The Line Between Fixing and Leading
The meeting was going sideways. Two senior leaders were locked in a familiar pattern – talking past each other, defending turf, and quietly recruiting allies around the table. The issue on the agenda wasn’t new. The tension wasn’t either. What was new was the expectant silence that followed, as eyes turned toward “Dave”.
This was the moment leaders know well: Do I step in and correct the course, or do I let the discomfort do some of the work?
Dave knew he could interview. He had enough context to name the real issue, clarify roles, and reset expectations in minutes. He’d done it before. It would be efficient. It would be decisive; and it would almost certainly solve today’s problem.
But, it would also reinforce an unspoken rule: When things get hard, the leader will fix it.
Instead, Dave paused. He named what he was observing – not the solution but the dynamic. He acknowledged the tension in the room and then asked a different question: “What responsibility does each of you have for how this is unfolding right now.”
The room got quieter. No one rushed to answer. That was the point.
What followed wasn’t clean or fast. There were awkward starts, partial admissions, and a few moments where Dave wondered if he’d miscalculated. But slowly, something shifted. The leaders began to speak to each other instead of past each other. Ownership emerged, not because it was assigned but because the space demanded it.
The issue wasn’t fully resolved by the end of the meeting; and that was okay. What was solved was something more important – a pattern.
Later, one of the leaders pulled Dave aside and said, “You could have fixed that for us, but I’m glad you didn’t.” That comment stayed with Dave.
Leadership often rewards intervention. We’re praised for clarity, speed, and decisiveness. But some of the most consequential decisions aren’t about what we fix. They are about what we allow others to face, wrestle with, and ultimately own.
The real work is knowing the difference. To be sure, stepping in can solve a problem. However, creating the conditions for responsibility builds leaders who won’t need you to.