Refeyn
Neurodiversity Global
← All scenarios

Scenario 02

The recently promoted lead inheriting a team they did not pick

Team Lead, Production Operations · No formal disclosure

Persona

Name
Sam
Age
33
Role
Team Lead, Production Operations (promoted four months ago)
Disclosure
No formal disclosure. In a one-to-one, Sam has mentioned they were assessed for ADHD as an adult but have not pursued anything formal at work. They have asked for clearer written expectations from their own manager.
Context
Sam was promoted into a team lead role after the Q1 restructure. They were a strong individual contributor and were seen as the natural next step. They are now leading a team of seven, two of whom used to be peers, and three of whom transferred in from another function when the structure changed. The team is delivering, but tension has started to surface. Sam is working long hours, holding most coordination in their head, and finding that things they thought were clear are not being followed through. Two of the team have started routing questions to a more senior colleague instead of Sam.

Record

  • Strong technical credibility from previous role.

  • Trusted by senior leadership.

  • Has delivered every operational milestone since promotion.

  • Has cancelled or rescheduled three one-to-ones in the last month.

  • Has been late submitting two team-level reports.

  • One team member has informally said Sam keeps changing what good looks like.

Scenario

Sam holds a Monday team huddle. They mention in passing that the priority for the week is the customer-facing build, and that the internal compliance work can slide a few days if needed. On Wednesday, in a corridor conversation with one team member, Sam says the compliance work actually needs to be done by Friday because a senior leader has asked for it. On Friday, the work is not done. Two team members thought it could slide. The team member Sam spoke to in the corridor did the work but is annoyed they were the only one. In the team meeting Sam says: I told you on Wednesday this needed to land Friday. One team member replies: You told one person on Wednesday. The rest of us were still working to what you said on Monday.

"You told one person on Wednesday. The rest of us were still working to what you said on Monday."

What happened after

Sam went quiet in the meeting and the conversation moved on. Afterwards they replayed it and felt they had been undermined in front of the team. They started writing longer emails to document everything. The team noticed the longer emails but also noticed that decisions were still being changed verbally. Trust in Sam as a clear communicator dropped further. The team member who did the work felt unrecognised.

Now, in your groups

Discuss in your group

  1. 01

    Where is the gap between intent and impact?

  2. 02

    What does Sam own here, and what does their manager own?

  3. 03

    If you were Sam's manager, what would you NOT say in the first conversation?

  4. 04

    What does the team need to see Sam do differently in the next two weeks?

The stretch of discussion

The easy framing is that Sam is a new manager learning the role. The harder discussion is what happens when someone is promoted into a leadership role without the structures or coaching to succeed in it. Sam is showing classic signs of overload: holding context in their head, communicating verbally to whoever is in front of them, and missing the cost to the rest of the team. This is not a Sam problem in isolation. It is a question about how the business supports newly promoted leads after a restructure.

What if there was no disclosure?

There is no formal disclosure. The conversation does not need one to be useful. The manager should focus on: What was communicated, when, and to whom. What the team can reasonably be expected to work from. Where Sam needs support, not where Sam needs labelling. What good looks like for a team lead in this team, written down once and agreed. Whether ADHD is part of the picture or not, the management answer is the same: build the structure so it does not rely on memory or corridor conversations.

Capture your thinking

Group output

Use this to note what your group lands on. One person can capture for the share-back, then save to send it to the facilitator review.