By Dr. Angela Sanders, Plant Manager, CertainTeed 

What leadership lesson took you the longest to learn in your career, and how has it influenced how you lead today? 

For much of my career, I “grew up” in the industry by being hands-on. I moved through different functional departments, learned different roles, and picked up enough experience to jump into almost anything and get it done. At the time, that versatility felt like a strength—and honestly, it was. It helped me succeed, it helped teams around me succeed, and it taught me the business from the ground up. 

But as I stepped into bigger leadership roles, I realized something important:
The same strengths that got me here could hold my team back if I wasn’t careful. 

Because when you’ve done so many different jobs yourself, the temptation is always there to step in, roll up your sleeves, and just do it. It’s faster. It’s familiar. And sometimes it feels easier than coaching someone through it. 

I’ll admit there was a point where I took on too many responsibilities—not because I didn’t trust my team, but because I knew I was capable. What I didn’t realize at the time was that being capable wasn’t the point anymore. My job wasn’t to be the one doing everything. My job was to make sure my team was capable, confident, and fully empowered to lead their own areas. 

That took me a while to learn. And truthfully, it’s something I’m still learning every day. 

Delegation isn’t about handing off tasks. It’s about handing over ownership. It’s about giving people the room to stretch, make decisions, solve problems, and sometimes even stumble—because that’s how they grow. When I step back, it gives them the space to step forward. And when they take that step, they become stronger, more independent, and more invested in the results. 

What I’ve discovered is that truly effective leadership isn’t measured by how much I can do.
It’s measured by how much my team is able to do without me. 

So I continue to practice this:
– Coaching instead of doing.
– Guiding instead of taking over.
– Delegating not because I have to, but because it’s what helps people develop. 

It’s not always easy. Old habits die hard. But watching my team grow into leaders themselves makes the effort worth it every time. 

How do you balance decisiveness with empathy when guiding teams through uncertainty or major change? 

One of the most difficult chapters in my leadership journey came during a recent business downturn. Over time, more than half of the workforce under my leadership was laid off—over 150 people from peak operations to the final shutdown. No amount of experience prepares you for something of that magnitude. It forces you to confront leadership at its most human level. 

During that period, I learned how challenging it is to be decisive while also maintaining deep empathy—especially when you don’t personally agree with the decisions being made or the pace of change being dictated. As leaders, we’re often expected to stand firmly behind decisions we didn’t create. And that requires stepping back, looking at the broader business perspective, and separating personal feelings from organizational necessity. 

But what I refused to separate was empathy. 

When people hear news that impacts their livelihood, their first reaction is emotional—fear, anger, confusion, grief. That’s natural. It’s human. And in those moments, how we deliver the message matters just as much as the message itself. 

My approach has always been rooted in transparency. I believe in sharing the reality clearly and directly, without hiding behind vague language or corporate phrasing. People deserve to know what’s happening. They deserve honesty. And they deserve the space to process what they’ve just heard before being expected to absorb details or next steps. 

I’ve found that after the initial shock settles, most people come to understand that the decision is not personal, it’s a business reality, not a reflection of their value or performance. And if they’re treated with genuine kindness and compassion throughout the process, the transition becomes less traumatic. It doesn’t erase the difficulty, but it creates dignity. It creates trust. And it reinforces that even in the hardest moments, leadership doesn’t have to lose its humanity. 

That experience taught me that leading through a downturn isn’t about delivering the perfect message. It’s about delivering it with integrity. It’s about honoring people as they navigate some of the hardest news they’ll ever receive. And it’s about balancing the weight of business decisions with the responsibility we have to the people behind them. 

It’s a lesson I’ll carry with me for the rest of my career. 

What strategies have you seen work best for turning digital transformation into measurable business impact? 

One of the most effective strategies I’ve seen in developing digital and automation technology is simple but often overlooked: fully communicating the “why” behind decisions and being candid about the details. 

Any time new technology enters the workplace—especially automation—people naturally worry about what it means for their jobs. I’ve seen teams jump to worst-case assumptions, and I understand why. Change can feel threatening, and uncertainty fills in the gaps we fail to address. 

That’s why I believe leaders have a responsibility to shape the narrative early and honestly. The reality is that automation and digital tools aren’t about replacing people. More often, they’re about enabling people to be more productive, increase output and capacity, and ultimately help the business win more work and grow market share. But none of that is obvious unless we explain it. 

Digital transformation isn’t just a technical shift—it’s a mindset shift.
And that shift starts with understanding. 

When I talk with teams, I focus on showing how digitization upgrades the operator’s job: 

• It removes tedious, repetitive manual tasks that add little value. 

• It reduces opportunities for errors and improves quality and consistency. 

• It allows operators to focus on higherskill, higherimpact work. 

• It creates safer, cleaner, and more efficient working environments. 

In other words, their jobs don’t become smaller; they become more meaningful. 

People want to feel secure, valued, and informed. When we communicate openly—when we explain not just what is changing but why—the fear subsides, and the conversation shifts. Instead of resistance, you start to see curiosity. You see engagement. You see people leaning into the possibilities instead of bracing against them. 

To me, that’s what successful digital transformation looks like: technology that elevates people, and leadership that brings them along every step of the way. 

What unique challenges do women face in manufacturing today, and what practical actions can organizations take to better support and retain female talent? 

Throughout my 20+ years in manufacturing, I’ve seen firsthand how far the industry has come—and how far it still has to go—when it comes to supporting women. Manufacturing has historically been shaped by decadesold mentalities, and many of those legacies still show up today. One of the most visible signs is the ongoing imbalance in representation. In every organization I’ve been part of, the gender split has hovered around 70/30, male to female. While that ratio has improved slightly over time, it highlights just how much work remains. 

I’ve also seen meaningful progress. Policies like expanded parental leave and pay transparency have made a real difference, signaling that companies are beginning to recognize the importance of equity and long-term retention. Those steps matter, and they should be acknowledged. But they’re not the finish line—just early milestones. 

What continues to be missing in many manufacturing environments is intentional, structured sponsorship for women. Not mentorship alone, but sponsorship—leaders actively advocating for, developing, and elevating female talent into leadership roles. Too often, advancement into supervision or frontline leadership is framed as “superoperator” promotions—rewarding the best technical performer, rather than cultivating broader leadership competencies. That model leaves talented women constrained to roles they’vemastered rather than roles they could grow into. 

If we want to change the 70/30 split, we must shift how we develop and promote talent. 

Women need tangible development pathways, not just encouragement.
They need upskilling opportunities that prepare them for leadership, not just additional technical responsibilities.
They need visible advocates, not just wellmeaning advice. 

I believe manufacturing has a tremendous opportunity right now: to build workplaces where women don’t just work, but lead—where diversity strengthens decisionmaking, culture, and results. The progress I’ve seen makes me hopeful. The gaps I’ve witnessed keep me focused. And the women I’ve worked beside—talented, resilient, innovative—remind me every day why this effort matters. 

We can move the industry forward. But it will take deliberate action, not passive optimism.