Higher Performance Insights | ARE YOU CALLED OR CONFUSED?

June 24, 2025
higher performance insights

Why 70% of Campus Leaders Are Burning Out—and How to Join the 30% Who Aren't


Are you well placed?


Here's what the latest research won't tell you:


Turnover rates for top leadership positions in higher education have reached an unprecedented high of over 20% between 2022 and 2024. But here's the part that should keep you awake at night—most of these departures aren't about budget cuts or external pressures.


They're about leaders who never found their sweet spot.


The difference between leaders who thrive and those who burn out comes down to one question: Where do your abilities, your affinities, and your opportunities intersect?


Remove any leg from this three-legged stool, and the whole thing topples. Get all three aligned, and you've discovered what researchers call your "calling"—which correlates with "feelings of satisfaction, efficacy, and meaningfulness" and can even "improve career performance."


The Campus Leadership Crisis Nobody's Talking About


Walk through any university today, and you'll see the symptom everywhere: smart, capable leaders spinning their wheels. They're managing budgets, faculty relations, student experience, accreditation, fundraising, and community partnerships. Always moving, always busy.


But busy doesn't equal effective.


Harvard's 2024 Global Leadership Development Study found that 70% of leaders say it's important to "master a wider range of effective leadership behaviors." Still, the real challenge isn't learning more skills—it's knowing when and how to deploy them.


The leaders who actually transform institutions have learned something counterintuitive. In an age of infinite demands, the most powerful strategy is focus, not addition.


They've built their leadership around three non-negotiable pillars.


Pillar One: Your Abilities (What You're Actually Good At)


This isn't about your job description or what you wish you were good at. Research on leadership effectiveness in higher education identifies "13 forms of leader behavior that are associated with departmental effectiveness"—but here's the kicker: no single leader excels at all thirteen.


Your abilities might include:


  • Reading complex organizational dynamics
  • Building bridges between competing factions
  • Translating academic vision into practical action
  • Connecting authentically with students
  • Navigating political complexities
  • Turning around struggling departments


The ability test is simple: What do colleagues consistently ask for your help with? What work feels effortless to you but seems difficult for others?


Recent research highlights "the essential attributes of effective higher education leadership, including personal, interpersonal, teaching, and academic capacities," but self-awareness isn't optional here. It requires honest assessment and feedback from people who've watched you lead.


Pillar Two: Your Affinities (What Energizes You)


Affinity goes deeper than interest. Researchers define this as what you "find meaningful beyond financial rewards" and note that individuals who identify this report "higher job satisfaction, higher job performance, less job stress, and longer tenure."


It's what you naturally gravitate toward even when no one's paying you to do it. The problems you think about in the shower. The work that doesn't feel like work.


In campus leadership, this might be:


  • Helping first-generation students navigate college
  • Building innovative academic programs
  • Solving complex resource allocation puzzles
  • Mentoring emerging faculty
  • Creating campus-community partnerships
  • Advancing research that matters


Affinity is your sustainability engine. But research also warns of the "dark side" of pursuing a calling—when people experience "regret, stress, or disappointment when they recognize a calling but it goes unfulfilled."


Without genuine affinity, you'll burn out. With it, you'll find energy even in the hardest seasons.


Pillar Three: Your Opportunities (Where the World Needs You)


This is the reality check that prevents noble dreams from becoming expensive failures.


Opportunity requires understanding your specific context: What does your institution need? Your community? Your students? Educational institutions face "dramatic systemic change" requiring "radical responses" from leaders who must balance "organizational functions that call for stability with those that demand creativity and adaptation."


Right now, our educational landscape faces unprecedented challenges:


  • Declining enrollment and funding pressures
  • Questions about ROI and career relevance
  • Technology disruption and digital transformation needs
  • Mental health crises among students
  • Workforce preparation for rapidly changing economies


The opportunity question is: Where do these real needs intersect with your unique context and capabilities?


The Research-Backed Sweet Spot Effect


When all three pillars align, something remarkable happens that the data supports:


Clarity emerges. Research shows that "career calling" serves as "a positive resource promoting vocational development and well-being."


Energy increases. Leaders who experience their careers as a vocation demonstrate increased "courage," which "plays a mediating role between career calling and well-being indicators."


Impact compounds. Studies reveal "a significant relationship between leadership styles in education institutions and academic staff's job satisfaction," with transformational leadership showing the strongest correlations.


Others rally. Research on teaching and learning leadership reveals that effective leaders prioritize "communication within and between communities of scholars and on working together, with the aim of achieving goals."


This isn't about finding the perfect job title. As research on calling demonstrates, it's about distinguishing between a general or primary calling and a relationship with the soul’s inner need for worthy work, loving community, and reclaimed suffering within a particular vocational path.


Your Assignment (Backed by Science)


Before your next leadership meeting, grab three sheets of paper:


Sheet 1 - Abilities: List 5-7 things you're genuinely good at in your leadership role. Research suggests asking trusted colleagues what they see as your strengths, as "surprisingly little systematic research has been conducted on which forms of leadership are associated with departmental effectiveness."


Sheet 2 - Affinities: Write down what aspects of your leadership energize you most. Research shows that "purpose can be an important component in the career decision-making process," and individuals who find their work meaningful report better outcomes.


Sheet 3 - Opportunities: Identify the 3-5 biggest needs your institution faces where leadership could make a real difference. Studies show that the most significant challenges center around "strategic leadership, flexibility, creativity, and change-capability" as well as "responding to competing tensions."


Now look for overlap. Where do all three intersect?


That intersection might be your calling as a campus leader.


The Three-Pillar Truth


With leadership turnover at unprecedented highs and "intense pressures and challenges leaders face in the sector," your institution doesn't need you to be good at everything. It requires you to excel at something that matters, something that energizes you, something the world actually needs.


Build your leadership on those three pillars.


Everything else is just noise.


YOUR TURN: Team Discussion Questions


Want to transform individual insight into institutional change? Use these questions with your leadership team:


Round 1 - Individual Reflection (10 minutes) Each team member privately identifies their top 2-3 items in each circle:


  • What leadership abilities do you bring that others consistently seek out?
  • What aspects of campus leadership genuinely energize you?
  • What institutional challenges could your leadership meaningfully address?


Round 2 - Team Mapping (15 minutes) Create a shared whiteboard with three columns. Have each person share one item from each circle. Look for:


  • Ability Gaps: Where are we missing crucial leadership strengths?
  • Passion Overlap: What energizes multiple team members?
  • Opportunity Blind Spots: What institutional needs aren't we addressing?


Round 3 - Strategic Alignment (10 minutes) Identify the sweet spots where individual team members' three circles align with institutional priorities. Ask:


  • Whose abilities should we be leveraging more strategically?
  • Are we deploying people in roles that match their affinities?
  • What opportunities require us to restructure leadership responsibilities?


The goal isn't perfection—it's clarity about how to deploy your leadership capital most effectively.



Register for the assessment https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/team-intelligence-assessment


References:


  1. Deloitte Insights. (2025). 2025 Higher Education Trends. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/public-sector/2025-us-higher-education-trends.html
  2. Harvard Business Publishing. (2024). 2024 Global Leadership Development Study. Retrieved from https://www.harvardbusiness.org/leadership-learning-insights/2024-global-leadership-development-study/
  3. Bryman, A. (2007). Effective leadership in higher education: A literature review. Studies in Higher Education, 32(6), 693-710.
  4. Aswad, N.G., et al. (2024). A comprehensive bibliometric analysis of trends in higher education leadership in the Global South, 2013-2023. International Journal of Educational Research, 127, 102421.
  5. Dik, B.J., & Duffy, R.D. (2009). Calling and vocation at work: Definitions and prospects for research and practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 37(3), 424-450.
  6. Parola, A., Zammitti, A., & Marcionetti, J. (2023). Career calling, courage, flourishing and satisfaction with life in Italian university students. Behavioral Sciences, 13(4), 345.
  7. Aziri, B., et al. (2023). The relation between leadership styles in higher education institutions and academic staff's job satisfaction: A meta-analysis study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1142411.
  8. Kinnunen, P., et al. (2024). Bringing clarity to the leadership of teaching and learning in higher education: A systematic review. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 16(1), 265-280.


Where do your abilities, affinities, and opportunities intersect in your campus leadership role? Share your insights in the comments—let's learn from each other's clarity.



Help Spread the Word

If you found value in this post, we’d love your help spreading the word! Please consider sharing this on your favorite social media platform and tag Higher Performance Group and Dr. Joe Hill. Your support helps us reach and inspire more awesome people like you!

Like What You've Read?


Get practical, research-based ideas to Accelerate Higher Team Performance delivered straight to your inbox every Tuesday.

More Blog Articles

By HPG Info August 5, 2025
Why Standing Still Costs More Than Moving Forward - Leader Insights for Campus and District Leaders Last Tuesday at 9:30 AM, you gathered your most trusted leadership team to discuss AI policy implementation. The stakes felt enormous—student futures, academic integrity, competitive positioning, all hanging in the balance. Two hours later, you'd facilitated an excellent discussion. Thoughtful questions raised. Valid concerns explored. Multiple perspectives honored. And made zero decisions. While your team debated implementation frameworks, six-year-olds in Beijing finished their mandatory AI literacy class—not as a pilot program, but as core curriculum required by the Chinese government starting this fall. Here's the research finding that stopped me cold: 89% of students already use ChatGPT for homework, yet only 35% of education leaders have concrete implementation plans —despite 97% recognizing AI's transformational benefits.¹ The uncomfortable truth? This article isn't really about AI. It's about the decision-making paralysis that's quietly bleeding your institution's competitive advantage while you perfect your process. B - The Hidden Crisis Behind Brilliant Teams I call it the Paralysis Tax —the compounding cost of choosing certainty over progress, perfection over momentum. Recent MIT research reveals something that challenges everything we believe about high-performing leadership teams: The institutions paying the highest Paralysis Tax aren't those with incompetent leaders. They're the ones with brilliant leaders who can't decide together. ² Dr. Sarah Chen's groundbreaking study of 847 educational leadership teams found that cognitive diversity—typically an asset—becomes a liability when teams lack protocols for leveraging different thinking styles. The result? Paralysis disguised as thoroughness. The Analytics Pattern : Data-driven leaders research comprehensive AI statistics but miss critical human adoption dynamics unfolding in real-time. The Harmony Pattern : Relationship-focused leaders prioritize stakeholder comfort over necessary change, inadvertently protecting the status quo. The Systems Pattern : Process-oriented leaders create policies that are perfectly efficient but systematically exclude innovation opportunities. The Innovation Pattern : Visionary leaders pursue cutting-edge solutions while overlooking essential infrastructure and change management needs. The Results Pattern : Performance-focused leaders push for immediate wins without establishing sustainable frameworks, resulting in implementation chaos. Each pattern brings essential value. But teams trapped in pattern dominance pay the Paralysis Tax while competitors methodically pull ahead. R - What Research Reveals About Decision Velocity Harvard Business School's three-year study tracking 500 educational institutions exposes the compound cost of decision paralysis with startling clarity:³ Strategy Paralysis : Teams spending 40% more time in planning phases without measurably increasing implementation success rates Innovation Stagnation : Institutions falling 18 months behind early adopters in student preparedness metrics that matter to employers Talent Exodus : 23% higher turnover among innovative educators in institutions with chronically slow decision-making processes Student Disadvantage : Graduates entering a workforce where AI literacy has shifted from a bonus skill to a baseline expectation Stanford's Leadership Institute research adds another dimension: Teams with time-bounded decision-making processes demonstrate 64% higher implementation success rates and 27% greater team satisfaction.⁴ The most expensive cost? Watching peer institutions systematically pull ahead while you're still forming exploratory committees. E - The Chinese Advantage: Cognitive Balance in Action China's remarkable AI education momentum isn't about superior resources or governmental mandate—it's about cognitive balance in collective decision-making . Their national AI education guidelines integrate technical training with ethical reasoning, individual skill development with collaborative applications, and innovation acceleration with systematic implementation protocols.⁵ While Western institutions agonize over academic integrity policies, Chinese universities teach responsible AI use as core competency. The measurable result? Nearly 60% of faculty and students use AI tools multiple times daily within clear ethical frameworks. ⁶ They're not smarter than us. They're not better funded than us. They're thinking differently TOGETHER. This is what breakthrough looks like when teams develop what MIT's Center for Collective Intelligence calls "Team Intelligence"—the capacity to leverage all cognitive perspectives in service of collective action rather than collective analysis. A - HOW TO: Transform Analysis Paralysis Into Strategic Action Step 1: Diagnose Your Team's Cognitive Imbalance (10 minutes) - Before your next strategic meeting, ask each team member to complete this rapid assessment: "What's your primary concern about [current challenge] implementation?" (Listen for pattern dominance) "What would need to be true for you to confidently support moving forward?" (Identify activation conditions) "What's the measurable cost of waiting another semester to act?" (Create urgency alignment) Pattern recognition is everything. Analytics leaders will cite research gaps. Harmony leaders will mention stakeholder resistance. Systems leaders will identify process deficiencies. Innovation leaders will point to infrastructure limitations. Results leaders will emphasize timeline pressures. Step 2: Practice "Loving Your Opposites" (Structured Integration) - Harvard research demonstrates that teams with cognitive diversity outperform homogeneous teams by 87% on complex decisions—but only when they have explicit protocols for leveraging these differences.⁷ Use this exact language sequence in your next decision-making session: "I need to understand how [opposite perspective] would strengthen our approach to this challenge." "What specific evidence would you need to see to feel confident about this direction?" "How can we honor both [innovation/stability, speed/thoroughness, individual/collective needs] in our implementation strategy?" Step 3: Implement the 72-Hour Decision Protocol - Transform endless discussion into bounded decision-making: Hour 1-24 : Individual preparation using each member's cognitive strengths Hour 25-48 : Collective decision-making session with structured perspective integration Hour 49-72 : Implementation planning with type-specific accountability measures Warning: Teams resist time boundaries initially. Stay firm. Parkinson's Law applies to decision-making: Work expands to fill available time, including decision-making work. K - The Collective Intelligence Multiplier Effect Here's what breakthrough teams understand that struggling teams often miss: Individual expertise becomes exponentially more powerful when combined through collective intelligence protocols. MIT's Center for Collective Intelligence research tracking 1,000 educational leadership teams reveals that high-Team Intelligence (TQ) teams demonstrate:⁸ 40% faster problem resolution in complex, multi-stakeholder situations 27% higher team member satisfaction and retention rates 35% more strategic objectives achieved within original timelines 52% better stakeholder confidence in leadership decisions These teams don't avoid difficult challenges—they approach them systematically through cognitive balance rather than cognitive dominance. Phase 1: Cognitive Balance Integration - Ensure analytical rigor AND relational wisdom, systematic planning AND innovative exploration, immediate results AND long-term sustainability thinking are represented in every major decision. Phase 2: Collective Decision-Making Protocols - Transform natural tension into creative energy through structured processes that capture diverse perspectives and build trust through differences, not despite them. Phase 3: Synchronized Execution - Leverage each thinking style's implementation strengths by utilizing accountability systems designed for diverse approaches, rather than relying on one-size-fits-all monitoring. T - From Individual Brilliance to Collective Transformation Last week, a superintendent shared this with me: "We spent eight months developing our AI policy framework while our students taught themselves to use it and our competitor district launched their implementation." That's the Paralysis Tax extracted with compound interest. But here's the deeper pattern I see everywhere: How many institutions have spent the last four years—eight semesters—refining shared governance models while the world fundamentally transformed around them? Committee after committee. Framework after framework. Policy about how to make policies about policies. All while enrollment shifts, technology advances, workforce demands evolve, and students graduate into a reality we're still debating how to prepare them for. The institutions that consistently thrive don't wait for perfect processes. They start with imperfect action, guided by collective intelligence protocols. They leverage early adopters while systematically addressing implementation concerns. They teach ethical AI use through comprehensive practice rather than prohibition. They iterate their way to competitive advantage instead of waiting for competitors to prove viability. Your students deserve leaders who can think together as powerfully as they think individually. Your community deserves decision-making velocity that matches the pace of change they're navigating. The question isn't whether AI will transform education—that transformation is happening with or without your participation. The question is whether your leadership team will guide that transformation or be managed by it. H - Your Strategic Choice Point Every day you spend perfecting your decision-making process is a day your students fall further behind global peers who are learning to work WITH emerging realities, not around them. Will you pay the Paralysis Tax another semester? Or will you invest in the collective intelligence that transforms uncertainty into your system's strategic advantage? The Paralysis Tax compounds daily. But so does the competitive advantage of teams that learn to decide together as brilliantly as they analyze individually. Your choice. Your students' futures. Your legacy as leaders who could think together when it mattered most. READY TO TRANSFORM? Stop hoping individual experts will eventually coordinate better. Start building the collective intelligence that creates breakthrough results for students. The first step is understanding your team's current intelligence quotient. In just 5 minutes per team member, you can discover: Where your team defaults to individual rather than collective thinking Which cognitive perspectives naturally enhance group intelligence How to transform your most challenging dynamics into breakthrough collaboration  Discover Your Team Intelligence → Take the 5-Minute Educational Leadership Team Assessment https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/the-group
By HPG Info July 29, 2025
Real HOW TO solutions from real educational leaders---and the research-backed answers that can transform how you navigate the complexities of modern leadership When 62% of senior leadership teams report significant gaps in psychological safety---the very foundation they're supposed to create for others---we have a leadership crisis hiding in plain sight. Every semester, I receive hundreds of questions from district and campus leaders through our executive coaching exchanges. These conversations occur in confidence — during leadership intensives, one-on-one coaching sessions, and late-night calls when the weight of responsibility feels overwhelming. This summer semester, I decided to pull some of the most compelling questions and share my thoughts publicly, restructuring them using the innovative "HOW TO" approach pioneered by Bradley Fuster and San Francisco Bay University . Their brilliant transformation of traditional course titles—eliminating the yawn-inducing "English 101" or "Intro to Marketing" in favor of practical "HOW TO" titles—has revolutionized how students engage with learning. We're applying that same energy to leadership challenges. These aren't hypothetical scenarios — they're real challenges from real leaders in districts and on campuses across the country. Names have been changed for confidentiality, but the struggles are authentic. If you find this format helpful, let me know. We plan to make this a special semester edition going forward. HOW TO: Maintain Psychological Safety for Your Team When You Feel Like You're Drowning Original question: "How do you maintain psychological safety for your team when you yourself feel like you're drowning? I'm supposed to be the calm, confident leader, but inside I'm struggling with imposter syndrome and the constant pressure to have all the answers." - Maria, University Vice President for Academic Affairs Maria, you've hit on the central paradox of every modern leader of people and systems: You can't give what you don't have, yet your role systematically strips away the very conditions you need to create for others. Recent research, tracking 769 K-12 staff members over four years, revealed predictable patterns in educational psychological safety. While 51% maintained stable-high levels and 44.8% remained at stable-medium, 4.2% experienced dynamic-low psychological safety. But here's what the research doesn't capture: Leaders often exist in a separate category entirely, experiencing what I call " psychological safety deficit disorder ." The stakes become even higher when we examine senior leadership dynamics specifically. Studies of nearly 300 leaders over 2.5 years found that teams with high degrees of psychological safety reported higher levels of performance and lower levels of interpersonal conflict. For senior leadership teams, where research found members reported the greatest differences in their perceived levels of psychological safety, 62% of senior teams demonstrated significant variability. The Calibrated Vulnerability Solution Maria, here's what you need to understand: Your imposter syndrome isn't a personal failing---it's an occupational hazard. When you're constantly in "performance mode," authentic connection becomes impossible. But psychological safety isn't built through perfection; it's built through what I call "calibrated vulnerability." Start with one person — your most trusted team member — and practice transparent leadership. "I'm working through this challenge and here's my thinking..." This isn't weakness; it's modeling the very behavior you want to see in your organization. The psychological safety you create for others begins with the psychological safety you create for yourself. When you demonstrate that uncertainty is acceptable, that thinking out loud is valuable, and that perfection isn't the standard, you give your team permission to do the same. Understanding psychological safety challenges leads us naturally to the next critical area: recognizing when those challenges are pushing leaders and teams toward burnout. HOW TO: Recognize Early Warning Signs of Burnout (That 90% of Leaders Miss) in Yourself and Your Team Original question: "What early warning signs should I watch for in myself and my team to prevent burnout before it becomes a crisis? I've seen too many good people leave education because they reach their breaking point." - Robert, Superintendent of Schools Robert, you're asking the right question at exactly the right time. A comprehensive meta-analysis of 348 studies involving over 3.6 million participants found that educational leadership impact on student achievement diminished significantly during exceptional circumstances like the COVID-19 pandemic---and burnout is often the culprit. The early warning signs aren't what most leaders think. It's not the obvious exhaustion or irritability. It's the subtle shifts that happen weeks before the crash: Individual Level Warning Signs: Decision fatigue masquerading as perfectionism Emotional numbing disguised as "professional boundaries" Innovation paralysis---when everything feels like a risk Team Level Warning Signs: Decreased psychological safety, which research shows is consistently associated with greater perceived supports and lower burnout Communication becoming transactional rather than relational Loss of collective problem-solving capacity System Level Warning Signs: Increased reliance on formal authority instead of influence Policy creation as a substitute for leadership presence Meeting multiplication- when committee work becomes the primary communication strategy The Sustainability Audit Framework The intervention framework I use with leaders: Implement what I call " sustainability audits " monthly. Ask your team: "What's one thing that's energizing you right now? What's one thing that's draining you?" Track patterns, not just individual responses. When you catch burnout in its early stages — before the obvious symptoms appear — you can address the root causes rather than managing crisis symptoms. Preventing burnout requires honest assessment, but it also demands the courage to have difficult conversations when performance issues arise. This brings us to one of leadership's most delicate challenges. HOW TO: Have Tough Conversations with Star Faculty Who Aren't Performing Without Losing Their Institutional Knowledge Original question: "How do you have tough conversations with long-term faculty members who aren't performing but have institutional knowledge you can't afford to lose? I feel stuck between accountability and preservation of relationships." - Jennifer, College President Jennifer, you've identified what researchers call "the competence-commitment paradox "-when emotional investment in people conflicts with organizational performance needs. Recent research on school leadership during crises has found that democratic, humanistic, and participatory leadership styles are most effective in maintaining mental health and performance; however, these approaches require skilled navigation of exactly this tension. The mistake most leaders make is treating this as an either/or choice: accountability OR relationship preservation. High-performing institutions understand it's a both/and challenge that requires what I've developed as the "fierce compassion framework" — a both/and approach that honors relationships while driving results. The Fierce Compassion Framework: Step 1 - Separate the person from the performance. Start the conversation with: "I value you and your contributions to this institution. That's exactly why we need to address this performance gap." Step 2 - Make the institutional knowledge visible. "Your understanding of our campus culture and history is invaluable. I want to find ways to leverage that while also ensuring you're set up for success in your current role." Step 3 - Create a growth pathway, not a correction plan. Research indicates that individuals respond more positively to development opportunities than to performance improvement plans. Focus on building capacity, not just addressing deficits. Step 4 - Set clear timelines with support systems. "Here's what success looks like, here's how I'll support you, and here's our timeline for seeing progress." Having the conversation IS preserving the relationship, not destroying it. Avoiding it destroys both the relationship and the performance. Even when we master difficult one-on-one conversations, we still face the broader challenge of leading change across diverse groups with varying levels of experience and buy-in. HOW TO: Lead Change When Your Most Experienced Faculty Resist While Your Newer Leaders Lack Credibility Original question: "How do you lead change when your most experienced faculty resist new initiatives, but your newer department chairs lack the credibility to drive implementation? I feel caught between generational divides." - David, University Vice President for Strategic Initiatives David, you're dealing with what recent leadership research identifies as the distributed leadership challenge — how to harness collective intelligence while managing natural resistance to change. This isn't actually about generational divides; it's about recognizing expertise and changing ownership. Studies on distributed leadership show that transformative change happens when leadership becomes "a collective endeavor involving multiple stakeholders" rather than top-down mandate implementation. The key is creating what I call "expertise bridges." The Expertise Bridge Strategy: Phase 1 - Map the real expertise. Your experienced staff have implementation wisdom; your newer staff have innovation energy. Neither group has complete expertise — and that's your advantage. Phase 2 - Create mixed-expertise teams. Pair your most experienced faculty with your most innovative department leaders. Give them shared ownership of both the problem definition and solution design. Phase 3 - Use resistance as data. When experienced faculty resist, they're often identifying implementation challenges that enthusiastic newcomers miss. Reframe resistance: "What implementation challenges is this concern highlighting?" Phase 4 - Build credibility through collaboration. Let your newer department chairs gain credibility by successfully partnering with respected faculty veterans, not by challenging them.  The breakthrough happens when both groups realize they need each other to succeed. Your job isn't to choose sides — it's to orchestrate that realization.
Show More