A leader's attempt to increase velocity by streamlining hiring (e.g., cutting interview rounds) can be misread by the team. What the leader sees as efficiency, employees may perceive as being excluded, making them question if their voice and judgment still matter in the company.
Challenge the 'hire slow' mantra. Hiring is an intuitive guess, so act quickly. Once a person is in the organization, their performance is a known fact, not a guess. This clarity allows for faster decisions—both in removing underperformers and, crucially, in accelerating the promotion of superstars ahead of standard review cycles.
To avoid stifling teams with bureaucracy, leaders should provide slightly less structure than seems necessary. This approach, described as "give ground grudgingly," forces teams to think actively and prevents the feeling of "walking in the muck" that comes from excessive process. It's a sign of a healthy system when people feel they need a bit more structure, not less.
Leaders can reduce team anxiety and prevent misinterpretation by explicitly categorizing input. 'Do' is a direct order (used rarely), 'Try' is an experiment, and 'Consider' is a low-stakes suggestion (used 80-85% of the time). This ensures a leader's random thoughts aren't treated as gospel.
When a leader models extreme behavior, like working immediately after surgery, it sends an implicit message to the team: 'Your personal crises don't matter; the mission is everything.' This can inadvertently create a culture where employees feel they can't take time for personal emergencies.
Innovation is stifled when team members, especially junior ones, don't feel safe to contribute. Without psychological safety, potentially industry-defining ideas are never voiced for fear of judgment. This makes it a critical business issue, not just a 'soft' HR concept.
According to the 'dark side' of Metcalfe's Law, each new team member exponentially increases the number of communication channels. This hidden cost of complexity often outweighs the added capacity, leading to more miscommunication and lost information. Improving operational efficiency is often a better first step than hiring.
Leaders who always have the right answer often create an environment where others feel devalued and excluded. The blocker's real cost is not the accuracy of their ideas, but the damage done to team connection and collaborative decision-making, which prevents the team from arriving at the best solutions together.
To scale hiring efficiently, eliminate ambiguity. Each interviewer must make a definitive 'yes' or 'no' decision. If an interviewer is 'not sure' after their session, they are the problem, not the candidate. This prevents endless interview loops and forces clear, decisive judgment.
Leaders are often insulated from the daily operational friction their teams face. This creates an illusion that tasks are simple, leading to impatience and unrealistic demands. This dynamic drives away competent employees who understand the true complexity, creating a vicious cycle.
Before labeling a team as not resilient, leaders should first examine their own expectations. Often, what appears as a lack of resilience is a natural reaction to systemic issues like overwork, underpayment, and inadequate support, making it a leadership problem, not an employee one.