
Last year, I received assessment results that rocked me.
My immediate response wasn’t curiosity. It was resistance. That can’t be right. Power? That doesn’t match how I see myself at all.
The assessment revealed that my need for influence—to drive outcomes, make an impact—was shaping my leadership in ways I hadn’t seen. I tend to speak first, move quickly, and rely on my own clarity to push things forward. What feels like momentum and decisiveness to me can land as dominance for others.
Not because I’m trying to shut people down. But because my presence takes up enough space that people stop pushing back.
And I had no idea it was happening.
The line between “finally owning your power” and “inadvertently dominating the space” is genuinely difficult to see—and almost impossible to navigate without honest feedback.
If you’ve ever received feedback that made your stomach drop—not because it was unfair, but because it didn’t match the leader you thought you were—this post is for you.
Here’s what makes this so disorienting: the qualities being flagged are often the same ones that got you promoted.
You’ve spent years learning to own your authority in rooms that didn’t always welcome it. Your decisive nature is one of your strengths. Your ability to move things forward is probably part of why you’re in the role you’re in.
But somewhere along the way, that hard-won confidence may have tipped into something else:
What feels like driving momentum might actually be shutting down dialogue.
What you think earns respect might be why people have stopped pushing back.
This isn’t a character flaw. It’s a developmental edge—one that almost every accomplished leader hits when they move into more senior, more strategic roles. The very traits that made you excellent aren’t fully serving you at this expanded level.
Research backs this up. Organizational psychologist Tasha Eurich and her team studied nearly 5,000 participants and found that while 95% of people believe they’re self-aware, only 10 to 15% actually meet the criteria. And here’s the part that matters most for senior leaders: the more power someone holds, the harder it becomes to get honest feedback—which means the gap between self-perception and reality tends to widen, not shrink, as you advance.
When you receive feedback that doesn’t match your self-image, what happens in your body? If you’re like most high-achieving leaders, you feel your defenses rise—your chest tightens, your mind starts building counterarguments—and then, eventually, you calm down.
That resistance? It’s not a problem. It’s information.
The question isn’t “Is this feedback accurate?”
The question is: “What am I protecting?”
When feedback triggers intense defensiveness, you’re often protecting an identity that matters deeply to you. Collaborative leader. Empowering manager. Someone who creates space for others. These aren’t just professional labels—they’re core to how you see yourself.
Research on relational dynamics identifies defensiveness as one of the key behaviors that erodes trust over time. Not because the defensive person is wrong, but because the pattern itself signals to others that honest conversation isn’t safe. And in leadership, that signal compounds. People stop bringing you the hard truths. They soften their feedback. They hint instead of naming what they see.
Which means the very reaction designed to protect your identity ends up widening the gap between your intent and your impact.
Here’s the reality that most leadership development programs don’t say plainly enough: you can have the best intentions and still create unintended impact.
Leadership effectiveness isn’t measured by what you meant to do. It’s measured by what others actually experience.
This is what I call the intent-impact gap, and it shows up in patterns like these:
None of these interpretations mean you’re a bad leader. They mean there’s a disconnect between your internal experience and your external impact—and closing that gap is some of the most important leadership work you can do.
The tricky part? You can’t close a gap you can’t see. And the higher you rise within an organization, the fewer people there are who will tell you it exists.
When difficult feedback lands, instead of immediately evaluating whether it’s “right” or “wrong,” try sitting with these three questions:
Identify the self-concept that feels threatened. Usually it’s something like “I’m a supportive leader” or “I empower my team.” Naming it takes away some of its power to drive unconscious reactions.
You don’t have to accept feedback wholesale. But asking yourself what a kernel of truth might look like opens up space for growth without requiring you to abandon your sense of self.
Behavior change doesn’t require a complete overhaul. One small shift—pausing three seconds before responding in meetings, asking “What do you think?” before sharing your perspective—can generate new data about how your leadership lands.
These aren’t theoretical exercises. They’re the kind of questions I work through with the leaders I coach, and they consistently unlock insights that years of performance reviews never surfaced.
You can intellectually understand feedback and still struggle to act on it. Understanding and behavior change are two very different things.
Here’s what I see with the leaders I work with: they receive feedback, they process it thoughtfully, they may even agree with it. And then the daily demands of their role take over, and the feedback sits untouched. Not because they don’t care—because they don’t have a structure for translating awareness into new habits.
What creates sustainable change is having a space where you can sit with feedback that stings without spiraling into shame, explore the gap between your intent and your impact, and build new practices that honor both your strengths and your growth edges.
When you can receive hard truths without allowing them to threaten your core worth, you become someone who grows through challenges rather than being derailed by them.
All feedback is filtered through someone else’s experience—which means it’s always partly subjective. The more useful question isn’t “Is this valid?” but “Is there a pattern here?” If multiple people across different contexts are reflecting similar themes back to you, that’s data worth sitting with, regardless of whether any single piece of feedback is perfectly accurate.
This is real and worth naming. Women in leadership often receive feedback that reflects bias more than performance—being told they’re “too direct” or “intimidating” when male colleagues exhibiting the same behavior are called “decisive.” The key is to separate the signal from the noise: Is there a legitimate impact gap you want to close? Or is the feedback asking you to shrink? A skilled coaching partner can help you make that distinction.
Rather than annual 360 reviews, consider building smaller feedback loops into your regular rhythms. A quick check-in with a trusted colleague after a high-stakes meeting, a monthly conversation with a direct report about what’s working and what’s not. Consistent, low-stakes feedback is far more useful than one high-stakes assessment per year.
Self-awareness becomes unproductive when it turns into rumination—constant self-monitoring that creates anxiety rather than insight. The goal isn’t to analyze every interaction. It’s to develop enough awareness that you can notice patterns and make intentional adjustments when it matters most.
Alli Celebron-Brown is a leadership coach who partners with accomplished women in leadership who are ready for what’s next. With over 25 years of leadership experience, including more than six years as a CEO leading comprehensive organizational transformation, Alli brings both professional expertise and lived experience to her coaching. She is certified by the International Coaching Federation (ICF) with advanced credentials from Georgetown University and Cornell University.
Book a Complimentary Discovery Call →