Today’s blog takes me back to one of my favorite sources of insight: real executives wrestling with
This person was crushing his numbers. He was innovative, decisive, and charismatic.
He forged loyal followership. He moved fast. He broke things. He got results.
He was, in the executive’s words, a “bull in a China shop who went to President’s Club every year for great performance.”
And here was the problem:
“In every role he’s had, he’s essentially planned for and executed a coup. But he never sees himself as leading the coup. He always feels like he’s just adjacent to it. Like the organization is dysfunctional and he’s simply stepping in to fix it.”
That phrase stuck with me.
Coup-adjacent leadership.
Not openly rebellious. Not formally insubordinate. But constantly destabilizing the system in the name of results.
The executive’s question to me was simple and profound:
“How do we develop leaders who can recognize this pattern, and neutralize it, without killing innovation?”
That’s a serious leadership challenge.
Here are five lessons in business acumen and leadership created from understanding the dynamics of the “coup-adjacent” environment.
1. Results Do Not Justify Organizational Instability
High performers often get more latitude.
When revenue grows, margins expand, or productivity spikes, behavior gets rationalized.
But business acumen is not just about the income statement. It’s about sustainability.
A leader who consistently:
…may deliver short-term gains while quietly increasing long-term organizational risk.
You don’t see that risk on a quarterly dashboard.
But you will see it in:
Great leaders build durable systems. Coup-adjacent leaders build temporary kingdoms.
2. The Most Dangerous Leaders Are the Ones Who Believe They’re the Hero
This is where it gets psychologically interesting.
The coup-adjacent leader rarely wakes up thinking, “Today I will destabilize the organization.”
Instead, the internal narrative sounds like this:
There is always some truth in that.
That’s what makes it dangerous.
In many organizations, transformation does require disruption.
The difference between a reformer and a destabilizer is intent and integration.
Reformers challenge and align. Destabilizers challenge and isolate.
3. If You Reward Lone-Wolf Heroics, You Will Get Political Insurgency
This is a systems issue.
Organizations that:
…are essentially incentivizing coup-adjacent behavior.
Business acumen includes understanding second- and third-order effects.
If the incentive system says:
“Win your silo at all costs.”
Don’t be surprised when leaders:
You designed the behavior you’re now frustrated by.
4. The Cost of Internal Coups Is Strategic Drift
In our business simulations, we often model capital allocation, trade-offs, and strategic alignment.
But here’s something harder to model:
When leadership teams are in subtle power struggles, strategic execution slows.
Energy shifts from:
To:
You can have a brilliant strategy on paper and still underperform because your executive bandwidth is consumed by internal coups.
That’s not a leadership style issue.
That’s an enterprise value issue.
5. Neutralizing a Coup-Adjacent Leader Requires Courage and Clarity
Here’s what the executive and I ultimately discussed.
You cannot:
You must make expectations explicit:
If a leader cannot win without destabilizing the system, then they are not ready for enterprise leadership.
That’s not personal. That’s structural.
And the most mature leaders, the ones truly ready for C-suite responsibility, understand this:
Leadership is not about being the hero in every chapter. It’s about strengthening the institution so it doesn’t need heroes.
In Summary
We are operating in a volatile world economically, politically, and socially.
Many organizations feel like they are one quarter away from a crisis at any moment.
In those environments, strong personalities emerge quickly. And sometimes they get celebrated before they are fully understood.
As you evaluate your leadership bench, ask yourself:
Leadership in a coup-adjacent business environment is not about suppressing intensity.
It’s about channeling it. And that is serious business.