When Leaders Aren’t Aligned, the Team Feels It

By Wendy C. Wilson

Prefer to listen? Click here on Audio below ▶︎ •၊၊||၊|။||။||||။||||

Last week, I wrote about how leaders decide what deserves attention when everything feels important.

This week, I want to look at a different problem.

What happens when leaders themselves are not aligned on what deserves attention?

That creates a very different challenge for the people doing the work. Employees are no longer trying to prioritize within a clear set of expectations. They are trying to interpret competing expectations coming from different leaders.

One executive says the priority is speed.

Another says the priority is reducing risk.

Finance is focused on controlling costs.

Sales wants faster turnaround.

Operations is worried about capacity.

Customer Service is pushing for better response times.

None of those priorities is necessarily wrong.

The problem begins when the leadership team has not decided how those priorities fit together, what the tradeoffs are, or which one takes precedence when they conflict.

When that happens, the conflict does not disappear. It simply gets pushed down the organization.

Your Team Should Not Have to Resolve Leadership Conflicts

Middle managers often feel this first.

They are handed multiple objectives from different parts of the organization and expected to somehow make them all work.

Move faster, but do not increase risk.

Reduce costs, but improve service.

Do more with fewer resources, but do not let quality slip.

Deliver the project sooner, but do not change the scope.

These are not always impossible expectations. Sometimes there are creative ways to accomplish several goals at once.

But sometimes there is a real tradeoff.

And when there is, the people closest to the work should not be left guessing which senior leader’s priority matters most.

That is a leadership decision.

If senior leaders do not make it, someone farther down the organization eventually has to.

Misalignment Creates Work You Never See

Leadership misalignment creates a surprising amount of hidden work.

Employees spend time trying to interpret what leaders really mean.

Managers have side conversations to determine whose request should take priority.

Teams redo work because one executive’s expectations differ from another’s.

People delay decisions because they are waiting to see which direction will ultimately win.

And sometimes employees simply try to satisfy everyone.

That usually means everything becomes urgent.

The problem may look like poor execution, slow decision-making, or weak accountability.

But the real issue may be happening several levels above the people being held accountable for the results.

Alignment Does Not Mean Everyone Has to Agree

Leadership alignment is sometimes confused with consensus.

They are not the same thing.

Good leadership teams can disagree.

In fact, they should be willing to challenge one another.

Finance should raise concerns about cost.

Operations should raise concerns about capacity.

Sales should advocate for customers and revenue.

Risk leaders should identify potential consequences.

Those perspectives are valuable precisely because they are different.

The problem is not disagreement.

The problem is allowing the disagreement to leave the leadership room unresolved.

Once a decision has been made, the organization needs to know what the decision is.

Employees should not receive one version of the strategy from one leader and a different version from another.

What Alignment Actually Looks Like

Getting aligned does not require endless meetings. It does require leaders to have the conversations that are sometimes easier to avoid.

Before announcing a new priority, leadership teams should ask a few practical questions.

Where does this priority conflict with something we have already told the organization to do?

If two objectives compete for the same people, money, or time, which one comes first?

What are we willing to delay, reduce, or stop?

What tradeoffs are we knowingly making?

Who has the final decision when two functions disagree?

And perhaps most importantly:

What are we going to tell the organization?

Consider a company where Sales is pushing for faster customer delivery while Operations is already running near capacity.

Both leaders may be right.

Sales may be responding to legitimate customer demand. Operations may know that accelerating further could create quality problems or employee burnout.

The answer is not for Sales to tell its teams to push harder while Operations tells its teams to slow things down.

The senior leaders need to resolve the tradeoff together.

Maybe they increase capacity.

Maybe they narrow the customer commitments.

Maybe they prioritize certain accounts.

Maybe they change the timeline.

There may be several workable answers.

But there needs to be an answer.

One Leadership Team, One Direction

Leaders will not always agree behind closed doors.

That is normal.

But once a decision is made, employees should not have to figure out which leader to believe.

If circumstances change, the leadership team may need to revisit the decision. That is also normal.

What creates confusion is when different leaders quietly change direction within their own functions without realigning with one another.

Then the organization begins operating with multiple versions of the truth.

Over time, employees learn to wait.

They stop reacting immediately to each new priority because experience tells them another one may replace it next week.

That is when leadership misalignment starts becoming a credibility problem.

Before You Ask the Team to Prioritize, Make Sure the Leaders Have

Last week’s question was:

How do leaders decide what deserves attention when everything feels important?

This week’s question is different:

What happens when the leaders themselves are giving people different answers?

Teams can handle competing priorities.

They can adapt to changing conditions.

They can make difficult tradeoffs.

But they should not be expected to resolve conflicts that the leadership team has not resolved for itself.

Before asking employees to execute faster, communicate better, or take more ownership, senior leaders may need to ask a harder question first:

Are we actually aligned on what we are asking them to do?

________________________________________

Wendy C. Wilson speaks to leaders, teams, and organizations about resilience, leadership under pressure, and the practices that help people stay steady in demanding seasons. To explore bringing Wendy to your next event, visit the Work With Me page or submit a speaking inquiry @ https://wendycwilson.com/work-with-me/.

***Subscribe to the blog for weekly leadership reflections

***Follow along on LinkedIn and Instagram for daily insights on resilience and leadership through adversity