Alignment is not a leadership skill…it’s about how you live

Alignment, for Cavelle Joseph-St. Omer, is not something you switch on at work and abandon everywhere else.

It governs how she chooses. How she commits. How she decides what gets her time — and what does not. It lives in decisions, in boundaries, and in those moments where ambition could easily override what matters.

There was a moment, she shared, when she had to confront the quiet cost of leadership. Too many family moments missed. Too many birthdays and celebrations sacrificed to responsibility. And so she made a decision that now anchors her: she would not miss another one. Not as an aspiration. As a line she would no longer cross.

That decision now anchors how she leads.

The same clarity shows up in her marriage. Even on Saturdays when work stretches long, she and her husband still go out afterwards. They make the time intentional. Turn the day into a date. Choose connection deliberately, rather than letting professional obligation slowly erode intimacy.

This is Cavelle’s understanding of alignment: not balance as an abstract idea, but coherence across the whole of one’s life.

She describes her mindset as both growth-oriented and abundant — but she does not soften it. She is hard on herself. Constantly self-assessing. Revisiting decisions. Asking what she could have done better. That internal audit runs quietly in the background, and it is not always kind.

Underneath it all is a deeper orientation. Cavelle understands herself as part of the universe — not separate from it. She listens for guidance. She trusts that clarity comes when she creates the space for it. When she needs answers, she goes into nature. Not as a ritual for show, but as a place of remembering.

Because of this, she does not move impulsively. She does not say yes casually. She is deliberate about what she lends her energy to.

Her compass is clear: people development, and particularly the development of women and girls. It is work shaped by lived knowledge of systems that can be deeply patriarchal and unforgiving.

It is why HR was never accidental for her. It was a natural home for someone who sees work not merely as output, but as a site where lives are shaped — sometimes strengthened, sometimes harmed — depending on how power is exercised.

Alignment, scaled

When Cavelle speaks about alignment in organizations, she is precise.

It begins with the individual — with values, purpose, and a sense of why one is here at all. But organizational success, she says, depends on whether people, processes, systems, and strategy are all pointed in the same direction.

When that alignment exists, decision-making changes. Daily choices stop being random. Teams understand how their work connects to the mission. Bottlenecks ease. Conflict reduces. Resources are no longer drained by projects that don’t matter.

And people feel it.

Employee engagement rises not because of perks or slogans, but because individuals can see how their work contributes to something coherent. Morale improves. Efficiency improves. Even customer experience shifts — because dissatisfied employees transmit dissatisfaction, while aligned employees can deliver care and clarity even when the message is difficult.

She is quick to note that alignment is not only about financial outcomes. Sometimes the tangible result is something quieter: being able to sleep well and feeling fulfilled…knowing you made a difference, even if it didn’t come with applause.

When alignment has to be rebuilt

If Cavelle ever needs a living example of alignment in action, she points to HRMATT.

When she stepped into the presidency during the pandemic, the organization was struggling. Finances were tight. Membership was at an all-time low. Engagement had waned. Trust had been bruised by past experiences many members still carried.

What makes this chapter telling is that leadership was never her plan. She didn’t seek the role. In fact, she resisted it, submitting her nomination at the very last moment, after being asked repeatedly. She took the persistence as a signal — something larger insisting.

Once inside, she worked from a simple premise: if HRMATT was to advocate credibly for HR as a strategic partner, it had to embody that truth itself.

The work began with data. With an honest look at membership patterns, disengagement, and unmet needs. One of the early realizations was that the organization had never truly acknowledged that its members were not the same. Consultants, early-career practitioners, seasoned professionals — each occupied a different place in the professional lifecycle, and each needed something different.

Segmentation followed. New offerings. New pathways for participation. A reframing of value that allowed members to see themselves in the organization again.

But alignment did not stop internally.

HRMATT also had to reposition how it showed up externally — with business leaders, policymakers, and the wider ecosystem. That meant being more visible…more flexible, and more intentional about engaging C-suite conversations – creating spaces where HR could be seen not as administrative support, but as a strategic force.

The shift became visible. Energy returned. Enthusiasm followed. Eventually, other associations began replicating what HRMATT was doing.

Cavelle does not romanticize this period. Rebuilding trust was painful. Early rejection was common. People projected old hurts onto new leadership. Grit, she says plainly, was required.

But the alignment held.

Red flags don’t whisper

Cavelle does not struggle to identify misalignment. She sees it constantly.

It often begins with communication breakdown. People not talking. Not sharing. Not understanding why decisions are being made. Trust erodes quickly in that silence.

Then come the signals: repeated turnover in specific departments, absenteeism, rising grievance reports. A culture of blame where mistakes are punished instead of examined. Meetings where no one speaks, followed by corridor conversations full of what was never said aloud.

Psychological safety, she says, is often
the first casualty.

More dangerous still is leadership hypocrisy.

Leaders who speak eloquently in public but behave very differently inside their organizations. Values proudly displayed on websites while employees experience fear, disrespect, or ethical compromise. Integrity preached while dishonesty is practiced. Respect celebrated while staff are humiliated.

That disconnect sends mixed messages — and shapes behavior in destructive ways.

She adds a red flag that many underestimate: meetings with no purpose. No agenda. No decisions. Hours lost to talk without direction, leaving people frustrated and behind before the real work even begins.

Course correction is not glamorous

Cavelle’s approach to correction is grounded, not flashy.

It begins with re-establishing goals and values clearly — and communicating them consistently. Alignment must be modeled, not announced. Leaders must behave in ways employees can actually observe.

Psychological safety must be rebuilt so people can speak without fear of reprisal. Positive, aligned behaviors must be recognized and celebrated publicly. Not performatively — but genuinely.

And then the organization must measure what matters. Not only financial performance, but people indicators: engagement surveys, exit interviews, performance patterns, absenteeism. Alignment is not static. It requires adjustment.

A word for outcome-obsessed leaders

Cavelle is candid about the cultural context she operates within. Trinidad and Tobago still carries deeply ingrained, patriarchal, top-down leadership traditions — especially in large, legacy organizations.

• Command-and-control.
• Fear as authority.
• Obedience mistaken for loyalty.

Her position is unambiguous: leaders who focus only on outcomes and numbers are missing the system producing those results.

Financial statements matter. But they are incomplete.

Culture leaves fingerprints on performance. Engagement affects brand reputation. Retention reflects leadership health. Younger professionals, in particular, will not remain loyal to environments that drain them, regardless of compensation.

Looking beyond percentages, she argues, is no longer optional.

Developing people without
shrinking them

Cavelle’s leadership style with individuals and teams is consistent with everything else she believes.

With mentees, development begins with reflection. Regular conversations that function like self-audits: identifying gifts, passions, aspirations, and patterns. Examining past successes. Deciding what to carry forward — and what to leave behind. Feedback is frequent. Tools are practical. Insight is translated into structure.

With teams, she observes before intervening. Distinguishes patterns from one-off moments. Meets people one-on-one. Coaches rather than controls.

She delegates real responsibility — even when it means watching someone struggle — because learning requires space. She steps in at the right moment, not the first moment. Afterwards, she debriefs: what worked, what didn’t and what to do differently next time.

Failure is not weaponized. It is examined.

She is intentional about not micromanaging, because she refuses to say one thing and model another.

Support, direction, accountability — all present. Ego absent.

Coherence, not performance

What emerges, when you sit with Cavelle’s leadership philosophy long enough, is coherence.

• Between values and action.
• Between personal life and professional posture.
• Between what she says publicly and what she practices privately.

In a landscape crowded with leaders who know how to sound good, Cavelle Joseph-St. Omer is a reminder that alignment is quieter — and far more demanding.

• It shows up in what you refuse.
• In what you protect.
• In how you lead when no one is clapping.

And in that coherence, people — and organizations — begin to find their footing again.