When teams grow from 20 to 80 heads, psychological dynamics shift. Suddenly, invisible barriers block daily operations.
"Nothing runs without me." You wanted to run a company, but now you intercept every operational bullet. Decisions pile up on your desk while your team drifts into dependency.
Marketing shifts blame to Operations, sales works past the product. Instead of open, objective resolution, passive aggressiveness and polite nodding brew. Valuable energy is burned in meetings.
The energy of the first hires fades into a mere task-execution mindset. New hires bring technical competence but block the system due to a lack of alignment.
That is how much rarer groups find the optimal solution when critical knowledge resides only in key individuals. Not because people are incapable, but because groups predominantly discuss what everyone already knows. This finding stems from an analysis of 65 studies covering over 3,000 groups.
No revenue growth, no percentages on your quarterly numbers. Research on team development shows reliable effects on collaboration, processes, and culture. It does not give more than that. Anyone promising otherwise has not read the studies.
Which sources sit behind my work, you can read right now – including the part where I argue against myself.
PDF, 13 pages. Every study with its source, every limitation named. No signup.
When there's friction, founders usually build new Kanban boards, redefine KPIs, or hire another project manager. The result? More bureaucracy, same frustration.
No esotericism, no hand-holding. As an organisational psychologist I make the hidden communication patterns in your team visible. The core is psychological safety: a concept proven since Amy Edmondson's work at Harvard Business School and reinforced by a meta-analysis across 136 samples.
We skip the corporate jargon. I hold an objective but razor-sharp mirror up to you and your team. It may sting initially, and it brings interface friction to a place where you can actually address it.
We change behaviours, not organigrams. The goal: your team takes ownership and you get back the freedom to work on the business instead of in it.
Work it out for your own team. A manager who leaves because the collaboration wore them down: search, selection, onboarding, the context knowledge that walked out with them, and the months the role sat empty. A release that shipped two weeks late because two teams worked past each other. A weekly meeting with eight people in which nothing gets decided.
None of these amounts appear as a line of their own. They show up as staff cost, as a shifted roadmap, and as turnover.
I do not promise you that a Sprint brings that money back. I am telling you the cost is there and that you can work it out before you ever talk to me.
The Sprint is the complete program. If you want to diagnose root causes first, start smaller. If you want your team to run retros independently, wrap up with host training.
You know friction exists, but not where it stems from. Audit, two facilitated retrospectives, an insight report with action steps. And each team leaves with clear next steps.
Diagnosis, resolving friction across teams, and establishing a self-sustaining routine. From initial hypothesis to full handover.
You already run retrospectives, but they yield no results? I train your team members to facilitate retros that drive real change. I am IHK-certified as a trainer.
The diagnosis is the start of the sprint. If you upgrade later, you pay no extra. Training is not part of the sprint, but what comes after it.
I do not bill by the day. You book an outcome, not attendance. The scope sets the price, and what is included is written into the proposal: preparation, analysis, delivery and follow-up.
I am not a classic business consultant, and I don't sugarcoat things. Alongside my psychology studies, I worked for years as an internal Change Agent in the startup ecosystem. There I learned: The most expensive mistakes in scaling do not stem from bad code, but from dysfunctional communication and unresolved blockers at key interfaces.
Today, I combine this in-house practical experience and scientific diagnostics to help growing teams scale smoothly.
Learn more about me →No. This is not psychotherapy. It is strictly about working dynamics, role alignment, communication blockers and the structural friction that puts the business at risk.
Teams under ten people. A conversation between two moves more than a programme there, which is what 1:1 Sparring is for. Companies in the middle of layoffs; alignment work during redundancies is not credible and everyone in the room knows it. Departments inside large corporations. And situations where leadership expects change but keeps itself out of it.
And if a conflict has escalated to the point where it is only about the other side losing, you need mediation, not team development. I will tell you that in the discovery call, before any money changes hands.
Let us spend 20 to 30 minutes on where your team is stuck. Free, confidential and without a sales pitch.
Free, 20 to 30 minutes, no sales pitch. You see my open slots and pick one. No waiting for a reply.
See available slotsIf I am the wrong person for this, I say so in the call.
Rather write first? The contact form lets you describe the situation in your own words. Either way it reaches me personally, and written enquiries get an answer within two working days.