Leader A and senior manager B had maintained an outwardly functional relationship for years, while internally being caught in a deeply entrenched communication pattern. In conversations, the same reactive sequence kept repeating itself: A raised critical questions, B took them personally and “shut down,” and A then attempted to smooth things over. Yet this usually worked only on the surface. After many of these interactions, B carried frustration outward, told the leadership team the story of the “bad boss,” and partly discharged accumulated negativity on the shop floor.
Within the coaching process, transformative skills were specifically transferred to leader A. A became increasingly able to recognize when B slipped into a “red” state of self-absorption and reactivity. At the same time, A developed the ability to stay with the moment without reacting reflexively. This gradually interrupted the familiar cycle of reactivity. Through a clearer, more grounded, and simultaneously more connected way of communicating, A became able to help B regain clarity more quickly. The potential for destructive energy decreased noticeably — often immediately.
Specifically: Earlier recognition of reactive states. · Greater steadiness and inner stability in difficult conversations. · Interruption of recurring escalation patterns. · Clearer and simultaneously more connected communication.
An unfamiliar kind of approach. But it was worth it.
Leader A
after a coaching session
Individual Contributor C works at corporate headquarters in direct support of the board, without holding formal leadership responsibility. For years, C had delivered presentations in demanding executive contexts. More recently, however, brief moments of panic had begun to occur at the very beginning of important presentations. For several seconds, C would internally lose the thread and no longer know what the presentation was about. Outwardly, this remained largely unnoticed, as C was able to skillfully navigate around the situation and quickly reconnect. Internally, however, pressure had been steadily increasing.
Across several individual coaching sessions, attention was gradually directed toward the underlying tension — initially without focusing on why the issue had emerged at that particular point in time. The process did not center around premature analysis, but around a shared exploration based on attention and perception. Through transformative conversational techniques, C was supported in sensing more deeply into the interconnected system of work, role, family, and personal dynamics, allowing patterns and connections to become visible that had previously remained unclear.
Specifically: Greater inner calm and stability under pressure. · Clearer access to personal perception and self-awareness. · Greater presence under conditions of high expectation. · Less inner narrowing at the beginning of important presentations. · Greater clarity regarding internal dynamics and sources of pressure.
The outcome was strange, unexpected, and priceless. We could probably stop already. Those two sessions had a major impact.
Individual Contributor C
after the second coaching session
Team and shift leaders within manufacturing company X described a shared pain point: “their people” were increasingly marked by disinterest and a growing sense of dull routine. In parallel to workshop formats designed for the shop floor itself (see below), several workshop formats were developed to strengthen the operational management’s ability to respond to these “growing” challenges. At the beginning, many participants shared the view that “the issue lies with the workers,” while at the same time admitting that it remained completely unclear how “meaningful change could actually be created there.”
The process focused on transformative interventions designed to uncover each participant’s own contribution to the “unsatisfactory situation.” This proved to be “extremely difficult for many.” The resulting “blockage” associated with looking inward became clearly noticeable and was openly articulated. From a transformative stance, this itself became part of the work. Over time, an “opening” gradually emerged within the group. At the same time, awareness grew that “only if we pull together” would the strength emerge to withstand everything “out there.” This, in turn, required greater “facilitation competence within middle management.”
Specifically: The group recognized recurring reactive patterns as well as the impact of time pressure and missing transitions on the quality of interaction. At the same time, awareness grew around the necessity of dialogue: “A good conversation initially increases the pressure. First, you have to ‘lower yourself’ enough to even begin the conversation.” In addition, a new sense of sensitivity emerged between guiding a conversation and redirecting it. At the same time, the realization grew that poor conversational outcomes could quickly render previously achieved progress “null and void.”
It was long overdue that we finally sat together like this.
Team leader
after a workshop
After work had already been carried out with middle management, the managing director of manufacturing company Y decided to initiate a workshop with his closest leadership circle — including his own participation. Repeatedly, the view was expressed that meaningful dialogue could not emerge “because the other side usually barely participates.” As a result, genuine dialogue would often not happen in the first place. At the same time, the “difference between professional and private life” remained present in the room, together with the underlying question of “whether I even want this at all.” And if one did want it, “then I always have to lead the conversation, because no one else speaks up.” Despite all these seemingly clear explanations, a deep level of dissatisfaction remained present among the participants.
Over the course of the workshop, it became increasingly visible that none of the participants wanted to open themselves beyond their familiar level of comfort. Many remained within their established comfort zones — not least because the managing director himself was part of the group. After several rounds of exchange, the shared dissatisfaction became increasingly clear, yet no real options for change initially came “onto the table.” At times, the workshop appeared to stagnate. This truth of the moment, however, became part of the work itself. The transformative interventions that followed unfolded a “strong effect.” At the same time, a growing sense emerged that “this is far from finished” and that “sitting together like this as a group clarifies many things and makes many things easier.”
Specifically: The morning round increasingly came to be understood as the “self” of management. At the same time, awareness grew that the fear of “getting too drawn into listening” often prevented genuine listening from happening in the first place — and that it is possible to remain both open and grounded in the process. Despite the overall pressure, growing confidence emerged that satisfaction at work could remain possible: “It is possible, despite all the weight.”
This really did me good. For me, it was liberating.
Manager
after a workshop
Within company X, work with shop floor employees was initiated in parallel to the workshops conducted with the operational leadership level. The aim was to counteract growing disengagement and increasing dullness in day-to-day work. The organizational conditions alone proved challenging: shifts were staffed very tightly, “making it difficult to take a group out of production for an entire day.” At the same time, all considerations had to take into account the “significantly increasing lack of concentration” observed over recent years. “People simply no longer ask questions — and they no longer know how to.” Under these circumstances, both online formats and traditional in-person training formats proved unsuitable.
A hybrid workshop format was developed in which a technical specialist joined remotely, while an on-site facilitator guided a group of shop floor workers in a meeting room at the company. This created a dual benefit. On the one hand, compact knowledge sequences provided know-how regarding the operational process as well as broader theoretical connections. This was considered “long overdue,” since “half-knowledge and a lack of basic understanding lead to unreflected decisions.” Through transformative interventions, the facilitator helped sustain a “sufficiently high level of concentration” within the group. At the same time, an additional layer of value emerged: team-building at the lower operational levels. “There are no dedicated formats for this part of the workforce. But it is becoming increasingly important.” The facilitator became a role model for saying: “I haven’t understood this yet.” He initiated dialogue and “shook people awake — otherwise they could just pick up a book or go through an online course.” “The moment people find themselves together in such a process, it creates cohesion.”
Specifically: “Initiative no longer emerges through direct instruction — it only develops through dialogue.” · A gradual “culture of paying attention” begins to emerge. · Human connection starts to act as a counterbalance to indifference and inner withdrawal. · Technical knowledge becomes more accessible and “digestible” through the facilitated process. · Employees begin transferring insights more directly to their own workplace reality. · Participation increases visibly — “by the end, everyone genuinely wanted to say something.”
It felt as if I had had an intense conversation with each of my foremen.
Participant
after a workshop session
Copyright © AttentAbility GmbH | Website creation by: Agentur Goldweiss, Berlin
