You Know What’s Happening. But Do You See What’s Coming?
Sales are down. A dependable employee has stopped contributing in meetings. A customer who used to order every month has gone quiet.
You can explain each one. You have the numbers, the notes, and the latest update.
But what do those changes mean for the decision you need to make next?
A leader can be well informed and still get caught off guard. Knowing the current condition is not the same as recognizing where it may be headed.
That gap deserves more attention than another status meeting.
Gathering information is only part of the job
A 2026 study by Katherine Jane Lamb, Cecilia Hammar Wijkmark, and Ian Greatbatch examined incident-command competence across 43 UK fire and rescue services.
The researchers analyzed assessment data spanning four command levels. The data included formal exercises, real-incident monitoring, and structured training events.
Their findings showed a recurring distinction: commanders generally demonstrated strengths in gathering early situational information, while anticipation, communication, and risk assessment were less consistent, particularly among less experienced commanders.
Novice commanders tended to rely more on procedural checklists. Experienced commanders demonstrated more intuitive, adaptive decision-making. The authors pointed toward differentiated training informed by demonstrated performance, rather than treating every commander’s development needs as the same.
This was research about fire-service command, not business leadership. It did not test an EndoDyne exercise or establish that a particular coaching method improves business results.
But it raises a useful question for anyone responsible for people and performance:
Are you collecting information to describe the situation, or using it to prepare for what could happen next?
The report can be accurate while the response is late
Consider a business that has missed its sales target for three months.
The leader knows the numbers. Every week, the team reports activity, open proposals, and expected closing dates. Everyone can explain where things stand.
What nobody has examined closely is that customers are taking longer to decide. More proposals now require a second approval. Buyers are asking smaller questions about price and bigger questions about whether they should spend at all.
The sales decline is the result they can already measure. The change in buying behavior may be the signal they need to understand.
Another activity report will not necessarily help them see it.
Or consider an employee whose work is still getting done, but whose behavior has changed. They no longer volunteer ideas. They contribute less in conversations where they used to be engaged.
That does not prove they are disengaged or preparing to leave. There may be an explanation you have not heard.
It does give you a reason to ask a better question before a missed deadline or resignation forces the conversation.
Anticipation is not assuming you know what people are thinking. It is noticing a change, considering what it could mean, and checking your interpretation.
Experience helps, but it does not end the need to check
A checklist can help someone learning a role remember what to consider. There is nothing weak about using one.
The problem comes when completing the checklist becomes a substitute for understanding the situation.
The same risk exists with experience. Recognizing a familiar pattern can help a leader respond quickly. It can also tempt that leader to decide that this situation must be the same as the last one.
“This always happens this time of year.”
“They just need more accountability.”
“That customer does this every time.”
Maybe. What evidence would tell you this time is different?
The research points toward training that responds to demonstrated strengths and weaknesses. For business leaders, I would apply that principle by looking at the decisions a person actually makes, not simply how long they have held the title.
A newer manager may need a clear sequence of questions and repeated practice. An experienced leader may need someone willing to challenge an assumption they no longer notice making.
Neither benefits much from training that ignores how they perform.
The EndoDyne Anticipation Drill
I would start with three questions. Use them on a real issue your team can examine without turning the exercise into another long meeting.
1. What changed?
Identify the signal, not just the current condition.
“Sales are below target” describes where you are.
“Customers who previously decided within a week are now taking three weeks and involving another approver” identifies a change worth examining.
Be specific about what you observed. Separate the observation from your explanation.
An employee speaking less is an observation. An employee no longer caring is an interpretation. If you confuse the two, you may act confidently on something you have not established.
2. What could happen next?
Name a plausible consequence and the assumptions behind it.
If buying decisions keep taking longer, what happens to the cash you expected next month? If one person continues carrying the work of two roles, where might the strain appear?
Do not turn this into a competition to imagine the worst outcome. The purpose is to prepare for a reasonable possibility.
Ask what supports your expectation, what remains unknown, and what other explanation deserves consideration.
You are not trying to predict the future with certainty. You are trying to avoid acting as though the current situation will stay still.
3. What would tell us to act?
Establish an observable trigger and name the person responsible for the decision.
“We’ll keep an eye on it” leaves too much unresolved.
A more useful agreement identifies what the team will watch, when it will review the information, and who owns the next call.
That might mean reviewing a particular customer segment when decision times pass an agreed threshold. It might mean scheduling a conversation now rather than waiting for an employee’s performance to deteriorate.
Not every signal requires immediate intervention. Some require a question, a closer look, or a deliberate review point.
The team should understand the difference.
Say what you expect, not just what you decided
Anticipation loses much of its value if it stays in the leader’s head.
Your team may know the plan without knowing the reasoning behind it. They may not know which assumption matters most or what new information should interrupt the work.
Before moving on, explain:
“We’re taking this approach because we believe this is happening. If we see something different, bring it forward. This person owns the decision, and this is when we’ll review it.”
That gives people a way to contribute without making every choice a group vote.
It also makes the decision easier to review. You can compare what you expected with what actually happened, rather than rewriting the explanation afterward.
Practice the part you keep missing
The Anticipation Drill is a proposed EndoDyne coaching exercise, not a method validated by this study.
To find out whether it is useful, we need to observe more than whether people enjoy the discussion.
Did they identify a meaningful change? Did they separate facts from assumptions? Did they establish a usable trigger? When new information arrived, did they reconsider the decision?
Those are behaviors we can examine and practice.
If a leader gathers information well but struggles to anticipate consequences, give them practice doing that. If they recognize the risk but fail to communicate it, work on making the reasoning clear. If they make a sound initial decision but never revisit it, build in the review.
Development should address the gap that shows up in the work.
Bring more than an update
At your next team meeting, choose one issue that keeps appearing in the report.
Before asking for another explanation of where things stand, ask:
What has changed, what could that mean, and what would tell us to act?
You may discover that the team already sees more than the report contains.
The next step is helping them turn what they notice into a decision someone owns.
Explore EndoDyne leadership workshops and coaching or talk with Jeff about a leadership challenge your team is facing.
Research source
Lamb, K. J., Hammar Wijkmark, C., and Greatbatch, I. (2026). “Incident command competence in UK fire and rescue services: characterising patterns to guide training and development.” International Journal of Emergency Services.
Research summary is based on the publicly available abstract. The business examples and EndoDyne Anticipation Drill are applications proposed here, not findings directly tested by the researchers.