Latest news with #videocall
Forbes
22-07-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Why Reading The Room Is A Strategic Leadership Skill
Diverse company employees having online business conference video call on tv screen monitor in board ... More meeting room. Videoconference presentation, global virtual group corporate training concept. Most people spend their prep time on content. They polish the story. Tweak the slide order. Clean up the numbers for the leadership team. Get the buy-in. But that's not where the decision gets made. Not really. AI can help now. It'll write the memo. Draft the deck. Sharpen your strategy. So your edge doesn't come from what you present. It comes from what you perceive. When you walk into a room of executives, you're not stepping into a presentation. You're stepping into a live system. A space pulsing with history, hierarchy and half-spoken truths. Everyone's got their own map of what matters. Some want speed. Some want cover. Some want to win. And some just don't want to lose. You might be there to pitch a project or get sign-off on a shift in direction. Maybe you're chasing investment for a new platform. But long before your first word, the real decision is already circling—in the glances, in the pauses, in what's left unsaid. You'll likely walk into a room where everything looks fine on the surface. But there's something off. A quiet tension between two execs. A budget conflict you didn't see coming. A project that steps on someone else's turf. The deck is tight. The logic sound. But the room won't move. Reading the room isn't polish. It's survival. The roles below aren't job titles. They're tendencies, patterns, lenses. A CFO might be your Humanist. A CHRO might ask the hardest strategic question. People shift. But if you learn to see the need underneath the title, you won't just present better. You'll lead better. I didn't always see it this way. Early in my career, when I was facilitating executive sessions or presenting strategy decks, I thought my job was to build consensus. To get everyone aligned, nodding, moving as one. But over years of working with hundreds of leadership teams—across workshops, boardrooms and hard decisions—I saw something else. The room doesn't move because everyone agrees. It moves because enough people see their own path to the same outcome. That's equifinality. Equifinality is the idea that people can arrive at the same endpoint through different routes. In leadership settings, it means decisions don't require identical thinking or full agreement. They require directional convergence. Each person may have a different motive, concern or lens, but they can still reach the same destination. If you're focused only on consensus, you'll miss the real alignment forming through tension, quiet resistance or fragile trust. The Strategist: Alignment Seeker Let's say it's Lena, the CSO. She's looking at how your idea lands three moves from now—what bets it connects to, what it threatens, where it ladders into the future. You'll likely see her pause when something doesn't track. One misalignment with a prior commitment and momentum can vanish. What helps? Don't just prove it's smart. Show why it fits the larger system. What she's thinking: If this knocks over something we've already committed to, we're not aligned. And if we're not aligned, we're exposed. The Decider: Action Driver Imagine Ray, the COO. Ray's energy is forward. He wants the plan, the cost, the steps. If you take too long setting context, he tunes out fast. You'll likely see him interrupt if the ask isn't clear. He's not being difficult, but indecision irritates him. What helps? Start with what you need. Be precise. Show the outcome. What he's thinking: If you can't lead me to action, how will you lead the project? The Humanist: Culture Carrier Let's say Priya, the CHRO, is in the room. She's listening for impact—not just organizational but emotional. Who this helps. Who it leaves behind. Whether it builds or breaks trust. You'll likely hear a question about voice or inclusion. One you hadn't prepared for. It might stall your flow, but it's not a derail. It's a safeguard. What helps? Frame the people implications. Belonging, voice, dignity. Show care, not just competence. What she's thinking: If this erodes trust, we'll spend a year trying to rebuild it. The Skeptic: Data Defender Picture Jennifer, the CFO. Jennifer doesn't attack. She asks. One sharp question at a time. She's not blocking you. She's stress-testing your thinking. You'll likely hear a challenge to something foundational—your comp set, your ROI logic, your timelines. If your answer is fuzzy, the room shifts fast. What helps? Name your assumptions. Bring clarity, not spin. Treat challenge like currency. What she's thinking: If I find one soft spot, there are probably more. I can't afford that risk. Diverse Modern Office: Businessman Leads Business Meeting with Managers, Talks, uses Presentation TV ... More with Statistics, Infographics. Digital Entrepreneurs Work on e-Commerce Project. The Operator: Feasibility First Now meet Jen, Head of Ops. Jen isn't chasing vision. She's scanning for consequences. What breaks. Who's accountable. What falls through the cracks. You'll likely hear a blunt question about capacity. Or a quiet one about who's covering the teams pulled into implementation. If there's no answer, the plan can wobble. What helps? Bring a rollout map. Even rough. Show handoffs, pain points and where readiness might be overestimated. What she's thinking: Don't hand me a beautiful idea and expect me to clean up the fallout. The Advocate: Inside Ally Andre, VP of Innovation, is with you. He brings energy, belief and early support. But he also wants credit, visibility and voice. Cut him out and his support softens. You'll likely hear him cool off mid-meeting if he feels excluded. A quiet shift. A missed reference. The belief stays, but the advocacy drops. What helps? Give him language, slides and soundbites. Let him shape the story. What he's thinking: If I helped build this and then am forgotten, can I still trust you? The Machine: The Algorithm at the Table There's one more participant in the room. Not human. Not on the agenda. But everywhere. The Machine—AI—now sits behind many of the decisions you're pitching into. It has already briefed the COO. Summarized your report for the CFO. Flagged reputational risks to the CHRO. It's surfacing issues, prompting questions and filtering tone in real time. You'll likely see someone checking a screen while you speak. That's not distraction. That's AI highlighting gaps or risk triggers. The Machine doesn't argue. It surfaces. It shapes decisions one prompt at a time. What helps? Assume it's working. Don't bluff. Don't bury tension. Name the tradeoffs yourself before it does. What it's doing that you can't see: It isn't emotional. But it speeds up emotion. Speeds up judgment. Flattens nuance. And it makes refusal easier. The Interplays: Where Power Shifts This is where decisions happen. Not in roles, but between them. The Decider and Operator might align fast but miss the risk the Strategist sees coming. The Advocate brings fire. The Skeptic brings water. You need both. The Humanist and Skeptic may clash. One wants care. One wants proof. Both want accountability. You'll likely see things fall apart not because someone objects but because no one bridges the tension between two others. Watch who defers to whom. Who goes quiet when someone speaks. Where silence lingers after a big ask. This is the real noise underneath. 'If this fails, it's my name on the line' 'If I stay quiet, I can't be blamed' 'Do I really trust the person pitching this' 'If I say yes, do I own it' No one says these things out loud. But they shape the room. Decisions don't run on logic. They run on self-preservation, ego, risk, memory and trust. For great teams divergence isn't dysfunction. It's a recalibration tool. Where You Stand Shapes What You See You're not just presenting. You're reading, feeling, adjusting. You're not there to impress. You're there to sense what others won't say. To catch the moment inside a pause. To name what's hiding in someone's silence. One mistake people make is this. They think reading the room means stepping back. Like being a fly on the wall. But that's not where influence lives. You don't belong on the wall. You belong in the center. Present. Grounded. Steady in your voice. The power of foresight doesn't come from watching. It comes from placing yourself inside the room. Eyes up. Body tuned. Reading patterns. Feeling shifts. Sensing the energy that floats in and out like breath. Because that's what an executive room really is. A living thing. It breathes. It tightens. It exhales. It moves even when no one is speaking. And if you can feel that—if you can sense it with your whole body, not just your mind—you move with it. You match it. You shape it. The best presenters don't walk out with praise. They walk out with momentum. Read the eyes. Read the silence. Read the room. That's where leadership buy-in starts. And the decisions begin.
Daily Mail
19-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Manager sacked after standing up with no pants on work video call claimed he was being racially discriminated against for being made to work on a bank holiday
A £60,000-a-year manager who was sacked after exposing his genitals during a work video call because he stood up with no pants on has had his case thrown out. The digital production manager for Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) was fired on January 30 last year after a disastrous virtual meeting in which he inadvertently flashed his colleagues. But the employee took the firm to a tribunal, claiming unfair dismissal as well as racial discrimination. His dismissal centred around a Microsoft Teams work call with a consultancy firm on May 8 2023 - which was a Bank Holiday because of King Charles III's Coronation. During the call, the manager stood up to adjust a cable behind his computer, but stunned his colleagues as he was wearing nothing from the waist down and his genitals were on show. A tribunal at London Central heard that an investigation was launched after a complaint was lodged by colleagues. After his line manager started a probe, the worker claimed: 'That was a bank holiday and l did not realise when l folded the laptop camera was on and pointing to the floor and then immediately shut down the camera so that don't know what was seen in the floor [sic].' The unnamed employee, who joined the FSCS in 2020, admitted he did not always 'wear full dress' at home and added: 'It is just an accident and apologies.' The manager argued that he was not culpable for what happened because the meeting took place on a Bank Holiday, adding: 'Expecting me to work during public holidays is a racial discrimination.' The tribunal heard that he holds dual Australian and British citizenship but he is Indian as he was born there. Sabah Carter, a senior figure at the FSCS, rejected the suggestion the dress code did not apply on public holidays. She found his actions had damaged the company's reputation and said he 'had not offered any reassurance that the incident wouldn't happen again'. And she noted he had 'not shown any remorse or apologised for his actions but rather sought to blame the external contractors on the call'. Ms Carter also pointed out his inconsistent evidence who initially admitted his genitals were visible before claiming he was wearing 'nude-coloured underwear'. As well as claiming unfair dismissal, he also claimed racial discrimination on over being passed over for a promotion. The employee said: 'The entire process and outcome is nothing but racial discrimination, mental harassment, unfair dismissal.' But the tribunal ruled that he had not been made to work on the bank holiday and had actually chosen to. 'Even if he were required to work inappropriately, that is no reason for appearing in a state of undress,' they noted. Although the panel accepted he had initially apologised for the incident, they found he later 'sought to obscure or deflect blame' and did not 'consistently show remorse'. The tribunal panel threw out all of his claims for unfair dismissal and racial discrimination. They concluded that his application for a promotion had been 'poor and failed to reveal sufficient relevant experience'. 'The position applied for was approximately twice the claimant's salary and FSCS was seeking relevant experience, particularly in heading departments,' they noted. Employment Judge Hodgson concluded: 'We find that the claimant chose not to wear either trousers or underwear... instead he deliberately chose to be naked from the waist down. 'This led to an obvious risk. If at any point he should need to stand, it was likely that he would reveal his genitals, if his camera was on. 'The claimant was an employee in a leadership role. He was dealing with external consultants. He should have realised that being naked was inappropriate, regardless of any policy. 'If he chose to wear no clothes from the waist down, he should have taken care to ensure that this fact did not become apparent. 'The claimant's action caused embarrassment to the employer and was inconsistent with his position and role.' Throwing out the claim, the judge said: 'All the claims of race discrimination fail. The claim of unfair dismissal is not well founded and is dismissed. The claim of wrongful dismissal fails and is dismissed.'
