|
Why heroics fail in liquid environments—and what actually holds teams together now by Helen Achterberg-Pentz Pattern spotter, team coherence whisperer and strategic resourcing partner --restoring coherence in people and teams For decades, we've treated leadership as command and teams as machines to be optimised. But the ground has liquefied: priorities shift mid-cycle, contexts morph, the map redraws itself as we walk. What remains? This article — the third in my Coherence Trilogy — explores a different possibility: that team success was never about perfect execution of a leader's plan. It was always about how we are together. Drawing on the Polynesian voyagers, Google's Project Aristotle, and the quiet intelligence of jazz ensembles, I offer a new lens: coherence as operating system. Not another leadership model. A different medium entirely  The most expansive migration in human prehistory — across thousands of miles of open ocean, from Samoa to Hawaiʻi, Easter Island to Aotearoa — was not commanded by any emperor, nor driven by a unified force. It was a quiet, deliberate, multi-generational wave of countless individual voyages, propelled not by central command but by a shared cultural operating system so deeply coherent that any group possessing it could launch a successful 'startup' on a new island. The empire built itself. This was not perfect execution of a leader's plan. It was cultivated coherence: a clear, shared, intrinsically motivating understanding of purpose, identity, and practice that enabled autonomous navigation, aligned decision-making, and collective momentum — across millennia, across oceans, and without specific instructions. The highest form of team performance is not obedient execution. It is distributed coherence. Coherence is the structural integrity of a human system under pressure. It's what allows a team to:
Coherence is the operating system beneath performance. The Unnamed ShiftIn 2012, Google launched Project Aristotle — a massive study to answer a single question: What makes a team effective? After years of data, they found something unexpected: success was not about who was on the team. Not about resources, incentives, or even clarity of goals. It was about how the team interacted. Psychological safety... Dependability... Structure and clarity... Meaning... Impact. One of the most data-driven companies on earth had discovered that team success was less about what they did, and more about how they were together. They had stumbled upon team coherence. Not as a soft skill, not as 'culture' or 'dynamics', but as the actual operating system of high-performing human systems. Most of us missed the significance. Still labouring under our mechanical hangover, we mistook it for 'norms' or 'engagement'. We didn't see it for what it was: the first signal that leadership itself was changing. The Water We're Swimming InWe've reached a peculiar moment in how we lead. The tools that once worked — clear direction, decisive command, performance management, strategic planning — generate diminishing returns. Teams that should be thriving with capable leadership instead feel perpetually unstable, or stuck, unable to make things 'work' the way they should. If the ground has liquefied and alignment fails, with teams exhausting themselves compensating for structural gaps, what's left? The water itself? And we've been trying to swim with tools designed for hiking. Traditional leadership assumes solid ground. It's about direction, control, motivation, alignment, predictability. Input → process → output. But in liquid environments, that logic breaks. Priorities shift mid-cycle. Contexts morph. The map redraws itself with each step. The leader who doubles down on clarity and control in this reality — doing what's always worked before — is no longer being decisive. Instead, they're adding noise to a system already struggling to hear itself. This is not a failure of leadership. It's the failure of outdated physics. From Hero to RegulatorConsider a symphony. For centuries, we've focused on leader as conductor — the heroic figure with the baton, setting tempo, cueing entrances, controlling dynamics. But what if the real magic isn't the conductor's control, but the orchestra's shared listening?  The violinist sensing the cellist's next breath. The oboist feeling the trumpet's entry. The entire ensemble moving as one living system, regulated not by command, but by mutual attunement. More like a jazz ensemble than a military band. The conductor doesn't create the music. He holds — regulates — the conditions under which the music can emerge. This is the shift: from leadership as control to leadership as systemic regulation.
The Three Regulators
When these three regulators function, leadership changes. It moves from providing answers to sensing and restoring coherence. The leader's question shifts from "What's the solution?" to "Where is our coherence fracturing? The Courage to Stop LeadingThis form of leading is profoundly different. It requires:
And here's the vulnerable truth: this shift is terrifying. Especially for leaders who have come to identify themselves as nouns instead of verbs. I've sat with leaders — capable, experienced, well-intentioned — who confess in quiet moments: "I don't know how to lead in this anymore. Everything I learned — the old ways — don't work. Engagement and performance keep declining. And I'm exhausted from pretending otherwise". This is not failure. It's recognition. Paradoxical to every old model, the courage is not in trying harder. It is in stopping. Stopping the heroic over-functioning. Stopping the compensation for system gaps. Stopping the pretense that one person can hold what the whole system should carry. It's less about being out front, and more about being in the centre — maintaining the integrity of the 'field'. The most powerful leadership intervention I've witnessed was not a strategic pivot or a restructuring. It was a leader saying, in essence, to their team: "I've been trying to hold this for you. I can't anymore. How do we hold it together?" That moment — that vulnerability — became the team's first experience of shared coherence-holding. A Practice, Not a PositionHere's the critical insight: coherence cannot be sustainably maintained by one person Just as a symphony needs every musician attuned to the whole, coherent teams require distributed sensing and regulation. This does not mean everyone is 'the leader'. It means leadership becomes:
In coherent teams:
This does not mean everyone's 'in charge'. It means the system self-regulates... like a forest that needs no tree manager' to distribute sunlight and water. The regulation is built into the relationships. The formal leader's role shifts from carrying the weight to cultivating the capacity for distributed coherence-holding. Why This Matters NowWe are not abandoning leadership. We're evolving it to match our reality. In mechanical systems, you need strong central control. In living systems, you need intelligent distributed regulation. Traditional organisation designs — optimised for efficiency, not humanity — are fracturing in a liquid world. We must recognise that organisations have become living systems operating in fluid environments. Continuing with mechanical leadership is like using a steering wheel to sail a boat. The wrong tool for the medium. Coherence is not something leaders 'create'. It's what they discover and sustain by working with — not against — the living intelligence of their teams. Where to BeginIf this resonates... if you're leading in liquid environments and feeling the strain... try this simple exercise, alone or with your team: 1. Map One Flow Pick a single thread that moves through your team: information, decisions, feedback, energy. Trace it. Unravel it a little. Follow its path. Where does it flow easily? Where does it get stuck? Just notice. 2. Ask One Revealing Question At your next team check-in, ask: "Where are we spending real energy that doesn't show up in any metric?" Do not solve. Just listen. 3. Practice Coherence-Holding For one meeting, do not lead it. Instead, hold it. Observe. Notice the space between people. Sense the rhythm of the meeting itself. Feel where attention gathers and where it scatters. Your only job is to maintain the container — not to fill it. The InvitationWe are at the threshold. The old leadership paradigm — heroic, directional, controlling — is not wrong. It's incomplete. Like using a compass when you need a sonar. Both navigate, but in different mediums. Coherence is not another leadership model to adopt. It is an entirely different operating system: the system that makes leadership possible in liquidity. It's not about working harder. It is about seeing differently. Seeing that the most important leadership work is not directing the team, but regulating the conditions under which the team directs itself. Seeing that your greatest leverage is not in having answers, but in sensing fractures before they break. Seeing that leadership, ultimately, is not about you at all. It is about the field you maintain: the invisible architecture of trust, rhythm, and purpose that allows human intelligence to flourish. The ground has liquefied. Alignment alone fails. Leadership reaches its limits.  And something new becomes possible.
Coherence. Not as a concept. But as the new reality we are learning to inhabit. Together. Comments are closed.
|
Test your own team:
Archives
March 2026
|
||||||||||||||
