Thousands of professionals across many industries are missing out. Our employers and organizations do not get the best we have to contribute, and our sense of professional fulfillment is limited. Career aspirations turn to frustration. Whether we aspire to top leadership and more management responsibilities, already fill such roles, or simply want to excel at and enjoy our current roles, we all want - and deserve -- to have a meaningful impact in our professional lives and experience the associated sense of accomplishment and connection.

We can wait and hope for wiser managers, more collaborative work environments, or additional support for our professional development, or we can individually choose to take action -- daily. In my work as an executive coach, I have heard from dozens of professionals about the common challenges that hold them back from bringing their best ideas, boldest requests, most valuable talents, and strongest convictions to their work. And when my clients actually do bring their best to the table, their organizations -- or selected stakeholders -- often fail to receive and employ that contribution effectively. Both the value of the contribution and the resulting sense of accomplishment are constrained.

Widening these channels - so that the 'professional flow' of what we give to our work, and what we get from it is not so constricted - is at the heart of coaching. More importantly, it is at the heart of professional success and fulfillment. In partnering with each of my coaching clients, I have accumulated a wealth of ideas and methods that improve that two-way flow of value. The first step for each client is to reframe their challenge in ways that reveal new possibilities. Regardless of a client's specific situation, this framework of giving and getting through a set of professional (interpersonal) channels can be applied to virtually any professional hurdle or goal. The framework's power lies in the breadth of possibilities it presents and in the fact that the individual manager is always in a position from which to act, to be the initiator of a desired change.

This article offers a glimpse at the collective wisdom of scores of professionals on how they find success, day to day, by creating new choices for themselves whenever they feel stuck.

The three examples - or case studies -- that follow touch on such professional imperatives as leadership style, management effectiveness, career management, and emotional intelligence. (This is a small selection from all the learning I have done jointly with inspired and inspiring clients; future writings will address other lessons.) Note that for each scenario presented, I offer a solution that will restore the individual's 'professional flow' and widen the channel of giving and getting to include more effective approaches and achieve desired outcomes. But I believe there are multiple right solutions and next steps for each of these predicaments; the solutions presented simply illustrate the power of creating new choices and are not intended to be prescriptive best practices.

1. For the senior executive who is stuck in his efforts to keep performance standards and staff motivation levels high without draining his own energy:

This executive wants to get (i.e., build) a team of self-motivated, reasonably self-directed experts to figure out how to improve their performance continually in a very competitive industry. He feels he already gives them tremendous guidance in the form of clear processes, tools, mentoring, resources, trust, and his own accessibility. But sometimes, staff anxiety levels rise among this high performing group, due to uncontrollable circumstances, performance swings, and the team members' own 'stories' about their problems. The anxiety clouds their thinking, and they ask for even more support, or more slack. How does the leader respond to this seemingly insatiable need for help, when he wants self-sufficient, confident experts - and when he wants to take pride in the talented team he has personally cultivated? How can he give differently, to get what he wants from his staff in return?

One approach would be for the executive to first reframe those requests for help. This requires a deliberate, disciplined choice. He must choose to let go of (give up) his assumption that their demands of him are (sometimes) unreasonable and even selfish, and that his responses are not appreciated. If he chooses to get some emotional distance from this challenge - by acknowledging that he is not being taken advantage of - then he could re-interpret the anxious requests for help as something more manageable: a need for greater clarity, or the occasional need for empathy from the boss. At challenging times, even the brightest, most talented people, turn to their leadership for a clear vision and reassurance. It is the leader's job to get rid of the noise and negativity that surrounds important goals, and organize the moving parts. This sometimes requires delivering important messages repeatedly - more than a leader would like to - because individual staff may not have the strength of convictions to stay on course on their own.

A second approach this executive could try - concurrently - is to get more specific and make new distinctions among the team members. For starters, if everyone is exhibiting the overwhelmed, needy behavior, perhaps he has truly unrealistically high standards. But if he can make distinctions - and notice who seems to thrive in the environment and who does not - he can try to learn how he personality traits and preferences (as well as skills) of the two groups are different. Can peers help each other more (and give their leader a breather) or agree to 'standardize' the best habits among them? Can the executive tailor his management style to accommodate variations (without going crazy)? Not everyone 'hears' instructions the way the speaker hears himself. Since we are all wired differently, we pay attention to different information and process what we hear differently. This executive cannot and should not psycho-analyze his staff, but he can look for cues that signal the personality differences among them, and experiment as non-judgmentally as possible… Get clear about which specific tendencies and idiosyncrasies of which analysts are affecting performance but addressable.

Finally, one of the most difficult decisions that executives have to make should be put on the table in this situation: Did he make any hiring mistakes that need to be undone? If a manager has been thorough, fair, and supportive in trying to isolate the sources of performance problems and unconstructive work relationships, he may need to accept that the best solution is to let someone go. He may have to give himself a break and conclude he can no longer carry the burden of fixing the problem. And although painful in the short term, letting someone go may be best for the employee as well - since their current position is eroding their confidence, motivation, and development.

2. For the hardworking, high performing mid-level manager who gets praised for her smarts and her output - exceeding expectations - but cannot get the stretch assignments and level of power and influence she desires:

This manager feels stuck at a lower level of contribution, or value, to her company than she feels capable of generating. She wants a seat at the table on more strategic decisions, where her skills and knowledge can have a much greater impact on the top and bottom line. But she is not being invited - despite her efforts to network with the right movers and shakers in the firm. How does she find balance between what she wants to give to her work and the level of authority and influence she gets in return? She feels stuck under some sort of ceiling -whether it is a stereotypical glass ceiling or something else.

So, how can this ambitious professional generate fresh career momentum? One counter-intuitive choice she can create for herself is to start by slowing down. Give herself some slack, and become an observer as well as a do-er. What exactly is she so busy doing extremely well, such that certain of her skills and talents shine in the spotlight and others are hidden from management and hardly used? By slowing down, she can notice what initiatives senior managers care most about and what they may be assuming about her. Is she just reinforcing their view that she is a top notch worker bee, so good at and so motivated by certain tasks that they do not see the upside of giving her higher level responsibilities?

She can also get better informed: probe to understand the company's strategic priorities and perhaps find new ways to employ her skills and interests that are particularly valuable to the business. She can start at the margin - by informally stretching the boundaries of her current position. Sometimes, this is as simple and non-threatening as asking probing questions of colleagues and clients and also sharing (giving) new insights generously via email - without any associated requests of others. She may also offer to serve on cross-functional task forces to get exposure to more manager, and ask to sit in on certain meetings in an area outside her formal responsibilities - to demonstrate her interest and ability to grow her role. (Gender differences around management style is too large a topic to address here but is fertile ground to find other ways this manager can give and get differently.)

On a more personal level, some self reflection would serve this manager well. Is there something about the way she communicates and makes decisions that may be self-limiting? She can ask herself if her natural inclinations and preferences yield some silent assumptions and behaviors that need to be replaced. For example, is her stellar attention to detail clouding out her ability to appreciate the big picture? Does her diplomatic speaking style actually sound apologetic, or otherwise dilute her authority? Such questions revolve around understanding her own hard-wired preferences and non-preferences.

Lastly, does this manager's 'just do it' work ethic leave room to let others feel heard and understood? Maya Angelou made an important observation that applies especially well to aspiring leaders: "People will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but they will never forget how you made them feel." Anyone striving to take the leap from superb individual contributor to promising, respected manager should give more attention to how they make others feel - in unplanned, informal interactions as well as in more structured forums.

3. For the director-level executive who must manage a cross-functional team without formal authority over the members, and without the depth of functional expertise that some key team members bring:

How does a manager -- who is a generalist and lacks direct-report authority - give, or disperse, authority generously enough across a team to empower its members without undermining her own powerbase and decision-making authority? How does she fuel the best talents of the team by giving them sufficient influence and autonomy and still get and sustain the level of control she needs to get her job done? Team members appear to have different levels of skepticism and support about both the team's mission and her approach to leading. They bring little positive energy to team meetings. This manager feels stuck in that collective set of assumptions.

She can try several things to get unstuck and to get everyone on board, bringing their best efforts to the project at hand. But the choices are not all obvious - she must create them. For example, she can break down the 'team dynamics problem' into separate one-on-one relationships, and choose to invest time in meeting with all the difficult team members individually, to give them a reason to trust her by building rapport and finding common, project-related ground. If she directly expresses her trust in and need for each team member, and explains her own role in their language, she can build a collection of stronger one on one relationships, as a foundation for the team building. Alternatively, if there are team members whom she just cannot relate to and who seem set on disliking or distrusting her, she can choose to get "third party help". Specifically, she can meet in trios, where she recruits another member of the team as translator, or mediator. This role would not be announced as such, but the third person - who is understood and trusted by the other two - can soften the interactions, and help the manager articulate common ground.

Another cluster of tactics for this team leader revolve not around individual relationships but around team dynamics collectively. A leader is in a position to give team members many things that they value. Beyond the mutual respect and trust noted above, every high performing team needs clarity about their goals and roles. A strong team leader does not declare the goals in a dictatorial way, but rather crafts and validates them with team input… inviting team members to contribute their insights and knowledge in their own words. This leader must confirm that she has given sufficient group time to clarity-building and sharing of ownership. The quality of that conversation matters as well as the duration, and the leader can set the tone - by modeling behavior that shows it is more important to understand than to be right.

If goals seem understood, but some members are still not engaged, this team leader may need to investigate what signals she has sent: has she invited all members to contribute, or has she - in the words of one leadership development consultant - sent "unintentional disinvitations" via her (judgmental) habits of mind and habits of expression? Since every team member interprets the leader's actions and words through his/her own personal lens, the leader serves the team and its goals most effectively if she uses a mix of communication styles and messages. For example, send meeting agendas in advance for those who like to plan and reflect on their own, provide details and dates for those who do their best thinking around concrete terms, but still remind folks of the big picture and future possibilities (to engage the creative innovators), and offer team checkpoints for those who want to confirm that members feel good about their roles. Such accommodating behaviors may initially make this team leader feel more like a servant than a leader (given her old habits and assumptions), and she may feel that productivity takes a short-term step backwards, but the resulting giant step forward, when she truly engages the capabilities of her team will more than offset the detour.

Which of the three scenarios described above resonates with you? Would more such case studies help you when you are stuck?... I am interested in determining if there is demand for more depth and breadth on the topic of professional contribution and fulfillment and what I term the 'flow' of giving to and getting from our professional lives. Please share your reactions with a reply to: hilaryjoel@wjconsulting.biz .