The leadership load: why operating models fail when executives carry the system instead of leading it

Every operating model depends on one thing more than structure, governance, or process: how much of the system the executive team is personally carrying.

After a change, leaders absorb work the model should handle:

• Decisions,

• Alignment,

• Conflict resolution,

• Translation,

• Escalation,

• Stitching,

• Smoothing, and

• Rework.

Not because they want to. Not because they’re controlling. But because the system isn’t stable enough to run without them yet.

This is the leadership load. The weight executives carry when the operating model can’t carry itself. It’s one of the biggest reasons transformations stall and if there are not conscious interventions to scaffold the model into stability, this becomes a permanent state leaving leaders worse off than before any of the changes took place.

What the leadership load looks like

Different roles, different systems, but the same patterns emerge: when leaders carry the system, the system can’t carry itself.

Example 1: The CPO who becomes the “alignment engine”

A Chief Product Officer spends hours each week reconciling priorities across product, tech, and operations. Historically the organisation has had too much autonomy meaning they try to do too many things at once and get nowhere. Trying to do her job in assessing, prioritising and delivering value is a struggle when she’s playing a game of whack a mole, stopping low value projects every day only to discover new ones popping up to replace them almost immediately.

She’s not over functioning. She’s carrying alignment load. Work the model should handle if the operating rhythm were adhered to and decision rights were clear.

Example 2: The CTO who becomes the “decision safety net”

A Chief Technology Officer finds himself remaking decisions his teams should own.

He’s not micromanaging. He’s carrying the decision load. Work the model should distribute along with the higher degree of information transparency that informs decision making. When teams don’t have the information they need to make the “right” decisions, those higher up will always end up remaking decisions and disempowering their teams.

Example 3: The COO who becomes the “flow stabiliser”

A Chief Operating Officer spends her time unblocking dependencies and smoothing out cross functional friction.

She’s not overstepping. She’s carrying flow load. Work the model should absorb when the flow of interactions between roles works as it was designed to. But between role confusion, old behaviours, and low relationship strength the frictions persist and grow.

Example 4: The GM in Finance who becomes the “glue”

A General Manager in Finance holds together sequencing, capacity, prioritisation, and delivery. Something he never expected to do as they embark on a new multi-year, multi-hundred-million-dollar investment to transform their finance systems and discover they need to embed a new operating model to enable it.

He’s not trying to be the hero. He’s carrying integration load. Work the model should coordinate but people who typically operate in run mode need time and support to shift to working in change mode.

Example 5: The CEO who becomes the “final escalator”

A Chief Executive Officer sees decision bounce between leaders until they eventually land on her desk.

She’s not trying to control and centralise decision making. She’s carrying system load. Work the model should resolve. It does on paper but when decision rights are assigned, leaders don’t quite know what to do with them since they haven’t had such a high level of autonomy before.

Why the leadership load is so destructive

It creates a false sense of progress.

When leaders carry the system:

• Delivery looks stable,

• Decisions get made,

• Issues get resolved, and

• Friction gets smoothed over.

But underneath, the model isn’t maturing. It’s becoming dependent on key people and would fall apart if they stopped carrying the emotionally draining load of holding the system together. The moment these leaders step back or the pressure increases, the system wobbles or breaks.

Operating models don’t fail because leaders aren’t committed. They fail because certain leaders are voluntarily carrying too much of the system for too long.

A quick reflection if this resonates

Take 60 seconds and ask yourself:

“What parts of the system am I personally carrying that the model should carry?”

You’ll know instantly.

If you want to go deeper, ask:

“What would break if I stopped doing that work tomorrow, and who would pick it up - if anyone?”

That’s where the leadership load is hiding.

What the reflection tells you

If you can see the leadership load, you’re already ahead of most organisations.

The question isn’t whether you’re working hard. It’s whether the system is working for or against you.

Leaders who get ahead of this don’t push harder. They build a system that carries itself.

If you’re carrying the system, now is the moment to act

You don’t need to put in more effort or to fight for new headcount. You need a model and an operating system that stands on its own.

If you’re ready to steady the system, let’s work on this together. Here are three ways:

• Interim Executive - when the transformation needs a senior leader inside the organisation to stabilise, steer, and deliver,

• Capability Building - when product and transformation leaders are expected to know how to navigate the people, politics, and performance expectations that come with their jobs, yet no one has taught them these skills during their entire career, and

• Executive Coaching - when senior leaders need a confidential, strategic partner to think clearly, make decisions, and lead through change and complexity.