Do you ever read the post-it notes stuck to the wall at the end of a training session? They always seem to say the same things: Communication. Ideas. Teamwork.
They’re not wrong — but they’re vague. What I’ve always wanted to understand is: how do teams actually make good decisions when the problem is unclear, time is limited, and the cost of getting it wrong is real? And specifically, how do we apply those themes to collaborate more powerfully at work?
A few years ago, I had a chance to see this up close. When I was working as a consultant at Atkins, I was invited to RAF Cranfield with about twenty delegates from other organisations to tackle the physical and mental problem-solving exercises used in aircrew selection.
A large part of the day involved getting the whole team across a series of obstacles using only limited, basic equipment — before the time ran out. The kicker: none of these courses had an “obvious” solution. It was as much a mental challenge as it was a physical one.
I still think about that day far more often than many courses I’ve taken since — because what it taught me wasn’t about leadership styles. It was about how teams really operate under uncertainty.
Challenge 1 — The Committee
We started with what felt like the sensible approach — and one we use all the time in the workplace without even noticing: as a group, workshop ideas, debate options, evaluate risks and build the perfect plan. Once we had that, the rest should be easy, right?
Our conference didn’t last long.
“Don’t just stand there — the clock’s ticking,” the instructors shouted.
So we stopped planning and moved. We solved the first part of the problem, and in doing so learned far more about the task, the equipment and the constraints than any discussion could have revealed. In short, we were now better prepared for the next part of the challenge — not because we had planned better, but because we had learned by acting.
Lesson: Progress creates clarity.
In complex work, trying to remove uncertainty before you start usually delays learning. Movement generates the information teams need to make better decisions.
Next up, each individual in the team had a chance to be the leader. The leader had a 2 minute head start to see the course before the team joined them at the obstacle course.
Challenge 2 — The Commander
Eric took the next turn. He stood confidently at the front, announced he’d solved the whole challenge, and started barking instructions:
“You do this. You lift that. Move there. Pass that.”
The rest of us had no idea what the plan was. We all stood quietly awaiting the next instruction. Communication had collapsed. Team intelligence collapsed with it.
Lesson: Command-and-control shrinks a team’s intelligence to one brain.
It creates a single point of failure and blocks the very things you need most in uncertainty: contribution, challenge, and better ideas.
Challenge 3 — The Contributor Leader
He invited quick-fire ideas from the group — but couldn’t stop himself picking up planks and arranging blocks while others watched as they weren't sure how to contribute.
He was trying to lead and do at the same time.
Lesson: When leaders become the busiest worker in the room, the system loses coordination.
A leader's job is to encourage contribution — not to compete with the team for tasks.
Challenge 4 — The Manager
Judith was clear in her communication, upfront that she hadn’t solved the whole problem, and she wanted ideas from the team. Then she stepped back, listened, and focused on keeping the whole team moving.
This was the first time the work felt calm, focused and effective.
Lesson: Leadership exists to preserve system-level perspective.
When leaders drown in execution, no one is left to manage risk, dependencies, or the flow of work.
Challenge 5 — One Big Problem
Mike was assigned a challenge that couldn’t be broken down. The nature of the work had changed — this was now a single, tightly-coupled problem rather than a sequence of smaller ones.
Mike took a tip from Judith and managed the task, sending others ahead. But he soon found himself at the back, unable to see what was happening, and unable to coordinate the team.
Lesson: Context determines posture.
Sometimes leadership requires distance; sometimes it requires proximity. The mistake is staying fixed while the situation changes.
Challenge 6 — Delegate
When it was my turn, I’d had the benefit of what had gone before and it left me with an idea.
I got people moving, but I also asked two people to think ahead about the next part of the challenge before we reached it. While they explored options, I stayed free to coordinate the whole team. By the time we arrived, a delightful solution was ready.
Lesson: Great teams multiply their problem-solving capacity.
The most powerful form of delegation is not assigning tasks or actions, but being clear on the outcome and trusting the team to determine the best path to achieve it. When teams own the outcome, they naturally decide the right actions and tasks themselves. Done well, this builds parallel learning and faster feedback into the system.
What Stayed With Me
What that day taught me was not which leadership style was best — but that the real skill of leadership in complex work is continuously sensing what the situation needs and deliberately changing how we lead.
Seen through that lens, delegation becomes one of the highest‑leverage tools a leader has. When we delegate outcomes — not just tasks or actions — we deliberately tap into the full intelligence of the team. The result is better ideas, faster learning, and more resilient solutions.
What’s surprised me most is how often these lessons have resurfaced since — in delivery, in quality, in leadership conversations, and in the way I now approach complex work.
If we want better outcomes, we don’t start by choosing a style or a process. We start by designing the conditions for intelligence to emerge — and then trusting our teams to solve the problem.
So my question for you is simple:
What did this article make you notice about the way your team works — and what will you do differently tomorrow because of it?
I’d love to hear your thoughts.