Blog 4- The Playbook: Leadership Through Situational EQ

When stepping into an interim management role—whether for a business turnaround, factory start-up, or merging cultures in a complex acquisition—the stakes are always high. Time is limited, the challenges are immediate, and the solutions must balance people, processes, and culture.

These unusual scenarios provide powerful insights into the Assertiveness-Duality Continuum, building on the foundation of the assertiveness quadrant and highlighting the critical role of situational EQ: the ability to stay centred while adopting the leadership style that best fits the moment.

The lessons from these high-pressure environments not only apply to extreme situations but can also enlighten your day-to-day challenges in business.

The Factory Start-Up: Balancing Command, Pacesetting, and Trust

Imagine walking into a factory that doesn’t exist yet—not a single machine running, not a single system in place. It’s not just about building a facility; it’s about building a culture, a team, and a shared sense of purpose. Factory start-ups are inherently high-pressure environments. Deadlines are tight, stakes are high, and clarity of command is non-negotiable. In these situations, as a leader, you often find yourself relying heavily on commanding and pacesetting styles to drive results and establish order.

But that’s only half the story.

In one of my factory start-ups, I found myself giving direct, no-nonsense instructions to ensure compliance with safety standards, processes, and timelines. There wasn’t much room for negotiation in these early stages; the nature of the work demanded decisive action and laser-focused execution. The commanding style became my default because it was the fastest way to establish clarity and move the needle.

At the same time, I leaned heavily on the pacesetting style, modelling the high standards I expected from my team. I would be on the floor, working shoulder to shoulder, setting the tone for what “excellence” looked like. When people saw me rolling up my sleeves and holding myself to the same standards, it sparked a culture of accountability. The pacesetting approach created momentum, but it also came with a risk: if you push too hard, you risk burning people out.

Balancing Command with Empathy

While I relied on command and pacesetting during the start-up phase, I knew these styles alone weren’t sustainable for building long-term trust and respect. That’s where assertiveness and empathy came into play. Even in high-pressure moments, I made it a point to listen. I’d connect with my team on the shop floor, asking them how they were finding the work, what they needed to succeed, and what frustrations they were facing.

One employee, let’s call him Jim, approached me after a particularly stressful week. “You’re pushing us hard,” he said. “But I’ve never had a manager take the time to explain why it matters.”

That struck a chord. I realised that while command and pacesetting were effective, they needed to be coupled with a clear, visionary style to give people a sense of purpose. I started every morning briefing by connecting the dots: “Here’s why this milestone is critical,” or “This is how your work contributes to the bigger picture.”

Introducing Other Styles Situationally

As we moved closer to operational stability, I shifted gears. I began leaning into coaching and democratic styles, focusing on developing my team’s capabilities and involving them in decision-making.

For instance, during our first major operational issue—a delay in machinery installation—I invited the team into a brainstorming session. I asked, “What’s the fastest way to resolve this while maintaining safety and quality?” I could have issued commands, but instead, I chose to listen. The result? A solution that came from the team, increasing their confidence and ownership.

Similarly, the affiliative style came into play when tensions ran high. I’d step back from the pressure and have informal chats with team members, making it clear that their well-being mattered as much as the deadlines. By creating moments of harmony and connection, I built a reservoir of trust I could draw upon in more demanding times.

Cultural Integration: Crashing Cultures Together

When tasked with merging multiple organisations after a series of acquisitions, the challenges shifted. Unlike the structured urgency of a start-up, the goal here was to create unity in a fragmented, often mistrustful environment. Each team brought its own culture, values, and way of working, and my job was to align them under a shared vision while avoiding alienation.

In this context, visionary leadership became my anchor. I articulated a future-focused message:

• “This isn’t about losing your identity—it’s about building something stronger together.”

To bring this vision to life, I paired it with affiliative leadership, fostering connections across groups:

• “How can we make this integration work for everyone?”

However, cultures don’t merge without tension. Conflicts arose, and here I leaned into the democratic style. By facilitating open forums, I gave employees a voice in shaping the new organisation, building buy-in and collaboration.

The 200-Year-Old Turnaround: From Chaos to a Sale

One of my most challenging turnarounds involved a 200-year-old business teetering on the brink of closure. I was placed there by the bank, and the situation was dire: two long-standing directors had recently retired, leaving behind an incumbent owner who embodied the "Nice, But" leadership style. While well-meaning, he had lost control, allowing manipulative key leaders to exploit the lack of accountability. The culture was toxic, and the business was just weeks from collapse.

The first step was to address the root of the problem. I made the tough decision to sack key manipulative individuals, removing the barriers to change. This set the tone for the turnaround, but it also meant stepping into a pacesetting and commanding leadership style. I held everyone—including the incumbent owner—strictly accountable for absolutely everything. It wasn’t about being aggressive or manipulative; it was about clarity and consistency. I made it clear that failure to meet expectations wouldn’t be tolerated, and I followed through on every commitment I made, expecting the same from others.

Initially, this approach created friction. Key leaders hated me deliberately, resenting the sudden shift in standards and accountability. But as the dust settled, they began to align—not with me directly, but with the owner’s vision, which I supported and reinforced as part of the plan. This combination of firm leadership and strategic alignment allowed us to stabilise the business.

Ultimately, we turned the business around enough to prepare it for sale, preserving its legacy and ensuring its survival.

Conclusion: Stay Centred, Move Intentionally

Ultimately, leadership isn’t about swinging between extremes—it’s about maintaining balance in the continuum’s centre while adopting situational styles. Building on the assertiveness quadrant, the Assertiveness-Duality Continuum highlights how leaders combine empathy and assertiveness to stay centred. This balance fosters trust, resilience, and effectiveness, ensuring long-term success in start-ups, cultural integrations, and the day-to-day challenges of growing businesses.

Review Blog 1: Unlocking Trust and Accountability with Assertiveness

Review Blog 2:The Assertiveness-Duality Continuum

Review Blog 3:Are All Leadership Styles Truly Balanced in the Centre