Blind Spots: What You Don’t See Will Trip You Up

When HR called about a senior leader I’ll call Marcus, the brief was short.

He delivered results. People did not trust him.

The combination is more common than it looks. The leader is valuable. The work matters. But the way the work gets done is creating resistance the leader cannot see. I’ve changed identifying details, but the leadership pattern is real.

Marcus thought he was being loyal. His peers experienced him as ruthless.

He was not trying to mistreat anyone. He was moving quickly to execute the CEO’s agenda, a pattern that had once served him well. At his current level, that same approach was tripping him up.

Marcus had a technical background and a real attachment to the organization’s mission. Leadership kept giving him difficult cross-functional work because he moved quickly, stayed focused, and remained closely aligned with the CEO.

That was the strength.

It was also the blind spot. He entered other leaders’ departments with a mandate rather than a conversation. His peers did not feel like partners. They felt rolled.

Marcus took on the work with energy and courage. The goal was clear—better leadership. The path was not. Here is what happened.

The Pattern He Couldn’t See

The Hogan Development Survey helped name the pattern. His strongest tendency was Dutiful: staying close to authority, aligning with the CEO, and executing what he believed she wanted.

At moderate intensity, that can look like loyalty and responsiveness. At higher intensity, it can become reluctance to challenge upward or defend direct reports or others.

When I shared that interpretation, Marcus did not reject it.

He also did not yet see the problem.

“I do want to stay in the CEO’s good graces. I don’t see anything wrong with doing exactly what she asks.”

His private leadership equation was simple: manage up well, do what the CEO asks, and the rest will follow.

That equation had helped him succeed.

At his current level, it was incomplete.

That is how a blind spot often works. From the inside, the pattern still feels reasonable. But, the impacts are not fully seen by the  leader.

The 360 Made the Cost Visible

Peers described someone who arrived already decided.

Marcus rarely paused to ask how the work would land, whether others needed to be involved earlier, or whether pushing back might better serve the organization.

His definition of loyalty was costing him trust and slowing the work.

He did not need to become less loyal.

He needed to evolve his definition of loyalty.

At his level, loyalty also meant judgment, constructive challenge, and partnership.

That is where coaching helps: not by telling a leader to “collaborate more,” but by helping them see the pattern, understand its impact, and lead differently.

Changing the Pattern

Once Marcus saw the pattern, he began changing it.

He engaged peers earlier, listened to concerns and insights, and brought more of his own judgment to the CEO rather than simply executing.

He learned to say:

“I can do that, but we should bring the affected leaders in sooner.”

“There may be a better way to hit the goal without creating unnecessary resistance.”

He also went back to peers and promised a change: “I can see why that created mistrust. I’m going to do this differently.”

A year later, he reported stronger relationships. He was more thoughtful about when to move quickly, when to involve others, and when to challenge upward.

The insight mattered. What Marcus did with it mattered more.

What Blind Spots Can Tell Us

Many blind spots are not spinach in the teeth. They are once-useful solutions that the leader has outgrown.

The work is to see the pattern clearly enough to evolve it.

For Marcus, what once looked like loyalty became something more complex: judgment, partnership, and the willingness to challenge upward when the work required it.

That was not simply greater self-awareness.

It was better leadership.