Leadership as Foraging: A Guide to Navigating New Territory

I had a fascinating conversation with Dr. Gaynel Nave, NMD, BSc, of FullJoy Wellness, during my Planting Progress webinar on October 16, 2025. Dr. Nave, trained as a naturopathic physician with a concentration in psychoneuro-endocrinology, shared what she learned in medical school about foraging for herbs and plants in the wilderness. As she described the methodical process of testing unknown plants, I couldn't help but see a powerful metaphor for leadership.

Here's the foraging protocol she shared:

1. First, smell it. What information does the fragrance give you? Does it seem inviting or does something feel off?
2. Second, rub a small piece on your skin and wait. Do you have a reaction? What kind? Your body is giving you data.
3. Third, take a tiny bite, chew it, and spit it out. Again, monitor for reactions.
4. Finally, take a bigger bite. If you don't get sick, you know it's safe to eat.

Of course, the experienced forager has done their research first—they're not going in completely blind.

The Leadership Parallel

When we step into a new leadership role or launch a new project, we're essentially foraging in unfamiliar territory. The temptation is to dive in fully, implementing sweeping changes or committing significant resources before we truly understand the environment.

But what if we approached it like a forager?

Smell it first. Before making any moves, observe. What's the culture like? What are people saying in informal conversations? What does your intuition tell you about the team dynamics or market conditions? Research on leadership transitions emphasizes that successful new leaders use their first 90 days to listen, learn, and observe before implementing major changes—those who rush into action too quickly often create "vicious cycles" that undermine their ultimate success.

Test on the surface. Introduce small pilots or trial initiatives. Float ideas in one-on- ones. Make minor adjustments and watch carefully for reactions. How does the team respond? What resistance or enthusiasm emerges? Studies show that pilot programs are essential for testing new initiatives in a controlled environment, allowing leaders to identify potential challenges, gather feedback, and refine approaches before full implementation.

Take a small bite. Implement something slightly more substantial. Launch a beta version. Try the new approach with one team before rolling it out company-wide. Chew on the feedback and reassess. Research confirms that well-selected and well- conducted pilots create strong commitment to change in managers and translate into willingness to champion the initiative within their organizations.

Then commit more fully. Only after you've tested at increasing scales—and confirmed you're not about to poison the system—should you roll out major changes or make irreversible commitments. This incremental approach aligns with research showing that continuous incremental organizational change, when properly managed, leads to improved employee performance.

The Value of Incremental Testing

This isn't about being timid. It's about being wise. Experienced foragers can identify many plants on sight because they've built knowledge over time. Similarly, seasoned leaders develop instincts about what will work. But even they test first.

The leaders who succeed in new environments are often those who resist the pressure to "make their mark" immediately. They observe, they experiment, they learn from small reactions before making big bets.

When the Plant Is Poisonous

Here's the harder truth: sometimes you test and discover the plant is toxic. You get a reaction at the skin level, or the small bite makes you ill. In leadership terms, you try a small change and the resistance is overwhelming. You pilot a new approach and it fails despite good execution.

The forager knows what to do with a poisonous plant: don't eat it. Move on.

In leadership, this means recognizing when a team member isn't going to change, when a system is fundamentally broken and can't be incrementally improved, or when the culture is so resistant that your initiative—no matter how good—won't take root.

Research on resistance to change reveals that opposition can stem from factors including fear of the unknown, loss aversion, and disruption of established habits. While some resistance can be overcome with proper communication and support, studies show that persistent, overwhelming resistance—especially when it appears early in testing phases—often signals that an initiative is fundamentally incompatible with the organizational context.

This reality can be particularly acute for women leaders and leaders of color. Research suggests that women leaders often face a "double bind"—the same assertive behaviors that signal strong leadership in men can diminish perceptions of likeability in women,

creating a lose-lose scenario where competence comes at the cost of being well- regarded.

For leaders of color, the challenges compound: they face what researchers call the "minority tax" of disproportionate service requirements, invisible labor, and inequitable evaluation processes. Recent research identified four key challenges experienced by faculty of color: invisible service, lack of opportunities for leadership roles, inequitable evaluative processes, and departmental climate. Black female leaders, navigating intersectional barriers, frequently must embrace higher risks to counter invisibility, yet face costly barriers to success.

The foraging metaphor holds dual significance here. First, incremental testing becomes even more critical when you face environments that may judge your initiatives more harshly or hold you to different standards. Small tests provide data that can protect you from overcommitting to initiatives that will face disproportionate resistance. Second, knowing when the plant is poisonous—when to stop pursuing an initiative or even when to leave an environment that consistently rejects your leadership—is not failure. It's wisdom. Recent research on women of color in leadership reveals that structural barriers including anti-Blackness, institutionalized patriarchy, and performative diversity initiatives create environments where even excellent leaders can’t thrive.

The testing protocol doesn't just tell you what's safe to consume. It also tells you what to leave behind. Organizational change research consistently shows that a significant percentage of change initiatives fail, often because leaders don't recognize early warning signs or abandon efforts that were never viable in the first place. The most successful change leaders understand that knowing when to stop pursuing an unworkable initiative is as important as knowing when to push forward. Sometimes the most important leadership decision is knowing when to stop trying to make something work and instead find nourishment elsewhere.

What's your approach to testing new initiatives? Do you have a "foraging protocol" that's worked well for you?

This post draws on research from organizational leadership, change management, and diversity in leadership. For those interested in the scholarly foundations, the full reference list is below.

References