2. Overcommitment at work: The role of leadership
In my previous post I talked to systemic issues that can lead to organisations overextending themselves. The result is pressure to present progress in a positive light to secure advancement, or attempts to avoid blame for poor performance. Both of these paths result in a similar outcome — an increasing separation of the way the organisation models the world from the reality on the ground. In this post I will focus on the role individuals and leadership play (both positive and negative) in setting and maintaining realistic expectations
Overcommitment in work can arise when there is a shift from the use of real-world feedback to purely subjective measures of success. The danger is this situation encourages distortions of messaging in the pursuit of individual aims — be it plans or schedules, financial reports or business projections. The need to maintain a consistent story also subtly discourages new thinking. Simple models, even if wrong, are easier to create and defend than those that allow for the ambiguity and complexity of delivery (I will cover this in a future post). Where this behaviour remains unchallenged or even rewarded, it becomes the default means of securing status and maintaining power within the organisational hierarchy. This is rational approach for individuals given that our status is such a key aspect of human societies.
The reality is this behaviour can always exist whenever the count of humans in a system is greater than zero. Are we always honest with ourselves when we miss our goals or make promises of action? Are we really thinking through the impacts on others or expressing the problem from a purely personal viewpoint? This effect has to be considered as our lives play out in social constructs with needs, politics and status games.
So what does this all have to do with overcommitment?
Inexperienced or poor managers are less likely to consider these pressures as something to deliberately counteract. Instead of trying to create options for honest feedback, they may avoid challenging conversations with those of higher status, pushing more demands to the teams below them instead. This can result in celebrating toxic behaviours such as an overloaded team constantly taking on more work outside the scope of their weekly priorities. Examples include end of year summaries routinely praising staff for their “commitment” after repeatedly being forced to work overtime, whilst having no time to maintain or learn new skills.
This lack of management effectiveness can quickly become normalised. Agreeing to unrealistic stretch goals beyond a reasonable scope can become portrayed as a sign of leadership ability rather than a failing. Overcommitters quickly lose sight of the fact that focus is a key means to delivering a quality outcome, and that value is derived from excellence in execution. Great client outcome is not the same thing as simply marking an output based milestone green and claiming success.
So how can we escape the overcommitment trap?
Firstly, this is not a quick fix. There are no easy answers otherwise this would not be a common issue. The increased pace of change means that there is always more work to do than there is time to do it, and this pressure will only increase. The answer is not found in unintelligent, throwaway lines like “Do more with less” or “Go the extra mile”, but in the tough choices and required actions to ensure the important things happen.
Any leadership unable to provide focus is messaging that it does not really understand what is important. This is why overcommitment is so toxic. It creates a culture where all demands are valid, overloads delivery teams and sacrifices quality. Teams view managers as incapable and trust erodes, as those same frustrated managers blame teams for lack of delivery to the plan. The organisation slowly loses focus on the outcomes (rather than excelling at them), drowning in work and creating unnecessary conflicts (due to incomplete dependencies and overlaps). As a leader, have you recently checked if the delivery teams within your influence are overloaded? If so, what concrete steps have you taken to resolve the situation?
This is not an academic point. These choices, or lack of them, directly affect all involved. People can end up miserable at work not because they were doing a bad job but because they took personal responsibility for things beyond their control. Plans become increasingly worthless, as it becomes apparent it is impossible to deliver on the commitment, but which portion that will be missed is unclear. This further erodes trust between different parties, increasing the risk of conflict.
The role of leadership is to make decisions when needed, and only reason for overcommitment is that decisions have not been made. Repeated overcommitment advertises poor leadership more effectively than almost any measure.
Try taking a small step today to address it — be persistent, and be patient.
