Last night in a coaching session a client described a meeting that bothered them all day. Nothing dramatic had happened; no one raised their voice or said anything inappropriate. On the surface, it was a perfectly normal conversation. And yet they left with the distinct sense something was off.
As we talked it out, the issue became clearer… not one obvious problem but a series of smaller cues. The answers were polished but oddly slippery, and while the questions were acknowledged, nothing was fully answered. There was a strong push to move forward before anyone examined the weak spots. By the end, everyone had technically participated, but the real decision seemed to have been made three exits earlier.
That is a very familiar workplace experience.
We talk as though good judgment is always slow, deliberate, and fully explainable. But in reality, people are often registering far more than they can articulate in the moment. Tone, timing, pattern, omission, history. Our minds quietly collect evidence while the rest of us is nodding along like a reasonable adult.
And that early read can be useful, it helps you catch risk sooner and notice when a “small change” is about to become a part-time job. It helps you recognize when a discussion is performative OR when a concern deserves a second question, or perhaps a third, depending on how dedicated the group is to revealing the real challenge behind the challenge.
But instinct is not the same as accuracy.
Sometimes what feels like insight is actually stress, old experience, or plain exhaustion. If you have worked long enough, there is a real chance your internal alarm system now reacts to the phrase “quick sync” like a clown reacts to a deflating balloon: immediately, intensely, and with a level of dread that feels oddly personal.
So, the lesson is not “always trust your gut” OR “ignore your reaction until you can produce a pie chart.” The better approach is this:
Pause. Name what you noticed.
Test it. Ask yourself:
– What specifically felt off?
– What facts support that feeling?
– What else could explain it?
– What question would give me better information?
That is the takeaway.
When something feels wrong at work (or IRL for that matter), do not dismiss it just because you cannot explain it instantly. But do not promote it to truth without evidence either.
Respect the signal.
Then investigate it.
This is not the time to declare Colonel Mustard did it in the conference room with a budget slide when you are still missing half the cards.
In the coaching conversation, that shift mattered. Once my client stopped asking, “Why am I reacting like this?” and started asking, “What exactly am I picking up on?” the situation became much easier to assess.
That is where better judgment lives. Observation followed by inquiry.
So, tell us, what is a time you sensed something early at work and later realized you were either exactly right, or completely wrong?
