Tag Archives: team alignment

Learning to Think Together

Leadership teams develop shared understanding by learning to think through important questions together.

The progression is simple:

What I think.
What you think.
What we think.
What more we can discern.
What we say.

This progression describes a discipline that leadership teams can apply to virtually any consequential issue. Practiced repeatedly, the discipline becomes part of how a team thinks and works together.

From Individual Thinking to Shared Thinking

The preceding essays explored what makes this possible. Leadership conversations begin before people enter the room. Individual thinking becomes more useful when it is made visible. Structured representations help people organize their thinking and give teams a common form in which to work with it.

Once thinking is visible, it can be understood, questioned, developed, and shared. The next discipline is learning how to do that across a leadership team so individual thinking contributes to stronger shared thinking.

Draft: What I think

Drafting gives each person an opportunity to develop and express their own thinking before the team works on the question together.

A structured Draft asks everyone to consider the same elements of the same leadership question. Each person brings different knowledge, experience, perspective, and judgment. Putting that thinking into words makes it visible and often develops the thinking itself.

The Draft can also receive feedback while it is being developed. Assessment can help a leader see where an entry could be clearer, more specific, or more internally consistent. Questions and suggestions can prompt further thought and another iteration. 

The result is a stronger expression of what each person thinks and useful material for the team to work with together.

Compare: What you think

Compare brings individual drafts together and reveals similarities and differences.

Similarities show where understanding is already shared. Differences create opportunities to learn from the information, experience, interpretation, and perspectives distributed among team members.

A common structure also helps separate ideas from their sources. The team can concentrate on what each contribution adds to its understanding, giving ideas an opportunity to be considered on their merits rather than according to the role, status, personality, or presentation style of the contributor.

How leaders respond to revealed thinking matters. Seeking first to understand what someone means, then asking questions that help develop the thinking, creates an environment in which people become increasingly willing to share what they really think.

A facilitator can help establish and reinforce these ways of working until they become natural to the team. Repeated experience of having ideas understood, explored, and developed together strengthens both the thinking and the team’s capacity to work this way.

Comparison turns differences into material for inquiry. Leaders learn more about the question at hand and about how their colleagues see it.

Consolidate: What we think

Consolidate uses what the team has learned to develop its current best shared understanding.

One person’s observation may sharpen another’s idea. Several partial insights may combine into a more complete view. Exploring differences may reveal distinctions or possibilities that were absent from the individual drafts.

The resulting consolidated draft represents what the team has developed together. It becomes a shared reference point for further thought, conversation, decisions, and action.

DRAFT → COMPARE → CONSOLIDATE
What I think →
What you think → What we think

What More We Can Discern

Reaching shared understanding establishes what the team thinks together. Making that thinking visible gives the team something it can examine, test, and further develop.

Clarifying questions sharpen what the team means. Push-up questions invite further consideration of assumptions, evidence, implications, and possibilities. Advice and suggestions contribute additional experience and perspective. Each can help the team discern something worth incorporating into what we say.

Shared thinking can also benefit from perspectives beyond the leadership team. Customers, employees, investors, partners, advisors, and others see the organization from different vantage points. Sharing the team’s thinking with the right people and listening carefully to their responses provides another way to test and develop it.

The purpose throughout is the same: use what can be discerned to strengthen what we think.

Infer: What We Say  

Organizations express their understanding of themselves through websites, management presentations, plans, brochures, advertisements, reports, articles, and other communications. Together, these materials provide evidence of what we say.

Manage to Lead calls the function for making that thinking visible Infer. Infer uses existing materials to create a draft in the same structured form the leadership team used to develop its shared understanding.

The team can then compare what we think with what we say. What it discerns may sharpen the team’s understanding, improve how that understanding is expressed, or bring useful thinking from existing communications back into the team’s shared view.

What the team learns feeds another round of comparison and consolidation. Thinking and its expression develop together as the organization learns and evolves.

The Shared Thinking Cycle 

The progression forms a continuing cycle for developing and maintaining shared understanding. We call it the Shared Thinking Cycle

What I think → What you think → What we think → What more we can discern → What we say ↻

Draft, Compare, and Consolidate provide structure for moving from individual thinking to shared thinking. Questions, advice, outside perspectives, experience, and evidence provide opportunities to discern more. Infer makes thinking already expressed by the organization available to the same process.

What the team learns feeds another round of thinking, comparison, and consolidation. The subject can change while the discipline remains the same. Leaders can work this way when considering strategy, an acquisition, an important hire, a customer situation, an organization change, or virtually any issue that benefits from their collective thinking.

The discipline can be used with different degrees of rigor. Some matters call for a quick exchange of views and a decision. Others warrant individual drafts, careful comparison, further inquiry, and several rounds of consolidation. The greater the consequence of the decision and the importance of shared understanding, the more worthwhile it is to invest in developing the team’s thinking together.

Making the Discipline Easier to Learn

The Manage to Lead Leadership Workspace makes this way of working explicit and easy to practice. Across its leadership tools, the Workspace provides Draft, Compare, Consolidate, and Infer functions in a consistent form. Leaders can develop their thinking independently, discover similarities and differences, develop shared thinking, and incorporate what they learn through further cycles.

The Workspace also includes the IntelliVen Operations Advisor, or IVOA, which supports leaders throughout the process. As thinking is revealed in a Draft or developed through subsequent iterations, IVOA assesses its clarity, specificity, integrity, provides feedback and guidance, raises questions for consideration, and offers suggested upgrades.

IVOA accompanies the work throughout the cycle. Each leader can use it while developing an individual Draft, and the team can use it as shared thinking is compared, consolidated, tested, and refined. In each case, IVOA helps leaders improve what they have expressed before carrying their thinking forward.

The leadership team brings the knowledge, experience, judgment, conversation, and responsibility for what it ultimately concludes. The Workspace structures and facilitates the work. IVOA helps leaders continually improve the quality of the thinking they bring to it.

From Method to Leadership Capability

The structure is especially useful as a team learns the discipline. Repeated practice turns an explicit method into a familiar way of thinking and working together.

Leaders learn to make their own thinking visible and invite others to do the same. They look for similarities and differences, seek to understand what others mean, and use what they discern to develop stronger shared thinking.

They also learn to test what they think against evidence, experience, outside perspectives, and what the organization communicates. As they learn, they revisit and refine their shared understanding. The cycle becomes a habit of leadership.

With practice, the capability travels with the team. Leaders can use it during a meeting, around a whiteboard, in a planning session, or whenever an important question benefits from their collective thinking.

The artifacts created along the way capture shared understanding so it can guide decisions and action. The more enduring result is a leadership team increasingly capable of thinking, learning, and working together.

That prepares the team to apply the capability to the work of leading the organization.

The work begins with developing a shared definition of success:

What are we trying to accomplish, by when?

When there’s no right answer: get input, get commitment, then decide

Calls about who the team counts on for what are hard. Leaders worry about making valued people feel overlooked or diminished. Direct reports mostly want clarity, fair reasoning, and as much scope and recognition as they can reasonably earn. This post offers a way to handle those tensions: get input one-on-one, secure commitment to support the outcome, then decide and lead alignment.

Before you decide on a consequential call about who the team counts on for what, check in one-on-one with those who will be most impacted. Use these 1x1s to get their best thinking and secure an explicit commitment to support the outcome, whichever way you go. Then decide, own it, and lead everyone to align and execute. Remember: there is no single “right” organization. What works is what your team commits to make work. Don’t chase the perfect answer; make a sound call and then make the call right.

Start each 1×1 by setting context. Explain the decision you have to make and why it matters now. Ask them to set aside self‑interest and give you their best view of what to do and why. Probe for what you may be missing, the main risks, and how they would mitigate them. Listen hard. You are not asking them to decide for you; you are gathering the input you need to make the decision you are accountable to make.

Close every 1×1 with a clear ask for commitment to support whatever you decide. Say plainly that it is your job to decide and that, when you do, you expect full support either way. Make sure they know that support means words and deeds, in the room and outside the room. If they hesitate, stay with it. Surface concerns now, while you can still use them. If after a real conversation they cannot commit, that is useful data about whether they are on this team for this next phase.

After you decide, announce the decision and the reasoning at a level that lets reasonable people understand how you got there. Remind the team of the commitments made in 1x1s. Set the expectation that leaders will be visibly and consistently supportive, especially when they share the decision with their teams. Organizations change best slowly because change is hard on people, so favor steady, incremental moves and keep everyone clear on what is happening, why, and what you need from them. Sometimes it is better to roll out a major change as a series of smaller changes over a longer period.

If support slips, use a three‑step response that matches the moment:

  • First slip: private reset. Meet one-on-one to reaffirm the decision and what support looks like—words and deeds, in the room and outside the room. Ask for explicit recommitment. If they hesitate, stay with it. Surface concerns now, while you can still use them. Leave with a clear “yes.”
  • Second slip: public correction. In the moment and in front of others, restate the decision and the expectation to align. Keep it short, neutral, and firm. Move the conversation back on track.
  • Third slip: in or out. Meet privately, with your inner circle if helpful, and make the choice explicit: be fully in and support the path we chose, or step out. This is about whether they are part of the team that moves forward in a specific way. If not, help them out.

Two mindsets make this work. First, own the call. Do not attribute the decision to advisors, the board, or the market. Once you know, own it. Second, get help without becoming dependent on it. Invite strong input and dissent, and then decide. Disagreement before the decision is input. After the decision, alignment is the standard.

How organizations evolve

Organizations are not fixed. Treat structure and roles as means to an end, and expect them to change as you grow.A short script you can adapt

  • I need to make this decision. Before I do, give me your best thinking—what do you recommend and why? What am I missing? When I decide, can I count on your full support either way?
  • If you can’t commit, tell me now and we’ll address it. After I decide, we speak with one voice and execute.

Why this works is straightforward. Everyone is heard and treated with respect. Commitment is explicit, not assumed. You show up as decisive and fair. And if misalignment appears, you handle it quickly and cleanly.

Next steps

  • Run the 1x1s. Use the script above. Capture each leader’s recommendation and explicit commitment in writing.
  • Book an IntelliVen workshop for your ELT. A focused 60–90-minute session to practice the Input → Commitment → Decide method on a real decision. Includes prep and a follow‑up plan.
  • Enroll in Manage to Lead (MtL) training. Apply the seven truths and the W‑W‑W framework to your strategy and org design.
  • Share the “How organizations evolve” section with your ELT. Ask each leader to name one risk and one action to support the change.
  • Set a cadence checkpoint. For the next four ELT meetings, include a 10‑minute alignment check on this decision.
  • Want help? Invite IntelliVen to facilitate your first round of 1x1s or the in‑or‑out conversation.

Get Clear. Align. Grow.

Process Maps Turn Confusion Into Clarity

Participants in IntelliVen’s Manage to Lead (MtL) program sometimes ask: “Why do we need to work on process maps?” It’s a fair question. The answer is that process mapping is not theory or busywork — it’s a practical tool you use on your own organization to turn hidden confusion into shared clarity. What follows explains how and why it works.

Every team member operates with their own mental map of how work gets done. The problem is, those maps rarely match. When they stay hidden, confusion builds, errors repeat, and opportunities slip away. Process maps transform scattered assumptions into one clear picture everyone can see, use, and improve together.

Turn Individual Mental Maps Into One Shared View

Organizations are an ecosystem of activities. Sales, delivery, support, finance, and HR leaders each hold pieces of the whole. Ask ten people how a key workflow happens across functions—say, onboarding a new customer—and you may hear ten different answers.

The same fragmentation shows up inside functions too: two sales reps handling similar opportunities may qualify leads or prepare proposals in completely different ways, even though the organization has learned a best practice for how it should be done.

When leaders work with their teams to draft a process map, a good first step is for each person to draw their own version of how the work gets done. Those maps reveal the similarities and differences in how people think the process works.

Looking at them side by side sparks discussion and exposes assumptions that would otherwise stay hidden. Collaborating to reconcile those views into a single, explicit picture reduces misunderstandings, strengthens alignment, and sets the stage for systematic improvement.

This aligns with the IntelliVen “Get Clear” truth: clarity is the first step to higher performance. Without it, even the best strategy gets lost in translation.

Make Handoffs, Gaps, and Choke Points Explicit

Once the flow of work is on paper (or screen), weak spots stand out. Teams can see:

  • Handoffs where work might fall between the cracks.

  • Gaps where no one is clearly responsible.

  • Choke points where one role or tool becomes a bottleneck.

  • Redundancies where two people are doing the same thing.

  • Error-prone steps where mistakes often creep in.

  • Measures—formal or informal—that indicate whether things are on track.

In day-to-day operations, these issues hide in plain sight. People learn to work around them. But a process mapping exercise surfaces them for open discussion.

This step mirrors the “NOW” stage of IntelliVen’s Change Framework. Leaders and teams must start with a clear-eyed view of how things currently work before they can chart a better “NEXT.”

Examine for Potential Breakthroughs

Mapping processes is not just about fixing problems. It’s about discovering opportunities.

When the whole flow is visible, leaders can ask:

  • What would happen if we automated this step?

  • Could two teams combine efforts to reduce time and cost?

  • Are we measuring what matters most?

  • Where could a small shift create disproportionate gains?

Sometimes, the exercise reveals breakthroughs. For example, moving a routine approval up in the process can cut cycle time in half. Or spotting a recurring customer question may inspire a new self-service product feature.

Organizations that grow successfully over time are those that consistently find and exploit such breakthroughs. Process maps are a tool to make them visible.

Ensure the Whole Team Plays the Game the Same Way to Win

Strategy is about how to win. Operations is about how to play the game. To succeed, the two must connect.

Process maps make the “playbook” explicit. They allow everyone—leaders, managers, staff, and partners—to see the same game board and understand their role on it. This alignment ensures:

  • Consistency: Consistency makes it easier to ensure everyone follows best practices and onboard new people. Consider an organization where half the professionals operate at peak effectiveness while the other half lag. If the whole team consistently applied the practices of the top performers, overall output and impact would rise dramatically. Process modeling is a step toward making that possible.
  • Efficiency: A shared map keeps teams from having to inventing steps or duplicate effort which frees time and energy for higher-value work. Efficiency in this sense isn’t just about speed — it’s about reducing rework, avoiding missteps, and channeling resources where they matter most.
  • Accountability: With a clear, shared process, everyone knows what’s expected of them and when. Instead of relying on memory, assumptions, or informal workarounds, roles and responsibilities are visible. This makes it easier to spot when something is off track and to coach or support people in real time, building trust and confidence across the team.

  • Scalability: Growth is hard when every new person has to “figure it out” on their own. A well-documented process gives newcomers a tested playbook so they can contribute faster and more reliably. It also allows leaders to delegate with confidence, knowing the approach will hold up even as volume increases or teams expand.

In IntelliVen terms, process maps help teams collaborate to “Get Clear and Get Aligned.” They make it easier for leaders to contract with their teams, govern effectively, and review performance against clear expectations.

Practical Tips for Leaders

If you’re considering introducing process mapping, here are some practical guidelines:

  • Start with one important process. Don’t try to map everything at once.

  • Involve people who do the work. They know the reality better than managers.

  • Keep it simple at first. Boxes, arrows, and labels are enough to start.

  • Use present tense. Describe how things actually happen now, not how they should.

  • Capture both formal and informal steps. Workarounds often carry key insights.

  • After mapping, ask: “What can we stop, start, or change to improve performance?”

  • Revisit maps as your organization evolves. A process that works today may need adjustment tomorrow.

Closing Thought

Working on process maps is not busywork. It is a leadership act. It shows commitment to clarity, alignment, and continuous improvement. It turns hidden assumptions into shared understanding. It shines light on bottlenecks and opportunities. And it ensures that your whole team is indeed playing the same game, the same way, to win together.

In short: process maps help leaders Get Clear. Align. Grow.

Put These Ideas Into Practice

In the Manage to Lead (MtL) program, you don’t just study tools like process mapping — you apply them directly to your own organization. YOUR CASE IS THE COURSE. By working hands-on with proven frameworks, you and your team surface hidden assumptions, sharpen execution, and accelerate performance. Learn more about the MtL program here »