The change was both measurable and visible. Over six months, the executive team’s performance score rose from 33% to 78% effectiveness—a 45% improvement. There was a noticeable shift in behavior and team dynamics, driven by the individual coaching, targeted interventions, and clear commitments made during the facilitated sessions. Team members began to engage with greater clarity, empathy, and alignment—resulting in stronger decision-making, increased trust, and restored confidence from the board.

This case demonstrates how executive coaching, data-backed interventions, and focused team development can quickly shift the trajectory of even the most high-stakes leadership teams—especially when the future of the business depends on it.

the result

To address this critical leadership challenge, Cristina and her team designed a six-month high-performance team engagement—grounded in coaching, assessment, and intentional behavioral change.
The process began with the Team Alignment Survey (TAS) to baseline effectiveness and surface key dynamics. Each executive also completed leadership assessments to identify communication styles, derailers, and development areas. One-on-one executive coaching was launched alongside the team work to support individual growth and reinforce accountability.

The full executive team engaged in four intensive, full-day working sessions focused on direct dialogue, building trust, and unpacking the root causes of underperformance. These sessions created space for difficult conversations, mutual commitments, and new behavioral norms. A particular emphasis was placed on coaching the CEO and President to move from conflict to collaboration—transforming their relationship from a liability into a leadership asset.

the solution

A $12B liquefied natural gas (LNG) company with bold ambitions to become North America’s leading exporter was facing internal turbulence at the highest level. As the company expanded its Gulf Coast terminal into a global export hub, all eyes were on the executive leadership team to deliver. But behind closed doors, collaboration was breaking down—especially between the CEO and President, whose interpersonal conflict had become so disruptive that the board issued a clear warning: improve or be replaced. The stakes were high, and failure was not an option.

THE SITUATION

behind the breakthrough