Your Accessible Leaders May Be the Real Problem

Sounds pretty counterintuitive, right?

Being able to reach a leader for an answer, especially when they are uniquely qualified to provide it, should be a good thing.

But what if doing that very thing makes the organization overly dependent on one person?

What if it makes the middle manager who could have gotten to an 80% solution hesitant to make the next decision?

What if constantly asking the boss eventually makes the boss wonder why you can't make decisions without them?

And what happens when bringing the boss into the conversation becomes the norm rather than the exception?

Accessibility is a good thing. Dependency is not.

When the senior leader becomes involved in every conversation surrounding their vision, priorities, or intent, they can unintentionally become a single point of failure. Decisions begin flowing through one person. Questions wait for their availability. Middle managers become less confident making decisions without approval. Eventually, the leader becomes the funnel through which everything must pass.

And funnels slow things down.

Organizations should absolutely have accessible leaders. Employees should feel comfortable raising concerns, asking for clarification, and bringing significant issues to leadership.

But accessibility should not replace decision-making at lower levels.

The goal should be to create an organization where people understand the leader's intent well enough to make good decisions without needing the leader in the room every time.

Maybe the question isn't:

“Are our leaders accessible?”

Maybe it's:

“Can our organization still make good decisions when they aren't?”