This case study illustrates the central idea in this week’s newsletter, “If People Don’t Need Pressure to Perform Well, What Do They Need?”
BHG | Flow Under Fire Newsletter Editions
Carla is the benefits manager for a company with 1,200 employees. Renee is the director of total rewards and Carla’s direct supervisor.
During the final rehearsal for an open-enrollment webinar, Carla loses track of the slides, rushes through several plan changes, and misses questions from the practice chat.
Response 1 Renee the Director of Total Rewards
Renee: “Carla, tomorrow cannot go like that. Twelve hundred employees are counting on accurate information. An unclear presentation could lead to confused enrollment choices, hundreds of calls, and questions from senior leadership. The presentation needs to be much sharper tomorrow.”
Carla already understands the stakes. Urgency is not missing. Carla is trying to present, advance slides, monitor the chat, track time, and prepare for technical questions. Renee’s warning may raise Carla’s arousal, but the warning does nothing to reduce the number of responsibilities competing for Carla’s attention.
Response 2 Renee the Director of Total Rewards
Renee: “Carla, what got in the way?”
Carla: “I was trying to present and manage everything else at the same time.”
Renee: “Is the material the problem?”
Carla: “No. I know the material. I just cannot do five jobs at once and do any of them well.”
Renee: “What would make tomorrow easier?”
Carla: “Have a benefits analyst monitor the chat and the vendor representative handle technical questions. Then I can focus on the presentation.”
Renee: “Done. How else can I help clear the way?”
Carla: “Cancel the afternoon meeting. I’ll rehearse the opening once more, then go home, eat dinner, take a walk, and get some sleep.”
Renee: “I’ll clear the meeting and confirm the support.”
The FACTs
The FACTs™ reveal what Carla actually needs:
- Focus: Carla’s attention is divided. Redistributing responsibilities allows Carla to focus on explaining the changes and answering employee questions.
- Arousal: Carla’s energy is already too high. More urgency would make the mismatch worse. Dinner, movement, and sleep can bring Carla’s energy closer to the level the webinar requires.
- Confidence: Can Do remains strong because Carla knows the material. Can Happen has weakened because a strong presentation seems unlikely while one person manages five responsibilities.
- Tenacity: Carla remains engaged, recommends a plan, and continues preparing. Another speech about pushing harder would address a problem that does not exist.
FACTs™ helps Renee match the response to the actual performance gaps. Focus, Arousal, and Confidence require attention. Tenacity does not.
Before adding pressure, which performance resource actually needs attention?
I help leaders and high-performing individuals eliminate pressure, reduce stress, prevent burnout, sustain motivation, and build cultures where teams perform at their best when it matters most. Mention this LinkedIn series when you schedule a free 60-minute session to discuss your organization’s challenges and how we could work together.
