The transition from manager to director requires a shift from managing tactical details to 'directing.' A director's value comes from high-level strategy, cross-departmental resource connection, and solving organizational problems, not from knowing more than their direct reports.
Companies mistakenly bundle management with authority, forcing top performers onto a management track to gain influence. Separate them. Define management's role as coordination and context-sharing, allowing senior individual contributors to drive decisions without managing people.
When leading a function outside your expertise (e.g., a comms leader managing BDRs), success depends on hiring a great functional leader. Your role becomes asking them to explain concepts simply until you understand, trusting their expertise, and advocating for their needs, rather than trying to become the expert yourself.
A leader's value isn't being the expert in every marketing function. It's identifying a critical problem, even one they don't fully understand, and taking ownership to push it forward. This often means acting as a project manager: booking the meeting, getting the right people in the room, and driving action items.
The transition to managing managers requires a fundamental identity shift from individual contributor to enabler. A leader's value is no longer in their personal output. They must ask, "Is it more important that I do the work, or that the work gets done?" This question forces a necessary focus on delegation, empowerment, and system-building.
Individual contributors are rewarded for having answers and sharing their expertise. To succeed as a leader, one must fundamentally change their approach. The job becomes about empowering others by asking insightful questions and actively listening, a diametrically opposed skillset that is difficult to adopt.
New leaders often fail because they continue to operate with an individual contributor mindset. Success shifts from personal problem-solving ("soloist") to orchestrating the success of others ("conductor"). This requires a fundamental change in self-perception and approach, not just learning new skills.
The transition from a hands-on contributor to a leader is one of the hardest professional shifts. It requires consciously moving away from execution by learning to trust and delegate. This is achieved by hiring talented people and then empowering them to operate, even if it means simply getting out of their way.
Unlike a line manager who can train direct reports in a specific function, a CEO hires experts for roles they themselves cannot perform (e.g., CFO). A CEO's time spent trying to 'develop' an underperforming executive is a misallocation of their unique responsibilities, which are setting direction and making top-level decisions.
Traditional leadership, designed for the industrial era, uses control to maximize manual output. In today's knowledge economy, leaders must shift to providing context and problems to solve, thereby maximizing what their teams can achieve with their minds.
The biggest blind spot for new managers is the temptation to fix individual problems themselves (e.g., a piece of bad code). This doesn't scale. They must elevate their thinking to solve the system that creates the problems (e.g., why bad code is being written in the first place).