- About us
- SolutionsCoaching Solutions
- Facilitators
- Resources
- Contact us
Before you buy a team offsite, find out which problem you actually have.
Nearly 75% of cross-functional teams are dysfunctional — Behnam Tabrizi’s study of 95 teams across 25 corporations, Harvard Business Review, 2015. They fail on budget, schedule, specification, customer expectations or corporate alignment. Almost none of them fail because people dislike each other.
Which means the standard response — a two-day offsite with games — is often the right activity aimed at the wrong problem.
Collaboration breaks in four distinct places. They present almost identically to HR: “we need to collaborate better.” They need entirely different interventions.
Functions operating as separate kingdoms. Leaders managing perceptions rather than telling the truth. Meetings that end in consensus while three objections go unspoken. Decisions that should take one conversation taking three rounds of escalation. Increasingly, CXO burnout tied to the absence of genuine support at the table.
You cannot facilitate trust into existence in a room where nobody has agreed what they are collectively for. Vision has to come before candor.
Opens with Hour of Power and the Tree of Life exercise, moves through Appreciative Inquiry, a co-created shared vision, NVC and the Light Seat method, and Open Space Technology, and closes each evening with Talent Night. A 30/60/90-day review architecture follows.
Every department hits its numbers. The chain still leaks. Purchase optimizes cost, Production throughput, Quality defect rate — each behaving rationally inside its own frame. Cross-departmental problems travel up two hierarchies and back down instead of across one desk. Structural friction gets read as personality clash, so it never gets solved.
Relationship-building between department heads does not change a handoff nobody owns. The work is at workflow level, not at the level of goodwill.
The whole value chain mapped on one wall, the Competing Values Framework to show why certain functions are in tension by design, and every handoff converted into a specific negotiated commitment with RACI and named cross-boundary owners.
The same two people carry every meeting; the same three never speak, and nobody has named it. Assumptions believed by everyone and tested by no one shape decisions daily. Commitments made warmly and missed quietly, with no agreed way to raise a slipped deadline.
This team already knows each other. More relationship-building adds nothing. The problem is the accumulated list of things that have become unsayable.
Diagnostic-selected experiential activities that make the team’s own dynamics visible, safety rated across Clark’s four stages, and the Myths and Taboos method to surface three myths and three taboos anonymously and dismantle them together.
A senior leader accountable for results delivered largely by people who do not report to them. Working the network on the org chart rather than the one they actually depend on. Offering across a boundary whatever is easy to give rather than what the other side values. Disagreements escalated or avoided, so problems get managed around instead of solved.
This is a personal capability, not a group condition. A team intervention does not build it, and a generic influencing course teaches persuasion rather than cross-boundary exchange.
Each leader brings one written live case, maps their real collaboration network, applies Cohen and Bradford’s exchange framework, and practices a cross-boundary disagreement in triads without escalating or conceding.
Every engagement begins before the room does.
The diagnostic determines which activities run, which topics get seeded, and what the days are actually about. It is also how we tell you if none of the four is what you need.
Not an upsell. Bonding for Greatness® reviews at 30, 60 and 90 days. ART and ECT at 3, 8 and 12 weeks, with the self-assessment re-administered and the business KPI measured against the goal set in the diagnostic. Collaborative Skills for Leaders follows through peer-to-peer at 30 days by design, with an optional facilitated group review at 90.
1500+ client organizations. 22+ countries. Grounded in founder Arun Wakhlu’s Wholesome Leadership philosophy — moving organizations from an EGO system to an ECO system of sustainable business excellence.
Each is built for a different point where collaboration breaks. Bonding for Greatness® works with an intact top leadership team on trust and shared vision. Achieving Results Together (ART) works across departments that share a value chain, fixing the handoffs between them. Enjoying Challenges Together (ECT) works inside a single intact team that already knows itself well but has stopped saying certain things out loud.
Collaborative Skills for Leaders works with an individual senior leader who must deliver results through people who don’t report to them. The pre-engagement diagnostic tells you which one — or whether none of them do.
Every engagement opens with a diagnostic: a sponsor conversation that names a quantitative business goal, a self-assessment completed by every participant, and program-specific pre-work — a value-chain audit for ART, a psychological safety pulse for ECT, a written live case for Collaborative Skills for Leaders. What the diagnostic surfaces decides which activities run and what the days are actually about.
Psychological safety — a concept originated by Amy Edmondson — is a team’s shared belief that it’s safe to speak up, disagree, or admit a mistake without being punished for it. We build it directly through Non-Violent Communication, the Light Seat method, and diagnostic-led experiential work, and rate it across the four stages defined by Timothy R. Clark: inclusion safety, learner safety, contributor safety, and challenger safety.
Collaborative Skills for Leaders can run in-person or virtually. Bonding for Greatness ®, ART, and ECT are designed as in-person experiences the diagnostic-led experiential work, and for Bonding for Greatness® the residential format, depend on it.
It depends on the program, by design. Bonding for Greatness® reviews at 30, 60 and 90 days; ART and ECT at 3, 8 and 12 weeks — in both cases the self-assessment is re-administered and the business KPI is measured against the goal set in the diagnostic.
Collaborative Skills for Leaders follows through differently and deliberately: because the work is a personal capability rather than a team artefact, there is no charter and no facilitator-led review — instead, a peer accountability pairing checks in at 30 days, with an optional facilitated group review at 90.
Yes. Every engagement starts with the diagnostic described above, so the case studies, high-leverage topics and activities reflect what is actually happening in your organization, not a fixed template. Two engagements of the same program rarely look the same.
Tell us what you are seeing – a conversation, not a proposal.