Craig Leach, MBA

Welcome to where transforming companies and careers with precision-tailored executive placements and progressive leadership coaching meets personalized solutions that align with your unique culture and strategic goals. If you're here, you're likely seeking to attract and retain top-tier talent in a competitive market, align leadership teams with corporate strategy and culture, navigate leadership transitions without disrupting operations, and ensure new hires are the right fit for long-term success.

With over 30 years of experience in leading teams, I guide executives from uncertainty and misalignment to building high-performing teams that drive results. Is reducing time spent on recruiting or mis-recruiting on your radar? Do you aspire to increase productivity and performance? If these aspirations resonate, you've found your path.

I blend my diverse skills in negotiation, business planning, operations management, sales, market development, and leadersip with my passion for talent development, crafting strategic solutions that truly represent your organization's needs. This strategy allows you to transform your leadership capital and achieve sustainable success.

My 21st Century technology-influenced approach uses personalized executive search and coaching to create long-term impact that delivers reduced commercial downtime, improved employee retention rates, and reduced overall costs to hire. I empower hiring managers to make confident decisions, so 96% of our placements are still in place after 12 months.

What you can expect:
• Minimized client commercial downtime
• Improved new employee retention rates
• Reduced overall costs to hire

Your outcomes:
• 96% of placements still in place after 12 months
• 94% of placements still in place after 24 months

Embrace a journey that transforms your organization through strategic leadership development and succession planning. Ready to start?

I offer different ways to work with me to suit your budget and needs:
• Retained Search: Exclusive tailored executive search and coaching solutions, best suited for senior leadership positions (C-Suite, VPs, Directors)
• Contingency Search: Exclusive search for technical, sales, and marketing roles
• Executive Coaching: Tailored, one-on-one partnerships to empower leaders and high-potential professionals to maximize performance and achieve personal and organizational goals

Who it's for:
• C-suite executives
• Senior managers
• Emerging leaders
• Professionals transitioning to higher leadership roles

Begin your journey: https://calendly.com/6202205911/30min

President

Craig Leach

The most expensive thing a CEO can have is a recruiter who won't say no.

A Fortune 500 company offered me $75K to find their next CFO.

I walked away.

Not because of the money. Because of what I heard in the boardroom.

"We need someone who can clean house. Fire 30% of finance. No questions."

I asked what was driving the 30% number.

"We promised the board headcount reduction. Easier to hire fresh talent at lower salaries."

They weren't looking for a CFO. They were looking for an executioner.

Their last three CFOs? All lasted under 18 months. Turnover rate? 47%. One former CFO told me they made him fire people who'd been there 20 years—good people—then blamed him when culture imploded.

A "yes" recruiter would have taken that search. Cashed the check. Placed someone. And watched them burn out in a year.

Then done it again. And again.

I offer a 1-year placement guarantee. Risk definitely outweighed the reward.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗬𝗲𝘀-𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗿𝘂𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗬𝗼𝘂:

• The $75K fee—three times over
• Six CFOs in three years
• Stock down 34%
• Glassdoor rating: 2.1 stars
• Every good candidate now knows to stay away

The recruiter fee was never the expense.

The expense was nobody saying: "This isn't a search problem. This is a leadership problem."

After 200+ placements, I've learned this:

The best thing I can do for a client isn't always finding them a candidate.

Sometimes it's telling them they're not ready for one.

They called me unprofessional when I walked away. Threatened to blacklist me.

That was three years ago.

I sleep fine.

Would your recruiter tell you no if you needed to hear it?

I Work with Senior Leaders to Build Teams that Shape the Future | Executive Search | C-Suite | 2x Top Voice

Most leaders misdiagnose their team problems.

They see the same symptoms—low energy, missed deadlines, tension in meetings—and reach for the same fix: motivation.

200+ placements taught me something different.

A stressed team and a checked-out team look almost identical. But they need completely opposite interventions.

𝗦𝗶𝗴𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗗𝘆𝘀𝗿𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗧𝗲𝗮𝗺:

• Small issues trigger big reactions
• People seem on edge, scanning for threats
• Exhaustion that doesn't improve with time off
• They care deeply but can't perform

These people are in survival mode. Their nervous systems are overwhelmed.

𝗦𝗶𝗴𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝗧𝗲𝗮𝗺:

• Flat reactions to good news or bad news
• Minimal effort—just enough to not get fired
• Silence that feels like surrender
• They've stopped caring altogether

These people have emotionally left. Something broke the connection.

Here's why this matters when I evaluate leadership environments:

You can't motivate a dysregulated team. Pep talks and incentives don't work when people are overwhelmed. They need safety first.

You can't regulate a disengaged team. Breathing exercises won't help people who've already checked out. They need honest conversations about what's broken.

Before I place any executive, I look for this:

Does leadership understand the difference between a team that's drowning and a team that's already gone?

The executives who fail often walk into dysregulated environments and push harder. Or they walk into disengaged cultures and try to inspire their way out.

Same symptoms. Wrong diagnosis. Predictable failure.

The executives who last? They read the room before they try to change it.

What's the first thing you look for when assessing a team's health?

I Work with Senior Leaders to Build Teams that Shape the Future | Executive Search | C-Suite | Top Voice 2024 - 2025

Why I Tell Candidates to Negotiate AGAINST Their Own Salary

Most recruiters coach executives to ask for more.

I ask them to argue for less.

Not as a trick. As a test.

200+ placements taught me this pattern:

The executives who can articulate why they might be overpriced are the ones worth every dollar.

Here's what I tell candidates in final rounds:

"Give me three reasons a company shouldn't pay you what you're asking."

The weak candidates freeze. Deflect. Get defensive.

The exceptional ones? They go deep.

"My industry experience is strong, but I've never led a team this size."
"I'm asking for equity I haven't earned yet."
"My last company's brand opened doors—I need to prove I can do it without that."

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘀:

• Self-awareness that can't be faked
• Intellectual honesty under pressure
• The ability to see their own blind spots

The executives who can argue against themselves are the ones who won't oversell and underdeliver.

They know what they're worth. And they know what they still need to prove.

I've watched candidates talk themselves into higher offers by being honest about their gaps. Boards respect it. CEOs remember it.

The ones who can't find a single reason they might be overpriced?

They're usually the first to underperform.

Confidence is knowing your value.
Self-awareness is knowing your limits.

The best executives I've placed have both.

Is there a question you ask that reveals more than a resume ever could?

Your LinkedIn headline doesn't matter as much as you think.

Controversial? Maybe. But after 200+ placements, here's the truth:

I spend about 2 seconds on your headline. Then I scroll straight to your experience section.

I've seen candidates with perfectly optimized headlines—all the right keywords, clever formulas, impressive-sounding buzzwords.

Then I look at their actual work. Nothing there.

I've also seen candidates with headlines that just say "CFO" or "VP Operations." No formula. No flair.

But their experience section tells a story. Clear results. Specific impact. A thread I can follow.

Guess which one I call?

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗡𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲:

• Does your experience section show progression or just job hopping?
• Can I understand what you actually did, or is it buried in jargon?
• Do your results have numbers, or just vague claims?

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝗦𝗰𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹 𝗣𝗮𝘀𝘁:

• Headlines stuffed with buzzwords that mean nothing
• "Thought Leader | Visionary | Change Agent"
• Anything that sounds like marketing copy instead of a person

Here's the uncomfortable truth:

A great headline on an empty profile is like a beautiful cover on a blank book.

And a boring headline on a strong profile? I'll still pick up the phone.

Your headline is the wrapper. Your experience is the product.

Stop optimizing the wrapper. Start building something worth unwrapping.

What's the first thing you actually look at when you review someone's profile?

I Work with Senior Leaders to Build Teams that Shape the Future | Executive Search | C-Suite | Top Voice 2024

Apple Just Created a Head of Executive Retention (And Every Fortune 500 Should Follow)

Most companies treat executive retention like an afterthought.

"We'll worry about keeping them once they're here."

Then their best leaders walk out the door to competitors. And suddenly everyone's scrambling.

Apple just did something different. They created a dedicated role focused entirely on keeping their top executives.

Not recruiting them. Keeping them.

After 200+ placements, I've watched this pattern destroy companies:

They spend $500K finding the perfect CFO.
They spend $0 figuring out how to keep her.
Then they spend $750K finding her replacement 18 months later.

The math never works.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀:

The war for executive talent isn't about hiring anymore. It's about holding.

Every Fortune 500 company has recruiters hunting your best people. LinkedIn messages. Competitor calls. PE firms dangling equity.

Your executives aren't wondering if they have options. They're wondering if you're worth staying for.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗠𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗚𝗲𝘁 𝗪𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴:

• They assume compensation is enough
• They ignore the small frustrations that compound
• They wait until the resignation letter to ask what went wrong
• They treat retention as HR's problem instead of a strategic priority

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗨𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀:

The cost of losing a great executive isn't the replacement search.

It's watching them build your competitor's empire with your blueprints.

I've placed the same executive three times because their previous bosses didn't understand this. They all called me afterward asking for "another Mike."

They had Mike. They lost Mike. And they still didn't get it.

Creating a Head of Executive Retention sends a message: We're not just investing in finding you. We're investing in keeping you.

That's the difference between companies that build dynasties and companies that build revolving doors.

How is your company thinking about executive retention?

Stop chasing “talent” as if it’s a fixed trait.

Most companies believe talent is something you’re born with. Either you have it, or you don’t.

That’s a myth. Talent isn’t fixed. It’s potential waiting for the right environment.

I’ve seen “average” candidates become legends. I’ve watched “top talent” burn out fast.

The difference? Leadership.

Great leaders don’t just spot talent. They build conditions for it to thrive.

They challenge before people are ready. They see potential others overlook. They push past perceived limits.

The best hires I’ve made weren’t the most credentialed. They were the ones someone believed in.

Talent is everywhere. What’s rare is the environment that unlocks it.

Are you hiring what they’ve done? Or what they could become?

No alternative text description for this image

Most hiring fails for one reason nobody wants to admit.

Companies hire for skills. They should hire for mindset.

200+ placements taught me this pattern:

The candidate with the perfect resume flames out in 8 months. The one with "potential" becomes a company legend.

Skills can be taught. Mindset can't.

I've watched CFOs with flawless credentials crumble under pressure. And I've seen "underqualified" operators build teams that transformed entire divisions.

The difference was never what they knew. It was how they thought.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗻𝗼𝘄:

• Do they take ownership when things break?
• Do they learn from feedback or defend against it?
• Do they lift others up or climb over them?

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜'𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁:

• The "right" certifications
• The prestigious company names
• The polished interview answers

Here's the uncomfortable truth:

You can teach someone your systems. Your processes. Your industry.

You cannot teach someone to care. To persist. To adapt when the playbook stops working.

The executives who last 10 years don't have better skills than the ones who last 18 months.

They have better mindsets.

Your next hire's resume tells you where they've been.

Their mindset tells you where they'll take you.

Which one are you screening for?

6 Principles That Separate Great Hires from Expensive Mistakes

If you're questioning your role at year 4, you're not impatient. You're right on schedule.

Here's what nobody tells executives:

In my experience, average Fortune 500 C-suite tenure often hovers around 5 years. CEO tenure? About 7-8 years.

200+ placements taught me this pattern:

The executives who stay too long aren't loyal. They're on autopilot.

The ones who start asking hard questions at year 3 or 4? They're the ones who end up in their best roles.

I placed a CFO two years ago who almost didn't take my call. She'd been in her role for five years. Good company. Solid performance. But something felt off.

She kept saying, "I should be grateful. It's a great job."

I asked her one question: "When's the last time you were excited about a Monday?"

Silence.

Six months later, she was leading finance at a company twice the size, building something from scratch. She told me recently it was the best decision she almost didn't make.

The signs were all there. She'd just convinced herself to ignore them.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝗧𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗪𝗵𝗼 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴:

• Give yourself permission to evaluate fit (not just performance)
• Revisit the impact you want to have in the next 5–10 years
• Start strengthening your network now, not when you need it

The real risk isn't exploring your next move too early. It's waiting until external forces push you out.

Executive careers are a series of strategic moves. The best leaders know when to make their next one.

When did you know it was time to write your next chapter?

If Your LinkedIn Says "Executive Recruiter" in 2026, You're Leaving Placements on the Table

A candidate asked me something last week that stuck:

"Why should I work with you instead of the 50 other recruiters in my inbox?"

Fair question. I had an answer. Most recruiters don't.

Here's what 200+ placements taught me about positioning:

The generic title is killing your pipeline.

"Executive Recruiter" tells candidates nothing. It tells clients even less. You're competing with thousands of people who have the exact same two words on their profile.

Meanwhile, the recruiters winning the best mandates?

They don't call themselves recruiters at all.

They're "FinTech CFO Specialist." "Private Equity Operating Partner Talent." "Healthcare C-Suite Search."

The shift isn't about being clever. It's about being findable.

When a PE firm needs a portfolio company CEO, they're not searching "executive recruiter." They're searching for someone who understands their world.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜'𝘃𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸:

• Industry-specific positioning attracts inbound
• Niche expertise commands higher fees
• Candidates trust specialists over generalists
• Clients stop comparing you to commodity recruiters

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜'𝘃𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗙𝗮𝗶𝗹:

• "Full-service" positioning that means nothing
• Trying to be everything to everyone
• Competing on speed instead of insight
• Hiding behind a corporate brand instead of building your own

The recruiters who'll thrive in 2026 won't be the ones with the biggest databases.

They'll be the ones clients and candidates think of first when a specific need arises.

Your title isn't just a label. It's your first pitch.

Make it count.

What does your LinkedIn headline actually say about your expertise? Recruiter or not?

Most companies call me when they're desperate.

CFO just quit. No succession plan. Board meeting in 30 days.

Then they ask: "How fast can you find someone?"

Wrong question.

The right question is: "Why didn't we prepare for this six months ago?"

Here's what reactive hiring actually costs:

• 6-9 months average search timeline under pressure
• $2M+ in lost productivity per vacant C-suite role
• Remaining executives burning out covering gaps
• Strategic initiatives stalled or abandoned
• Competitors poaching your best people during chaos

I've seen it destroy companies.

One client waited until their COO announced retirement. Two weeks notice.

No pipeline. No internal candidates ready. No transition plan.

They promoted someone unprepared. He lasted four months.

Total cost: $3.7M in severance, recruiting fees, and operational disruption.

Compare that to my clients who build partnerships before crisis hits:

We map their leadership bench quarterly.
Identify succession gaps before they're urgent.
Build relationships with potential candidates over time.
Coach internal talent for future roles.

When someone leaves? We're ready in weeks, not months.

One CEO told me: "Craig, having you embedded in our strategy saved us when our CFO got recruited away. We had her replacement starting within 45 days."

The companies crushing it aren't reacting to turnover.

They're anticipating it.

Because in executive search, preparation isn't expensive.

Desperation is.

When's the last time you stress-tested your succession plan?

If you're questioning your role at year 4, you're not impatient. You're right on schedule.

Here's what nobody tells executives:

In my experience, average Fortune 500 C-suite tenure often hovers around 5 years. CEO tenure? About 7-8 years.

200+ placements taught me this pattern:

The executives who stay too long aren't loyal. They're on autopilot.

The ones who start asking hard questions at year 3 or 4? They're the ones who end up in their best roles.

I've watched executives ignore the internal signals for years. The role changed. The organization shifted. Their goals evolved. But they kept showing up to the same job.

By the time they finally moved, they'd lost momentum. Lost leverage. Lost options.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝗧𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗪𝗵𝗼 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴:

• Give yourself permission to evaluate fit (not just performance)
• Revisit the impact you want to have in the next 5–10 years
• Start strengthening your network now, not when you need it

The real risk isn't exploring your next move too early. It's waiting until external forces push you out.

Executive careers are a series of strategic moves. The best leaders know when to make their next one.

What's driving your questions – a problem, or a readiness for growth?

I just placed a VP of Technology who never finished college.

She beat out five Ivy League candidates.

Here's why the board chose her:

She taught herself AI, rebuilt her company's entire tech stack, and led a digital transformation that doubled revenue in 18 months.

The others had perfect resumes.

She had proven learning velocity.

This is the shift I'm seeing after 200+ placements:

Skills-based hiring is replacing credential worship.

Boards don't ask "Where did they go to school?" anymore.

They ask "How fast can they learn what we need next?"

The data backs this up:

Skills assessments reduce mis-hires by 88%.
They predict job success better than any CV.

What companies prioritize now:

• Learning agility over tenure
• Digital literacy over job titles
• AI proficiency over degrees
• Pivot speed over pedigree

Our 96% retention rate comes from one philosophy:

Hire for mindset and adaptability.
Train for skills.

The executives thriving today don't have the longest credentials.

They have the sharpest learning curves and measurable impact.

That VP of Technology?

Still crushing it two years later.

Outperforming every "safer" candidate on paper.

Are you still hiring resumes or hiring potential?

The best interview question I've ever asked isn't on any list.

After 200+ placements, I've sat through thousands of interviews. Watched hiring managers ask the same tired questions. Watched candidates deliver the same rehearsed answers.

Everyone's prepared for "Tell me about yourself." Everyone's got a weakness that's secretly a strength.

So I stopped asking what everyone else asks.

Now I ask this:

"Tell me about a time you were wrong about something important, and what it cost you."

Silence. Every time.

Because this question does something the others can't. It forces honesty.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜'𝗺 𝗟𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗙𝗼𝗿:

• Do they own the mistake or blame circumstances?
• Can they quantify the impact or do they minimize it?
• Did they actually learn something or just survive it?

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜'𝘃𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗲𝗻:

• Candidates who can't answer have never been accountable for anything meaningful
• Candidates who blame others will do the same in your company
• Candidates who get specific and own it? Those are your people

The resume tells you what someone did. The interview tells you who they are.

But only if you ask questions they can't prepare for.

Your best hires won't be the ones with the perfect answers. They'll be the ones who can sit in discomfort and tell you the truth anyway.

What's the one interview question that's revealed the most about a candidate for you?

Most executives ask the wrong question about their career.

"How long can I keep this job?"

That's survival thinking. Not strategy.

Here's what 200+ placements taught me:

The moment you step into a C-suite role, you're on a 3-7 year runway. That's not pessimism. That's the data. Average C-suite tenure hovers around 5 years. CEOs get about 7-8.

The best executives I've placed don't think about how long they can stay. They think about what this chapter will be known for.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿:

• What do I want this chapter to be known for in 3-5 years?
• What needs to be true for me to stay energized here?
• At what point will it be time to design the next move?

High-performing executives treat their career like a portfolio. Regularly reviewed. Intentionally rebalanced. Aligned with where they can create the most value next.

I've watched executives cling to roles that stopped fitting years ago. They weren't loyal. They were comfortable. And comfort has a cost.

The executives who build remarkable careers don't wait for a crisis to reassess. They build reflection into the rhythm of how they lead.

If your current role no longer matches the leader you've become, that's not a problem.

It's your signal.

How often do you step back and evaluate whether your role still fits?

96% of my placements are still there after 12 months.

94% after 24 months.

Here's what most recruiters won't tell you:

Skills don't predict success. Culture fit does.

I've seen brilliant executives flame out in 6 months.
Not because they couldn't do the job.
Because nobody assessed if they should.

The placements that fail? Same pattern every time:

Recruiter focuses on resume.
Company focuses on credentials.
Everyone ignores the culture gap.

Then acts shocked when the executive quits or gets pushed out.

Here's what actually drives 96% retention:

Before placement:
• Deep culture assessment (not just "values" on a website)
• Leadership style alignment with board expectations
• Strategic vision compatibility with company trajectory

During transition (first 90 days):
• Executive coaching through political landmines
• Stakeholder mapping and relationship building
• Quick wins identified and executed

Most placements fail in the first 90 days.
Not because executives can't perform.
Because they're navigating blind.

The difference between 96% retention and industry average?

I don't just match skills to job descriptions.

I match leadership DNA to organizational reality.

Are you in the right culture for your leadership style?

I've placed 200+ executives.

96% are still there after 12 months.

Here's what separates the ones who thrive from the ones who don't:

It's not credentials.
It's not pedigree.
It's not even experience.

The last five years in executive search taught me retention comes down to three things:

1. Strategic Alignment

The executive's vision must match where the company is actually going.

Not where they say they're going in the job description. Where they're really going.

I've seen brilliant CFOs fail because they were hired to transform, but the board wanted stability. And vice versa.

Misalignment kills placements faster than anything else.

2. Cultural Fit

Skills get you hired. Culture keeps you employed.

An executive can have every qualification on paper and still be gone in six months if they don't fit how the company operates.

I don't mean they need to be best friends with everyone. I mean their leadership style needs to work within the existing culture or have the mandate to change it.

3. Leadership Agility

The ability to adapt when things don't go as planned.

Because they never do.

The executives who last are the ones who can pivot, read the room, and adjust their approach without losing sight of the goal.

They don't need perfect conditions. They create them.

Here's what I've learned:

You can't fake these three things in an interview.

But you can assess for them if you know what to look for.

That's why our placements stick. We don't just match resumes to job descriptions.

We match people to reality.

What do you think matters most for executive retention?

Connector of Talent and Success 💼 | Empowering Businesses to Thrive through People | Culture Growth Strategist | Coach | Writer | HR leader | #1 LinkedIn Belgium | Top #150 LinkedIn 🌍

Who I help: Ambitious introverts and people-first companies

Problems: Visibility without burnout, quiet leadership, culture that enables deep work

Outcomes: Promotions, role transitions, retention, high-trust cultures

STRATEGIC HR LEADER AND COACH WITH HANDS-ON APPROACH AIMING FOR THE BEST EMPLOYEE/BUSINESS EXPERIENCE - INTROVERT ADVOCATE

International HR Executive passionate about the link between employee experience and business dynamics. Combining a strong focus on strategic thinking and planning with a structured and factual hands-on approach. A positive well connected team coach with a natural sense of empowering team members in a spirit of challenge, learning and mutual recognition. Sound decision making capabilities based on critical reflections within companies focusing on innovation, change, digital transformation and learning.

A. Group HR Director Alter Pharma (200 FTE - BE/IRL/US) – private equity backed firm defining & implementing HR strategy (from strategy to operations) including definition of mission/vision/strategy & values.
B. Global HR Business Partner BU Kerley international/Tessenderlo Group (+/-300 employees - 11 countries) developing/transforming key HR processes (talent resource planning, talent acquisition, performance management, competency management, learning, reward,..) - HR project lead new factory Rouen, France. 
C. Global HR Executive SWIFT (+/- 3.000 employees in +25 countries) transforming/coaching business and HR into new ways of (digital) working/thinking to improve the employee and business experience 
D. Global Head of Reward Tessenderlo Group (+/- 5.000 employees in +25 countries) - strategic development/transformation reward strategy
E. Development new holistic performance management framework for Tessenderlo Group, including full implementation recognition stream.
F. HR Project Manager : move of the Chiquita EME Headquarters from Belgium to Switzerland (social plan negotiations, c&b setup, recruitment, mobility, new policy/process design,...)

Professional coaching certification Better Minds at Work               2018 - 2019
Centre for Creative Leadership - senior leadership program           Q1-2 2018
Management Development Programme Vlerick (17 days)		  2010 - 2011
Strategic Compensation & Benefits Management, Vlerick 		  2007      
Master degree in Law&Taxation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven    1997 - 1998

Steven Claes

She had the highest retention in the company.
They passed her over twice.

The feedback? "Needs more presence in leadership meetings."

But when I dug deeper:
→ Her teams stayed longer than anyone else's
→ Her projects delivered early, consistently
→ Her cross-functional relationships were the strongest in the division

She wasn't lacking presence. The organization hadn't learned to recognize her kind of leadership yet.

I've watched this play out for 20 years as a CHRO.

The quiet leader gets labeled "not a team player." The thoughtful contributor gets told to "speak up more." The one who needs processing time gets dinged for lacking executive presence.

Meanwhile, they're the ones noticing what everyone else missed. Thinking three steps ahead while others are still talking through step one. Building relationships that actually matter instead of collecting business cards.

We're not shy. We're not stuck up.
We're listening. Observing. Taking it in before we speak.

And if an introvert opens up to you? Know that trust was carefully given.

Your way of showing up isn't wrong. It's just different, and often exactly what your team needs.

📩 Daily success as an introvert? These are the techniques I swear by: 
https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

🔁 Know an underrated introvert? Repost this to remind them they’re not alone.

undefined undefined

CHRO | Introvert Advocate | Career Growth for Ambitious Introverts | HR Leadership Coach | Writer | Newsletter: The A+ Introvert (60% Open Rate)

Louise Corbin

They said I was too much.
Turns out they were too limited.

A brilliant CHRO told me recently: "Steven, I've spent 15 years toning down my opinions, holding back, pretending shallow conversations were enough when depth is all I've ever craved."

I understood immediately.

I've lived it too.

Softened my directness to seem "diplomatic."
Smoothed my edges to appear "approachable."
Pretended small talk satisfied me when I was hungry for real connection.

And I ended up feeling like an outsider.

Because I WAS an outsider in places where I'd shrunk myself just to belong.

The pond people have labeled me:

→ Too quiet (meaning: you're hard to read, and that unsettles me)
→ Too direct (meaning: you skip the performance, and I can't handle that)
→ Too intense (meaning: you make me think, and I'd rather not)
→ Too ambitious the "wrong way" (meaning: you chase impact, not just visibility)

But two decades as a CHRO taught me this: Every time you shrink yourself, you train people to expect less from you.

When you're constantly making yourself smaller:
→ You attract relationships that require you to stay small
→ You master the art of being less than you are
→ You construct a career that fits everyone but you

I once believed the introvert advantage meant networking like an extrovert. Speaking louder. Being more visible.

I was wrong.

The true advantage? Recognizing that your need for substance IS your value.

When I stopped apologizing for choosing depth over surface, everything shifted.

1️⃣ You stop dimming your light so others feel comfortable in their mediocrity.

2️⃣ You surround yourself with people who see your intensity as integrity.

3️⃣ You discover your tribe. The ones who view thoughtfulness as strength, not a flaw to fix.

The teams needing someone to navigate complexity? They relied on me.
The cultures hungry for authentic leadership? They found me.

But only because I showed up fully. Not the diluted version.

Not everyone can handle you at full strength.
That's not yours to fix.

The people meant for you? They'll swim out to meet you in deep water, even if it scares them.

The rest will stay on shore, insisting the ocean is "too much."

Let them.

If you're an ocean, stop shrinking yourself into a pond.

If you're built for depth, you don't have a career problem.
You have a boundary problem.

The moment you address that, everything transforms.

As 2026 starts: Which boundary will you finally protect in the year ahead?

💾 Save this & ♻️ share if you're an ocean refusing to become a pond

📩 Join Weekly depth in The A+Introvert Newsletter: https://lnkd.in/e7xQPNtn

Quiet does not mean weak.
It means intentional. And that changes everything.

For 20 years, I heard the same advice:
"Speak up more."
"Be more visible."
"Get more executive presence."

I tried. Really tried.
But forcing myself to be louder never made me a better leader.
It just made me exhausted.

So I stopped fighting my wiring.

Today, I'm a CHRO.
Still introverted. Still leading.

And here's what I've learned from two decades in the C-suite:
Introvert isn't a limitation. It's a leadership advantage.

Every letter in INTROVERT reflects a strength I lead with and build teams around.
(See image)

My favorite? “T is for Trusted.”
Because trust doesn’t come from speaking the most.
It comes from meaning what you say.

The best teams I've built were never led by the loudest voice in the room.
They were led by the one people knew they could count on

So if you've spent years wondering why you don't fit the mold of a "typical leader"...
Maybe the mold was never made for you.

Stop fixing what was never broken.
Start building with the strengths already in you.

💾 Save it if you're done trying to lead like someone else.
🔁 Repost if you're quiet is your power.

📬 Want some of my go-to introvert tips I swear by:
→ https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

Your workplace was not designed for you.

Not if you're an introvert.
And no one wants to talk about it.

You have no idea what storms people are walking through. But for introverts, the workplace often adds to the storm instead of offering shelter.

Every day you're fighting a quiet battle.
Meetings that drain you.
Open plans that scatter your focus.
The constant pressure to "be more visible."

You just want to do good work without exhausting yourself.

The truth is most introverts are walking through storms alone. And no one sees it.
➟ They deliver excellent work, then watch someone louder get the credit
➟ Back-to-back meetings leave zero time to recover
➟ They hear "speak up more" when their strength is thoughtful contribution

Ping pong tables and pizza Fridays?
Nice. But they do not fix what's actually draining you.

"Be more visible" and "network more"?
That advice ignores how introverts actually build influence.

What introverts need to do their best work:
✅ Leaders who value depth over volume
✅ Recognition for written work, not just who speaks loudest in meetings
✅ Meeting-free blocks for actual focus time
✅ Permission to recharge without feeling guilty about it
✅ Career paths that do not require constant performance
✅ Time for thoughtful processing before decisions
✅ Cultures where reflection counts as much as quick reaction

This is what makes introverts want to stay.
A workplace that honours different strengths.
That recognises quiet confidence.
Where people succeed without burning out by Tuesday.

What is ONE thing your workplace does (or does not do) that makes the biggest difference for you?

🔁 Repost this if you want to support introverts in your network.
📩 My weekly A+Introvert Newsletter → see profile 👆 or featured section

Matthew Smith

Years ago, I watched HR let someone go for being "too quiet."
I was once that quiet person too.

The official reasoning?
"Lacks energy."
"Not aligned with our culture."

But after twenty years leading teams, I've learned what genuine enthusiasm actually looks like:

Arrives prepared.
Delivers excellent work.
Communicates with clarity.
Elevates others.

That's what deserves recognition.

Yet too many organizations still reward:
• Volume over substance
• Reaction over reflection
• Perception over results

I've been in those performance conversations.
I've read the carefully worded feedback.
I've watched exceptional people walk away because they weren't loud enough.

Excellence doesn't require a spotlight.
Impact doesn't demand a stage.
Results outweigh small talk every time.

We get it wrong when we:
• Label quiet as a weakness
• Treat extroversion as the culture standard
• Mistake personality for capability

Genuine enthusiasm shows up as:
✓ Reliability
✓ Craftsmanship
✓ Steady presence
✓ Measurable impact

The strongest teams don't pick between energy and depth.
They embrace both.

They need you. Whether quiet or loud.

Stop penalizing quiet excellence.
Start tracking what actually matters.

As we step into 2026: What will you measure differently this year?

💾 Save this & ♻️ share if you believe quiet work deserves loud recognition

📩 Weekly insights for ambitious introverts in The A+Introvert Newsletter: https://lnkd.in/e7xQPNtn

"Don't fall in love with success. Fall in love with the habits that bring success."

That would've saved me years.

Twenty years ago, I was the ambitious introvert.
Crushing tasks. Exceeding targets. Getting nowhere.

Then my mentor pulled me aside.
"You're winning battles. But you're losing the war."

I was working harder than anyone else in the room.
But I was still invisible.

Success is borrowed. Habits are owned.

The project you deliver? That's success.
The deep work that made it brilliant? That's a habit.

The recognition you earn? Success.
The daily rituals that keep you going? Habit.

Chase success without habits, and you're building a career on sand.
Build the right habits, and success has no choice but to follow.

Quiet leaders who last do not fall in love with the spotlight.
They fall in love with:

⏰ Morning routines that protect their energy
🚫 Calendar blocks that make space for focused work
🤔 Time for reflection that sharpens judgment
📚 Reading habits that widen perspective
🛡️Boundaries that preserve their sanity

Promotions can be delayed.
Bonuses can be cut.
Recognition can be missed.

But habits?
They compound.
They decide who you become.

The introvert's edge isn't volume.
It's systems that keep working when the noise fades.
__________
Repost if you're done proving yourself and ready to build yourself

I built some tools for Introverts around exactly this. https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

Ngan Pham

Networking like an extrovert nearly cost me everything.

More events.
More coffee chats.
More small talk with people I'd never see again.

I thought more connections meant more opportunities.

I was wrong.

What I actually built was exhaustion.
And a contact list full of people I barely remembered.

When I finally dropped that belief, everything changed.

I stopped chasing quantity.
Started protecting my energy.
Invested in fewer people, went way deeper with each one.

The networking events I skipped?
Cost me nothing.

The shallow connections I let go?
Made room for the ones I actually need.

After 20 years as a CHRO, I've watched too many introverts burn out trying to play the extrovert game.

The ones who thrive?

They stop forcing what drains them.
They build their network around how they actually work best.

This weekend, try this:

→ Text one person who genuinely energises you. No agenda. Just checking in.
→ Say no to one thing you were going to push yourself through.
→ Spend 10 minutes in stillness. Introverts don't recharge in crowds. They recharge in quiet.

Letting go of the wrong approach is not giving up.
It's making space for the right one.

What's one thing you're letting go of this weekend?

💚 Happy Friday, friends.

♻️ Repost if you believe success should never require self-erasure.

💌 I write the A+ Introvert Newsletter. Weekly insights for introverts who lead quietly and build deeply. No fluff, ever.→https://lnkd.in/e2Yn259g

A cat that dreams of becoming a lion must first lose its appetite for rats.

This African proverb stopped me cold.

Because for years, I was that cat.

Chasing the safe wins. The invisible contributions. Work that kept me comfortable but never actually challenged me.

Rats felt manageable. Low risk. Low visibility. Low reward.

And for introverts? Rats feel even safer.

We tell ourselves that staying small is strategic. That avoiding the spotlight is wisdom. That if we just keep delivering quietly, someone will eventually notice.

But here's what two decades as a CHRO taught me:

The rats never run out.

There's always another inbox to clear. Another meeting where you stayed on mute even though you had the answer. Another task that feels productive but changes absolutely nothing.

Meanwhile, the lion work sits there waiting.

→ The difficult conversation you've been rehearsing in your head for months.
→ The one where you finally tell your manager what you actually want.
→ The role you're qualified for but haven't applied to because it feels too visible.
→ The idea you keep refining privately because sharing it would mean being seen.

The shift doesn't start with action.
It starts with appetite.

You have to:
→ Stop craving the comfort of smallness.
→ Stop finding safety in being overlooked.
→ Stop confusing busyness with progress.

I spent years perfecting rat-catching. Efficient, reliable, forgettable.

Until I realized something painfully obvious: nobody promotes the best rat-catcher.

They promote the person who stopped chasing rats long enough to hunt something that actually mattered.

The shift from cat to lion isn't about becoming louder.

It's about becoming hungrier. For work that moves you forward, not just work that keeps you busy.

So here's my question:

What's one "rat" you've been chasing that you know won't get you where you want to go?

Because I'm willing to bet you already know the answer.

♻️ Share if you're done playing small
📬 Want to build your lion appetite? These tools helped me:
→ https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

"You're too quiet for executive leadership."

My boss said that to me at 32.
I replayed it for years.

Every meeting I stayed silent.
Every presentation I let others take over.
Every networking event I left early.

I believed him.

The lateral moves? I blamed myself for not being louder.
The passed-over promotions? Thought I didn't sell myself enough.
The struggling projects? Maybe I was too introverted to lead.

I carried those stories like stones in my pocket.
Getting heavier with each new challenge.

Then something shifted.

The promotions I didn't get kept me learning.
Now I lead with knowledge, not just ambition.

The struggling projects taught me to listen for what wasn't being said.
That skill transformed every team I touched.

What I've learned about how introverts process setbacks:

→ We don't bounce back. We build back.
→ We don't forget feedback. We mine it for truth.
→ We don't perform resilience. We develop it in silence.

What others saw as weaknesses were actually strengths forming:

Avoided office politics → Built trust through work instead
Skipped self-promotion → Let results speak louder
Stayed in roles too long → Mastered depth others rushed past
Took time to process → Made better decisions than those who reacted fast

Today I'm CHRO.
Still quiet.
Those "setbacks" were my education.

Every introvert I've hired has a similar story.
Told they were too quiet. Too thoughtful. Too slow.

Now they're running divisions.
Transforming cultures.
Leading without performing.

Your setbacks aren't failures.
They're data points.

Your quiet processing isn't weakness.
It's how you turn feedback into fuel.

That boss who said I was too quiet?
He was half right.
I was quiet.
But I was building.

♻️ Repost if you've ever been underestimated for being quiet

📩 Looking for some daily success techniques as introvert:
https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

Introverts don't need fixing.
Your workplace culture does.

For 20 years, I watched companies try to "improve" their introverted employees.

They sent them to presentation skills workshops.
They placed them in open office layouts.
They nudged them toward noisy networking events.

But they missed what really needed changing.

Meeting norms that reward the loudest voice.
Brainstorms that drown out deep thinkers.
"Collaboration" that looks more like constant interruption.

When I was 32, a VP pulled me aside.
"You're too quiet. That'll hurt your career."

So I tried to become louder.
More visible.
More like everyone else.

Eventually I realized something important.

I wasn't the problem.
The environment was.

Today I'm a CHRO.
Still quiet.
Still thriving.

Not because I changed who I am,
but because I focused on changing the system.

If you're doing this:
❌ Telling introverts to speak up more
❌ Requiring constant collaboration
❌ Assuming quiet means disengaged
❌ Defining culture through happy hours
❌ Rewarding visibility over value

Try this instead:
✅ Send agendas in advance so they can prepare
✅ Start meetings with quiet time for written input
✅ Offer multiple ways to contribute, not just talking
✅ Create quiet zones for focused work
✅ Recognize the impact, not just who talks the most

The most innovative companies don't try to fix introverts.
They build environments where introverts can shine.

Quiet-friendly cultures boost productivity.
Written brainstorming surfaces better ideas.
And your next big idea might be sitting silently in the corner.

The companies losing top talent right now?
They're still trying to make introverts louder.

The ones winning?
They're creating spaces where every style can thrive.

If someone seems too quiet,
maybe the system is too noisy.

Stop trying to change them.
Start changing what's actually not working.

Because a culture that works for introverts
works better for everyone.

💬 What's one small change that could make your workplace more inclusive for quieter thinkers?

♻️ Share if you believe quiet leadership deserves more respect

📩 Join 100K+ ambitious introverts who get free weekly career tips: https://lnkd.in/e7xQPNtn

Burnout isn't about working too hard.
It's about pretending too much.

For introverts, the real crisis is not the workload.
It's performing extroversion 40 hours a week.

7 signs you're burning out from the performance:

1️⃣ Hiding in your car between meetings. 
→ This is not odd. It's survival mode.

2️⃣ "I'm fine!" when you're clearly not. 
→ The mask stays on. Always.

3️⃣ Your best work happens after everyone leaves. 
→ Because finally, you can stop performing.

4️⃣ Sunday night dread about people, not tasks. 
→ Your nervous system already knows what Monday brings.

5️⃣ Social battery dies by Tuesday. 
→ You're not weak. You're drained from acting all day.

6️⃣ Calls drain you more than the actual work. 
→ It's not the content. It's the constant "on" that kills you.

7️⃣ Recovery takes the whole weekend. 
→ Two days to recover from five is not a sustainable equation.

After 20 years in HR, I've watched this pattern destroy talented people.
Not because they weren't strong.
Because they were never given permission to stop pretending.

What helps (for you):
→ Block 10 minutes between meetings. Non-negotiable.
→ Replace one call with async. Protect your voice.
→ Batch high-contact tasks on specific days. Guard one deep-work block.
→ Stop apologizing for needing quiet to think.

What workplaces need to change:
→ Create meeting-free blocks for real work.
→ Default one weekly update to async instead of live.
→ Train managers to lead introverts: advance agendas, written input options.
→ Design offices with actual quiet spaces, not just open-plan buzz.

Your energy is real.
Your limits are legitimate.
Your need for space is not weakness.
It's wiring.

Which sign hit closest to home?

♻️ Repost to help introverts burning out in silence.

💌 Want to thrive without burning out: https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

A shark in a fish tank stays small.
In the ocean, it grows to its full size.

The science may be shaky, but the principle holds:
Environment dictates growth.

Introverts work the same way.

But here's what nobody talks about: we don't just need bigger environments.

We need environments with depth.

For years, I tried to grow in loud rooms.

Networking events.
Open offices.
Brainstorm sessions where speed won over substance.

I wasn't shrinking because I lacked ambition.
I was shrinking because I was in the wrong water.

Kurt Lewin, one of the founders of social psychology, proposed that behaviour is a function of both the person and their environment.

You cannot outwork a bad fit.

The typical growth questions fall short for introverts

❓ Am I growing here?
❓ Am I being challenged?

Here's what we need to ask instead

❓ Does this environment reward reflection or just reaction?
❓ Can I contribute in writing, not just in real-time?
❓ Do the people here value depth, or only volume?
❓ Is there space for quiet processing, or just constant noise?
❓ Am I becoming more myself here, or less?

If the answers point to "less" and you can change your environment, change it.

But sometimes you cannot leave yet.

So you build your ocean where you are:

→ Curate inputs that expand your thinking.
Books, podcasts, communities that go in depth, not wide.

→ Find one or two people who match your wavelength.
Mentors or peers who value substance over small talk.

→ Create pockets for depth.
Block time for focused work, even if the culture does not protect it for you.

→ Set quiet challenges for yourself.
Write the memo that showcases your thinking. Lead the project that needs patience over speed.

Your environment shapes your growth.
Your choices shape your environment.

Introverts don't grow by swimming faster.
We grow when we find depth.

Stop trying to grow in a fish tank.
Find your ocean. Or start building one.

💾 Save this and ♻️ repost if you believe introverts deserve environments built for depth

📩 Want to build your ocean? These are the techniques I swear by:
https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

Being "always available" destroyed my best work.

My sharpest thinking happened at 6am before anyone could reach me.
My worst decisions came from back-to-back calls with no space to process.

For years I wore it like a badge of honor.
Responding within minutes.
Never missing a meeting.
Always on.

As a CHRO, I thought that's what leadership looked like.

I was wrong.

7 truths about introvert productivity:

🔋 90 uninterrupted minutes beat all-day availability
Research shows it takes 23 minutes to regain focus after an interruption.
This is where real work happens.
Not in constant collaboration.

🔋 Transition time is not optional
15 minutes between meetings to reset is not luxury.
It's how your brain works.

🔋 Alone time is strategic
Your brain recharges in quiet, not chaos.
Biology, not antisocial behavior.

🔋 Saying no is a productivity strategy
Three meetings with real substance beat twelve status updates.

🔋 Email beats video calls for most things
Async communication protects time for work that actually matters.

🔋 Morning energy is sacred
Give your peak hours to hard thinking.
Not admin.

🔋 Your calendar should reflect your nervous system
Not everyone else's expectations.

Productivity is not about doing more.
It's about protecting your energy for what actually matters.

♻️ Repost for the introvert doing real work after everyone leaves
📩 Weekly introvert career insights → https://lnkd.in/e2Yn259g

You're still replaying it. The moment you said the wrong thing in the meeting.

The decision that caused extra work.
The email you hit send on too fast.

At 2am, you zoom in on every face.
Every silence.
The question underneath: do they still trust me?

What I've learned after 20 years in HR:
People care less about the mistake itself.
They care about what you do next.

✔️ Take responsibility
✔️ Communicate clearly
✔️ Follow through consistently

That advice works. But for introverts, there's a step before the step.

Our nervous system treats mistakes like threats.
So we go quiet. And quiet gets misread as indifference.
We withdraw. We overcompensate.
We rehearse conversations that already happened.

The problem?
Silence rarely repairs trust.

My Quiet Repair Plan:

1️⃣ Name the mistake in one sentence
"I missed a dependency. That created extra work."
No over-explaining. No spiraling. One clear sentence.

2️⃣ Own it 1:1, not on stage
Three sentences in private work better than a public performance:
"I've been thinking about what happened."
"Here's what I see now."
"Here's what I'll do differently."

3️⃣ Make the fix visible
Pick one new behaviour.
Use it consistently.
Let actions speak louder than apologies.

4️⃣ Ask for micro-feedback
Not: "Do you trust me again?"
But: "Was that clearer than last time?"

Small questions feel safer. For both sides.

A visible mistake, handled well, can build your credibility faster than playing it safe ever will.

That's what quiet confidence looks like.
Not perfection. Recovery.

♻️ Repost for the introvert still stuck in the replay loop at 2am.
📩 Weekly tools for quieter leaders → https://lnkd.in/e2Yn259g

The lighthouse doesn't chase ships.
It stands still. And they find their way.

I spent 10 years being the ship.

From 30 to 40, I was drowning in the chase.
Speaking louder in meetings where I had nothing to add.
Networking harder at events that drained my energy.
Projecting confidence I didn't feel in rooms that didn't need me.

Doing everything leaders were "supposed" to do.

Exhausting myself trying to be seen.

Then I watched the quietest engineer become CTO.

While I was running around like a ship without a compass, she stood still.
Like a lighthouse.
She never chased the promotion.
She attracted it.

While others networked, she built systems that worked.
While others pitched ideas, she solved real problems.
While others performed leadership, she delivered results.

The promotion found her.
Three companies tried to poach her within months.
She never applied for any of it.

That moment changed everything for me as an introvert CHRO:

Chasing drains you.
Attracting energizes you.

While others chase the spotlight, we become the steady light others steer toward.

Stop chasing what drains you.
Start building what attracts success:
→ Deep expertise over shallow networking
→ Quality relationships over quantity connections
→ Consistent delivery over constant visibility
→ Thoughtful strategy over reactive hustle

The lighthouse does not announce itself.
It stands steady.
Its light cuts through.
And every ship finds its way.

♻️ Repost if you believe quiet leadership deserves more visibility

📩 Want to be the lighthouse? These are some techniques I swear by: 
https://lnkd.in/eSdKpkMs

Stop forcing yourself to be "on" all day.

Your boss sees quiet.
Your close team sees hilarious.

Your network sees reserved.
Your best friend? Sees you acting like an extrovert.

And here's the thing.
Everyone holds a different version of you.
That is not broken. That is strategic.

➡️ When you are around people who give you energy, you show up fully. 
➡️ When you are around strangers or high-stakes rooms, your battery drains faster than you'd like.

This is not two people.
This is one person with limited energy making intentional choices about where to spend it.

Most introverts sabotage themselves trying to be the same everywhere.

So they either:
➡️ Exhaust themselves performing for everyone
➡️ Hide completely and wonder why nobody knows what they can do

Here is the breakthrough:

➡️ Stop trying to be consistent.
➡️ Start being intentional.

You are not broken because you go quiet at a conference.
➠ You are smart because you know the return on your energy investment.

You are not unfriendly because you skip happy hour.
➠ You are protecting your ability to show up fully in the meetings that actually matter.

You do not need to be the same version in every room.
You need to decide which rooms deserve your full energy.

What is one event or meeting you are going to skip this week, guilt-free?

♻️ Repost this for the introvert who needs permission to stop performing

We promote the loudest voice.
Then wonder why teams burn out.

I've spent 20 years in leadership.
And I've watched brilliant introverts get overlooked again and again.

They didn't fall short.
They quietly pulled ahead.

Harvard and Wharton research tells us something most companies ignore. Introverted leaders drive:
➜ 28% higher productivity
➜ 84% more engagement
➜ 50% lower turnover

So why do we still mistake quiet for weak?

Because we've built systems that reward volume over value.
Visibility over results.
Performance over substance.

This carousel breaks down:
➜ What the data really says
➜ Why introverts make elite leaders
➜ How to lead with quiet confidence

The quiet ones in your meeting today?

They're not disengaged.
They're processing at a level most leaders never reach.

💾 Save this for your next leadership conversation.
♻️ Share if your culture still mistakes noise for leadership.

Your Team Thinks Quiet Means Weak (The Data Disagrees)

I ignored the warning signs for 3 years.
Then my body made the decision for me.

Most leaders still think burnout is a discipline problem.
Better time management. More willpower. Stronger boundaries.

Yet the introverts I work with burn out even with perfect calendars.
Color‑coded.
Blocked.
Optimised.

Still exhausted.

The real issue? Their energy design has holes.

As a CHRO working with introverted leaders, I see the same pattern on repeat:

→ Saying yes to a "quick call" that hijacks your only thinking block
→ Attending the meeting you weren't needed in, just to be seen
→ Skipping the 10-minute buffer because "it's just one more"

One VP was ready to quit.
Exhausted by Tuesday.
Every. Single. Week.

We implemented the 3B Framework:

→ Boundaries: Clear office hours for interruptions
→ Buffers: 15-minute blocks between meetings
→ Being Selective: 3 strategic meetings, not everything

Result: 40% fewer burnout symptoms.
Same influence. Better decisions.

Your exhaustion is not a discipline problem.
It is a design problem.

Swipe through for the full 3B Framework.

💡 Save this before your next burnout warning sign.

👉 If your energy at work or in rooms full of people feels unfixable, this will change how you see it and how you show up:
https://lnkd.in/eEk9FQBx

You're Not Tired. You're Overspent. (And Now what?)

I stayed quiet in meetings for years.

Then one CEO told me:
"When you speak, I know it matters."

I'd spent years thinking my silence was a liability.
Turns out it was my edge.

Most communication advice for introverts?
"Just speak up more."

But more communication does not equal better communication.

⬇️ Swipe to learn how introverts turn quiet into influence.

💾 Save & repost this before your next meeting.
📩 Get my newsletter The A+ Introvert → link in carousel last page

Stop Apologizing For Not Speaking Up Immediately (Really)

Stop trying to be a louder leader.

In 20 years as CHRO, I've watched brilliant introverts burn out.
They tried being more visible.
More charismatic.
More loud.

When teams take initiative, introverted leaders drive 28% higher productivity.

Not despite being quiet.
Because of it.

Your quiet leadership is not the problem.
The cult of charisma is.

⬇️ Swipe through to see how quiet leaders actually lead.

💾 Save this before your next leadership moment.
📩 Join ambitious introverts in The A+ Introvert Newsletter → link in carousel or my profile

taplio

The Battle

Craig Leach

Steven Claes

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreCraig Leach's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreSteven Claes's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Craig Leach

Steven Claes

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Craig Leach's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreSteven Claes's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreCraig Leach's LinkedIn Performance