Saber Coaching

Call Directions Website

Saber Coaching Inspiring leaders to effectively master their craft | coaching individuals, teams, and organizations

Coaching taught me a skill I brought straight back into leadership, and it’s the one I need most.Every problem that some...
10/23/2026

Coaching taught me a skill I brought straight back into leadership, and it’s the one I need most.

Every problem that someone brings you is not an invitation to solve it.

When I was a more junior leader, I treated a lot of problems that way. I didn’t give my team the space for any other type of conversation.

That instinct is fairly common. It’s what experience builds in you.

As you gain experience as a leader, you get better at solving problems. You get better at pattern recognition. You have the authority and the ability to remove roadblocks for your team and give them advice along the way.

Sometimes that’s exactly what your team needs from you.

Sometimes it’s not.

What coaching taught me is that there is an alternative way to treat that moment.

So now, I pause. Listen. Really hear what my team is telling me.

Then I choose what posture is best in that situation. What does the situation actually require from me?

Sometimes the best leaders do need to jump in, remove the roadblock, and solve the problem.

A lot of the time, though, your team needs space.

Giving them the space to talk through a problem and see it from a different angle allows them to hear themselves as well.

When you allow them that space, they are able to come up with a better solution on their own.

Which type of leader does your team need this week, the one who solves or the one who listens? Would love to hear your thoughts in the comments 👇

10/21/2026

Change works better as a reflex than as a project you have to manage.

In the old days you might have one project, or five, and you would run them sequentially.

There was always a point where an organization hit supersaturation and couldn't handle any more change, and that usually got felt at the manager or director level.

Now the changes arrive as a constant stream.

I still see people using the seven-step approach to change management, or the five-step approach, or ADKAR.

None of that is going to be fast enough for the number of changes coming at us.

What I'd rather see is constant adaptation, constant test and learn, constant agility.

And when those tensions between stability and change show up, emotional equanimity is what lets you manage the paradox instead of getting pulled apart by it.

If your organization feels overwhelmed right now, that's the place to look.

Leaders are getting more done than ever and getting less ready than ever, at the same time.People are able to get faster...
10/19/2026

Leaders are getting more done than ever and getting less ready than ever, at the same time.

People are able to get faster repetitions because they're using AI.

But that doesn't change the quality and judgment required to determine what's good and what's done.

That's the performance versus development paradox, and I'm seeing it all the time.

You certainly want performance.

The problem is what happens when performance is the only thing you're measuring, because development is the part that quietly stops getting paid for.

DM me to learn more about protecting leadership capacity while the performance pressure keeps climbing.

10/16/2026

When the quality isn't good, you can run a quick after action review.

Give candid feedback, then get a better repetition the second time.

All of that is applicable when you're working with AI.

The move from individual contributor to manager is the gate almost nobody gets coached through.You can survive that way ...
10/14/2026

The move from individual contributor to manager is the gate almost nobody gets coached through.

You can survive that way for a number of years.

But once you get to the next level, you have to be able to develop people and get work done through others.

If you don't catch it at that first gate, it becomes all-consuming.

People are now overwhelmed, they're over their skis on every task, and they can't get enough done.

What I keep seeing is that it's almost like you have to grow in spite of the leader that you're working for, unless that leader happens to be really good at developing people.

Which means a huge amount of your trajectory comes down to who you happened to report to.

That's not a plan.

Were you developed on purpose, or did you have to figure out the jump to manager on your own? Would love to hear your thoughts in the comments 👇

10/12/2026

The next leader up gets ready because someone gave them the scary repetitions before they needed them.

I work with a bunch of leaders, so I'm usually in conversation with them about what's on their mind, and right now I'm hearing a ton about succession planning.

It's coming out as different things than it used to.

Sometimes it sounds like restructuring, removed layers, a reorganization.

Other times it sounds like this: great people at the top, great people at the bottom, and a middle that isn't necessarily ready now.

We've talked for years about a sticky middle.

People below want to get promoted, but they don't get the opportunity to practice, to get feedback, to do the reps that feel risky.

When I was in the army, there was an assumption that the next person needed to be ready, for obvious reasons.

In corporate, that never really seemed to take hold.

At a certain point all roads go back to Stephen Covey and the P and PC balance, production and production capacity.

You want the golden eggs, but you have to care for the goose.

Right now we are completely over-indexed on pulling those golden eggs, and we are not taking care of the goose.

The goose is your capacity, your leadership capability.

That's the performance versus development paradox, and I'm seeing it all the time.

You certainly want performance, but you better make sure you take care of that goose.

Who gave you the reps that got you ready for the role you're in now? Would love to hear your thoughts in the comments 👇

In the old days with change management, you might have a project, you might have five projects, and you do those sequent...
10/09/2026

In the old days with change management, you might have a project, you might have five projects, and you do those sequentially.

And usually there's a certain point where you hit a super saturation point in an organization where they cannot handle any more change.

That's usually felt at the manager or director level.

Now we've got so many changes coming at us that it's almost like a constant stream of changes.

Restructures, new tools, AI in the workflow, fewer layers, new targets, and they all land on the same people at the same time.

If we're still thinking about it the old way, we're just not going to be able to keep up and everyone's going to be overwhelmed.

So if you feel overwhelmed in your organization, this is something to take a look at.

I read a really interesting article in HR Executive discussing the idea of pervasive change and how you deal with it.

One of the things that came out is the idea to routinize change, thinking about the practices required to make change a reflex or a habit instead of a project that you have to manage.

Openness to new ideas.

Very effective time management.

Quickly understanding business concepts, using technology effectively and trying new things.

Working well with others, your non-human teammates and your teammates.

And then regulating our emotions.

Because when we get in these sort of tensions between stability and change, emotional equanimity is the thing that we need, and that's what we need to manage paradoxes.

I'm not seeing that in a lot of organizations.

I'm seeing people still take the old approach, the seven step approach to change management, or the five step approach, or the ADKAR approach.

None of that is going to be fast enough to deal with the number of changes coming at us.

If we just think about a need for constant adaptation, constant test and learn, constant agility, I think we're going to be better for it.

10/08/2026

The best thing I ever did for my coaching, other than building coaching skills, was be a client.

Because I sometimes show up to my coach without my homework done.

And that feels a certain way. And my coach responds a certain way.

Early on in my career, some of my clients told me something that was hard to hear. When we show up without our homework done, you make us feel guilty.

My honest reaction at the time was, yeah, because get it done.

But then I show up as a client the same way. A little bit messy. Not really ready. Not knowing exactly what I want to talk about.

And that gives me a lot more empathy for the client experience.

It is the same reason I went through a full 360 process myself before adding one to my practice. I wanted to understand what the experience was before I invested in it.

The profile I chose looks at our reactive tendencies. The things we just do under stress, that suited us when we were really young, because that is how we found safety.

Maybe you are in it to win it, super competitive. Maybe you withdraw into yourself, read books, want to be the smartest in the room. Maybe making other people happy is what makes you feel safe.

There are different ways people respond and react. But there are also creative competencies underneath, and if we are intentional, if we are centered, we can bring out our best and bring out the best in others.

You learn that faster from the other chair.

When did being on the receiving end of something change how you deliver it? Would love to hear your thoughts in the comments 👇

10/07/2026

People can't improve if you haven't told them they need to improve on a particular thing.

That seems logical. And yet I am often brought in as an executive coach to work with someone on something they do not know about.

From the outside in, I ask one question. When was the last time you had the conversation and gave them that direct feedback?

Then you hear a little bit of tap dancing.

That is why I am careful about how I set up the triangle. Coach, client, and sponsor.

In a sponsored engagement, coaches often get put in the middle. We become the deliverer of feedback that has never really landed.

That is uncomfortable for the coach, and it is a very difficult position for the client, because they have not heard the message.

Building the next level includes a lot of things. Leadership development. Potentially coaching. Stretch assignments. It certainly includes feedback.

It is not going to magically happen, and you cannot outsource all of it.

You can bring in partners to help. There still has to be an intention, and a way to identify who those next level people actually are.

I think everyone is so busy working in the business that they do not have the time to step back and think about leadership development intentionally.

Who on your team is being measured against a standard they have never been told about? Would love to hear your thoughts in the comments 👇

People still think you can learn to be a leader in ninety minutes to three hour increments only.You show up to class, kn...
10/06/2026

People still think you can learn to be a leader in ninety minutes to three hour increments only.

You show up to class, knowledge gets poured in your head, and then you leave.

It used to be an issue of having access to content, or the quality of it.

Now content is everywhere.

So as an executive coach, I can encourage clients to go to the gym and do the workouts.

What I am noticing is that everyone is so busy, so time poor, that they do not do them.

Which means the thing holding leaders back moved, and most development has not caught up.

What is one leadership skill you have read about but never actually practiced? Would love to hear your thoughts in the comments 👇

Address

Boston, MA

Telephone

+16179387993

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Saber Coaching posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category