In almost every company, there is someone entrusted with the work when there is no longer any room for error. Not because it is in their job description, but because everyone knows they will get it done. They do not need reminders, supervision, or an explanation of how important something is. It is enough to tell them what needs to be done.
At first, it looks like recognition. They are given more complex tasks, greater trust, and increasing responsibility. Their manager is pleased to finally have someone they can count on. Over time, however, something happens that is rarely recognised as a problem. Their reliability becomes the reason they are also given work that others have left unfinished.
When someone falls behind, they step in. When someone makes a mistake, they put it right. When work must be finished ahead of schedule, they are counted on again. And so, almost imperceptibly, someone who was simply doing their own job responsibly becomes the person who also bears the consequences of other people’s irresponsibility.
The worst part is that this is often presented as a sign of trust. We tell them they are irreplaceable, that we would not have succeeded without them, and that only they can finish a particular job. Yet we rarely ask ourselves what lies behind that praise.
Because every time we give a responsible person work that someone else should have completed, we are not solving the problem. We are simply passing its cost on to the person we know will not object.
Over time, that person starts working more while having less and less room for their own development. While others learn, try things, and make mistakes, they finish the work that cannot wait. When an opportunity for advancement arises, their reliability often becomes the very obstacle in their way. They are too necessary in their current role for anyone to move them.
This raises a question every owner and manager should ask themselves: what message are we sending people when we reward responsibility with an additional burden, and irresponsibility by having someone else bear its consequences?
I am not claiming that every additional assignment amounts to exploitation. There are periods when we all have to do more than planned. But if the same person has spent years being the solution to every other person’s failure, the problem is no longer the amount of work.
The problem is how we lead people.
As an owner, I believe one of the more serious mistakes is precisely that it is easiest to place an additional burden on someone who has never let us down. It is much harder to confront the people whose actions keep creating that burden.
Then one day, we are surprised that the most responsible person has become tired, disengaged, or has decided to leave.
Perhaps we did not value them enough.
Or perhaps we praised their endurance so often that we failed to notice how much we were wearing them down.
The greatest injustice towards a responsible person is not always our failure to acknowledge their worth.
Sometimes, it is using their value as an excuse not to demand responsibility from others.
Comments