Selling trauma-informed approaches to leaders who are convinced they don’t need it
How do you sell trauma-informed leadership to someone who has no interest in mental health?
This is a question I’ve been thinking about for the last year since I decided to take my big career pivot. It’s a question that comes up repeatedly when I speak with leaders who can see the need for trauma-informed leadership in their organisation, but the CEO does not. There are still plenty of executives who believe in traditional management approaches. Leave yourself at home and be ‘professional’ at work. Leaders who don’t believe that sick leave should be taken unless you’re vomiting. Who see mental health challenges as weakness rather than humanity.
A common pattern: the leader whose decisions and behaviour create confusion, frustration, stress, and even trauma for their team members, who then blames those team members for not being ‘resilient’ or ‘professional’ enough. The leader who doesn’t act on bullying because they don’t see why it’s a problem – who reframes bullying as strong leadership. The leader who sees everyone as replaceable and prefers turnover to uncomfortable introspection.
Here’s what I’ve learned:
There is no easy answer.
Don’t lead with an empathy argument – it won’t work.
Find what they care about and link trauma-informed leadership to that. What frustrates that person, both as an individual and in their role?
Risk reduction. Compliance and avoidance of legal threats can be a powerful argument.
Capital asset protection. As Ice Cream System once said to me, “high-stress environments treat talent as a depreciating and disposable asset.” Turnover is costly, both financially and through loss of institutional knowledge.
Focus on productivity, not pity.
Read the full article at The Trauma-informed Leader on Substack.
