Adapt Consulting Company

How to Write Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) That Work

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are the backbone of consistency in any organization. Whether you’re in finance, education, manufacturing, or non-profit services, SOPs help ensure that tasks are performed the right way, every time. Yet many organizations struggle to write SOPs that are clear, consistent, and practical.

This guide explores the best approach to writing SOPs — covering format, style, content, and process — so your documents do more than just tick a compliance box; they actively improve how your team works.

1. Format: Structure Matters

A good SOP starts with a consistent structure. Readers should know exactly where to find information, regardless of the topic. Typical sections include:

Title and Reference Code – a unique identifier so the SOP can be filed and found quickly.
Version Control – a table showing version number, date, author, approver, and summary of changes.
Purpose and Scope – why this SOP exists and where it applies.
Roles and Responsibilities – who is accountable for what.
Procedure – the step-by-step process, written clearly and logically.
References and Appendices – supporting documents, checklists, or templates.

Consistency is key. If all SOPs follow the same structure, staff know exactly where to look, saving time and avoiding confusion.

2. Style: Keep It Clear and Practical

SOPs should be easy to read and easy to use:

Use plain language and avoid jargon unless it’s defined.
Write in the active voice: “Staff must complete the log daily,” not “The log should be completed daily.”
Break down steps into bullet points or numbered lists rather than long paragraphs.
Highlight key actions or warnings with bold text or call-out boxes.
Where processes are complex, add flowcharts or diagrams.

Think of your audience: the people using the SOP should be able to follow it without extra explanation.

3. Content: What to Include

An SOP should balance clarity with completeness. At a minimum, it should include:

What needs to be done (step-by-step instructions).
Who is responsible (roles, not just job titles).
When it should happen (timelines, triggers, or deadlines).
How to record outcomes (forms, systems, or reports).
Escalation points (when and how to involve managers or other teams).

The goal is to remove ambiguity so there’s one clear way of doing things.

4. Process: How to Create and Maintain SOPs

Writing a great SOP isn’t a one-off task. It’s a process of drafting, consulting, testing, and updating.

1. Draft – written by a subject matter expert or process owner.
2. Consult – share with those who will use it; gather feedback on clarity and practicality.
3. Review and Approve – ensure compliance with regulations and alignment with policies.
4. Publish – store in a central, accessible location (e.g., intranet, shared drive).
5. Train – make sure staff are aware of the SOP and know how to use it.
6. Review and Update – set review dates; update when processes or regulations change.

Version history is critical. Staff should always be working from the latest approved version, with earlier drafts archived but accessible if needed.

5. Why It Matters

Well-written SOPs:

Improve efficiency by standardizing tasks.
Reduce errors and risk.
Support staff training and onboarding.
Demonstrate compliance with legal and regulatory standards.
Provide accountability and transparency.

In short, they’re not just documents — they’re tools for better performance and governance.
Final Thoughts

The best SOPs are consistent, clear, and current. They aren’t written once and forgotten; they are living documents that evolve with your organization. By focusing on format, style, content, and process, you’ll create SOPs that actually work in practice — and that’s the real measure of success.

Balancing Science, Belief, and Humanity in Difficult Conversations

I’ve had a couple of fascinating conversations recently with people in difficult circumstances who view the world in ways that don’t always align with scientific or fact-based thinking. Their ideas, strategies, and beliefs may seem unusual—even illogical—but they are deeply personal. These beliefs are often core to their identity, values, and sense of agency, especially when they’re seeking solutions in times of vulnerability.

This raises an important question: how do you balance being a scientist, professional, or expert on the one hand, and being deeply human and empathetic on the other?

The Risk of Undermining Agency

It’s tempting to rely on qualifications, experience, or authority as a kind of “top trump,” stepping into conversations with directive certainty. But in healthcare, or any field where people’s wellbeing is at stake, that approach can backfire.

If someone feels their values, beliefs, or identity are being challenged, they may resist—even if your evidence is sound. Push too hard, and you risk undermining not only their confidence but also their ability to engage in positive change.

When Beliefs Clash with Responsibility

At the same time, some beliefs can be problematic, even dangerous. As professionals, we may feel both a moral and professional responsibility to correct misunderstandings that could harm the individual—or others.

The challenge lies in how we do this. Conversations often operate on multiple levels:

The matter at hand
The person’s thoughts and feelings about that matter
The negotiation between ideas that matter deeply to them, ideas of little consequence, and ideas that might be harmful

Navigating this requires both skill and sensitivity.

The Middle Ground

Too directive, and you disempower. Too hands-off, and you fail to share expertise that could make a difference. The balance is to co-create options, offering guidance without ridicule or condescension. This way, people retain agency, and you remain a trusted voice rather than an opposing force.

It’s less about telling people what to do and more about helping them explore options, weigh consequences, and make choices with dignity intact.

Style and Substance

This is where “style versus substance” becomes critical. It’s not just what you say—it’s the way that you say it. You can passionately argue that the earth is flat, but that doesn’t make it true. Equally, mocking someone who believes it won’t change their mind.

Most real-world situations are far more nuanced than that. People may have latched onto fragments of truth, half-understood scientific findings, or information taken out of context. Your role is to bring context back in without crushing belief.

Simplicity, Choice, and the Paradox

Humans crave simplicity. Nuance, research, and complexity are often unwelcome. Yet, offering only a binary choice—“right” versus “wrong”—is rarely effective. Too many options, on the other hand, can overwhelm.

The sweet spot lies in offering a manageable range of possibilities, framed with empathy and respect. Enough choice to feel empowered, but not so much that the individual feels lost or paralysed.

Final Thoughts

Working at the intersection of science, belief, and human experience is never easy. It requires patience, humility, and the ability to navigate paradoxes. But when handled well, it allows us to uphold our professional responsibility while honouring the humanity of those we serve.

In the end, the goal is not to win an argument, but to build trust—and through that trust, create the conditions for real, sustainable change.

Writing Effective Business Cases: Beyond Costs and Returns

A business case is more than just a financial justification—it is the foundation for decision-making, accountability, and measuring success. Done well, it clarifies the why, what, how, and who of a project, providing stakeholders with confidence to commit resources. Done poorly, it risks being a tick-box exercise that fails to anticipate hidden costs, regulatory obligations, or diverse stakeholder needs.

What Is a Business Case?

A business case formally presents the rationale for undertaking a project or investment. It seeks approval, secures funding, and sets expectations. It is also a living reference point against which outcomes and performance can later be evaluated.

Core Components of a Business Case

While formats vary, most robust business cases include the following headings:

1. Executive Summary – A concise overview of purpose, proposal, and expected outcomes.
2. Strategic Fit & Objectives – How the proposal aligns with organisational strategy, priorities, or compliance requirements.
3. Options Analysis – The rationale for chosen approach, including alternatives considered and rejected.
4. Scope & Deliverables – What is included, what is excluded, and what success looks like.
5. Costs & Funding –
Capital costs (infrastructure, technology, assets).
Operational costs (staffing, licensing, maintenance, training).
Ongoing costs beyond implementation.
6. Benefits & Value –
Financial (savings, revenue growth).
Non-financial (customer satisfaction, compliance, risk reduction, social impact).
7. Risks & Constraints – Potential threats, dependencies, or limitations, with mitigation strategies.
8. Governance & RACI – Who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed, and the approval process required.
9. Implementation Plan – Timeline, milestones, and resource needs.
10. Evaluation & Success Criteria – How progress and benefits will be measured, both during and after delivery.

Common Challenges in Business Case Development

Narrow focus on costs – Many cases calculate purchase or setup costs but neglect ongoing revenue spend such as licensing, maintenance, or training. This is like buying a car without considering fuel, insurance, or servicing.

Ignoring stakeholder diversity – Different stakeholders value different things: Finance cares about ROI, Compliance about regulation, Operations about feasibility, and Customers about usability.

Overlooking non-financial benefits – Improved culture, reduced risk, or enhanced reputation can be just as critical as cost savings.

Weak governance – Unclear ownership or approval processes can stall decisions or create ambiguity later.

Approval hurdles – Whether requiring a signed document, formal board approval, or email confirmation, clarity is needed on what constitutes valid authorisation.

Best Practices for Building Strong Business Cases

1. Engage stakeholders early – Use the RACI model to ensure diverse voices are heard and expectations understood.
2. Balance lead and lag measures – Show both predictive indicators (training uptake, system usage) and outcome indicators (cost savings, compliance achieved).
3. Include the full cost of ownership – Capital + operational + future costs. Avoid “surprise” expenses that undermine credibility.
4. Articulate non-financial value – Regulatory compliance, risk reduction, customer satisfaction, or staff well-being often justify investment as much as financial return.
5. Provide options, not ultimatums – Present at least two or three feasible approaches, showing why the preferred option is best.
6. Keep it clear and concise – Decision-makers may only read the summary and key numbers. Use appendices for detailed analysis.
7. Define success up front – Include measurable outcomes so the business case doubles as a benchmark for later evaluation.

The Business Case as a Living Document

A strong business case is not only about permission to proceed; it is also about performance management. Returning to it after delivery helps organisations ask: Did we achieve our intended benefits? Did costs align with projections? Were risks managed effectively?

Conclusion

An effective business case balances rigour with clarity. It ensures consensus, builds confidence, and provides a shared framework for delivery and evaluation. By anticipating challenges, including the full range of costs and benefits, and engaging stakeholders early, organisations can avoid costly surprises and create a solid foundation for successful outcomes.

Data in Business: Measuring What Matters

In business, as in sport, performance is judged by results. Athletes are measured by their times, distances, or scores. Businesses are judged by their revenues, profits, or market share. These are the lag measures—the outcomes that tell us where we’ve been.

But if we only look at results once the race is over, we miss the chance to influence performance while it still matters. The key is to balance lag measures with lead measures—the inputs and activities that shape future outcomes. In sport, that might be hours of training, nutrition quality, or rest. In business, it might be customer calls, product tests, or training hours.

The art of managing with data is knowing not just what to measure, but why—and for whom.

Lead and Lag Measures: The Two Sides of Data

Lag Measures show what has already happened.

Business examples: revenue, market share, profit margin, customer satisfaction.
Sport examples: race completion times, finishing positions, average speeds.
They are important, but retrospective—too late to change.

Lead Measures predict and influence future results.

Business examples: number of client meetings, product prototypes tested, hours of staff training.
Sport examples: weekly training hours, healthy meals, sleep quality.
They are controllable in the present and point toward better outcomes.

Focusing on both allows leaders to act proactively while still learning from outcomes.

The Right Data vs. Convenient Data

A common trap is measuring what is easy rather than what is meaningful. For example, counting the number of meetings held or emails sent may be convenient but says little about impact. The right data aligns with strategy, speaks to outcomes, and provides actionable insight.

The test is simple: If you couldn’t measure this tomorrow, would decision-making suffer? If the answer is no, it may not be a critical measure.

Different Stakeholders, Different Measures of “Good”

Not all data is valued equally by all audiences.

Executives / Board want data that links to strategy, growth, and risk.
Finance cares about cost control, compliance, and budget accuracy.
Operations value timeliness, clarity, and efficiency of data.
Customers look for reliability and trust.
Regulators focus on accuracy, transparency, and compliance.
Analysts prize completeness, consistency, and usability.

Measures of “good” can therefore vary:

Time – is data available when needed?
Quality – is it relevant and fit for purpose?
Cost – is it efficient and worth the investment?
Accuracy – is it correct, consistent, and reliable?

Great organisations recognise these competing priorities and design their metrics accordingly.

Data as a Decision Tool

The true value of data is not in collection, but in application. Data should enable:

1. Clarity – giving a shared view of the current state.
2. Management – supporting control, coordination, and accountability.
3. Decision-Making – providing confidence to act, adjust, or invest.

This means creating systems that link measurement with action. Lead measures inform where to focus effort; lag measures validate whether effort produced the right results.

From Sport to Business: A Practical Analogy

Think of business as preparing for a race.

Lag measures are the finish time: what the market, customers, or regulators will ultimately see.
Lead measures are the training regime: the controllable choices that prepare you to succeed.

An athlete who only looks at the scoreboard will always be reactive. An athlete who tracks and manages their training inputs has the power to influence outcomes before race day.

The same is true for organisations.

Measuring What Matters

To make data meaningful, businesses should:

Balance lead and lag: measure both actions and outcomes.
Align to strategy: ensure metrics support the bigger picture.
Engage stakeholders: understand what “good” means for different groups.
Focus on impact: distinguish activity from value.
Keep it actionable: collect data that drives decisions, not just reports.

Conclusion

Data is not just numbers—it is the narrative of performance. The right data, chosen thoughtfully, empowers organisations to measure what matters, manage with foresight, and make confident decisions. Like sport, business success depends not just on crossing the finish line but on preparing in ways that make that success possible.

The question every leader should ask is not just “What happened?” but “What can we influence today that will shape tomorrow?”

The Art and Science of a Good PID
By Tim Rogers | Programme Manager | Leadership & Change Advocate

A successful project doesn’t begin with a plan—it begins with a shared understanding. That’s the role of the Project Initiation Document (PID): to create consensus, clarity, communication, and engagement before delivery starts. Done well, a PID isn’t just paperwork—it’s a leadership tool.

Purpose of the PID

The PID is the foundational document that formally authorizes a project. It sets the tone, scope, and governance framework, ensuring that everyone—from sponsor to team member—understands the “why, what, how, and who.”

Key objectives:

Define why the project exists (business case).
Establish what it will deliver (scope).
Clarify how it will be managed (governance).
Identify who is involved (roles and responsibilities).

The Process of Creating a PID

1. Mandate Review – Start with the request or idea that triggered the project.
2. Stakeholder Engagement – Consult early, capture expectations, and surface concerns.
3. Drafting the PID – Pull together scope, objectives, risks, and governance.
4. Approval and Sign-Off – Secure endorsement from sponsor or board.
5. Baseline for Delivery – The PID becomes your contract for scope, decision-making, and accountability.

Composition of a Strong PID

A robust PID blends structure and story. The science is in the framework; the art is in how you make it engaging and relevant. Typical sections include:

1. Project Definition – Title, context, objectives, and success criteria.
2. Business Case – Benefits, value, costs, and funding.
3. Scope and Deliverables – What’s in, what’s out, and when.
4. Governance – Roles, responsibilities, decision-making, reporting.
5. Plan – Timelines, resources, dependencies.
6. Risks – Key risks, assumptions, and mitigations.
7. Quality & Change Control – Standards and processes for adaptation.
8. Communication – Who needs to know what, how, and when.

Benefits of a Good PID

Clarity: Aligns all parties on purpose and priorities.
Control: Defines governance and escalation routes.
Confidence: Builds trust that the project is grounded in evidence.
Continuity: Serves as a living reference point through delivery.

The Art Behind the Science

The science of a PID is about frameworks, checklists, and compliance. The art is about tone and engagement. A PID that simply lists deliverables may tick boxes—but a PID that tells a compelling story of why this matters inspires alignment and energy.

Good PIDs are co-created, not imposed. They emerge from dialogue, balancing business objectives with human dynamics. In this sense, a PID is as much about psychological safety and shared ownership as it is about scope and governance.

Reflective Exercise

Think about your last project initiation:

What went well?
What challenges emerged?
Which issues could have been avoided with better initiation?
Did the PID help create clarity and consensus, or did it sit unused?
What would you do differently next time?

Final Thought

A good PID is not bureaucracy—it is the art and science of alignment. It provides the clarity of science through structure, and the energy of art through engagement. Get both right, and you don’t just launch a project—you launch collective ownership of success.

Part 1: The Art of Observation in Meetings
By Tim Rogers | Programme Manager | Leadership & Behavioural Insight Advocate

The ability to observe others deeply and accurately is a leadership superpower. Whether you’re facilitating a meeting, coaching a team, or navigating stakeholder dynamics, your capacity to read subtle cues can shape outcomes, build trust, and elevate performance.

This article explores the theory, process, and practice of observational insight—how to see beyond words, decode behaviour, and use those insights to lead with empathy and impact.

Why Observation Matters

Observation is more than watching—it’s interpreting behaviour, context, and emotion. Leaders who sharpen this skill can:

1. Detect alignment or resistance in teams.
2. Understand power dynamics and psychological safety.
3. Tailor communication and leadership styles to individuals.
4. Identify non-verbal signals that words may conceal.

The Psychology Behind Observation

Spatial Positioning & Power
Where someone sits can reveal their role, intent, or comfort. Central positions often signal influence; peripheral seating may indicate disengagement.

Body Language & Mirroring
Subtle non-verbal mirroring builds rapport and trust. Research shows mirroring increases perceived empathy and connection.

Environmental Influence
Room layout shapes interaction. Circular seating encourages equality, while head-of-table positioning reinforces hierarchy.

The Observational Checklist

Use these eight dimensions as a quick scan during meetings:

Spatial Awareness: seating position, use of space.
Orientation & Engagement: posture, physical alignment with group.
Vocal Cues: tone, pace, consistency.
Response Patterns: deference to authority vs. peers.
Facial & Emotional Signals: congruence or mismatch between words and expression.
Mirroring & Empathy: subtle mimicry, emotional contagion.
Use of Silence: reflective, avoidant, or strategic.
Note-Taking Behaviour: detail, timing, and focus.

Case Study: Observation in Lean Management

Research at the University of Twente found that middle managers who asked for ideas, shared information, and mirrored team behaviours fostered more effective collaboration. Teams unconsciously adopted the positive habits of leaders—demonstrating how observation is both a leadership tool and a cultural amplifier.

Benefits and Limitations

Benefits

Reveals hidden dynamics and emotional states.
Enhances coaching, feedback, and leadership development.
Supports inclusive, adaptive communication.

Limitations

Vulnerable to observer bias and cultural misinterpretation.
Requires practice and consistency to be reliable.
Can be over-analysed without context.

Tools for Implementation

Observational Questionnaire for Meetings – structured assessment.
Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS) – for reviews and appraisals.
Mirroring Practice – deliberate mimicry to build empathy.

Final Thought

Observation is not passive—it’s a strategic, empathetic, and analytical skill. Leaders who learn to read the room with precision unlock the ability to lead with clarity, connect with authenticity, and influence with integrity.

Part 2: Observational Questionnaire (User Guide / Form)

This tool can be used as a self-reflection form, a coaching aid, or a structured way to evaluate meeting dynamics. Tick or circle the most relevant option for each question, then use the appendix to interpret what the behaviour might signal.

Observational Questionnaire

1. Position in the Room

☐ Centre, engaging with multiple people
☐ Edge, observing quietly
☐ Near exits or windows
☐ Dominant/controlling position

2. Orientation Toward Others

☐ Direct and open
☐ Sideways/partially turned
☐ Turned away/disengaged
☐ Frequently shifting position

3. Tone of Voice

☐ Warm and engaging
☐ Flat/monotone
☐ Assertive/commanding
☐ Hesitant/uncertain

4. Speaking Pace

☐ Very fast/anxious
☐ Moderate/clear
☐ Slow/deliberate
☐ Variable

5. Language Style

☐ Positive/constructive
☐ Neutral/factual
☐ Negative/critical
☐ Mixed/inconsistent

6. Response to Others

☐ Respectful/engaged with all
☐ Deferential to authority
☐ Prefers peers over groups
☐ Withdrawn/defensive

7. Facial Expressions

☐ Expressive/congruent
☐ Neutral/unreadable
☐ Inconsistent/mismatched
☐ Frequently changing

8. Mirroring Behaviour

☐ Subtle/natural
☐ Distinct/no mirroring
☐ Occasional/strategic
☐ Overly mimicking

9. Use of Silence

☐ Thoughtful/reflection
☐ Avoidant/disengaged
☐ Strategic/control
☐ Rare, fills all gaps

10. Note-Taking Behaviour

☐ Detailed/consistent
☐ Sporadic/minimal
☐ Focused on key quotes/moments
☐ None observed

Appendix (Quick Reference for Interpretation)

Centre seating → influence, confidence.
Edge/quiet → cautious, reflective.
Warm tone → builds trust; flat tone → disengagement.
Positive language → collaboration; negative → resistance.
Strategic silence → control; avoidant silence → discomfort.
Detailed notes → engagement; no notes → detachment or alternative processing.

Suggested use: After each meeting, quickly review your notes, look for patterns across people and time, and reflect: What does this tell me about group dynamics and my leadership response?

THE MAGNIFICENT 7 WAYS TO INFLUENCE, AVOID OR REACT

These are check-lists that I have developed from various sources, none is entirely original but I have found them useful and happy to share with others.

7 WAYS TO INFLUENCE

Do it…

1. Because you like me, and you’re like me
2. Do it to reciprocate, repay past or future debt or promise
3. Do it because everyone else is doing it
4. This offer is good for a limited time only
5. Do it to be consistent, with past, with values, with type
6. You can believe me, I’m an authority
7. Do it or else

7 WAYS TO AVOID INFLUENCE

No, because…

1. I like you, but I don’t like this proposal
2. Is this a favour? Are you looking for something in return?
3. Just because everyone else is doesn’t mean..
4. If I don’t have time to think, I don’t have time to buy
5. I need to think about what I want, and be consistent with that
6. If I were you I might, but I’m not you
7. Please explain the “or else” slowly so I fully understand

How to react to negative feedback (possibly bullying)

1. Ask for time to think – it should force a pause or moment of silence.
2. Think about what you want to happen – don’t fight back, think forward.
3. Get the bully to stop yelling – “Please speak more slowly, I’d like to understand” or (if on the phone) say nothing until they ask “Are you still there?”
4. Whatever you do don’t explain – think forward, don’t justify, recriminate, excuse or offer explanation. They’re looking to exploit weaknesses (-) not strength (+)
5. Ask “what would you like me to do?”. If so challenged they will ask you for something more acceptable than what they want. This is your exit opportunity.
6. Don’t take criticism personally – attacks on your team, your work, your values, etc are not attacks on you. Although it is hard to resist “fight or flight”
7. Learn from criticism – if you wait 24 hrs before answering criticism it will demonstrate maturity, reasonableness and you may learn something!

CONTACT

If you are interested in any of the above and would like to contribute to the discussion by posting a comment, or meet with me to chat about your experiences and the issues and opportunities in your organization I would be delighted to meet and buy the coffee and croissants for an interesting conversation.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Tim Rogers is an AMPG Qualified Change Practitioner, a PRINCE2 Project Manager, with an MBA in Management Consultancy. Past projects have included the incorporation of Jersey Post Office, Operations Change and Sales Support for RBSI and NatWest and the integration and incorporation of Jersey Harbours and Airport. He is a past tutor/lecturer for the Chartered Management Institute, a curator for TEDxStHelier (2014 & 15) and a volunteer for Jersey’s Cancer Strategy and the Jersey Police Complaints Authority. Current work includes coaching and mentoring.

Building Cohesive Action Groups and Task Forces: The Power of Safe Spaces and Facilitation

Why Introductions Matter

When building a new team, one of the most valuable exercises is to let each member introduce themselves — not just their role, but their story. A simple five-minute share can cover:

Why they’re here
What they bring to the team
What’s important to them
Any hopes, fears, or concerns

This exercise fosters understanding, helps people feel heard, and gives everyone a sense of agency, accountability, ownership, and opportunity. It lays the groundwork for genuine collaboration.

The Role of Environment in Psychological Safety

These sessions work best in a safe, closed environment — somewhere different from the usual workplace.

Neutral ground helps avoid territorial thinking (“someone else’s turf”).
Novelty sparks fresh thinking and creativity.
Separation from daily routines signals that this is a different kind of conversation.

This is what’s known as a liminal space — a threshold between the old and the new, where teams can explore new ideas, relationships, and ways of working without the baggage of everyday office politics.

Boundaries as Catalysts for Creativity

Creativity thrives when there are boundaries. Much like constraints in art (“create something on one side of A4” or “only with a pencil”), clear limits can focus energy and spark innovative thinking.

The boundaries might be:

A clear aim or ambition
A defined mandate or manifesto
A specific problem or burning question to address

These aren’t about micromanagement — they’re about creating the framework within which the team has complete agency over how it works, what it tackles, and the solutions it chooses to pursue.

The Facilitator’s Role

Facilitation is not the same as leadership. A facilitator:

Creates the conditions for success
Encourages participation and equity of voice
Prevents domination by any one person
Guides the group without imposing their own solutions

This is where Nancy Kline’s 10 Components of a Thinking Environment can be so valuable — ensuring everyone is heard, respected, and encouraged to think deeply.

Belonging, Accountability, and the “Tribal” Mindset

Teams work best when there’s a sense of belonging and shared accountability. One coach I know insists that in group programmes, missing even one session means you’re out. It sounds harsh, but it creates:

A strong sense of commitment
A feeling that “I’m here for my colleagues as much as for myself”
Peer accountability that doesn’t require heavy-handed leadership

Contrast this with many workplace meetings where people drift in late, leave early, or skip entirely — without consequence. The difference in commitment and outcomes is striking.

From Forming to Performing

Co-production can be slower at the start. The early “forming, storming, norming” phases take time. But this investment pays off in stronger, more resilient teams. Once foundations are in place, the group can perform at a far higher level — not as a collection of individuals with side agendas, but as a unified, collegiate team.

Top Tips for Facilitating High-Performing Action Groups

1. Start with Stories – Give each person 5 minutes to share who they are, why they’re here, and what matters to them.
2. Choose a Neutral Venue – Avoid the workplace to encourage fresh thinking and psychological safety.
3. Set Clear Boundaries – Define the purpose, scope, and expectations before creative work begins.
4. Ensure Equal Participation – Use facilitation techniques to prevent dominance and encourage quieter voices.
5. Use Chatham House Rules – What’s said in the room stays in the room, fostering openness and trust.
6. Commit to Attendance – Establish attendance as a non-negotiable to create belonging and accountability.
7. Focus on Co-Creation – Let solutions emerge from the group rather than imposing them from the top.
8. Allow for the Storming Phase – Don’t rush early disagreements; they’re part of building a strong foundation.
9. Apply Nancy Kline’s Thinking Environment – Build equity, respect, and genuine listening into every session.
10. End with Next Steps – Finish each meeting with clear actions, owners, and timelines.

Optics vs. Operations: The Politics–Process Divide

Two Levels of Management Behaviour

In many organisations, people seem to operate at two distinct levels:

1. The Political Level – where the focus is on optics, perception, sound bites, and engagement.
2. The Process Level – where the focus is on understanding how things actually work, diagnosing problems, and implementing sustainable solutions.

Increasingly, it feels as if the balance is shifting towards politics over process. We are more concerned with appearances than with operational reality. This is reflected in managers who fight fires but never invest in fire prevention, because prevention is less visible and less glamorous than reacting to emergencies.

The Skills Gap in Management

One cause of this imbalance is that many managers are promoted based on interpersonal skills or tenure, rather than on an understanding of the systems, processes, and disciplines that keep organisations running.

Most managers have never been trained in the fundamentals of:

Policies and compliance
HR processes
Marketing
Operations and manufacturing
Continuous improvement

Instead, they are asked to manage people without a grasp of how to manage process. And without that knowledge, they inevitably become hostage to the politics of the workplace, focusing on relationships, alliances, and self-promotion rather than on long-term efficiency and productivity.

Why Process Matters

When process is neglected, problems are addressed only at the symptom level. Root causes go unresolved, and issues become chronic.

Process understanding is not theoretical — it is lived. You cannot learn to ride a bicycle by reading about it, and you cannot truly understand operational processes without having been involved in them. This is why leaders who live only in the “optics” world often talk theory without practical insight — like discussing how to play the violin without ever having picked one up.

The Resistance to Learning

In theory, this imbalance could be addressed through education, training, humility, and a genuine willingness to learn. But in practice, people often resist change until they are forced to confront failure.

We see this in many domains:

Recovery programmes – Alcoholics Anonymous speaks of hitting rock bottom before change begins.
Military training – Boot camp breaks down old habits before instilling new ones.
Medical diagnoses – Sometimes only a crisis prompts lifestyle changes.

As long as someone feels in control, they will defend the status quo — micromanaging, manipulating, or managing the optics to maintain authority. Only when that control is stripped away do they become open to transformation.

The Empty Cup

Confucius is often credited with the idea that “you must first have an empty cup before you can fill it.” If you are convinced you already know everything, you leave no room for new knowledge. The shift from optics to process often begins with that emptying — replacing ego with curiosity, defensiveness with openness, and political manoeuvring with genuine operational understanding.

Closing Thought

The politics–process divide is not the same as the leaders–managers divide. Both leaders and managers can fall into the optics trap, just as both can excel in operational improvement. The challenge — and the opportunity — lies in recognising the balance, valuing substance over style, and creating a culture where process competence is as celebrated as political skill.

Psychological Safety: The Hidden Power Tool in Project Management

Introduction

Project management is often painted as a science of planning, scheduling, and risk management. But behind the Gantt charts and dashboards lies something that can make or break a project long before the critical path is breached: psychological safety.
In its simplest form, psychological safety is the shared belief that it’s safe to speak up—without fear of blame, humiliation, or career damage. In a project environment, where stakes are high and deadlines are unforgiving, this is not a “nice-to-have.” It’s a strategic asset.

Managing Teams

Psychological safety within teams is about more than being “nice.” It’s about creating an environment where team members can challenge ideas, admit mistakes, and share concerns without repercussions. A safe team culture allows for early identification of issues, constructive conflict, and creative problem-solving.
Without it, silence takes over—and silence in projects is expensive. Small problems stay hidden until they explode into major issues.

Managing Stakeholders

Stakeholder management isn’t just about keeping people informed—it’s about fostering trust. When stakeholders feel psychologically safe, they are more likely to share emerging concerns, shifting priorities, or political risks. When they don’t, they may quietly disengage or conceal bad news until it’s too late.
Creating safety means valuing all perspectives, even when inconvenient, and avoiding “shooting the messenger.”

Managing Risk

Effective risk management depends on honesty. If team members fear being associated with problems, risk registers become optimistic fiction. Psychological safety ensures that risks are raised early, realistically, and without shame. That doesn’t mean tolerating poor performance—it means separating the problem from the person.

Managing Updates and Bad News

Bad news in projects is inevitable. How it’s handled determines whether the team rallies or retreats. Leaders who react with curiosity instead of blame turn bad news into a problem-solving opportunity. Those who react with anger or defensiveness breed avoidance—and avoidance kills projects.
Psychological safety doesn’t eliminate bad news. It ensures you hear it early enough to do something about it.

Top Tips for Building Psychological Safety in Projects

Model vulnerability—admit mistakes and share lessons learned.
Ask open questions and listen without interrupting.
Separate critique of work from critique of people.
Respond to bad news with “thank you for raising this” before taking action.
Make risk logs and lessons learned safe spaces for honesty.
Encourage curiosity over compliance—invite alternative views.
Celebrate early flagging of problems as much as you celebrate delivery wins.

Self-Evaluation Checklist

Do my team members speak up in meetings without hesitation?
Do stakeholders share bad news with me directly, without fear?
Are risks raised promptly, or do they emerge late in the project?
Is my first response to a problem curiosity or blame?
Do I make it clear that honesty is valued more than “looking good”?
Have I publicly admitted mistakes as a leader?
Do I praise people for surfacing issues early?

Closing Thought

The best project plans are worthless if people are afraid to tell you when they’re in trouble. Psychological safety is not a soft skill—it’s a hard requirement for delivery. In an environment where people feel safe to speak up, you’ll find risks earlier, solve problems faster, and build stronger trust with your team and stakeholders.
It’s not just about keeping people comfortable—it’s about keeping projects alive.