Bias is no longer an unfamiliar concept in most organisations. Awareness has increased, language has evolved, and intentions are often sincere. Yet patterns of exclusion, preference, and uneven opportunity persist. This reflection explores why. Moving beyond the idea of bias as something purely unconscious, it examines how comfort, convenience, and unexamined habits allow bias to endure even in well-intentioned environments. Rather than offering solutions or prescriptions, t

Organisations ask people to learn, adapt, and innovate, while keeping them inside the same system that defines what “good” looks like. Learning becomes entangled with impression management. Even in well-run cultures, there is often a faint evaluative current: a sense that ideas are being weighed, competence inferred, status silently negotiated.

A positive interaction, a moment of recognition, a difficult exchange left unresolved, all carry forward. They shape how people speak in the next meeting, how they show up with a client, how confidently they take decisions. In sales environments, these emotional traces often decide outcomes long before price or proposition come into play. This is emotional carryover...

When a merger is announced, the first phase is usually reassuring by design.Town halls emphasise continuity. Leadership stresses stability. Teams are told that nothing changes overnight. This early period matters. It protects morale and buys time. But it is also deceptive...

Desire is the quiet engine of change. It is emotional, exposed, and easily bruised. And yet, it is the point at which most change initiatives quietly fail...

Coaching creates structure. It offers reflection, challenge, and containment. As people grow in confidence and competence, the need for that structure changes. This creates a paradox. Effective coaching accelerates growth, yet that same growth can make continued guidance feel restrictive. What once felt supportive can start to feel like constraint. Psychologically, several dynamics converge...

Many organisations speak confidently about empowerment. Decision-making is said to be decentralised. Managers are encouraged to “own” their scope. Leadership frameworks emphasise autonomy, trust, and accountability. Yet inside many teams, the lived experience feels very different...

A KU Leuven professor raised a concern that deserves attention beyond academia. Among university students, particularly younger ones, fewer and fewer feel safe to speak openly. Even in environments designed for debate, people increasingly hold back. What struck us was not only the implication for learning, but how closely this mirrors what we observe in organisations.

Personalisation in sales has long been framed as preparation. Know the client. Understand their market. Anticipate their challenges. In today’s language, this has evolved into hyper-personalisation, powered by data, tooling, and increasingly sophisticated segmentation. Yet something essential is often absent...

For many years, emotional labour in organisations was shared across layers of work. Frontline roles handled customer frustration, hesitation, and disappointment as part of their everyday responsibility. Sales teams managed rejection and uncertainty. Team leaders and managers stepped in when situations escalated beyond routine handling. Artificial intelligence is now reshaping this architecture.

People talk about themselves constantly at work. To colleagues. To clients. To the people they lead. It happens in meetings, in one-to-ones, in negotiations, and in moments that feel informal but carry weight. What is less often examined is why this impulse is so strong, and why its effects vary so widely depending on context.

During a training session with a group of young professionals, we discussed recent research showing that customers tend to expect two things from their suppliers: ease and recognition. The exchange should feel smooth, and the person on the other side should feel seen. One participant raised his hand and said, plainly, “I’m not a social counsellor. I’d rather avoid personal contact with customers.”

Under pressure, perceptual range can start to narrow. Leaders do not stop listening, but they begin to hear selectively. Signals that confirm competence, coherence, or control move freely. Signals that introduce ambiguity, challenge, or contradiction struggle to land. This narrowing rarely announces itself. It feels like decisiveness. Over time, selective perception can become selective disclosure....

In many organisations, the absence of resistance is taken as alignment. A meeting ends with nodding heads, a round of thanks, and a sense of momentum. Later, by the coffee machine, a different conversation unfolds. Doubts surface. Frustrations are named. Questions appear that never reached the room. Leadership often remains unaware...

There is a state many leaders recognise, though few name easily. Work continues. Responsibilities are met. Nothing is overtly wrong. Yet momentum thins. Direction feels muted. Energy circulates without traction. This experience has been described as languishing. What matters less than the label is the pattern it points to...

In many organisations, some managers lead quietly. They absorb pressure. They adjust schedules. They advocate behind the scenes. They smooth the edges of policy so their teams can keep moving. Their focus stays on continuity rather than visibility. Over time, something subtle happens...

Supplier relationships often sit quietly in the background of organisational life. Managed through contracts, processes, and operational routines, they are rarely seen as cultural moments. Yet they are observed....

In most workplaces, people know how to present themselves. They understand expectations, calibrate their language, and adjust how they contribute depending on context. This is not in itself a problem. It is part of professional life. What matters is the cumulative effect when that adjustment becomes constant.

There is a point in many managerial roles where clarity begins to thin. Not because of inexperience or lack of intent, but because the context becomes denser. Expectations multiply. Signals conflict. Decisions carry more consequence, while the margin for error narrows...

Psychological safety now appears in many organisations as an explicit objective. It is referenced in values statements, tracked through engagement surveys, and sometimes summarised in a single score reviewed at leadership level. Yet a practical question remains. When people do not yet feel fully safe to speak, how reliable are the methods used to measure that safety?