Five Personas of the Untrained Leader
Leaders without proper development tend to adopt one of five personas.
- The Superhero swoops in to rescue whenever a team member struggles. They handle the difficult customer call. They fix every problem themselves.
- The Open Door encourages learnt helplessness. “My door is always open” becomes code for “I’ll solve everything for you.”
- The Micromanager wants everyone to replicate their exact approach. It stems from anxiety that any deviation will cause targets to be missed.
- The Old School Manager insists on “the way I used to do it.” If it was good enough for them, it must be good enough for everyone.
- The Mini Me simply replicates what their previous manager did, whether it worked or not.
None of these approaches are inherently wrong. That’s what makes this so difficult. What’s fascinating is how predictable these patterns are. Speak to ten untrained team leaders and you’ll see the same five personas emerge. It’s not random. It’s what happens when people default to survival mode without the frameworks to guide them.
The Problem of One Speed
Using an accelerator in a car isn’t bad. Unless you only use the accelerator. Garlic isn’t a bad flavour when added at the right time in the right amount. But too much is overpowering. These leadership styles all contain seeds of truth. A bit of proven value. Often good intent.
The damage comes from never being taught how to modulate.
A little of each approach is needed at different times. Too much creates learnt helplessness, stifles creativity, squashes autonomy, and sets the tone for unhealthy working practices.
The data confirms what I’ve observed: when agents said that their team leaders lacked the right skills, job satisfaction dropped to 29%.
But how could these leaders know which approach to use when? They were never shown. The tragedy is that most of these leaders genuinely care. They want to do well. They’re working harder than they ever did as agents, staying late, taking work home, losing sleep over team performance. But effort without skill just leads to exhaustion.
The Critical First Moment
This lack of modulation becomes visible early. Usually in the first month or two.
Initially, the team cuts the new leader some slack. They’re still friends, really. Still one of the team. Professional distance hasn’t been created yet.
Then comes the moment: a target is missed, a team member’s behaviour is off, something needs course-correction.
This is where it breaks.
The new manager has to step up and step in. Without the right skills, thinking, or groundwork, they can easily be forced to make it up as they go along:
- A team member struggles with a difficult customer. The manager transfers the call to themselves.
- The start-of-day huddle reviewing yesterday’s stats simply replicates what previous managers did, even though it never worked.
- A team member’s behaviour is off, but the manager lets it go because they used to be friends. The bad behaviour gets reinforced.
They’re either rescuing, replicating, or avoiding. What makes this moment so critical is that it sets the template. The team watches how their new leader handles pressure. They form judgements quickly. And once a pattern is established, it becomes incredibly difficult to break. The leader, meanwhile, is often unaware of the precedent they’re setting. They’re just trying to survive the day.
It’s like being handed the car keys for a family holiday without a satnav or enough fuel. You desperately want to get everyone there safely. But you’re set up to run out of fuel and get lost.
The Gap Nobody Talks About
When I speak to these leaders months later, they often say the same thing: “The job isn’t what I imagined.”
They thought they’d carry on doing the same job, feel the same pressures, maintain the same relationships, still feel as confident. Just get paid a bit more.
This reality hits hard. They’ve had to step back from the coalface, away from work relationships and camaraderie. And step up into greater accountability, increased pressure, and increased visibility.
None of that is bad if you’re ready.
It’s overwhelming when nobody prepared you.
Perhaps that’s why nearly 50% of employees are now turning down promotions. They’re watching these unprepared leaders struggle and thinking: not for me.
The numbers are brutal: 60% of new managers fail within the first 24 months, and the same percentage never received training when they transitioned into leadership.
Why We Keep Doing This
Promotions in contact centres are reactive.
UK contact centre attrition rates average 26%, nearly double the national average. It’s an ever-moving feast.
Potential leaders are rarely identified, nurtured, and ready. Most sites don’t have leadership development for when someone gets the job, let alone to prepare them beforehand. I’ve asked senior leaders why this keeps happening. The answers are always the same: “We don’t have time.” “It’s too expensive.” “They’ll learn on the job.” But here’s what they’re not calculating.
Let’s talk about what this actually costs.
Take an average UK contact centre with 150 agents. At 26% attrition, you’re replacing 39 people every year.
Conservative estimates put the cost of replacing a contact centre agent at £5,000 to £8,000 when you factor in recruitment, training, lost productivity, and the impact on team performance. Let’s use £6,000.
That’s £234,000 annually just from agent turnover.
Now add the leadership failure. With 60% of new managers failing within 24 months, and the average contact centre having around 10-15 team leaders, you’re likely replacing 3-4 team leaders every two years. At £15,000-£25,000 per failed team leader (higher salary, longer training, greater operational impact), that’s another £30,000-£50,000 annually.
We’re looking at roughly £280,000 per year for an average-sized operation. And that’s conservative.
That’s before you count the cost of poor customer experience, lost sales, and the ripple effect of untrained leaders on team performance.
Instead of seeking those with leadership capability, organisations look for those who are “great at the day job.”
Being brilliant at handling customers doesn’t automatically make you brilliant at leading people who look after customers.
The Uncompromising Truth
I don’t think anyone is potentially terrible at leading. Unless they’re obviously narcissistic or psychopathic.
Saying someone will be terrible at leadership before they’ve had development is like saying someone is terrible at running before they’ve learned to walk.
People have capability within them. But it needs nurturing.
To be a leader, you have to have development. There is no compromise, no middle ground.
Think about any other profession. Would you promote someone to be a surgeon because they were excellent at taking patient histories? Would you make someone a pilot because they were brilliant at checking in passengers?
Of course not. The skills are fundamentally different.
Not training their teams. Just having the right conversations about the right stuff.
Launch them with a guided conversation template linked to one key behaviour you want to shift. Give them two weeks to have these chats.
Yet in contact centres, we do this every day. We take our best customer handlers and assume they’ll naturally become great people leaders. It’s illogical.
These team leaders aren’t failing because they lack talent.
They’re failing because we’re sending them on a journey without a map, without fuel, and expecting them to find their way.
Then we act surprised when they get lost.
The real question isn’t whether these individuals can lead. It’s whether we’re willing to invest in preparing them properly before we hand them the keys.
There Is a Better Way
Leadership development doesn’t have to be an afterthought.
If you’re ready to start the conversation about preparing your team leaders properly, I’d like to hear from you.
Drop us a line here: ndassociates.co.uk/contact