Conscious Leadership: The 15 Commitments Explained

By Tara Minh · Updated Oct 10, 2026

Conscious leadership is a model from Jim Dethmer, Diana Chapman and Kaley Klemp built on 15 commitments. Each commitment is a choice between two stances: living "above the line" (open, curious, taking full responsibility) or "below the line" (closed, defensive, wanting to be right). The goal is to notice which side you're on and shift on purpose.

The model gets quoted in leadership circles and team offsites, and it's easy to see why. It's concrete, it names behaviors most people recognize in themselves, and it gives a team shared language for conversations that usually go sideways. Below you'll find all 15 commitments, how they're sequenced, how the model compares with other leadership frameworks, a step-by-step way to try it, and a template you can copy.

What is conscious leadership?

The framework comes from the book The 15 Commitments of Conscious Leadership, written by Diana Chapman, Jim Dethmer and Kaley Klemp, and from the work of the Conscious Leadership Group. Penguin Random House's listing describes the book as a way of leading that is open, curious and self-aware rather than reactive or defensive, built from fifteen commitments.

The central distinction is the line. Per the group's own description, each commitment names a choice between two ways of being. Below the line, you live "To Me": at the effect of your circumstances, other people and conditions, closed and wanting to be right. Above the line, you live "By Me": you take radical responsibility for your life exactly as it is, and you stay open and curious. Learning to notice which side you're on is, in their words, where conscious leadership begins.

That's a useful frame because it's behavioral. You don't have to agree with a theory of consciousness to ask a practical question in a meeting: am I defending my position right now, or am I trying to learn something?

Key Facts

Key Facts

• The framework is laid out in The 15 Commitments of Conscious Leadership by Diana Chapman, Jim Dethmer and Kaley Klemp (Penguin Random House).
• Every commitment pairs an above-the-line stance ("By Me") with a below-the-line stance ("To Me") (Conscious Leadership Group).
• The authors group the commitments into four phases: ending drama (1 to 6), investing reclaimed energy (7 to 9), seeing who you really are (10 to 12), and relating co-creatively with the world (13 to 15) (Conscious Leadership Group).
• The authors say they chose fifteen because that is how many they could identify, not because of a statistical or empirical analysis (Conscious Leadership Group).
• The model rests on practitioner experience and coaching, not on controlled studies. Treat it as a set of practices to test with your team, not a proven formula.

The 15 commitments, one by one

Here are all fifteen, paraphrased from the Conscious Leadership Group's list. Each one has an above-the-line version you aim for and a below-the-line version you learn to catch.

How the commitments are sequenced

The order isn't random. According to the authors' own explanation of the structure, the commitments map a journey in four phases.

Phase 1, ending drama (commitments 1 to 6). The first phase is about spotting and reducing drama in yourself and your team. Responsibility, curiosity, feelings, candor, gossip and integrity are the working tools.

Phase 2, investing the energy you get back (commitments 7 to 9). Once drama stops eating your energy, the question becomes where to put it. The authors offer appreciation, your zone of genius and play.

Phase 3, seeing who you really are (commitments 10 to 12). These are the more reflective commitments: questioning your stories, sourcing your own approval, and experiencing enough.

Phase 4, relating co-creatively with the world (commitments 13 to 15). The last three describe how a leader works with others and with the larger system: allies, win-for-all solutions, and becoming the resolution.

For most business teams, phase 1 is where the practical value sits. Gossip, blame and defensiveness are daily problems. Phase 3 asks for a more personal, philosophical kind of work, and it's reasonable for a company to adopt the first six commitments without signing up for the rest.

Above the line vs below the line in practice

The line is a self-check, not a verdict on character. Everyone drops below it, often several times a day. The skill is noticing quickly and choosing to move.

Here are common signals that you're below the line:

• You're rehearsing what you'd say to win an argument instead of listening.
• You're explaining why something isn't your fault.
• You're telling a colleague something about a third person that you haven't told that person.
• You feel a flash of resentment because nobody noticed your work.

And here's what shifting looks like. You pause. You name what you're feeling. You ask a genuine question ("What am I missing here?"), or you say the thing you've been withholding, directly and without spin. The shift is small and visible, which is why it works as a team practice: people can say "I think I'm below the line on this" without anyone needing a seminar.

How conscious leadership compares with other models

The model overlaps with several frameworks you may already use. The differences are mostly about where each one puts the emphasis.

If you're deciding which to use, they aren't rivals. Many teams use a self-awareness exercise, a feedback model for conversations, and the above/below-the-line check for the moment-to-moment stance.

How to apply conscious leadership: step by step

You don't need a retreat to try this. Here's a practical sequence for a team lead.

1. Pick a small slice. Start with commitments 1 to 6 only. Six is plenty for a first quarter.
2. Introduce the line. Explain "above" and "below" in five minutes. Frame it as a tool for noticing, not a score. Be clear that you'll go below the line yourself.
3. Model it first. In your next meeting, say out loud when you notice yourself defending a position. Leaders who do this make it safe for others, which ties directly to psychological safety.
4. Choose one commitment per month. For example, run a month on Gossip: the agreement is that concerns go to the person involved, not around them.
5. Add a check-in. Open weekly meetings with a quick round: where am I on the line today, and what's one thing I'm withholding or blaming?
6. Review and adjust. After a few weeks, ask what changed. Fewer side conversations? Faster decisions? Less rework from unspoken disagreements? Keep what's useful and drop what isn't.
7. Add the next commitment. Move on only when the current one feels routine.

Conscious leadership check-in template

Copy this into your team doc and fill it in at the start of a weekly meeting or a one-on-one.

A short version for a team round: line position, one feeling, one withheld thing, one appreciation. That takes about a minute per person.

Examples by business function

The commitments are general, but the triggers look different in each function.

Sales. A deal slips and the rep blames marketing for weak leads. Above the line, the rep asks what in their own qualification or follow-up they can change (Responsibility, Curiosity). It also shows up in forecasting: candor means saying a deal is shaky instead of padding the number.

Marketing. Campaign results come back below target and the team defends the creative. A curiosity move is to ask what the audience was actually reacting to. A Win for All move is to design the next test so it serves both the brand and the sales team's needs.

Operations. Two teams quietly complain about each other's handoffs. The Gossip commitment turns that into a direct conversation with the other team lead, and Integrity asks both sides to keep the agreements they made about handoff timing.

HR and people. A manager avoids a hard performance conversation because they don't want to feel the discomfort. The Feelings and Candor commitments point at the same move: feel the nervousness, then say the true thing clearly and kindly.

Finance. A budget cycle runs on scarcity: each department hoards headroom. The Enough commitment doesn't tell finance to ignore constraints. It asks leaders to notice when fear of "not enough" is driving decisions that a clear look at the numbers wouldn't support.

Product and engineering. A postmortem turns into assigning fault. The Responsibility commitment reframes it: each person names their own part, no more and no less than 100 percent.

Do's and don'ts

Do:

• Start with your own behavior before asking others to change.
• Use the line as a shared, low-stakes vocabulary ("I'm below the line on this").
• Introduce commitments gradually, one at a time.
• Keep agreements small and specific so you can actually keep them.
• Pair it with practical systems like clear roles and decision rules. Our guide to the five dysfunctions of a team shows how trust and accountability problems often sit underneath missed targets.

Don't:

• Use "you're below the line" as a weapon against someone else. The tool is for self-observation first.
• Treat candor as permission to be harsh. The commitment is to say what is true for you, and to be someone others can be candid with too.
• Expect it to replace strategy, process or good hiring.
• Force vulnerability. If people don't feel safe, they'll perform openness instead of practicing it.
• Claim it's proven. It's a practitioner framework, and you should judge it by what changes on your team.

Strengths and limits

The model's strengths are its specificity and its vocabulary. Fifteen named behaviors are easier to practice than a general call to "be more self-aware," and a shared phrase like "below the line" can shorten difficult conversations.

The limits are worth stating plainly. The authors say they chose fifteen because that was how many they could identify, and the framework is taught through coaching rather than tested in studies. There's no body of controlled research behind the framework as a package. Some of the language (genius, magnificence, consciousness) will feel too abstract for certain teams, and a few commitments, like Feelings and Opposite of My Story, ask for more personal work than many workplaces are set up to support. Adopt what helps, adapt the language, and don't mistake a good practice for a guaranteed result.

If you're newer to the broader landscape, our overview of leadership styles is a good place to see where this fits.