The Cost of Assumed Capacity

Over the last few years, moving between executive roles, advisory work and trusteeship has changed how I experience decision-making.

In senior settings, decisions are usually sound. Financial implications are modelled. Risk is documented. Trade-offs are articulated. The logic is rarely casual.

A few weeks later, in operational meetings, that same decision often shows up as an additional reporting cycle, a new approval step, a tighter deadline or a resource assumption that wasn’t fully tested. None of it dramatic. All of it cumulative.

The issue isn’t poor intent. It’s proximity.

We are disciplined about challenging the commercial case. We are less consistent about quantifying the operational stretch. Capacity is assumed rather than stress-tested.

Sitting on both sides of that dynamic has changed the questions I ask. I now try to introduce one additional line of enquiry before supporting a proposal: where exactly will this sit once agreed, and how much capacity are we consuming to make it work?

The direction of travel doesn’t always change.

The clarity of responsibility often does.