Let's talk about something that happens to almost every manager at some point, and almost nobody gets trained for it.
This is when you walk into a team that you didn't build, but you're here to lead. Maybe you were promoted, over your former peers. Maybe you were hired in from the outside. Maybe a reorg dropped a group of people in your lap that you've never really worked with, or hired for that matter.
Either way, the team already has a history, a rhythm, old wounds, and a way of doing things that was set long before you actually showed up. And while you didn't choose them, they also didn't choose you. And this is a completely different job from building a team from scratch.
When you build a team, you hire for fit, you set the culture, you start clean. You set up the processes, you build the history together as you go. But when you inherit one, you're walking into the middle of a story that you
can't fully see, and the people are watching to find out one thing. The question is, are you going to make their work life better or worse?
My name is Ramona Shaw, and I'm the founder of Archova, and this is the Manager Track Podcast Now here's the real game, and most new managers miss it.
Inheriting a team is not a chance to prove how good you are. It's a chance to earn the right to lead them, and those are not the same things, and confusing the two is the most common way new managers blow this, because they're coming in trying to prove themselves and their competence. But before we get tactical, I wanna make the case for why getting good and understanding the difference between building a team and inheriting a team matters more than many of us may think.
First, it's actually one of the most common situations that we'll face and we're not trained for. Research says that around 60% of first-time leaders get no formal training when they try to step into their role.
It's also about 60% of new managers who fail or underperform in the first 18 months on the job. So in the scenario that we're talking about, most people will come in and improvise as they're trying to lead this inherited team.
Not a good setup. Now, second, the first 90 days set your ceiling with this team. The impression that people form of you in the first few weeks is sticky, so getting it right will help. Getting it wrong, not so much. When you do get it right, and you build what I call, like, political capital and trust,
And you can spend that reserve of trust and credibility later when you need to make a hard call, a difficult decision. When you get it wrong, when you get it wrong, it's likely that you're going to spend the whole first year kind of digging yourself out of the hole Now third, and this is the part that affects your career, the managers who can walk into a messy established team and stabilize it are the ones who get handed bigger and messier teams.
Stabilizing an inherited team that's lacking leadership, for example, or is going through a transition, is a skill that senior leaders notice because most people can't do it. So getting good at this and being really intentional about how you handle an inherited team will make it more likely that you become the person that they trust with such hard situations, and that definitely increases your chances of moving up.
Let's talk a little bit more about the trap.
The instinct is that when we take over a team, we wanna make our mark. We wanna show value first and have good ideas, because we were probably put in that situation because we are good at the work. So now you look at how the team operates, and you immediately see things that you would like to do differently. And the temptation is to start changing them right away. A, because you might be someone who likes quick actions and moving on and seeing progress. But two, that comment about like you want to prove yourself, you want to earn their respect, you want to make that mark.
That is the ego talking. Not necessarily in a bad way ego, but it's that ego that like, "Oh, I need to claim that. I need to get that in order to then be successful." But the opposite is actually true. When you change things before you understand them and you're telling the team, you're basically telling the team that their experience doesn't matter and the way that they've been working was wrong.
And you haven't earned the standing to say that yet. You're also almost certainly missing context. That clunky process you want to kill might be the actual workaround for a problem you don't know about. And when you move too fast, you start to look like you're being clueless or ignorant or arrogant, which is actually the exact opposite of what you're going for. I remember a conversation with a client where they said that the new leader came in, and the new leader basically said, "Hey, the CRM that you guys are using, I'm not familiar with. So, I'd like to switch over to this new CRM."
And there was some pushback from the team. People didn't really like the new CRM, but the manager was insisting on it. So from like, "I would like to, would you be open?" from that dialogue, it turned into a command. And so the entire team had to switch over to this new tool that, yeah, their leader was familiar with and liked, but it didn't work with their workflow, and they were not familiar with it at all.
They also didn't really have a big problem with the old system that needed to be addressed urgently. And so that kind of friction not only brought inefficiencies to the process but also immediately created mistrust of why is this suddenly a command when they don't yet understand how we operate, and we didn't ask for it?
And is this being a selfish move because they have all their expertise in that tool, and so it's gonna make them look good. It's gonna make us look bad 'cause we're not familiar with it. So the principle ultimately is to start simple. You wanna diagnose before you touch anything
Here's another example of how this can go wrong. I coached a manager who took over a team after the previous lead left on somewhat bad terms. This was, a very sharp guy. He has really strong instincts, and in his first two weeks, he wanted to reorganize the entire workflows and, like, make changes and move people around, because from the outside, this looked inefficient.
But what he wasn't thinking through was that the step he wanted to tear out, was the one thing holding together a really fragile handoff with another department. And when we talked through it, and as we talked through it, he realized that maybe he needs to do a test run.
And so in the test run, what happened was that it, the whole process got blown up, and the other team had an issue. It further escalated it. And yes, there was a bit of a coincidence. And yes, it was a bit bad luck or good luck that the escalation happened during that test run.
And with that, he was able to recognize that he was almost about to make a really foolish mistake by looking at something that seemed broken from the outside, not fully understanding the nuances of the process and make an immediate move in order to demonstrate some kind of competence.
It was the ego that was driving him to make that decision. So because he ran this as a test run, they were able to quickly revert back to the previous process, and they took a lot more time, about six months or so, before they actually started to make changes to it. If he hadn't done that, it's likely that he would have spent months rebuilding trust that he would have torched in a matter of a few days.
But here's the thing, like overall, he wasn't wrong that the process was clunky. He was wrong about when to touch it and how to change it.
By him spending a few more months like listening before making these reorgs and changes to the workflow, the team was able to tell him why the step was there and point out all the different risk factors that needed to be addressed first.
So zooming back out, like imagine you are inheriting a team, and this is your first day on the job. You'll probably address the whole team at run, at once, and what you say there matters more than we might realize.
We wanna be really short, concise, and to not over-promise. Like, we don't wanna walk in with this grand vision and a five-point plan. Even if in the interview process, the people who interviewed you, they asked you for your vision for the team and the five-point plan. But on day one, that is not how we're going to address a team.
It's not.. We're not gonna come in with all this clarity already figured out in the back end before ever talking to them. So this should sound way more like, "Hey, I'm so glad to be here. I know I'm stepping into a team that already knows how to do the work."
So my first job is to understand how you operate before I change anything. I'll be setting up time with each of you over the next couple of weeks to really understand your role and your responsibilities.
And so that message does a lot of quiet work. It signals humility. It tells them that you're not about to detonate everything that they've built. It also lowers the threat level in the room so that real conversations can actually happen because you're telling them, "I'm here to learn." And then, of course, step one is to figure out what kind of situation you've actually inherited, which is likely different than what you were told.
So we're working with that assumption that there's a discrepancy. Because you really seeing what's actually going on through your own lens and your own evaluation is then making you so much more of an authentic, and consistent leader, 'cause you're not parroting what someone else said, but you can actually explain your own thought process and analysis, and insights. Then that allows you to determine how fast you're allowed to or able to move in making some of the changes. There is a well-known model from Michael Watkins that works here as a quick gut check. And it's basically helping understand, like, what kind of team are you, are you inheriting one, are you inheriting a team in a turnaround where things are genuinely broken and people know it? Or are you inheriting a high-performing team that's already humming and just needs you not to break it?
Or is it a steady team somewhere in between? Right? A turnaround gives you permission to move quickly because people wanna change. They wanna get out of this turmoil. A high-performing team is the opposite, where your job in the first month is mostly not to mess it up. It's the same role, but completely different speed.
And if you read this wrong, and you'll either sit still when the team is begging for leadership change, or you'll come in swinging at the team that was doing just fine. Either way, it's going to be a problem. So before anything else, get really clear on where are you on that spectrum. I mean, the chances are high that you're somewhere in the middle of this.
But understand, like, what part of the team, like, is in this turmoil and in a phase of change? What part is steady and already high performing? And then you need different approaches for each of them. And I wanna highlight again, when other people tell you what they think it is, that's all good information, but ultimately, you need to understand it yourself and do your own assessment.
Okay, step two is to run an actual listening tour. In, listening tour. And yes, that sounds a bit corporate-y, but it is important. In your first two to three weeks, right, sit down one-on-one with every single person on the team.
And in those conversations, you are not there to talk and to sell yourself. In fact, the ratio should be heavily tilted toward them talking and you taking notes and asking good questions, like real questions, and then just be quiet and let the silence, your silence, do some work by prompting them to think through answers and to share more information.
You can ask questions such as, "What's working well that I should be careful not to change? What's frustrating you or slowing you down here? If you were sitting in my seat, what's the first thing you'd fix?" Or, "What do you want me to know about how you like to work?" And then you can ask an uncomfortable question like, " What are you worried that I'm going to do?" And yes, that last question can be awkward to ask, but it's exactly why it's valuable. It pulls sort of the fear into the room and acknowledges like, hey, a new manager always comes with change.
There may be some insecurities. Let's talk about this. And by pulling this into the open, you can actually address it and learn a ton now a few rules for that listening tour. Don't trust your predecessor, even when the team does it for you, right?
The moment you pile on and you agree with them, you've taught them that you talk about people behind their backs, and they might start to assume that you do it about them too. So you always wanna stay neutral when someone tries to pull you into old politics or when they vent about colleagues.
Like, " yes, I'm listening and understanding and empathizing and acknowledging, but I'm staying neutral." And so y- listening is a big part of this. You're taking it in, but you're not picking sides in week one. And of course, I'm making a point here to take notes. And it's very likely an advice that you would record those sessions so that later on you can pull that all into an AI tool and help you, connect the dots more so than you might be able to do yourself.
It's also useful to have the notes to these conversations that you can refer back to it when you introduce change or when you make certain decisions, and you can recall, you know, "We've talked about this before, and you shared with me this and that."
And that is demonstrating that you truly care, and you take that into their information and their sharing into account as you make decisions. And one more note here, open that very first one-on-one by handing them the floor, not you talking about yourself and recapping your resume.
"Hey, I wanna use this time to understand your world, so I'm mostly going to ask questions and listen. And if at the end you have questions for me, I'm happy to answer those too." People are often braced for a new boss to come in, talking about their own plans and themselves, and when you do the opposite, they start to relax, and you will also learn so much more.
So that was step two. Step three, deal directly with the skeptics and especially with anyone who wanted your job. And that is like ninety-nine percent of the time the case when you inherit an existing team, that someone else put their hat in the ring for your position. So if you were promoted over a peer who also applied or hired in over someone who expected to get the role, do not pretend like that isn't happening or as if you didn't know.
I've watched managers spend months sort of tiptoeing around that one person, and the tension just sits there and kind of poisons everything. Both people are aware of it. So name it instead. Go to that person early and say something like, "Hey, I know you were up for this role. I imagine it's a strange situation to now figure out how to work with me in that seat.
And so I generally like to find a way to work well together, and I want to hear what would make this work for you." You won't be able to fix their maybe disappointment and all that in one conversation. But naming it directly builds trust 'cause they know that you're, like, genuine and honest and transparent.
It also takes most of the, like, bad air out of it, - and again, it's just a demonstration that you lead by addressing difficult things, not by avoiding them and then step four is to secure one early visible win.
Somewhere in your listening tour, you'll hear the small, the same small frustration come up more than once. That's very likely. A recurring meeting everyone hates, nobody needs. A tool the team's been asking for and it's getting ignored,. An approval step that takes three days for no reason.
Pick one of those small, naggy problems and fix it fast. A- and when I say that, I really mean like a small, not a big problem. A small, low risk, low hanging fruit kind of problem. It does something powerful, right? It proves you listened, and it proves that you listening leads to action
And with that, you'll build real credibility, and that's the kind of credibility that you will need to spend later on the bigger, harder changes.
Okay, then step five, get clear on expectations and what good actually looks like. So ambiguity here is the enemy, and that doesn't just apply to new managers. We do everyone, all team members. All team members, all leaders. Once you've listened, start setting your standards plainly and without apology, but really framed in a forward-looking way instead of as a criticism of the past.
Something like, "Hey, here's what I care about and how I like to operate. Here's what I'll be paying attention to. Here's what success looks like for this team over the next quarter." You're not saying the old way was wrong. You're saying, "Here's where we are going now," and people can follow that. And you wanna be as explicit as possible and make sure that people actually understand it.
And then step six is that once you've done all that, you make your first real change, and some time has already passed by now, right? When you do, you will have to communicate the why really clearly. People will get behind a change that they understand far more willingly than one that just appears, you know, appears one morning or doesn't make sense in their point of view and they realize you're giving them some kind of propaganda, but that's not truly the case.
So by this point, you've listened, you've built some trust, you understand the context, and you've earned the standing to lead the change instead of imposing it. And that's the whole difference in inheriting a team that's not in the midst of a turmoil where fast action would be called for. This is when you are establishing yourself as the leader. And so you pacing yourself across the full first 90 days, not the first 90 hours, that is key. There's no prize to win for fastest reorganizations or too many reorganizations. A rough rhythm that works well, just as an indication overall, spend the first few weeks almost entirely listening.
Then use the second month to fix the small things and set your expectations, and then save the structural changes for the third, fourth, or even fifth months once you've gotten the context and the trust to land them. And if you
feel pressure to prove yourself, really pause and ask yourself where this is coming from. It's usually coming from our own head, not from the team or from your boss
Now a quick pause here. If this is landing for you and you want to get genuinely good at this part of the job, this is exactly the kind of thing
We go deep on inside the Leadership Accelerator. This is our 12-week program that we run for new and first-time managers. The people who are good at their work and now have to become good at leading. We work the real moments, how to take over a team, how to run the conversations that build trust, how to set expectations without coming across as heavy-handed.
It's cohort-based so that you're going through it alongside a small number of other managers who face the same situations. And through the coaching in this small group and one-on-one support, the skills will actually stick. And our track record on increased confidence and competence for managers proves that. If you're stepping into a new team right now, this was built for you. The link to learn more about the Leadership Accelerator is in the description below
So when you inherit a team, the worst thing that you can do is walk in trying to prove that you belong and that you were the right hire, and especially if you know there's competition on the team.
The best thing that you can do is to walk in trying to understand what you got. Listen first, fix something small, set your standards, and I'm gonna include here your strategic plan and your vision, and then lead the change.
And I don't recall a time where this has been such a, like, mutually shared challenge, as it is now, because so many teams are going through the AI transformation, and that creates change, and that requires a new strategic plan and a new vision for the team.
And if you are the one who's put in charge of going through this transformation, you following these steps is key. The managers who rush in to make their mark usually spend the next year cleaning up the damage. Let's not be one of them. Instead, the ones who slow down at the start, they will move so much faster for years afterward because they've built the trust to do it.
We don't earn a team's respect by being impressive in week one. The way we wanna impress is the humility and the wanting to listen and respect their work and the history that they've already built. And then you will earn everything else by proving over and over that you make their work better.
So start there. And with that, we'll be back next week with another episode of the "Manager Track" podcast. I'll see you then. Bye for now.
If you enjoyed this episode, then check out two other awesome resources to help you become a leader people love to work with. This includes a free masterclass on how to successfully lead as a new manager. Check it out at archova.org/masterclass. The second resource is my bestselling book, The Confident and Competent New Manager, How to Quickly Rise to Success in Your First Leadership Role.
Check it out at archova.org/books or head on over to Amazon and grab your copy there