Where does your involvement make the difference?

Write down the most important outcomes for the next six to twelve months.

Include both current performance and future needs:

• Financial and customer outcomes.
• Essential operational improvements.
• Changes to products, services, or ways of working.
• Leadership and workforce capabilities.
• Risks that could materially affect the organisation.

For each outcome, identify why your involvement is needed.

You may need to:

• Resolve competing priorities.
• Allocate resources across functions.
• Make a decision within your authority.
• Agree on an acceptable level of risk.
• Address a significant leadership gap.
• Maintain a relationship that others cannot manage alone.

Be specific. “Support growth” gives little guidance. “Agree which two markets receive investment and which expansion plans we postpone” identifies a decision.

Then ask:

Does my calendar give these outcomes enough time?

If it does not, decide which existing commitments to reduce.

Look at the previous two weeks of meetings, decisions, and interruptions.

Group your involvement into:

• Setting direction and allocating resources.
• Reviewing performance and significant risks.
• Developing leaders and addressing people issues.
• Managing important external relationships.
• Resolving operational problems.
• Receiving routine updates.

For each recurring commitment, ask:

1. What purpose does this serve?
2. What decision or action follows?
3. Why is my involvement necessary?
4. Could someone else own it?
5. Would a shorter meeting or written update be sufficient?

Look for patterns. Repeated operational escalations may indicate unclear authority, weak coordination, or a capability gap.

For example, if several teams repeatedly ask you to settle scheduling disputes, examine who should decide and what rules they need. Addressing that underlying problem may be more useful than resolving each dispute yourself.

Identify decisions that repeatedly reach you.

For each one, establish:

• Who owns the outcome.
• Who can make the decision.
• Who needs to provide input.
• Which limits apply.
• What requires escalation.
• When the result will be reviewed.

Delegation works better when people understand both their authority and the boundaries around it.

For example:

The operations lead can approve changes within the agreed budget. Changes affecting a major customer commitment or exceeding that budget require executive review.

Check whether the person has the information, skills, and resources needed to exercise that authority.

If decisions continue to return to you, ask why. The issue may be confidence, conflicting instructions, or your own habit of reopening decisions after delegating them.

An initiative can generate considerable activity without improving performance.

For AI, organisational redesign, or any other substantial investment, ask:

• What problem are we addressing?
• Who should experience an improvement?
• What is the current baseline?
• What result would justify continuing?
• What costs, risks, or unintended effects need monitoring?
• Who is accountable for the outcome?

For example, an AI tool intended to improve customer support should be assessed against relevant outcomes such as resolution time, response quality, repeat contacts, and customer experience.

Usage figures can show adoption. They do not, by themselves, establish value.

Examine whether the initiative also requires changes to:

• Responsibilities.
• Workflows.
• Training.
• Performance measures.
• Incentives.
• Review and approval processes.

If employees are expected to experiment but assessed entirely on existing delivery targets, clarify how they should manage that conflict.

Executive meetings should give people a realistic opportunity to raise concerns before commitments become difficult to change.

For an important proposal, ask:

• Which assumptions does this depend on?
• What evidence supports them?
• Who sees the situation differently?
• What would cause us to reconsider?
• What happens if we are wrong?
• Can we test part of the proposal before committing fully?

Invite views from people close to customers and delivery, as well as those responsible for the proposal.

Make uncertainty visible. An estimate, a confirmed fact, and an aspiration should not be presented as equally reliable.

When a disagreement persists, establish what needs resolving:

1. A factual question.
2. A difference in priorities.
3. A disagreement about acceptable risk.
4. Unclear decision-making authority.

Each needs a different response. More analysis may resolve a factual question; competing priorities may require an executive choice.

Immediate problems can consume the time needed to prepare for future ones.

Schedule regular attention for:

• Leadership development and succession.
• Skills the organisation will need.
• Customer and market changes.
• Dependencies on particular people, suppliers, or systems.
• Strategic options that deserve exploration.

Ask:

What are we postponing because the consequences have not become urgent yet?

Choose specific actions. If critical knowledge sits with one person, arrange documentation and shared responsibility. If a future strategy depends on unfamiliar capabilities, identify how to develop or obtain them.

Also review your own contribution:

• Are you too involved in familiar operational work?
• Are you postponing a difficult decision?
• Are people waiting for your approval unnecessarily?
• Are you giving enough attention to developing other leaders?

Choose one behaviour to change and ask a trusted colleague to help you assess progress.