Executive teams are often assumed to be the most confident, capable and self-sufficient group in an organisation.
In my coaching work, I see something more human: highly accomplished leaders navigating a shift in role, identity and relationships for which few are fully prepared.
Of course, every executive leader is different, and so is every executive team. Yet across industries, geographies and organisational contexts, familiar patterns emerge again and again.
Drawing upon my experience gained over decades of coaching executive leaders and teams, I have curated a number of these recurring themes. I hope they offer useful insight, provoke reflection and support useful conversations about what goes on for the people leading at the top.
The Seductive Draw to ‘Step In and Do’
One of the most persistent challenges I see is the need to shift from being close to the work to creating the conditions for others to do that work well. I call it the move from the dancefloor to the balcony.
On the dancefloor, a leader is immersed: solving, deciding, fixing, responding. It can feel productive, and in earlier roles it often was.
From the balcony, however, a leader can see patterns, dependencies, risks and opportunities that are invisible when they are in the middle of the action.
But executive leaders often articulate a persistent difficulty in stepping back because it can feel like stepping away from value. Leaders who have built their reputation on being the person who delivers, fixes or knows the answer can worry that they will become dispensable. I often hear senior leaders worry about their reduction in value, or about making themselves ‘redundant’.
Others clearly struggle with that uncomfortable feeling which links with relinquishing control, concerned that mistakes will happen ‘on their watch’ that could have been avoided. Underneath the all-too-familiar coaching request to help the leaders learn to ‘delegate more’ is almost always a set of deeper questions to be explored about identity, control, fear and trust.
The goal, of course, is not absence. It is intentional presence – knowing when involvement adds value, and when mindful withdrawal creates the space for others to grow.
The Rarely Named Loneliness
From what I see and hear, executive life can be intensely social and intensely lonely at the same time.
‘It’s like the revolving door of a doctor’s surgery” is a phrase I’ve heard several times, from different executives. They are in meetings, calls, off sites and making decisions all day long, yet many describe a growing isolation as they become more senior. Relationships change as colleagues become direct reports, peers may become competitors, and every conversation acquires a new potential power dynamic.
Couple this with a ‘silence’ that often follows senior leaders around; a kind of void created by people managing what they say around a senior leader and this adds to a sense of loneliness. I recall several CEOs saying flatly to me “well I don’t know, because I’m the last person they’d tell…”
For many reasons people may offer senior executives the version of the truth they believe is safest, rather than the challenge or information the leader most needs. Over time, this can create an echo chamber – which can be especially dangerous when we consider the level and impact of decisions a senior executive is likely to be making, and the information they need in order to be able to do this.
Add to this sense of isolation the stark visibility of executive life, and the cost becomes clearer. Leaders are watched closely, expected to project confidence and can feel less able to show doubt, fear or uncertainty. Outward success can co-exist with a private sense that no one truly sees or hears you. Which, of course, can be hard.
This is why psychological safety inside an executive team matters so much. Leaders need places where they can speak their truth, test half-formed ideas and admit ‘I do not know’ without it becoming evidence against them. Easy to say, but very hard – although not impossible – to create.
An executive team cannot remove every pressure, but it can make isolation less inevitable. It can agree that challenge is a contribution, not disloyalty; that vulnerability is not weakness; and that no one has to carry the weight of leadership alone.
The Silence of Burnout
The presence of burnout at executive level is loud and clear.
Burnout is not discerning. And it most definitely does not choose whose door to arrive at based on leadership level. For me, it’s a deeply concerning workplace experience.
Working with senior leaders, it’s striking how relentless their roles are, and how varied – jumping from one thing to the next. Constantly on the move – whether in thought, action or interaction. Which is why it’s so common to find burnout symptoms frighteningly prevalent at executive leadership levels.
Couple this intensity with the ‘on show’ nature of their roles’ and we’ve a powerful mix. One CMO once told me ‘I can’t let the mask slip – I simply can’t – just imagine the impact it would have on those people around me, on everyone and everything I’m responsible for….’. I’m sorry to tell you that when he crashed, he crashed really hard.
What I’ve learned in my work with senior leaders is that the slow creep of the causes of burnout is one of the things that makes it so brutal. Pressure becomes normal, recovery becomes optional, and the baseline of what feels acceptable keeps moving. Remember, stress itself is not the enemy. In short bursts, it can sharpen focus and help people respond to a demanding moment. But the danger begins when sustained pressure becomes the daily rhythm, leaving too little room for recovery. People can still appear highly functioning – hitting targets, attending meetings, answering emails – while privately becoming increasingly depleted. And in my experience, executive leaders can be masters of this deception, eventually leading to their own downfall.
What we know is that prevention matters more than repair. A week away will not undo deep depletion on its own. Ideally, senior leaders need to be working in executive teams where workload is discussed honestly, boundaries are encouraged and supported, and recovery is treated as part of sustainable performance rather than a guilty indulgence.
One CPO told me recently that her boss called her on the phone when she was on holiday to ask her why she’d jumped in on an email response. The boss had clocked that she was ‘out of office’ and that she was breaking her own boundary of taking time out. And the boss called her out on it. Great call I’d say.
Imposter Feelings Definitely Don’t Stop at the Top
In my experience, nagging and persistent self-doubt does not disappear when people take up senior leadership roles. It may simply become better hidden.
At senior level, imposter feelings can be rife. An unsettling sense of being in an undeserved role or being about to be ‘caught out’ and seen for what you ‘really’ are.
These feelings and thoughts exist in many executive teams. And what’s interesting is how they are often masked. For example, what looks like diligence may in fact be anxiety trying to secure safety. The result is a familiar cycle: self-doubt leads to overwork, success brings temporary relief, then the internal critic returns to take an extra dig again, just as confidence could be building.
We know that telling someone to believe in themselves is not enough if the system in which they are operating keeps signalling that they need to be more, or less, or different. Leaders can help themselves and others by speaking openly about their own moments of doubt, and asking for, and offering, specific, meaningful feedback rather than generic reassurance.
A record of concrete feedback, thanks and evidence of impact can be more grounding than another attempt at positive thinking. And these behaviours amongst people in executive roles can have a profound impact on creating change. But for busy executive teams creating the opportunity for this level of dialogue can be challenging.
Strengths Can Become Traps
Another common pattern in work with executive leaders surrounds an aspect of identity linked to strengths. Often, the behaviours that got someone to executive level may not be the same as those that make them effective there.
Early management careers for example, often reward energy, delivery, personal accountability, speed and control. Those qualities create momentum and results – until the role becomes less about doing and more about shaping.
But at executive level, a COO known for a track record of detailed operational excellence for example, may inadvertently create dependency by scrutinising everything. Or a CEO who prides themselves on having knowledge and answers may suppress debate and teach people to defer rather than contribute. Their former strengths have by no means disappeared, but maybe they have become less useful in the new context.
In my work, I’ve been struck by how useful the mental move from ‘contribution’ to ‘multiplication’ can be in this type of situation; moving from a mindset of not ‘what can I achieve’ but ‘what can I enable others to achieve?’ That does not mean abandoning past strengths. It means recognising when they have become automatic reflexes and knowing when and how to choose a different approach.
Practical steps include creating time to notice patterns, inviting honest feedback, separating identity from behaviour, redefining success for the current stage of leadership, and building tolerance for the discomfort of unlearning. Discomfort is not proof that something is wrong – it seems to me that it’s more likely to be evidence that growth is happening.
A better executive team conversation
The themes above are different, but they connect.
An executive who cannot get to the balcony may overwork, burn out and unintentionally limit their team and colleagues.
An executive who feels unsafe may hide doubt, over-prepare and struggle to be curious.
An executive who feels they must fit in may spend energy on adaptation rather than contribution.
An executive who equates certainty with authority may stop learning precisely when learning matters most.
From what I’ve experienced so far in my work, really open and progressive executive teams do not pretend these pressures away. Instead, they create the conditions to talk about them.
Whether that is through creating executive cultures where challenge, dissent and uncertainty are treated as contributing factors towards better decisions, or replacing premature certainty with questions, hypotheses and prototypes.
I am in awe of senior leaders. I have complete respect for the weight they carry and for the breadth required of their shoulders. But the vulnerability behind the themes outlined in this piece point clearly towards executive leadership not being about having no doubts, no limits or no need for support. Instead, it’s about leading in full awareness of them.
The leaders and teams who thrive are not those with the fewest tensions, but those willing to name the tensions – both individually and collectively – and choose how they respond.