|
⎈
Distributed Leadership
|
Seed
Role Assignment · Departure Brief
Every crew member owns a named role before leaving the dock.
Before departure, each participant is assigned a specific role — helm, navigator, mainsheet, bow — and briefed on their decision authority. This is the first experience of distributed ownership: the captain delegates, the crew executes, and the boat either moves cleanly or it doesn't.
|
Growing
VHF Radio · MOB Drill #2
Communication protocols require real-time distributed judgment.
VHF radio communication demands that crew members speak with authority, give clear positional information, and make independent calls when the captain is occupied. The second MOB drill tests whether distributed leadership holds under sudden, high-stakes pressure — does the crew self-organize, or does it wait for instruction?
|
Primary
Captainless Triangular Course
No captain. The team navigates, trims, and makes every call.
For a full triangular passage, there is no designated captain. Every navigation, sail trim, and safety call is made collectively by the crew. This is the primary test of distributed leadership: does the team have the trust, communication, and judgment infrastructure to self-direct? The sailing environment makes the answer immediate and unmistakable.
|
Synthesis
90-Day Leadership Plan
What structures, not just values, enable distribution at work?
The Day 4 debrief asks: what structural conditions made distributed leadership possible on the boat? Clear role boundaries, real-time feedback, shared information, genuine stakes. Participants map these conditions to their own organizations and build a 90-day plan to redistribute decision authority in one specific domain.
|
|
◎
Judgment Under Uncertainty
|
Seed
Hold a Steady Course
When conditions shift, how do you know when to adjust?
Holding a steady course in variable wind requires constant micro-judgments: when is a shift significant enough to respond to? When does adjusting the heading improve VMG, and when does it introduce instability? Day 1 introduces the judgment loop — sense, evaluate, decide, act — without the pressure that will come on Day 2.
|
Primary
Reefing · Sail Upwind · Heave To
Real conditions, real consequences. No simulation.
Reefing in building conditions requires a judgment call before the situation becomes dangerous — too early wastes speed, too late risks the boat. Sailing upwind in variable wind demands continuous recalibration. Heaving to is the active choice to pause and reassess rather than press on. All three are direct analogs for strategic judgment under uncertainty.
|
Deepening
All Calls Distributed
Judgment without the safety net of a designated decision-maker.
On the captainless leg, judgment calls are distributed across the crew — there is no single person to defer to. This deepens the skill because it requires each participant to own their judgment fully, make it visible to the group, and integrate conflicting assessments in real time. The stakes are real: the boat's safety depends on the quality of collective judgment.
|
Synthesis
Override & Defer Framework
When do you override AI recommendations — and on what basis?
The final debrief applies the week's judgment framework to AI decision-making: what were the conditions under which you overrode the recommended course? What information did you have that the instrument didn't? Participants build an Override & Defer Framework — a personal decision protocol for high-stakes calls where AI input is present but human judgment is required.
|
|
⟡
Communication Under Pressure
|
Primary
Departure Brief · Docking · Lines
Boat handling at close quarters requires precise, real-time communication.
Docking and line-handling require communication that is specific, timely, and acknowledged. Vague instructions ("a bit more", "soon", "watch out") produce immediate, visible failures. Day 1 establishes the communication standard: who calls, what they say, and how confirmation is given. Every maneuver in the harbor is a communication diagnostic.
|
Deepening
Night Brief · Weather Assessment
High-stakes communication in conditions of uncertainty and time pressure.
The Day 2 night brief requires participants to communicate a weather and passage assessment to the full crew — synthesizing GRIB data, coastal forecasts, and their own observations into a clear decision. This mirrors the leadership challenge of communicating under uncertainty: you don't have all the information, the stakes are real, and the crew is waiting for clarity.
|
Active
Captainless Decision Calls
Communication without hierarchy — everyone speaks, everyone listens.
On the captainless leg, communication patterns are exposed. Who speaks? Who defers? Who speaks too late? Who overrides without buy-in? The absence of a formal hierarchy creates a live diagnostic of each participant's communication instincts — and the debrief makes these patterns explicit and transferable.
|
Synthesis
Stakeholder Mapping Exercise
Translating sailing communication discipline to organizational change.
Day 4's stakeholder mapping exercise applies the week's communication insights to the participant's organizational change plan. Who needs to know what, in what sequence, with what level of detail? The brief-execute-debrief rhythm that structured the sailing week becomes the template for communicating a leadership change initiative.
|
|
⚖
Ethical Reasoning
|
Emerging
Safety Culture Introduction
Ethics begins with what you won't compromise — not what you prefer.
Day 1's safety culture introduction establishes the non-negotiable foundation: certain actions are simply not taken on the water, regardless of time pressure, peer expectation, or competitive desire. This is the first experience of ethics as a structural commitment rather than a situational calculation — and it sets the frame for Day 2's harder scenarios.
|
Primary
Override Scenarios · AI Ethics Cases
When the recommended route is wrong — and everyone can see it.
Day 2's override scenarios place participants in situations where the algorithmically correct course conflicts with observable reality, crew welfare, or ethical obligation. Each scenario is debriefed against the AI Ethics cases: when does efficiency trump safety? When does the recommendation embed a bias the system cannot see? When is human override not just permitted but required?
|
Active
Captainless Ethics: No Override Available
Ethical reasoning without the safety net of escalation.
On the captainless leg, there is no one to escalate to. Ethical judgment must be exercised in real time by whoever holds the call. This activates ethical reasoning as a live leadership capacity — not a framework to apply after the fact, but a decision filter operating in the moment, under uncertainty, with real stakes.
|
Synthesis
AI Ethics in the 90-Day Plan
Where does AI decision-making require human ethical override in your org?
The 90-day plan includes an explicit AI ethics audit: where in the participant's organization are consequential decisions being delegated to AI systems without clear human override protocols? Where is efficiency being optimized at the expense of equity, safety, or accountability? Participants leave with a specific commitment — one domain, one protocol, one named owner.
|
|
⚡
Trust at Speed
|
Seed
First Sail Together · MOB Drill #1
Trust begins in motion — and the first emergency drill happens before the boat moves again.
Day 1 includes the first Man Overboard drill: instructor-led, full Figure-8 recovery — shout, throw, mark, assign, execute. Every participant must know this before the boat moves again. It is introduced as a safety requirement, not a leadership exercise, but the debrief reveals what it actually is: the first moment the crew self-organises under pressure. The rest of the sail — dock departure, tacking, line-handling — builds trust through action, not conversation.
|
Growing
Night Watch · MOB Drill #2
Trust is tested in low-visibility, high-stakes conditions.
The night watch is the first experience of extended, unsupervised responsibility — participants manage the boat with reduced sensory input and no natural check-in points. MOB Drill #2 is now team-led: crew run the full recovery without instructor prompting, roles self-assign, commands are crew-generated. The question is whether the trust and fluency built since Day 1 holds when conditions reduce visibility and heighten consequence. These conditions compress the trust-building timeline in ways no classroom exercise can match.
|
Peak Test
MOB Drill #3 — No Captain
Trust is either instantaneous or the maneuver fails. No captain to sanction it.
Someone is in the water and there is no captain. The team has run this drill twice before — once with an instructor, once self-led. The question is whether the trust built over three days holds under maximum pressure with no one to call it. By Day 3, shout-throw-mark-assign-execute happens in seconds — or not at all.
|
Synthesis
Replicating the Compression Effect
What created rapid trust on the boat? How do you build those conditions at home?
The final debrief asks: what specific conditions compressed trust-building this week? Shared risk, interdependence, physical vulnerability, real consequences. How do leaders replicate the structural conditions — not the feelings — in their organisations?
|
|
↺
Change Leadership
|
Latent
Programme Arc Not Yet Visible
The destination must be visible before the journey makes sense.
Change leadership requires the full programme context before the destination makes sense. Day 1 is foundation-setting — building the trust, safety, and judgment infrastructure that change leadership will draw on.
|
Latent
Not Yet in Scope
Focus remains on judgment and ethics. Change leadership requires the full arc first.
Day 2's intensive focus on judgment and ethical reasoning is the prerequisite for change leadership — leaders who cannot make high-stakes calls under uncertainty cannot lead others through transformation.
|
Latent
Seeds Being Planted
Participants design a distributed system in real time — the template for change.
Day 3 plants the seeds: participants are building a distributed authority system from scratch, in real time. The captainless leg is the experiential proof of concept for the organisational change they will design on Day 4.
|
Primary
Docking · Anchoring · 90-Day Plan
The entire day: transferring four days of sailing experience into organisational action.
Docking as a change plan — who does what, in what order, with what contingency. Anchoring: choose where to hold, calculate how much room you need, verify it's fixed. The 90-day deployment plan is the deliverable: map leadership changes to team context, identify stakeholders, define success metrics, commit to accountability partners.
|
