we can make our point. Impatiently listening with only half an ear and being quick to respond, keeps us (and likely, the other person) in Hare mode. The result is that we are vulnerable to falling into the trap of habitual thinking which is generally inflexible and more likely to contain biases and cognitive distortions.

To engage a deeper form of thinking and engagement, experiment with listening as if you don’t know about the topic. Listen with curiosity, and seek to find areas of common ground in discussions and debates. Careful and curious listening makes the other feel understood and this is an important leadership skill. Research tells us that if a person perceives that we have respectfully and carefully listened to their position, they are then more likely to negotiate and make concessions. As a leader we can influence and guide others, as much through careful listening, as through speaking.

Say what you mean, Kindly. 

Practice taking your time to formulate your thoughts and the messages you use to express your thoughts and wishes with clarity. Keep in mind Pascal’s famous quote: I have made this longer than usual because I have not had time to make it shorter.  Under pressure some can become too preoccupied with how the message may be received, and in a bid to avoid all possible conflict or offence, will be too indirect and include too much detail and then fail to communicate the essential aspect of their idea or request. But conversely, don’t then use an oversized hammer for the communication job, as being too heavy handed or direct can also be a pitfall. If we become too direct and don’t spend sufficient time to reflect on how the communication may be received by others, it can lead to unnecessary misunderstandings or disharmony.

Take your time to think about the point you want to communicate, reflect  on whether it is based on reason, think about  how it may be received, reflect on whether the emotional tone of your message is measured and how it may impact on your work relationships, beyond the current moment.

Please reach out to Optimal Minds if you would like to develop your skills in responding rather than reacting, to deepen your leadership skills or to improve the psychological safety of your organisation.

Written by Dr Ian Cameron, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post Do as I say, or do as I do? appeared first on Optimal Minds.

My story is not unique. Many leaders were once technical experts in their field: accountants, software engineers, architects, engineers, doctors, etc. Stepping up into a leadership position seems to be a logical progression for those working in organisations. However, there are several traps that technical experts can find themselves stuck in if they are not careful.

The pay trap

Salary levels for managerial and directorial positions are often much higher than they are for technical employees. For example, salaries for medical officers in leadership positions can be double the rate of clinical specialists. Stepping up to managerial positions is also a natural and exciting career progression. However, while the pay is a great motivator, leadership roles are not to everyone’s liking. Enjoying a software engineer role where you can develop advanced algorithms does not mean you will enjoy dealing with the issues of managing a team of disgruntled software engineers with high turnover rates.

People in higher paid positions often adjust their lifestyles and habits accordingly. They buy bigger houses, have larger mortgages, an extra car, and spend on regular overseas holidays. The thought of stepping down from a leadership position and returning to a lower pay scale can bring real and uncomfortable financial consequences, and here is the pay trap. People may find themselves feeling trapped in a leadership position they don’t enjoy and knowing they can’t afford to return to practising the technical skills they have trained and developed for many years.

The expert trap

It is not easy for a manager to shut down or push away knowledge that has been accumulated over many years of university training and on the job experience. However, while the manager’s main role involves leading people, technical issues are constantly being brought to the manager’s attention. While the manager’s expertise and experience can bring tremendous value to their management role, it can interfere with the functioning of the organisation if the manager neglects leadership duties to focus on being a technical expert. And here is the expert trap. Managers neglect their leadership role to step in and solve the technical problems that their staff are responsible for solving. In doing so the manager runs the risk of micromanaging the team and leaving their staff feeling under appreciated, controlled, and stifled in a work environment that feels negative and uncreative. Neglecting leadership roles to focus on problems the team can solve can also adversely impact the organisation. It is likely that no one else can step in and perform the manager’s duties while they solve problems for their team. The end result is sooner or later, managerial and organisational duties, such as setting strategy and direction, engaging with stakeholders and coaching talents, begin to pile up leaving the manager feeling stressed, bitter and overwhelmed.

The competency trap

Most technical experts turned leaders do not start their leadership journey with sufficient training. They are expected to learn from their bosses and to learn on the job. This may mean copying and imitating what their bosses have done in the past, both the good and the bad, because the new manager hasn’t got the experience to know any better. I was fortunate to have a great manager and mentor who taught me for a good six years before we parted ways. During that time, I was able to learn from others experiences, and I was also able to observe poor leadership practices. The contrast helped me learn to discern between good and poor practices. I have noticed over the years that many people who struggle in their leadership positions have never sufficiently focused on building their leadership competencies. They are good people and competent technical experts in their fields, but this does not necessarily translate into them becoming good leaders. It is these leaders who fall into the (lack of) competency trap.

Leadership is a competency and a discipline that one must master. As we have focused on continuing professional development in our technical areas of expertise, so must we focus on learning about leadership when managing staff. Psychologists have found that to become an expert in a skill, at least 10,000 hours of deliberate practice is required. Good leaders spend time every day learning to be good leaders, practising their leadership skills and seeking feedback about their leadership practices.

Are you a skilled professional in your field? Do you feel that you may be trapped in a leadership position you do not enjoy? Contact Optimal Minds today for a confidential discussion with our skilled coaches. Set yourself free from the pay trap, the expert trap or the competency trap and return to feeling fulfilled in your career and life journey.

Written by Rheza Tan, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post Three Traps for New Leaders appeared first on Optimal Minds.

After completing his degree, Gallwey had embarked on a journey of self-discovery and an exploration of Eastern philosophies, particularly Zen Buddhism. This spiritual exploration had a profound impact on his perspective on sports and performance, leading him to develop a holistic approach to coaching that emphasised the mental and psychological aspects of athletic performance.

In his book he introduced the concept of “Self-1” and “Self-2,” highlighting the critical role of self-awareness and mental clarity in achieving peak performance. Gallwey’s philosophy emphasised the need to quieten the inner critic (Self-1) and trust the body’s innate abilities and intuition (Self-2). Performance author Brad Stulberg unpacked Gallwey’s ideas using the expression “You need to get out of your own way”. Stulberg wrote Gallwey’s “Self-1” is the “you” and his “Self-2” is the “your”. We all have a noisy- judgey Self-1 voice in our mind which is incessantly trying to boss around Self-2. Gallwey envisaged Self 2 to be our mind-body system, “a tremendously sophisticated and competent collection of potentialities.” However Self 1 does not trust that self 2 knows what to do and when to do it. Gallwey gives the example of a challenging but enjoyable tennis match in which you have lost yourself. Suddenly, you find that you are at match point,  poised to win  and Self-1 wakes up and whispers. ‘Wow! Match point! This is really important, you should try hard to win but don’t stuff it up.’ Self-1 in trying to “help”, encourages us to tighten up, overthink, and try too hard.

A vivid example of the troubled Self 1-2 relationship comes to my mind from my memories of the heart in-mouth experiences of watching my son compete in mountain bike racing. One of his high-school Mountain Biking competitions took us to Thredbo, Australia (think steep and fast downhill tracks). The students had completed their cross country trail, their blue (intermediate) down hill trail and were now onto  the black-rated downhill trail. The competitors were pretty pumped, as the black trail was the fastest, most challenging, and from a parent’s perspective, the most dangerous. My son had not ridden many black runs before (well, not that he had told me about).  After discussing  the pros and cons, he decided that he was going to give the black-rated downhill trail a go. I was apprehensive but also proud that he was extending himself by challenging his fears.

Fast forward to the heats of the black run. I was standing near, but back from a series of tight banked fast corners before a big jump, leading to the finish line. From this position I was able to watch the riders burst out of the scrub at breakneck speeds before throwing themselves through these tight, fast corners. They were all pushing themselves to their limits to get the very best times they could. I was keen to see my son emerge out of the scrub but also keen that he didn’t hear or see me. A year earlier I had been photographing him taking a jump further down the same run and he knew I was there. He had been thinking about landing an impressive jump for the perfect Insta shot. No doubt as a result of  trying extra hard, instead of the ideal Insta shot, instead he landed some impressive grazing and bruising after miscalculating the jump and  crashing heavily.

It was for this reason, I waited silently in my camouflaged spectator spot to see my son appear from the scrub and complete the final part of the challenging black run.  In stark contrast however, not far from me, was  someone’s nanna, standing in prime position like a politician at a ribbon cutting right on the outside of the apex of a tight  corner. Her hands were anxiously gesturing to the riders to slow down, and to each of the riders, in an imploring tone she voiced one simple word, (which in fairness to this nanna,  was also being said in my head): “Careful!’.

Nanna’s potential to distract the riders horrified me but thankfully, none of the kids seemed to even register her hand flapping  presence. However, had they been aware of her, I fear her actions and verbal warning  would have been speaking directly to their Self-1 minds. Would they have suddenly been aware of all of the spectators and the photographers, and worried for a moment too long about how to pull off an awesome Insta shot, or would they have doubted that they knew how to take the next corner? Would they have started to wonder about their times and if they should push that little bit further outside of  their comfort zone? When we are distracted by the imploring, anxious, and distrustful chatter of Self-1, we can tighten up, try too hard, and perhaps  over think something we already know, rather than letting the next corner just happen.

So often in our lives, at home and at work, we get caught up in our minds, commentating on how we are performing, and anticipating how we may be judged by others. We doubt that we know what we are doing, that others will place their trust in us or that processes will work out. Getting caught in Self-1 leads to reduced confidence, distraction, worry, inadequacy or other feelings such as frustration. When we are in Self-1 rarely are we just in the moment of the current task, mostly we are re-hashing past difficulties or we are thinking ahead and imagining ourselves in future feared situations. Our Self-1 struggles to trust in our abilities and it won’t let the next corner  just happen.

As leaders how often do we inadvertently engage with our team members’ Self-1, rather than their Self-2? Consider that,maybe with the best of  intentions, while we think we are  encouraging our teams to be ‘careful’ in their work, our approach triggers  them to withdraw from the present moment and start evaluating themselves, their skills, their social standing within the team, the risk of being humiliated if they share an idea, or are they quietly quitting this job in their mind and  already at their next company?

Alternatively, like me, spectating at the mountain bike racing, we can think that we are ‘all good’ because  we are keeping our anxious thoughts to ourselves. However, we also know that our minds are not vaults. Rather our anxieties can leak out through our behaviour, our facial expressions, through the grammar of our speech and so often through what is not said or encouraged.

To engage with our Self-2 minds we need to create opportunities wherein we can lose ourselves into the flow of the present moment of our endeavours.  We are seeking states of mind where, rather than being self conscious, we are self aware. In this state of self awareness we are in the moment and more adept at making assessments and reflections and taking effective action. Self-2 is at its best when it is trusted to know where to go next, to monitor and evaluate its current performance but without getting too focussed on all of the things which will make it crash. In mountain biking there is an adage, ‘your bike will follow your eyes’, meaning, look at where you need to be, not at what will make you crash.

Workplaces which are psychologically safe are optimised to produce an environment for staff to be more engaged in the challenges of the moment rather than being caught up in worrying about their careers, their self image or caught in resentments of past perceived injustices. As a leader, you can foster a psychologically safe workplace through: communicating and modelling the mission and values of your organisation, acting with transparency and honesty, setting clear and achievable goals for your team, and balancing challenge and empathy in your coaching.

Please reach out to Optimal Minds if you would like to develop your skills in being present in the current moment, to deepen your leadership skills or to improve the psychological safety of your organisation.

Written by Dr Ian Cameron, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post Flow States – Getting Out Of Our Own Way appeared first on Optimal Minds.

Switkowski concluded that a number of factors contributed to PWC’s self-destructive behaviour including: the CEOs were elected by the senior partners in a presidential style election and functionally reported to no-one, resulting in unchecked power; PWC had an over focus on positive results and a lack of self reflection or examination of undesirable outcomes; and there was an over emphasis on positive collegiate relationships, which functionally suppressed diversity of expressed opinion and debate.

It is useful to unpack some of these points further through the lens of psychological safety.

Speaking with Candour  

A key tenet of psychological safety is having a voice; the ability to be able to speak candidly. On the face of it, in 2020 the CEO had established a process to listen to the voices of PWC. He established The People’s Council which was composed of staff representatives from across the firm, to whom the CEO extended “an open invitation” for all staff to speak up about issues and propose solutions. In 2022 when a staff survey asked the representatives on The People’s Council about speaking up, they reported that not only did they have a voice, but that they felt a responsibility to speak up and propose solutions. However, it is worth wondering how likely it would be that such a group could ever feel safe to name the problem of senior partners acting far outside of the company’s ethics and standards of behaviour? And how much more unlikely it would be that they could propose the solutions which have since played out: that the CEO resign; the board be restructured; or that the Federal Police investigate the firm’s behaviour? Switkowski concluded that the staff had the freedom to speak up but it seems only about ‘safe’ issues. Switkowski said that the CEO had failed to establish the conditions in which staff were able to “challenge the status quo”, as there was a general understanding that such an action would be unsafe, an end to one’s career progression in PWC. It seems that the threat was implicitly known but not explicitly spoken.

Mission Impossible

It is difficult in overtly positive environments to visualise where the threat lies. Threat is much easier to identify when it is linked to anger, as was the case in Volkswagen’s infamous fall from grace some years ago. You may recall Volkswagen’s fraudulent engineering of their diesel vehicles to fake emissions output whenever the vehicles detected they were in a lab environment under evaluation. A number of the analyses of the scandal focused on the behaviour of the global CEO of Volkswagen who was renowned for his relentless perfectionistic standards, and for his volatile anger. The CEO had set the goal for Volkswagen to be the number one seller in the USA, but to achieve this they had to produce clean diesel cars. Low emissions had seemed ‘mission impossible’ from the start but no one on the management team had the courage to tell the CEO. It was as if no-one had ever read Hans Christian Andersen’s fable about the Emperor’s New Clothes.

Who is fooling who?

In this fable the emperor, who is known for his love of lavish clothing, is duped into appearing naked in front of his subjects by swindlers who pose as weavers of a cloth so exclusive as to be visible only to the intellectually elite. The swindlers charm the emperor and are enthusiastically effusive about his acumen to judge fine clothing. The swindlers are soon hired by the emperor to make him a wardrobe of magnificent clothes. The emperor’s subjects who monitor the weaving of the exclusive cloth are quickly faced with a dilemma: the looms are clearly empty and no cloth is being woven but if they speak up, they not only risk looking foolish themselves, but they will make the emperor appear even more foolish. The fable tells us that our fears of an angry emperor go much deeper than his anger. Speaking up risks the threat of shame, exclusion and humiliation. The silence at PWC may well have developed in the presence of threats such as these. However, in stark contrast the CEO’s of PWC were described as positive, with a focus on rewards, achievement and a collegiate environment.

It seems likely that PWC started with the very best of intentions to create a supportive environment with a positive rapport between staff at all levels, but over time the positivity became the driver of silencing mono-culture. When ideas and behaviours gain momentum in a dominant culture, the interpersonal control takes place within the minds of all of the group members. Just like the emperor’s subjects, the fear of negative consequences leads us to doubt our own senses, and to rationalise our decisions to stay silent. When this happens, the psychological control is hidden by the negation and self silencing of those who fear negative consequences. The groundwork is then set, just as it was in the fable, wherein all that the swindlers asked was that the emperor’s subjects and the townsfolk said nothing. To add to the effect, self silencing becomes quite seductive in an atmosphere of positivity where there are high rewards for adherence to the dominant narrative.

The Bad News; It’s Universal

Now please don’t misunderstand this commentary. Where do I position myself? Well if we look at the tale of the Emperor’s New Clothes, the emperor’s subjects and the townsfolk were swept up in their own need to fit within their community. All of them feared the shame of looking foolish and losing the emperor’s favour. In the end, it was a child who did not understand the rules at play, who called out publicly that the emperor was wearing no clothes at all. If I had been a staff member at PWC, as an adult with my own fears and frailties, I expect I too would have most likely been swept up into adhering to the rules of the dominant culture, and had I been a member of the People’s Council, I suspect I too would not have spoken out. My commentary is not about PWC, but about the universal underlying frailty of the human psyche; we are all vulnerable to unchecked power, we all share a dread of shame and the need for social acceptance.

When faced with the challenge of speaking out against our leaders or our peers, we all wish to be thought of as clever and knowledgeable, while also greatly fearing looking foolish. Many of us play it safe and stay silent to avoid the heavy risk of shame. But the more we kick the can of shame down the road, ultimately the more naked and exposed we become to the shame of being foolish.

Solutions?

What are the solutions? For an organisation to be healthy and thrive it needs to recurrently develop culture which is direct and empathic, and keeps both power and shame in check. Ray Dalio, the founder of the highly successful firm Bridgewater, believes that developing a healthy organisation’s culture starts with senior leaders modelling and fostering an atmosphere in which power, consensus and group thinking are actively challenged through debate and transparency. The psychological safety literature recurrently finds that in people-based systems there is an inevitability of mistakes and errors, but that organisational health can be found through leaders setting the expectation that mistakes can be a source of learning and improvement.

Brene Brown in her work on courage, repeatedly emphasises the need for open and authentic relationships at work which support and dissolve the divisions of difference, and the shame of owning or naming mistakes and failure.

Optimal Minds has a highly experienced team of consultants who aid individuals and workplaces to deepen the psychological safety of their organisation. We can help you enrich the processes through which you engage with your team and aid you in the development of individual practices so that your business thrives through authentic relationships with your staff.

Written by Dr Ian Cameron, Psychologist and Consultant
Updated 27th September 2026

The post Psychological Safety and the Emperor’s New Clothes appeared first on Optimal Minds.