Could This Get Us In Trouble?
Realistic governance situations, drawn from the pressures leaders actually carry. Choose a response, then see the governance analysis, the consequences that follow, the better options, and the questions worth asking first. Decision Room provides the simulation methodology beneath these leadership questions.
This week’s challenge · two minutes
A senior leader tells council, in an open meeting, that a named employee "needs to go" and asks for support to make it happen this month. There is no written performance record, no investigation, and the employee supervises a program several councillors have publicly criticised. Two councillors nod along.
Make the call →15 scenarios
Council vs Administration
Policy review recommendedA councillor visits the works yard and instructs a crew to reprioritise their week. The crew complies. The CAO learns about it three days later, after a scheduled repair is missed. The councillor believes they were being responsive to a community need.
What would I do? →CEO / CAO
Legal review recommendedThree council members privately believe the CEO is underperforming. Two believe the CEO is being undermined. There has been no performance review in two years, and no written objectives were ever set.
What would I do? →Hiring
Professional review recommendedA senior manager position is being filled. Several members want to sit on the interview panel, citing community accountability. Administration has an approved hiring policy that reserves panels for staff and an external expert.
What would I do? →Procurement
Professional review recommendedA community-owned contractor submits a proposal that scores third of four on the evaluation. A member argues the contract should go to the community business regardless. The procurement policy contains no community-benefit criteria.
What would I do? →Community complaints
Legal review recommendedA community member attends a council meeting and describes, by name, poor treatment by a housing staff member. Several members want to respond immediately. Others want the matter moved out of open session.
What would I do? →Confidentiality
Professional review recommendedWithin hours of a closed session, details are circulating in the community. The information is accurate. Members begin speculating about who shared it.
What would I do? →Social media
Professional review recommendedA community post criticises a housing allocation decision and contains inaccurate figures. A member replies at length, correcting the figures with information from a staff briefing note.
What would I do? →Conflict of interest
Legal review recommendedA member's sibling owns a company shortlisted for a construction contract. The member has not declared a conflict, noting the sibling operates independently.
What would I do? →Housing
Policy review recommendedA family in genuine hardship is twelfth on the housing list. Members are receiving daily calls. The allocation policy is points-based and administered by staff.
What would I do? →Partnerships
Policy review recommendedEighteen months into a joint venture, the partner has changed its project lead twice, milestones have slipped, and the last two steering meetings were cancelled by the partner. Nothing has formally breached.
What would I do? →Governance reform
Policy review recommendedA governance reform package proposes a new committee structure, a revised code of conduct, and a new delegation framework — all to take effect within sixty days, four months before an election.
What would I do? →Election transitions
Professional review recommendedA twenty-year land-use agreement is ready for signature. Two members are not seeking re-election. Administration is asking for a decision before the transition to protect funding timelines.
What would I do? →Spot the Risk
Legal review recommendedA senior leader tells council, in an open meeting, that a named employee "needs to go" and asks for support to make it happen this month. There is no written performance record, no investigation, and the employee supervises a program several councillors have publicly criticised. Two councillors nod along.
What would I do? →Spot the Risk
Legal review recommendedA workplace investigation into a harassment allegation is underway. Only the CAO and council were briefed — in camera. Within a week, the complainant's identity is common knowledge among staff, and a councillor mentions details of the allegations at a community event, believing they were defending the organisation's handling of the matter.
What would I do? →Spot the Risk
Legal review recommendedFrustrated by delays on a housing project, a councillor posts on social media naming the contractor, stating the company "can't be trusted to finish anything," and tagging the funding agency. The contractor's lawyer sends a letter the following week alleging defamation and interference with contractual relations.
What would I do? →After you decide
Your Governance IQ moves with every decision you commit to.
After you score
Every scenario reveals how other leaders answered the same pressure.
After you compare
Send the same scenario to your team and read the divergence.
Ixgena provides governance education, decision-support tools, and leadership intelligence. Ixgena does not provide legal advice, accounting advice, tax advice, employment advice, financial advice, or professional consulting through the platform. Seek qualified professional advice when legal, financial, employment, or regulatory matters arise.