Thinking in the Midst of Chaos: How reflective practice becomes a way of working in complex organisations

Recently, I caught up with one of our Masters alumni, Laurette, to reflect on the work we had done together over a number of years of coaching and then through NIODA’s professional development subscription.

What struck me most in the conversation was not any single insight, but the way her learning had become integrated in its application. It had simply become how she works.

When Laurette and I first sat together for coaching, she had recently been made redundant from a senior project management role in a large, multi-layered wholesale and retail distribution organisation. At the time, the experience was deeply unsettling. Alongside the practical implications sat a complex mix of feelings: resentment towards particular individuals, general disappointment and uncertainty, as well as questions about what redundancy meant for her professional identity.

We met fortnightly as she worked through the last months of her role and through these conversations, she was able to make sense of the experience. Rather than rushing into the process of finding another role, she chose to take stock. With the space afforded to her, she focused on her Masters studies and reflected more deeply on what she wanted from her work.

In time, she was invited to return to the same organisation, initially on a contract for a complex project management role, and then into a larger, transformation role across multiple projects and areas of the business. She found herself working closely with executive leadership, reporting to the CFO, and increasingly being asked to take on projects that others found difficult. The CEO would give her “pet projects,” trusting that she would deliver while also bringing others along.

We reflected on the shift in how she was valued in the organisation — from redundant to ‘go to’. Laurette was clear that this shift was not accidental. She attributed it to what she had learned through the NIODA Masters, and her growing capacity to apply that learning in practice.

Creating Space to Think

Not long after stepping back into this organisation for the second time, Laurette became a NIODA professional development subscriber. Over the next two years, we met monthly for 90 minute sessions, which she saw as a sensible investment, ensuring the learning of the Masters would continue to increase in value. Not strictly coaching or Organisational Role Analysis, but meeting a need for regular, reflective sensemaking.

When we spoke recently, she described those sessions simply as:

“Clear space to think through what felt like chaos at work.”

Each session created a pause, an opportunity to step out of the immediacy of organisational demands and reflect more deeply on what was happening, both in the system and in her role within it.

Working Beneath the Surface

We would think together about the dynamics she was encountering. At times, this involved working with drawings Laurette had created in advance, abstract, often amorphous images that emerged from sitting with a specific question about an issue that had arisen at work, and allowing something less conscious to take shape. We use drawing in many of the subjects we teach in the Master’s. Not all our students and clients take to it as a method for accessing more deeply held aspects of their experiences at work. For Laurette this way of working feels both creative and efficient. The process of sitting with the uncertainty of what has emerged on the page, gently probing for meaning, allows more and deeper insights than just talking, although we did a lot of that too.

At other times, she brought dreams, which we explored not as personal interpretation, but as another way of understanding what might be happening below the surface of the organisational system. A few times we also used Laurette’s somatic awareness, stopping to feel what her body could tell her about her experience of the workplace; a way of working that I am exploring in my PhD research.

What mattered was not the artefact itself, but the thinking it enabled.

Through these conversations, insights emerged that informed how Laurette approached her work: how she handled difficult conversations, when she chose to step forward and take authority, and when it was more useful to step back.

Making Sense Through Metaphor and Paradox

She also found that working with metaphor became a powerful way of engaging others in the projects she was working in. ‘Organisations and management through the art of metaphor’ is one of the first subjects we teach in the Master’s and it provides a wonderful overview of management theory whilst demonstrating the power of metaphor in shared meaning making and thinking through complexity. Laurette enjoyed this subject and continues to use the method it taught her. In high-pressure situations, where teams were struggling to make sense of what was happening, metaphors created understanding without relying on abstract or technical language; very handy when working with team members from different disciplines, trying to communicate across a technical language divide.

At one point, the metaphor of Siamese twins gave the project management and IT teams Laurette was working with a way of grappling with the interdependence at the heart of a new point-of-sale system design, and what was at stake if that relationship was not handled carefully. Another time the metaphor of the solar system became central to the way Laurette pitched projects aimed at creating reliable shared data repositories.

When we reviewed our work together, another important part of Laurette’s development that we noted was her growing capacity to sit with uncertainty.

Rather than being caught up in maintaining punishing or unrealistic timelines that were inevitably mired by unexpected contingencies, she became more able to pause and ask what a delay might mean. What was happening in the system that had led to this point? What might this moment be making possible?

She described this as learning to “stay in the grey”, to resist the pull toward immediate action, blame, or certainty, and instead remain curious. This is known as ‘negative capability’, a term coined by the poet John Keats and borrowed by Wilfred Bion, whose work underpins many of the foundational concepts in systems psychodynamics. Laurette became comfortable, capable of “not knowing” and waiting for a way forward to become clearer.

By contrast, she could see how quickly others around her moved into reaction: tightening control, attributing fault, or pushing harder to meet plans that no longer made sense. Influenced by ideas encountered in the Masters — including the work of Ralph D. Stacey — she came to see organisational life as inherently emergent. Plans remained useful, but only if held lightly, with the capacity to adapt as conditions changed. Part of this is greater comfort with paradox. Rather than trying to resolve competing demands, Laurette had become more able to hold them, to work with both/and rather than either/or.

Translating the Learning into Practice

Our sessions were an opportunity for her to continue to engage with the language of systems psychodynamics. Like many of our students and graduates, she encountered the challenge of translating this way of thinking into language that could be understood — and valued — within her organisational context.

Her solution was pragmatic.

She began to use what she described as “risk language” to convey key ideas. Rather than speaking about the need to “contain anxiety”, she would frame concerns in terms of risks to wellbeing or performance. In doing so, she retained the underlying thinking while making it accessible and relevant to her colleagues in language that cut through with her work colleagues and management.

Over time, much of this learning became integrated into how she took up her role. As she reflected, her understanding of key ideas from the course like anxiety, social defences, and containment is no longer something she has to think about applying; rather, it has become part of how she sees and responds.

One idea she highlighted was the importance of maintaining what Wilfred Bion described as a kind of “binocular vision”, holding attention simultaneously on the individual and the system. This, she said, helped her not to take things personally. In environments where tensions can easily become personalised, that capacity created space. It allowed her to stay engaged and thoughtful, even when others were caught up in emotional reactions.

The Cost — and the Choice to Leave Well

This role and the way she was taking it up, in a new way, was not, however, without cost.

The work remained intense: high stakes, long hours, with ongoing restructuring and uncertainty. Over time, I became concerned about the toll it was taking, particularly as Laurette experienced a series of respiratory illnesses.

At one point, I asked a simple question: how long could this continue? Was this what she wanted?

That question marked a shift.

Rather than simply enduring the demands of the role, Laurette began to think more deliberately about her longer-term direction. Over time, this led to a carefully managed exit at the end of her contract, despite strong encouragement to stay on.

She left intentionally. There were no burned bridges, only a track record of well-executed work and strong relationships. Importantly, she left before reaching burnout, which had been a very real possibility.

What This Work Makes Possible

Reflecting on our work together, Laurette noted something that stayed with me. She had come to see that chaos is not necessarily a problem to be eliminated. It is something that can be worked with.

But only if there is space to think.

For me, the work with Laurette was equally valuable. It offered insight into an organisational context very different from my own experience. My role was not to provide expertise in her industry, but to think alongside her, to listen closely, to ask questions, and to remain open to what might be emerging.

At times, this meant paying attention to metaphor, to what came to mind, or to what was felt in the body, possible signals of dynamics that were not yet fully articulated. This is part of a psychodynamically informed approach to coaching and consulting: working not only with what is said, but with what may be communicated indirectly, through image, feeling, or association.

I really appreciated our review conversation. What it brought into focus is something we see often, but do not always name.

Learning of this kind is not simply about acquiring knowledge. It is about developing a capacity for thinking that can be sustained over time, in the midst of real organisational demands.

That capacity is not developed in a single moment. It is built through ongoing reflection, through the opportunity to think with others, and through the gradual integration of ideas into practice.

And once integrated, the learning becomes less visible, but more powerful.

It becomes part of how the work is done.