In my opinion, the schools communities but especially those with high levels of disadvantage often face a familiar challenge. The children who struggle most with attendance, behaviour, engagement or attainment frequently come from families whose own experiences of education have been marked by disappointment, exclusion, failure or mistrust. Or they have simply been ground down by the system and all trust has been lost … especially the parents of children who’s learning is inhibited by an SEND. However, I would argue that hope is not a by-product of successful schools; it is one of the conditions that makes success possible. The Psychological Capital (PsyCap) framework developed by Luthans and colleagues comprises Hope, Efficacy, Resilience and Optimism (HERO).
Many parents who are hardest to engage have experienced years of interactions focused on deficits. Attendance concerns, behaviour incidents and safeguarding meetings can unintentionally reinforce a perception that school contact is synonymous with criticism. Over time trust diminishes and engagement reduces. These interactions may have started positive and hopeful but over time they slip into something else. The reasons for this could be many but in truth it was probably down to professional fatigue and eventually a loss of hope.
Hope is more than positive thinking. Snyder describes hope as a combination of agency and pathways: the motivation to pursue goals and the ability to identify routes towards them. For schools, this means helping families believe improvement is possible and supporting them to identify practical pathways to success. For me, even in the darkest days of the journey there needs to be hope. It’s our professional duty. Don’t get me wrong, I am myself guilty of negativity and losing hope. But as professionals we need see this occurring in ourself and others and be able to challenge this. Bringing the focus back to the hopeful interaction and planning.
There seems to have developed two behaviour camps in education: behaviouralist and progressive. For me, the most successful schools rarely sit exclusively within either behaviourist or progressive traditions. Effective schools combine strong routines, clear expectations and consistent teaching with deep relational practice, emotional safety and appropriate adjustment for individual need. Strong systems create predictability, while strong relationships create engagement. However, consistency should not mean identical treatment. High expectations can coexist with flexible pathways. Successful schools maintain clarity about outcomes while adapting the support required to help children and families reach them.
Outstanding teachers, pastoral leaders and family support practitioners often build hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism through everyday interactions. They notice strengths, celebrate progress and maintain belief in children and families even during periods of difficulty. This can be developed into a whole school culture and whole-school cultures founded on hope recognise that relationships, safety, teaching quality and strong systems are mutually reinforcing. By intentionally developing Hope, Efficacy, Resilience and Optimism in parents and staff, schools can strengthen engagement and create better outcomes for children.
American Psychological Association (2023) Psychological capital: What it is and why employers need it now. Available at: https://www.apa.org/topics/healthy-workplaces/psychological-capital (Accessed: 25 August 2026).
Covey, S.R. (1989) The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Restoring the Character Ethic. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Luthans, F. and Youssef-Morgan, C.M. (2017) Psychological Capital: An Evidence-Based Positive Approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, pp. 339-366.
Luthans, F., Youssef-Morgan, C.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2007) Psychological Capital: Developing the Human Competitive Edge. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Snyder, C.R. (2002) Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), pp. 249-275.
Microsoft (2026) Microsoft 365 Copilot. Available at: https://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-365/copilot (Accessed: 25 August 2026).
The greatest risk facing the new Inclusion Strategy is that it becomes the next Pupil Premium Strategy.
The introduction of the Inclusive Mainstream Fund (IMF) presents a significant opportunity for schools to strengthen inclusive practice and improve outcomes for children and young people with SEND. The government has been clear that the purpose of the fund is to help schools become “inclusive by design”, investing in sustainable improvements that remove barriers to learning and participation through high-quality inclusive practice rather than isolated interventions (Department for Education [DfE], 2026).
Schools are expected to publish an Inclusion Strategy that identifies barriers to learning and participation and explains how funding will be used to address them (DfE, 2026). This should be welcomed. Done well, the strategy could become a powerful school improvement tool.
However, school leaders should be cautious. There is a danger that the Inclusion Strategy could follow the same path as many Pupil Premium strategies have over time.
When Pupil Premium was introduced, it brought additional funding intended to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. In some schools it led to genuine innovation and improvement. In others, however, the funding gradually lost its distinct purpose and became absorbed into the wider school budget. Once it disappeared into the financial systems of a school or trust, it was often distributed across multiple priorities like slices of a cake, making it difficult to maintain a clear line of sight between spending, intended impact and actual outcomes.
As a result, the Pupil Premium Strategy frequently became a retrospective justification for expenditure rather than a carefully planned improvement strategy. Spending decisions were made first and plans were written afterwards. Impact was something schools sought to demonstrate retrospectively rather than something designed and evaluated from the outset.
The risks associated with this approach have been highlighted in national reports. The Public Accounts Committee reported that 47% of school leaders said they had used Pupil Premium funding to plug wider budget gaps, compared with 23% in 2019 (House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts, 2025). The same report noted concerns about the difficulty of tracking and evaluating the impact of disadvantage-related funding when it becomes absorbed within wider school finances.
At the same time, the attainment gap remains stubbornly persistent. The Education Endowment Foundation reports that disadvantaged pupils are approximately 19 months behind their peers by the end of secondary school (Education Endowment Foundation, 2026). Similarly, the Education Policy Institute found that the disadvantage gap had widened to 19.2 months in 2023, making it the largest gap recorded since 2011 (Education Policy Institute, 2024).
While many factors contribute to this picture, including broader social and economic influences, these findings serve as a reminder that funding alone does not improve outcomes. How funding is used matters.
This is why the Inclusion Strategy must be different.
The Inclusive Mainstream Fund should not be viewed as simply another funding stream to relieve financial pressures. Nor should the Inclusion Strategy become a narrative explaining where the money went. Instead, it should be a prospectively planned improvement strategy that identifies barriers to learning, sets out the actions required to address them, defines what success will look like, and establishes how impact will be evaluated from the outset.
The Department for Education states that IMF funding should support schools to develop sustainable inclusive practice, strengthen staff expertise, improve participation, and build capacity within mainstream settings (DfE, 2026). This emphasis on systemic improvement is important. The strongest Inclusion Strategies will focus on building inclusive capacity across the whole school through improvements in universal provision, adaptive teaching, staff development, early intervention, and participation.
The lesson from Pupil Premium is simple. Additional funding can easily lose its purpose when it becomes absorbed into the wider budget and accountability becomes focused on expenditure rather than outcomes. The Inclusive Mainstream Fund offers schools an opportunity to avoid that mistake. School leaders should ensure that the Inclusion Strategy remains a genuine vehicle for improvement, not merely a mechanism for explaining spending after the event.
If used well, this funding has the potential to create lasting improvements in inclusive practice and deliver better experiences and outcomes for all learners.
Department for Education. (2026). Developing an inclusion strategy using the inclusive mainstream fund. GOV.UK.
Education Endowment Foundation. (2026). The EEF Guide to the Pupil Premium. Education Endowment Foundation.
Education Policy Institute. (2024). Annual Report 2024: Disadvantage. Education Policy Institute.
House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts. (2025). Improving educational outcomes for disadvantaged children. UK Parliament.
Resilience is one of those words that gets thrown around a lot, usually in staff meetings, leadership conferences or on motivational posters involving mountains. But beneath the clichés sits something far more important. Resilience is the foundation on which every successful organisation is built. Whether you work in a school, a charity, a business or a shop floor, resilience is the thing that keeps people going when the work gets tough, the pressure rises and the unexpected arrives.
The irony is that resilience is often treated as something people either have or don’t have, like being good at maths or enjoying Marmite. In reality, resilience is far more like a muscle. It grows when you use it, it weakens when you don’t, and it develops best when someone shows you how to train it properly.
I say this with some authority because I was not exactly a natural-born example of resilience. My early attempts at revision were a masterclass in avoidance. I could find a distraction in an empty room. If resilience had been measured in my teenage years, I would have scored somewhere between “fragile” and “structurally unsound.” It wasn’t until I started working that I began to build it. And I didn’t build it alone. I had people like Dave and Janet in the Insolvency Service who coached me, nudged me, challenged me and occasionally told me to get a grip. They helped me understand that resilience isn’t about being tough. It’s about learning how to keep going, how to adapt and how to stay steady when everything around you is wobbling.
This is where leadership comes in. Not leadership as a job title, but leadership as a behaviour. Leadership that exists in every corner of an organisation. The colleague who quietly supports a new starter. The teaching assistant who brings calm to a chaotic moment. The middle leader who steadies a team during change. The senior leader who sets direction. The trustee who holds the long view. Leadership is everywhere, and because of that, resilience needs to be everywhere too.
Transformational leadership gives us a helpful way of thinking about this. At its heart, it is about building trust, acting with integrity, inspiring others and developing the people around you. These behaviours are not reserved for executives, the senior staff or business. They can be learned, practised and strengthened at every level. And when they are, they create the conditions in which resilience can flourish.
Trust gives people the confidence to take risks. Integrity provides stability when things feel uncertain. Inspiration fuels motivation when the work is demanding. Coaching builds capability so people feel able to handle what comes next. Put these together and you have a workforce that can adapt, recover and grow rather than simply endure.
This is why resilience should never be left to chance. A structured approach to developing it makes a difference. It helps the shop-floor worker who is juggling competing demands. It helps the teacher navigating a challenging class. It helps the middle leader balancing people and pressure. It helps the senior team steering the organisation through complexity. It helps the business owner or trustee carrying the weight of long-term responsibility. Resilience is not a soft skill. It is the bedrock of performance, wellbeing and long-term success.
So if you are tempted to overlook resilience because it feels too obvious or too intangible, don’t. Everything else you want to achieve depends on it. And if you feel your own resilience could use a little strengthening, take heart. If someone like me, who once struggled to stick at revision for more than seven minutes, can build it, then anyone can. You just need the right support, the right habits and the willingness to keep practising.
After all, resilience is a muscle. And muscles grow when you use them.
Across 2025–2026, multiple studies and market analyses converge on the same conclusion: coaching has shifted from a discretionary perk to a strategic lever that measurably improves productivity, retention, leadership pipeline health and, ultimately, financial performance (Gitnux, 2025; Simply.Coach, 2026).
Recent market data reports exceptionally high satisfaction among organisations that deploy coaching, with near‑universal positive experience ratings and sizable gains in workforce productivity and retention (Gitnux, 2025). In parallel, updated ICF‑aligned industry statistics indicate that 87% of organisations report a positive return on investment from coaching, linking outcomes to stronger leadership capability, engagement and goal attainment (Simply.Coach, 2026).
Leadership development research adds context: businesses investing in leadership capability, which is often anchored by coaching and report materially better business outcomes (Exec.com, 2025). Together, these findings position coaching as a keystone practice for organisations facing hybrid work, faster decision cycles and heightened talent mobility (Simply.Coach, 2026; Exec.com, 2025).
The ROI narrative for executive coaching is no longer anecdotal. Synthesis pieces referencing long‑standing studies report average ROI multiples ranging from 5.7× to >500%, reflecting improvements in productivity, conflict reduction, and satisfaction (Joslyn, 2025). While these figures vary by context, advisory analyses show how even modest performance shifts compound at scale; for example, a 5% team productivity lift or a step‑change in retention can translate directly into measurable savings (Velocity Advisory Group, 2025).
A practical illustration: modelling a mid‑sized company’s turnover cost shows that improving retention after coaching can generate six to seven figure annual savings, before accounting for benefits such as better decision quality and collaboration (Velocity Advisory Group, 2025). This complements aggregate leadership development data linking effective leadership (often strengthened through coaching) with 25% better business outcomes and higher profitability driven by engagement (Exec.com, 2025).
To satisfy CFO scrutiny, measurement should be mixed‑method and time‑phased:
In the current operating environment of hybrid work, rapid transformation and competitive talent markets it is clear that coaching stands out for its dual impact: accelerating leadership behaviour change and delivering provable business value. Some of the latest data from 2025–2026 makes a compelling case to treat coaching as a core component of enterprise strategy, not a discretionary spend (Simply.Coach, 2026; Gitnux, 2025).
To some, this blog will seem obvious and the bread and butter of running a meeting but for some it will be new. Most meetings run longer than they need to, not because the issues are complex, but because the ideas behind them have not been prepared in a clear and accessible way. A short discussion paper shared before the meeting provides structure, reduces misunderstanding, and presents the author as organised, competent, and credible.
A discussion paper works in large meetings and in one to one conversations with a line manager. It is particularly useful when a decision is required. It can also act as the concise top sheet of a longer document when the level of detail needs to be available but not present in the meeting itself.
When colleagues receive a well structured document in advance, they arrive better prepared, more confident about the purpose of the meeting, and more able to contribute constructively. The communication looks clearer and more professional, and the presenter is perceived as someone who respects others’ time and understands the need for clarity.
A planned and concise written paper helps prevent misinterpretation and misunderstanding. Instead of reacting to new information in the meeting, participants have time to reflect and think through their perspective beforehand. This reduces emotional responses and encourages reasoned contributions. It also prevents the meeting from being dominated by the loudest or quickest voices. Everyone arrives with the same information, which creates a balanced starting point. The result is fewer disagreements rooted in confusion and a smoother path towards a well considered decision. Most importantly, the document provides a single reference point. When discussion becomes unfocused or tangled, the group can return to the paper, which keeps the meeting moving and prevents unnecessary detours.
The paper should be no more than two sides of A4. One side is even better. Keeping it short improves engagement and increases the likelihood that it will actually be read.
This opening section frames the issue clearly.
How to write it:
This section positions you as a clear thinker who can articulate the situation without drama or ambiguity.
This section prevents the common problem of the meeting revisiting ideas that were tried or discussed already.
How to write it:
This demonstrates that you have done your homework and protects the meeting from unnecessary repetition.
Offering options signals balanced judgement and avoids the impression that you are pushing a single idea.
How to write it:
This structure shows analytical competence and helps others compare the options quickly.
A meeting moves more efficiently when the presenter states their recommendation upfront.
How to write it:
Stating your preference improves the optics of competence, because it shows that you can evaluate choices and take a reasoned position.
This section captures information that might affect the decision but does not fit into the previous sections.
How to write it:
A well written discussion paper signals professionalism. It shows that you can distil complexity into a clear structure, provide balanced thinking, and respect the time and capacity of your audience. This enhances the perception of your competence and reliability.
It also improves your verbal presentation. Rather than speaking through a long slide deck, the discussion paper provides a simple structure to talk through. This reduces the need for lengthy PowerPoint presentations, which often overwhelm audiences and encourage passive listening. With the paper as a guide, you can lead the meeting with clarity and purpose while encouraging active engagement.
During the meeting, the paper acts as the anchor for the discussion. This reduces the need for improvisation, keeps you focused, and helps you present your ideas confidently. The audience sees a clear thinker with a disciplined approach to communication.
Brown, B. (2012). Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead. Penguin Publishing Group.
Dutton, J. and Spreitzer, G. (2014). How to Be a Positive Leader: Small Actions, Big Impact. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behaviour in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, pp. 350 to 383.
Preparing for an Ofsted inspection is not about producing extra paperwork; it is about demonstrating how the school’s everyday systems, culture and decisions improve pupils’ experiences and outcomes. The Ofsted Schools Inspection Toolkit makes this explicit, stating that inspectors focus on the “impact of the systems and processes that leaders use to support the continuous improvement and effective running of the school” (Ofsted, 2025a). A high‑quality SEND review is one of the most effective ways to evidence that impact. It brings clarity, challenge and coherence to a school’s SEND practice and prepares leaders confidently for inspection. Crucially, it also ensures that pupils with SEND receive the ambitious and inclusive provision they deserve.
Every school develops routines and assumptions about its SEND provision. These may once have been useful but can become barriers to improvement. An SEND review challenges these norms and tests whether current practice aligns with the expectations of the Ofsted toolkit. For example, the toolkit highlights the importance of “embedding a culture in which early and accurate assessment of pupils’ needs is prioritised” (Ofsted, 2025a). A review examines whether identification is accurate, timely and linked properly to adaptations in classrooms. This aligns directly with the SEND Code of Practice’s requirement for the graduated approach, which calls for SEND support to follow a cyclical assess–plan–do–review process in which earlier decisions are “revisited, refined and revised” to improve outcomes (Department for Education, 2015).
Ofsted does not want compliance for its own sake; it wants evidence that practice is coherent, effective and child-centred. The toolkit reiterates that inspectors will “collect first-hand evidence … mainly through professional conversations and observing … the day‑to‑day work of the school” (Ofsted, 2025a). A SEND review mirrors this approach by analysing what is happening in real classrooms, in real interactions and in real processes; not in theoretical policy documents. It also prepares leaders for inspector questioning by ensuring that curriculum decisions, adaptations and support plans can be clearly articulated. This aligns with the School Inspection Operating Guide, which emphasises that leadership, inclusion and safeguarding are key focus areas when gathering inspection evidence (Ofsted, 2025b).
Backdrop Leadership Group SEND reviews begin by understanding your unique context. Leaders often know where strengths and gaps may lie, and a review validates this knowledge through structured, evidence‑based analysis. This mirrors Ofsted’s method in one way, in which inspectors build a “clear and typical picture of all aspects of the school’s work” through discussions, visits and analysis (Ofsted, 2025a). Feedback from Ofsted’s pilot inspections reinforces this. Leaders reported valuing the collaborative tone, learning walks and reflective conversations used by inspectors, describing them as fair and inclusive (Ofsted, 2025d). A SEND review prepares staff for exactly this type of professional dialogue.
In every school there are hierarchies, loyalties and blind spots. An external reviewer can ask challenging questions and present objective insights that internal staff may find difficult to raise. This helps leaders refine their SEND narrative, ensuring it aligns with the Ofsted focus on effective identification and support.
The toolkit describes inclusion as the process by which schools “identify and support … pupils with SEND” and stresses the importance of “setting high expectations for all pupils, including disadvantaged pupils [and] those with SEND” (Ofsted, 2025a).
A review examines:
Inclusion is not confined to one section of the inspection. The operating guide makes clear that inspectors use the toolkit to “celebrate the school’s strengths, validate leaders’ priorities and progress and highlight where improvement is needed” (Ofsted, 2025b). A review tests whether inclusion is visible across your website, curriculum, behaviour systems, staff training and daily routines. It also looks at how leaders work with families — something highlighted throughout Ofsted’s supporting evidence base for the renewed framework (Ofsted, 2025c). This ensures that the “golden thread” of inclusion is woven across policy, practice and culture.
Ofsted makes it clear that the toolkit “can also be used by leaders to support self‑evaluation and continuous improvement” (Ofsted, 2025a). An SEND review supports this ongoing process by:
This iterative model reflects the assess–plan–do–review cycle required by the SEND Code of Practice (Department for Education, 2015). It also aligns with Ofsted’s own direction of travel, as indicated in pilot feedback that highlighted more collaborative, reflective inspections (Ofsted, 2025d).
Ultimately, the purpose of an SEND review is not to “prepare for Ofsted”. It is to ensure that pupils with SEND receive the best possible education. However, outstanding practice naturally leads to inspection readiness.
A review helps schools:
All of this aligns with Ofsted’s expectation that inspectors evaluate provision through first‑hand evidence, professional dialogue and real impact on pupils’ development and achievement (Ofsted, 2025a).
Department for Education (2015) Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years. London: Department for Education.
Ofsted (2025a) State‑funded school inspection toolkit: for use from November 2025. London: Ofsted.
Ofsted (2025b) School inspection operating guide for inspectors: for use from November 2025. London: Ofsted.
Ofsted (2025c) Renewed education inspection framework: supporting evidence base. London: Ofsted.
Ofsted (2025d) Our renewed inspection framework: what we’ve learned from pilots. Ofsted: Education Blog, 5 November.
Many leaders already understand the role that compassion plays in effective leadership and healthy organisational cultures. They also recognise that communication is shaped not only by what is spoken but by what is noticed, sensed and left unsaid. The research base for compassionate leadership continues to grow, showing its positive effect on performance, wellbeing and organisational resilience (Trzeciak, Mazzarelli and Seppälä, 2023; Rogers, 1957). One area where compassion and communication frequently meet is in the handling of feedback, particularly when that feedback is a complaint.
Schools, businesses and charities often fear complaints because they can feel like personal criticism or institutional threat. When compassionate leadership is applied, complaints become something different. They become a form of communication that carries emotional weight, unmet expectations and important information about the lived experience of stakeholders. A compassionate organisation would state this openly. Imagine a school or charity communicating the following message on its website.
“We welcome your feedback and hope you will let us know when we have not got things right, so that we can grow, develop and get better.”
This is more than good public relations. It is a cultural value that signals openness, accountability and psychological safety. It is also an invitation into partnership.
A compassionate leader is not simply someone who is kind. They cultivate a culture in which compassion is embedded in the everyday behaviours of the organisation (Poorkavoos, 2016). This supports the development of an organisational culture that actively notices when something is not right (Schein, 2010). Such leaders understand that feedback, including complaints, serves several important purposes. It can reveal difficulties, unmet needs and blind spots within systems or interactions. It offers opportunities for personal and organisational development. It strengthens trust when the response to feedback is open and non defensive. This reflects Rogers’ (1957) view that compassionate responses enable growth. It also aligns with the research that emphasises the importance of what is unspoken in communication, including tone, gesture and emotional undercurrents (Mehrabian, 1971; Van Nieuwerburgh, 2020).
Avoiding feedback, or responding defensively, has consequences. Unspoken or unaddressed concerns can give rise to insecurity and fear (Brown, 2012). In schools this can damage trust with parents or reduce staff wellbeing. In charities it can affect stakeholder confidence. In businesses it can impact retention, performance and morale.
Psychological safety, described by Edmondson (1999), is essential for healthy cultures. It develops when individuals feel able to share concerns, aspirations or difficulties without fear of judgement. Leaders who invite feedback without blame or stigma create this safety (Tehan, 2007). Leaders who avoid feedback weaken it.
Complaints often tell a story that is far wider than the issue described. They contain emotional meaning, relational context and personal experience. Compassionate leaders therefore attend to both what is said and what remains unsaid. They consider the emotions being communicated, the assumptions they themselves may hold, and the history of previous interactions that may shape interpretation (Hassin, Uleman and Bargh, 2005).This interpretation should be approached carefully. Bias can influence what is heard and understood. Transference and countertransference, described in coaching literature by Clutterbuck, Whitaker and Lucas (2016), can also affect leaders. These dynamics can cause leaders to project their own experiences onto others, or adopt the emotional tone of the person bringing the complaint. Compassionate leaders recognise these risks and reflect on their responses with care.
When leaders adopt a compassionate approach, complaints stop being perceived as threats. Instead they become valuable information that supports improvement. Complaints can provide insight into lived experience, opportunities for better practice and moments of connection. A complaint is, in many cases, an act of trust. People complain because they believe improvement is possible and because they care enough to say so. The advantages of compassionate leadership support this approach. Benefits include greater staff trust and engagement, improved wellbeing and reduced absence (Trzeciak, Mazzarelli and Seppälä, 2023). A compassionate response to complaints therefore strengthens both culture and performance.
Creating a culture that values feedback requires intentional action. Research from Harvard Business School highlights several practical approaches.
Leaders should start small, and recognise that compassion does not require significant time investment. They should express gratitude for acts of feedback, since appreciation keeps them attentive to moments where compassionate responses are needed. They should be purposeful and ask themselves what they can do, and how they can support the individual offering the feedback. They should seek common ground, including supporting those outside their immediate team. They should celebrate moments of compassion within the organisation to reinforce them (Trzeciak, Mazzarelli and Seppälä, 2023).
When schools, charities and businesses clearly state that feedback helps them grow, they express humility, curiosity and accountability. These qualities cultivate a compassionate culture where everyone can contribute to collective development.
Brown, B. (2012). Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead. Penguin Publishing Group.
Clutterbuck, D., Whitaker, C. and Lucas, M. (2016). Coaching Supervision: A Practical Guide for Supervisees. London: Routledge.
Dutton, J.E. and Spreitzer, G.M. (2014). How to Be a Positive Leader: Small Actions, Big Impact. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler Publishers.
Edmondson, A.C. (1999). ‘Psychological safety and learning behaviour in work teams’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, pp. 350 to 383.
Hassin, R.R., Uleman, J.S. and Bargh, J.A. (2005). The New Unconscious. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Management Consulted (2022). ‘Compassionate Leadership: Model, Benefits and Examples’. Available at: https://managementconsulted.com/compassionate-leadership/ (Accessed 13 May 2024).
Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Poorkavoos, M. (2016). Compassionate Leadership: What Is It and Why Do Organisations Need More of It. Available at: https://affinityhealthhub.co.uk/d/attachments/2-compassionate-leadership-booklet-1558606680.pdf (Accessed 13 May 2024).
Rogers, C. (1957). ‘The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change’, TACD Journal, 17(1), pp. 95 to 103.
Schein, E.H. (2017). Organizational Culture and Leadership. 5th edn. Hoboken, New Jersey, Wiley.
Sogyal, R., Gaffney, P. and Harvey, A. (2017). The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying. London, Rider Books.
Starr, J. (2021). The Coaching Manual: Your Step by Step Guide to Becoming a Great Coach. 5th edn. Harlow, Pearson Business.
Tehan, M. (2007). ‘The Compassionate Workplace: Leading with the Heart’, Illness, Crisis and Loss, 15(3), pp. 205 to 218.
Trzeciak, S., Mazzarelli, A. and Seppälä, E. (2023). ‘Leading with Compassion Has Research Backed Benefits’, Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2023/02/leading-with-compassion-has-research-backed-benefits (Accessed 13 May 2024).
Van Nieuwerburgh, C. (2020). Introduction to Coaching Skills: A Practical Guide. 3rd edn. London, Sage.