The fastest way to kill a team’s ownership is to make them dependent on your solutions.
As managers, we are wired to fix things. When a project goes sideways or an employee struggles, the impulse is to jump in and take over. It feels productive in the short term, but every time you do that, you also send a message: “I trust my ability to solve this more than I trust yours.”
You might even convince yourself that this is mentorship (it’s not). But this behaviour is simply a rescue mode that ensures the immediate problem is solved. Meanwhile it increases the odds that your people will fail in the long term. You rob them of the necessary struggle and condition them to wait for your rescue.
Your team’s competence will sink exactly to the level of responsibility you demand of them.
The Indispensable Bottleneck
I’ve seen this constantly in organizations I’ve worked for. There are always managers who prided themselves on being “firefighters,” always saving projects at the last minute. They looked busy and vital, but their team members never leveled up because they rarely experienced real failure.
The leaders I respect understand that their job is not to solve, but to frame the problem.
My biggest development as a specialist was due to a leader who demanded that I solve the issue, even if it meant sitting back and watching me sweat for a bit. I didn’t always appreciate it then, but they prioritized ownership over speed.
Good leaders champion decentralized decision-making. They know teaching someone to find the solution is ten times more valuable than giving them the answer. The difference between coaching and collapsing is thin, and that's where usually managers get it wrong.
Many managers talk about empowerment while their actions scream micromanagement. They preach "proactive leadership" but then jump in to dictate the smallest details, like a subject line on a meaningless email.
Great managers refuse to be the rescue service. They accept that speed will be sacrificed for competence. They endure suboptimal short-term results because those outcomes build resilience.
If you consistently solve the same problems your team should own, sorry, but you're not a good manager. You are simply an indispensable bottleneck.
Define Your Intervention Line
And I’m not saying you have to be hands-off. The goal is to be brave enough to allow productive struggle. It means being willing to watch a minor fire burn, knowing the process of putting it out is the exact lesson your team needs.
So, I want you to ask yourself (and be honest) - Do you feel your primary job is solving problems your reports should handle?
If so, you need to define your intervention line immediately.
Intervene only when the mistake is existential (e.g., losing a client, legal exposure).
Step back when the mistake is merely educational (e.g., a slow process, a suboptimal strategy).
Identify your team's two types of failure and write them down:
Catastrophes (where you must intervene: e.g., legal exposure).
Coaching Opportunities (where you must observe: e.g., a slow process).
When a problem arises, classify it first. If it’s a coaching opportunity, resist dictating the solution. Instead, ask your team the most powerful question: "What is your plan to fix this?"
Then, let them execute it.
Your team’s capacity won't grow until they learn to solve problems without you.
That’s all for today.
See you next Tuesday.