Frequently
asked questions.

When skilled people struggle to collaborate, the cause is rarely just technical.

Organisational factors (such as roles that are not entirely clear, processes that are not aligned or goals that are seen differently) often come into play, together with relational dynamics such as trust, communication or psychological safety.

Typical signs include meetings with little participation, difficulty in bringing forward new ideas, working in silos, or struggling to share problems and mistakes.

Addressing these situations requires a systemic approach: understanding the dynamics at play, working with leaders, creating spaces for discussion and building working agreements that can be put into practice day to day.

A few facilitation meetings and follow-ups are usually needed to consolidate the change.

Although they can be complementary, team building and team coaching follow different logics.

• Team building: a short experience (from half a day to two days) that helps people get to know each other and supports the quality of relationships. It is useful when a team is starting out, going through change or consolidating.
• Team coaching: a programme that develops over time and works on the dynamics that influence collective performance: communication, decisions, conflicts, collaboration and alignment. The aim is to support the team in improving results in a sustainable way.

A team coaching programme can include moments of team building; its main focus remains improving the team’s effectiveness and business results.

So-called generational conflicts rarely depend on age alone. More often they reflect differences in expectations, language, ways of working and the criteria by which professional value is recognised.

In many contexts, established experience and emerging skills live side by side, but risk being seen as alternatives rather than as complementary. On one side there may be people with great experience and knowledge of the organisation; on the other, professionals who bring emerging skills, new perspectives and familiarity with tools and contexts that are evolving rapidly.

It therefore becomes useful to create spaces for structured discussion, to make expectations and needs explicit and to build shared working agreements, recognising the value of different contributions.

Depending on the context, facilitation, team coaching or dedicated workshops can be used.

The adoption of artificial intelligence often meets resistance that is not only technological, but also organisational and personal. Concerns about people’s own role, uncertainty about how to use the tools, or expectations that are not aligned with the change may emerge.

This is why introducing AI requires not only technical training, but also attention to the dynamics that come with change. ImpulsoFuturo has developed the AI Mirror Method™, which works on three dimensions:

• Knowledge: understanding the opportunities and limits of AI tools
• Awareness: recognising individual and organisational reactions
• Ownership: defining ways of using AI that recognise the value of the human contribution

The programme combines training, facilitation, coaching and hands-on experimentation.

The AI Mirror Method™ is ImpulsoFuturo’s proprietary method for supporting organisations and leaders as they adopt artificial intelligence with awareness.

The basic principle is that AI acts like a mirror: it tends to amplify the strengths, vulnerabilities and dynamics that are already present in people and organisations. The method develops through three phases:

• Knowledge
• Awareness
• Ownership

Every engagement starts with a phase of analysing the context, which includes expectations, resistance and initiatives already under way.

The programme can include workshops, coaching, work with teams and the definition of internal guidelines.

These are two different approaches to managing conflict.

• Mediation: a structured process in which a neutral third party helps people reach an agreement that is shared and acceptable to both parties on a specific issue.
• Conflict facilitation: an approach that works on the relational and organisational dynamics that fuel the conflict, with the aim of improving the conditions for collaborating, communicating and dealing with disagreements constructively.

If conflicts are also linked to roles, expectations and ways of working, and not only to the explicit topic of the disagreement, it may also be useful to intervene in the dynamics that generate the disagreement and keep it going over time.

Not every conflict requires an external facilitator, who can be useful when the team struggles to manage tensions on its own and these begin to affect collaboration, climate or results.

Some recurring signs are:

• conflicts that come back over time
• less participation in meetings
• recurring difficulties between functions or groups
• projects slowed down by misunderstandings
• informal communication that never becomes explicit discussion

An external facilitator can offer a neutral view and help make visible dynamics that are already present in the system, but have not yet been clarified and worked through.

Psychological safety is the shared perception, within a team, that it is possible to express ideas, questions or mistakes without fear of negative consequences for relationships.

The concept was developed by Amy Edmondson and has also been explored by organisational research, including Google’s Project Aristotle, which highlighted it as a recurring element in effective teams.

It doesn’t mean the absence of conflict or feeling good together: it means, precisely, being able to face disagreements openly and constructively.

When it is present, it raises the quality of discussion and increases learning, collaboration and innovation.

The level of psychological safety can be measured with validated tools, such as Amy Edmondson’s 7-item scale.

In a few minutes, the survey gives an indication of the average level the team perceives and of how much the answers vary within the team, to see how similarly or differently the people in the team experience it.

The tool is not a conclusive diagnosis. It is rather a starting point for a structured conversation in the team and with leaders, and for monitoring how things evolve over time.

Psychological safety is built over time through consistent behaviour, above all from the people who lead the team.

Some important levers are:

• clarify context and expectations
• encourage everyone to take part
• set an example through openness and transparency
• treat mistakes as an opportunity to learn
• recognise contributions explicitly

People watch a leader’s behaviour more than they listen to their recommendations: if the leader doesn’t speak up, the team is unlikely to. Conversely, if people experience that this behaviour is useful and not penalised, they are more willing to put themselves forward.

Yes, and the evidence is strong. Google’s multi-year research (Project Aristotle) on the factors that make work groups effective analysed more than 180 internal teams and identified 5 factors that predict performance. Psychological safety is the first and the most important: the other 4 (dependability, structure/clarity, meaning, impact) work fully only when there is a solid foundation of psychological safety.

Other research (Edmondson, Harvard 2018) has linked psychological safety to lower turnover, greater capacity for innovation, a reduction in errors reported in time, and better quality of decisions in complex contexts. In medical and aerospace settings there is also evidence of fewer serious incidents.

The PONTE Framework (ponte is the Italian word for ‘bridge’) is ImpulsoFuturo’s proprietary method for supporting sustainable organisational change.

It combines hands-on experience, organisational neuroscience and a systemic approach to develop change in five steps:

• Prepare the ground
• Observe without judging
• Name the unspoken
• Test in practice
• Extend and consolidate

The process also rests on a few cross-cutting principles linked to learning, transformation in small steps and consolidation over time.

A PONTE programme lasts 4 to 8 months on average and aims to make the organisation autonomous in practising change every day.

The 5 phases of the PONTE Framework describe a structured path for supporting organisational change that can last over time.

• Prepare the ground: create the conditions for change by listening to people and understanding expectations, fears and constraints before the work begins.
• Observe without judging: gather information from the organisational context, distinguishing between the explicit problem and the underlying dynamics that influence it.
• Name the unspoken: bring to light tensions, difficulties or things left unsaid that affect collaboration and results, and turn them into something to work on.
• Test in practice: experiment with new behaviours and ways of working in real situations, with concrete, gradual steps.
• Extend and consolidate: make change more stable over time by transferring skills, strengthening practices and setting up internal ways to keep on top of the change.

Several studies, including analyses by McKinsey that are often cited, indicate that a significant share of change programmes do not fully achieve the expected results.

The most frequent causes are not so much technical as organisational and cultural. Among the most recurrent:

• change is sometimes treated as an ‘on/off switch’, without adequate work on the context and on the people involved;
• an alignment is assumed that, in practice, has not yet been built;
• the effort focuses mainly on classroom training, without enough support in day-to-day operations;
• fears about changes of role, status, job security or professional identity are not always addressed explicitly;
• there is a tendency to measure mainly perceptions and statements, rather than the behaviour actually shown in daily work.

When these aspects are not considered systematically, old organisational patterns may tend to reassert themselves, even after structured change programmes.

Coaching often begins in organisations, but it isn’t reserved for managers. In fact, it can be useful to anyone going through any kind of change, or who simply feels the need to stop and reflect more clearly on a phase of their life.

Many people come to coaching because they are taking on new responsibilities, have an important decision to make, want to find their balance again, or feel that the way they have handled certain situations so far needs to evolve.

It isn’t the role that makes the difference. It’s the willingness to understand better what is happening and to choose how to face it.

Coaching and psychotherapy have different goals and areas of work.

Psychotherapy deals with a person’s psychological wellbeing, with emotional difficulties and suffering that may require clinical treatment.

Coaching, on the other hand, supports people who want to develop greater awareness, face a change, make decisions or reach personal and professional goals.

If, during the first introductory meeting, a situation comes up that requires a different kind of support, we will say so clearly. We believe respect for the person comes before everything else.

There is no specific reason or moment to look for a coach’s support.

It can be useful when you feel that carrying on doing things the way you always have no longer helps you.

Perhaps you have a difficult decision to make. Perhaps you are going through an important change. Or you simply want to talk with someone who helps you look at the situation from different perspectives, without telling you what to do.

If you recognise yourself in one of these situations, a first meeting can help you understand whether coaching is the most suitable tool, and whether you are talking to the right person to support you on this path.

Confidentiality is a fundamental principle of coaching.

Everything that comes up during the meetings stays strictly confidential.

This lets you speak freely and explore doubts, fears, ideas and decisions in a protected space, without worrying that what you share will be passed on to others.

Yes.

Many programmes take place online and allow you to work with the same depth as face-to-face meetings.

The format is chosen together, based on the person’s needs and the goals of the programme. In some situations it is possible to alternate online and face-to-face meetings.

The first meeting is a chance to get to know each other.

Its purpose is to understand the situation you are in and the goals you want to reach, and to assess together whether coaching is the most suitable path.

It is just as important for the coach to understand whether they can really be useful to you. If another professional is better suited, we will tell you openly.

Executive coaching is a one-to-one programme of support for leaders, managers and members of the C-suite who work in contexts that are highly complex and constantly changing.

It isn’t based on ready-made solutions, but supports the ability to read situations, explore alternatives and make decisions that are consistent with a person’s own vision.

Through dialogue, reflection and experimenting with new behaviours, coaching encourages an evolution of leadership that can generate results that are sustainable over time.

A programme generally involves 6 to 10 sessions spread over at least six months.

An executive coaching programme generally lasts 6 to 10 months, depending on the goals, the professional context and the needs of the person or the organisation.

Sessions last between 60 and 120 minutes and normally take place every fortnight or once a month. In some cases shorter programmes can also be designed, when the goals are limited in scope.

The investment varies according to the length of the programme, the number of sessions, the management level involved and any additional services.

For this reason, a first introductory conversation is always included, to help define a proposal that fits the context and the goals.

These are three distinct approaches, each useful in different situations.

• Consultancy: the consultant analyses a situation and proposes solutions based on their own expertise and experience. It is particularly useful when technical knowledge or operational guidance is needed.
• Mentoring: the mentor shares their own experience in a specific area, offering guidance and perspectives built up over time. The focus is on passing on experience.
• Coaching: the coach supports a process of learning and change. Through observation and analysis, dialogue and experimentation, they help develop decision-making, relational and organisational capability.

Coaching is particularly useful when the challenges concern leadership, relationships, change or complex decisions. When specific technical skills are needed instead, the support of a consultant or an industry expert may be more appropriate.

Neuroscience-based coaching combines the coaching method with the evidence from neuroscience on how the brain, decision-making and learning work.

It helps to understand how factors such as stress, attention, emotions and the perception of safety influence individual and collective behaviour.

This makes it possible to read the dynamics that emerge in organisational contexts with greater awareness, and to design approaches that are more consistent with the way people learn and make decisions.

The aim is to use this evidence to support leadership, collaboration, learning and performance in a sustainable way.