Helen Nutkins

Leading change demands deep emotional strength & self-awareness. Leaders of change have to balance an “inner battle” between agency (the need to drive momentum & action towards the vision) & ambivalence (identify risks, invite reflection & apply caution before proceeding). Typically, agency vs. ambivalence isn’t a resolvable “either/or”; it’s a “both/&” tension that leaders of change have to constantly hold & manage. @RonCarucci says we have to consider this tension across five critical dimensions of inner conflict: 1) Voice: Inspiring others with a compelling picture of the future, yet inviting dissent. 2) Ideas: Reframing possibilities with imagination while fostering unity. 3) Passion: Emotionally fuelling the cause of change & encouraging others to make their own connection to the cause. 4) Discontent: Challenging the status quo productively. 5) Conviction: Believing in the need for change but being flexible about the approach. The leaders who succeed at transformation are those who can live with the tension, read the conditions & repeatedly recalibrate that mix without overfocussing on either extreme for long. The author sets out advice to recognise the dimensions, watch for signs that they’re out of balance & use “guardrails” for sustaining balance as a leader of change: hbr.org/2025/09/the-resilien…

There's a big difference between "speaking up" & "calling out". This is so relevant in the context of building psychological safety & addressing issues & concerns within teams. ‘Speak up’ cultures enable people to get under the surface of issues; to feel & be heard. ‘Call out’ cultures shut down open & honest communication, breeding fear & discontent. When things go wrong, there's often a knee jerk reaction towards fault finding. Stepping back from this & instead focusing on finding solutions supports growth & development of people & systems. linkedin.com/feed/update/urn…. By @drbrockbastian. Graphic: Mays W. on LinkedIn. Via @tom_geraghty & Jayne Cheswick.