What does it really mean to be a member of the Leadership Team?
There’s a useful tension at the heart of being on a leadership team: you are simultaneously responsible for your function and collectively accountable for the whole.
Most leaders say they understand this,
few actually live it, especially under pressure.
Below is a synthesis of what it really means to be a member of a leadership team, grounded in the work of Patrick Lencioni, Peter Hawkins, Vanessa Druskat, Amy Edmondson, and Liane Davey. I went out of my comfort zone and chose not to include Simon Sinek, Adam Grant and Brene Brown (my usual “go-to”). See what you think…
1. You are still “the head of your function” BUT primarily responsible for leading the organisation
→ You are a steward of the enterprise
Lencioni: The first team is the leadership team, your function comes second
Hawkins: The team exists to serve stakeholders beyond itself (staff, system, beneficiaries)
Davey: Functional loyalty is one of the biggest derailers of team effectiveness
Expectation:
You prioritise what is right for the organisation over what is right for your silo - even when it costs you.
Where this goes wrong: Leaders advocate brilliantly in the room… then leave and protect their turf.
2. You carry collective accountability (not individual)
→ Success and failure are shared
Lencioni: “Peer-to-peer accountability” is the hardest discipline
Hawkins: Teams must take responsibility for collective outcomes, as well as individual KPIs
Davey: High-performing teams hold each other to commitments in real time
Expectation:
You don’t say, “My area is fine.”
You don’t blame shortcomings in your area on other parts of the organisation.
You ask, “How are we doing as a system?”
You seek common ground on the problem you are solving for and design the solution collaboratively.
Where this goes wrong:
Polite meetings. Private frustrations. Externalised blame.
3. You engage in real (and uncomfortable) conflict
→ Not aggression, but constructive truth-telling
Lencioni: Productive conflict is essential for commitment
Edmondson: Psychological safety enables speaking up - but does not remove discomfort
Davey: Avoiding conflict is one of the most costly team habits
Expectation:
You bring your perspective fully - and stay open to changing your mind or being wrong.
You are honest but not aggressive.
Say what you have to say in a way in which your colleague is not diminished.
You are open to giving and receiving learning.
You say the hard thing AND loosen your grip on being right.
Where this goes wrong:
“Walruses on the beach” - trading honest opinions until someone gives up wounded.
4. You help create psychological safety
→ Safety is a condition for performance, not comfort
Edmondson: Psychological safety = belief that it’s safe to take interpersonal risk
Druskat: Emotionally intelligent teams actively manage norms that enable this
Hawkins: Teams must balance support and challenge
Expectation:
You don’t: Expect other people to create safety for you.
You:
Invite dissent
Respond non-defensively
Make it safe for others to challenge you
Are kind but not nice
Where this goes wrong:
“Nice” becomes the culture.
And “nice” kills performance.
5. You manage the emotions of the team
→ Not just tasks - energy, tone, and undercurrents
Druskat: High-performing teams regulate group emotions deliberately
Hawkins: The team must attend to process, not just content
Pink: People are emotional beings not rational doings (he didn’t quite say it like this but that’s the gist).
Expectation:
You notice:
Who isn’t speaking
Where tension is being avoided
When the team is in fight / flight / freeze
And you name what you witness, skillfully, and invite candour (and courage) with curiosity.
Where this goes wrong:
Everyone focuses on the task, not the feelings.
6. You think systemically
→ Every decision has ripple effects
Hawkins: The leadership team is a system within a wider system
Davey: Teams must make trade-offs visible and explicit
Expectation:
You consider:
Cross-functional impact
Long-term consequences
Stakeholders beyond the room
Where this goes wrong:
Short-term, functionally optimised decisions which are organisationally sub-optimal.
7. You model the behaviour you want the organisation to follow
→ The LT is the culture (there is no one else to blame)
Lencioni: The leadership team sets the tone for the organisation
Edmondson: Leader behaviour directly shapes voice and learning
Druskat: Norms cascade
The expectation is to model what you want to see in others.
Accountability → you hold yourself accountable
Curiosity → you find out what colleagues outside the leadership team are experiencing
Openness → you admit mistakes
Collaboration → you collaborate visibly, even when you disagree with the direction of travel
Where this goes wrong:
Leaders talk about values the organisation never actually experiences.
8. You align publicly
→ Even when the decision wasn’t your preference
Lencioni: Commitment doesn’t require consensus
Davey: Disagree and commit is a discipline
Expectation:
Once a decision is made:
You align externally as a unified team
You don’t re-litigate in corridors (no gossip)
You don’t send mixed signals to your teams or defer blame
You don’t assign the decision to someone else
Where this goes wrong:
“It has been decided that…” instead of “we have decided that…”
9. You do your inner work
→ Because the pressure will draw you into your worst behaviours
None of these thinkers say it quite this explicitly, but it sits underneath all of them, and is what I believe is the essential, often overseen, ingredient for team success.
Leadership team dynamics are deeply human.
Under pressure:
You protect your identity
You defend your expertise
You do not risk speaking honestly
You avoid threat to your position, status, reputation
Expectation:
You develop awareness of:
Your triggers
Your need to be right / liked / in control
Your default survival strategies
Because otherwise, you become the dysfunction you’re trying to solve.
The uncomfortable truth
Being on a leadership team is usually a reward for being excellent at your job.
BUT it is a fundamentally different job.
And the shift is this:
From owning a piece of the business to co-owning the health of the whole system.
Teams under-perform if this shift never fully happens.