Clinical Researcher—June 2026 (Volume 40, Issue 3)
NEW E-R-A IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Zoran M. Pavlovic, MD, ACC
The engagement began as a leadership-development request, framed in familiar performance language. Ana (pseudonym), a senior clinical project leader at a multinational pharmaceutical company, sought coaching support after being promoted to oversee several global trials. Her initial goals focused on productivity, stakeholder management, and executive communication. She described herself as “functioning, but stretched,” underscoring the operational complexity of coordinating clinical research associates, meeting regulatory timelines, and leading cross-functional teams.
Although the coaching contract was positioned from the outset within a leadership-development framework, my approach intentionally integrated mental health literacy as a core coaching competence. Mental health literacy comprises the knowledge, attitudes, and capabilities that enable recognition, understanding, and appropriate responses to psychological strain, even when it does not meet the criteria for diagnosable mental disorders (Jorm, 2000; Kutcher, Wei, & Coniglio, 2016). In leadership coaching—particularly in high-pressure environments such as clinical development—this competence shapes how coaches interpret behavior, structure conversations, and calibrate expectations.
Phase 1: Early signals masked as performance issues
During the first three sessions, Ana framed her challenges in operational terms. She described delays, misalignment between medical and regulatory teams, and a growing sense that “everything requires immediate attention.” Her language conveyed urgency rather than distress. However, subtle signals emerged. She struggled to prioritize, had difficulty concentrating in meetings, and reported increasing irritability when interacting with senior stakeholders.
Rather than interpreting these solely as competence gaps, I treated them as potential signals of capacity. Leadership performance is not determined solely by skills and knowledge; it also depends on cognitive, emotional, and physiological capacity (Hobfoll et al., 2018). When capacity is strained, performance variability often precedes overt burnout.
In session four, Ana remarked, “I can still deliver, but it feels like pushing through fog.” This statement marked a turning point. Rather than moving directly to productivity techniques, I shifted the conversation toward awareness. I asked how her energy fluctuated throughout the day, how decision-making felt compared to a year earlier, and what recovery looked like after demanding weeks.
This was not a diagnostic inquiry. The intention was to expand her language to describe her internal experience. In coaching, mental health literacy often begins by helping leaders differentiate among stress, fatigue, cognitive overload, and emotional depletion (Reavley & Jorm, 2012).
Ana began to recognize patterns. She noticed she was postponing difficult conversations, rereading e-mails multiple times before sending them, and feeling “emotionally flat” after major project milestones.
Phase 2: Naming strain without medicalizing
Over the next three months, the coaching focused on building reflective capacity. Leaders often interpret psychological strain as a personal failure or a deficit in competence, especially in performance-oriented cultures (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). My role was to normalize the experience without pathologizing it.
I introduced the idea that sustained regulatory pressure, decision density, and exposure to accountability can gradually deplete attentional and emotional resources. We discussed how chronic stress impairs executive functioning, narrowing attention and increasing reactivity (Arnsten, 2009).
Ana responded with relief. “So this isn’t just me being disorganized,” she said.
Mental health literacy helped us reframe her experience from incompetence to a capacity strain, thereby shifting the coaching trajectory. Instead of focusing solely on leadership behaviors, we began exploring recovery, boundary management, and emotional processing as leadership competencies.
Importantly, I remained transparent about the scope of coaching. When clients present with psychological strain, ethical practice requires clear boundaries between coaching and therapy (Cox, Bachkirova, and Clutterbuck, 2014). Ana did not present with clinical symptoms; she remained functional, motivated, and future-oriented. However, she was operating near the limits of sustainable capacity.
Phase 3: Cognitive overload and decision fatigue
By month five, Ana’s responsibilities expanded further. Two trials entered critical phases simultaneously, and she became the primary liaison to global medical affairs. Her workload increased, but the cognitive burden concerned her most.
“I feel like my brain never shuts off,” she said. “Even when I am home, I am thinking about risk mitigation.”
We examined cognitive load as a leadership risk factor. Decision-heavy roles can create cumulative strain, leading to attentional fragmentation and emotional exhaustion (Kahneman, 2011). Rather than offering time-management tools immediately, I focused on expanding her metacognitive awareness.
We mapped her decision-making ecosystem: high-stakes regulatory choices, operational trade-offs, and people-management dilemmas. This exercise helped her recognize that exhaustion was not a personal weakness but a predictable outcome of sustained exposure to complexity.
Mental health literacy in this phase involved translating neuroscience and stress theory into accessible insights. When leaders understand the mechanisms behind their experiences, shame decreases, and their sense of agency increases.
Ana began experimenting with cognitive recovery strategies: structured pauses before decision blocks, deliberate delegation, and “closure rituals” at the end of workdays. These were not productivity hacks; they were capacity-protecting practices.
Phase 4: Emotional blunting and relational distance
By month seven, a more subtle shift had emerged. Ana reported feeling less emotionally engaged with her team. She remained supportive and responsive, though she described her interactions as “automatic.”
“I am doing everything I should as a leader,” she said, “but I do not feel connected to it.”
Emotional blunting often appears in high-performing leaders before burnout becomes visible (Maslach and Leiter, 2016). From a mental health literacy perspective, recognizing this pattern is critical. It indicates that emotional processing capacity is being suppressed to sustain performance.
We explored her emotional landscape without clinical labels. I asked what had given her a sense of meaning in her work and how that felt now. She reflected on early-career moments—working closely with investigators and seeing trial outcomes translate into patient benefit.
Her current role, in contrast, felt distant from that impact. The conversation shifted from stress management to identity. Leadership strain is not only about workload; it often reflects a misalignment among values, meaning, and role demands (Boyatzis, 2008).
Phase 5: Longitudinal recalibration
The coaching continued for more than a year. What made this engagement longitudinal was not only its duration but also its depth of development. Mental health literacy guided each phase: recognition, normalization, capacity protection, and identity integration.
Ana gradually redesigned her leadership approach. She implemented structured delegation systems, reintroduced regular one-on-one meetings with team members, and negotiated clearer expectations with senior stakeholders.
More importantly, she began treating her internal state as leadership data. Rather than ignoring fatigue or emotional detachment, she used these signals to recalibrate her workload and communication.
At the 10-month mark of the engagement, she said, “Earlier, I pushed through everything. Now I notice when something feels off and adjust before it escalates.”
This statement reflected a shift from reactive coping to self-leadership. Mental health literacy had been operationalized.
Phase 6: The coach’s role as a mental-health-literate practitioner
Throughout the engagement, my role required balancing awareness with restraint. Coaches are not clinicians, yet they increasingly encounter leaders experiencing psychological strain. Mental health literacy enables coaches to recognize patterns without diagnosing, support reflection without pathologizing, and refer appropriately when needed (Kutcher et al., 2016).
In this case, no referral was necessary. Ana maintained functional stability and continued to develop. However, the coaching process consistently included gentle monitoring of changes in sleep patterns, emotional regulation, and cognitive functioning.
Ethical coaching entails maintaining this dual awareness—supporting performance while safeguarding psychological sustainability (Grant, 2014).
Phase 7: Breakthrough through capacity restoration
By the end of the engagement, Ana described a different relationship to her role.
“The work is still intense,” she said, “but it does not feel like it is consuming me anymore.”
Her leadership effectiveness improved not because she acquired new techniques but because she restored her cognitive and emotional availability. Her team reported clearer communication, greater psychological safety, and more consistent decision-making.
From a developmental perspective, the breakthrough stemmed from restoring capacity rather than optimizing performance. When leaders regain attentional, emotional, and reflective space, leadership behaviors naturally recalibrate (Day et al., 2014).
Phase 8: Implications for coaching practice
This vignette illustrates that mental health literacy is a foundational coaching competence in high-pressure environments, such as clinical research organizations. It shapes the coach’s listening, framing, pacing, and intervention choices.
Rather than treating strain as an obstacle to leadership development, mental health literacy treats it as integral to leadership. Leaders do not develop in the absence of psychological load; they develop by learning to recognize, regulate, and integrate strain.
In clinical project management, where uncertainty, regulatory scrutiny, and decision density are constant, this competence is especially critical—coaches who lack mental health literacy risk misinterpreting capacity signals as motivation or skill deficits. Coaches who possess it can help leaders sustain performance while safeguarding psychological integrity.
Ana’s journey shows that leadership sustainability is not achieved through resilience rhetoric alone. It requires awareness, language, and practices that enable leaders to respond intelligently to strain.
Mental health literacy does not turn coaching into therapy. It turns coaching into a psychologically informed developmental practice—one that supports leaders operating at the edge of their capacity while preserving their humanity.
Resources
Arnsten AFT. 2009. Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 10(6):410–22.
Boyatzis RE. 2008. Competencies in the 21st century. Journal of Management Development 27(1):5–12.
Cox E, Bachkirova T, Clutterbuck D. 2014. The complete handbook of coaching (2nd ed.). Sage.
Day DV, Fleenor JW, Atwater LE, Sturm RE, McKee RA. 2014. Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly 25(1):63–82.
Grant AM. 2014. The efficacy of executive coaching in times of organisational change. Journal of Change Management 14(2):258–80.
Hobfoll SE, Halbesleben J, Neveu J, Westman M. 2018. Conservation of resources in the organizational context. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 5:103–28.
Jorm AF. 2000. Mental health literacy: Public knowledge and beliefs about mental disorders. British Journal of Psychiatry 177(5):396–401.
Kahneman D. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kutcher S, Wei Y, Coniglio C. 2016. Mental health literacy: Past, present, and future. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 61(3):154–8.
Maslach C, Leiter MP. 2016. Burnout in the workplace: A review. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 3:397–422.
Reavley NJ, Jorm AF. 2012. Public recognition of mental disorders and beliefs about treatment. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 46(10):946–56.
Zoran M. Pavlovic, MD, ACC, (heruka.innovations@gmail.com; https://www.linkedin.com/in/zoranmpavlovicmd/) is a psychiatrist, executive coach, and leadership development expert with nearly 30 years of experience in clinical psychiatry, psychopharmacology research, and the global life sciences industry. His work sits at the intersection of neuroscience, mental health literacy, and evidence-based coaching, supporting leaders—particularly women—in pharmaceutical, biotech, and healthcare environments to strengthen their leadership capacity, decision-making, and psychological resilience under sustained pressure. He is an ICF-credentialed coach trained at Henley Business School and an active contributor to international coaching and clinical research communities, including the Institute of Coaching at McLean, an affiliate of Harvard Medical School. He is currently offering ACRP members a complimentary strength-based coaching session.
