You may not have a performance problem; you may have a coordination problem disguised as excellence. Strong leaders are hitting their goals, protecting their teams, and optimising their workflows. But it’s still not working. What looks like misalignment is often something more uncomfortable: success at the wrong level of the system. As a strategic, systems-level leader, this becomes a long-term problem. Let’s explore why.
LEARN something.
In larger and more complex organisations, teams are designed to specialise. Over time, that specialisation hardens into a unique identity, language, and set of metrics. Researchers describe this as the differentiation paradox. It is valuable because depth creates capability. It is also risky because the stronger and more cohesive a team becomes, the harder it is for them to coordinate with others. The issue is not poor intent, weak communication, or a simple silo effect. It is a form of systemic discordance. Teams pursue legitimate local objectives that quietly conflict with system-level outcomes. In the long run, you end up with local wins but system losses.
Research into multiteam systems shows this tension intensifies when pressure points, problems, or crises collide and compete for the same resources, time, and priorities. Leaders are forced into a tension: commitment to their team and commitment to the wider system. Lean too far into the team, and you get local optimisation at the expense of the system. Lean too far into the system, and you erode team cohesion and execution. By the way, saying something cliché like “you can do both” is both naive and dismissive of the real tension leaders face at this level. By ignoring this tension, we also miss a genuine growth opportunity. An opportunity to develop leaders’ situational awareness and cognitive range so they can hold both levels at once, and the judgement to shift focus as conditions change. The practical implication is simple but uncomfortable. Alignment is not about more meetings or clearer org charts. It is about developing leaders who can decide when to trade off their own team’s success for the organisation’s success, and then rebuild their team afterwards.
REFLECT on an idea.
“Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success.” (Henry Ford)
This quote captures the essence of collaboration, but it leaves out a critical reality for modern organisations: it’s not just about working together, but about working together under pressure. Every team eventually fragments under pressure when priorities, resources, and demands collide. The only question is: how much pressure?
SMILE a little.
One thing I’ve learned about strategic leadership: if nobody is unhappy with the decision, there’s a reasonable chance no decision was actually made.
DO IT to get results.
If you want to develop strategic systems thinking and situational awareness, make it a regular conversation in your leadership meetings, not something you discuss once a year at an offsite. The next time your leadership team faces competing priorities, ask each leader to define their team’s success in one sentence, with a clear metric attached. Then ask: If every team achieved the success you’ve all just described, what would break at the organisational level? Sit with the tension. Don’t solve it and don’t prioritise for them. Over time, this builds the habit of recognising trade-offs, balancing competing priorities, and thinking beyond team boundaries.
