“True humility is not thinking less of yourself; it is thinking of yourself less.” — Rick Warren

Most leadership failures don’t stem from a lack of skill or intelligence. They stem from the ego.

When leaders make it about “I and Me” instead of “We and Us,” teams disengage. Strategic plans become mandates instead of shared commitments. The future feels like something being done to people rather than something being built with them.

This is where adaptive leadership diverges from traditional command-and-control models.

The Leader’s Intent Framework

Humble leaders understand that the future doesn’t belong to them alone—it belongs to everyone on the team. That’s why the most effective leaders build their organizational intent collectively, not in isolation.

The framework has three components:

Our End State: What does success look like in 3-5 years?

Key Tasks: What are our “must-dos” to achieve this end state?

Our Purpose: What’s our why?

Notice the language: Our end state. Our key tasks. Our purpose.

This isn’t semantic wordplay. It’s the difference between a plan that lives in a PowerPoint deck and a roadmap that people actually own.

Why This Approach Works

When leadership teams develop intent together, something shifts. Buy-in doesn’t need to be manufactured through cascade communications or town halls—it’s built into the process itself.

Each person who participates in defining the end state, identifying key tasks, and articulating purpose becomes invested in the outcome. They’re not executing someone else’s vision. They’re building a future they helped design.

This is how learning cultures sustain themselves through the difficult middle period I discussed in my last post. When leaders demonstrate humility by making strategy a collective effort, persistence follows naturally.

Making It Real

The framework only works if you maintain it. That means:

• Quarterly reviews to ensure you’re on track
• Champions and Co-Champions for each key task
• Accountability that runs both ways (not just top-down)

I’ve seen many leaders skip this part. They do the initial work, feel good about the collaborative process, then let it gather dust. Six months later, they’re frustrated that “nothing stuck.”

Humble leadership isn’t a one-time exercise. It’s a persistent practice of thinking of yourself less and your team more.

That persistence—that commitment to “We and Us”—is what separates organizations that transform from those that simply reorganize.

What’s your experience with building a strategy collectively versus a top-down approach? I’d love to hear how it’s worked (or hasn’t) in your organization.