Why leaders stall: workload and job design

When an organization makes cuts, the work does not necessarily leave with the people. Many cuts may make sense on a spreadsheet, but the remaining workload can land on leaders who are already managing teams.

According to Gallup, managers now carry a median of 40% individual contributor work. At the same time, many leaders are seeing their span of control increase. Manager engagement has fallen nine points since 2022, to 22%, according to Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace report.

Together, these pressures point to a job design problem, not a talent problem. A leader may need support, but coaching alone cannot remove work that remains in the role or change an expanding span of control. The boss has the authority to redesign the job: to decide what comes off the leader’s plate and what matters most. Treating a workload problem as an individual shortcoming risks overlooking the conditions that are making the role harder to do.

What the boss can change

The boss has leverage a coach does not: the authority to redesign the leader’s job. Start by looking at the leader’s workload and deciding what can come off their plate. Work often remains even after people are cut, so removing a priority can be more useful than asking the leader to manage more efficiently.

Then agree on the two things that matter most this quarter. Not five: two. A shared focus gives the leader a clearer basis for deciding what deserves their time.

The boss also needs to provide air cover. When the leader says no to a peer or a project, back them. If the boss reverses that decision once, the leader may stop saying no.

Finally, the boss shapes the leader’s reputation with senior executives. How the boss talks about the leader upstairs influences what others believe. If “stalled” becomes the story in the executive suite, the leader cannot rewrite it alone; the boss must change the narrative.

Why coaching the leader alone falls short

Coaching can help a leader get sharper, but those new skills meet their limit when the leader returns to the same job. If the work and pressures around them remain unchanged, frustration builds and engagement drops further.

The leader may try to put coached behaviors into practice while work piles up. With no change to the job, old habits return: the leader quickly reverts to survival mode. The investment in coaching leaks away as the demands of the role take over.

That cycle can leave a capable leader believing they are the problem. They aren’t. The system hasn’t changed, and the old job is still there.

The boss has leverage a coach does not: they can change what is on the leader’s plate, agree on the two priorities that matter most this quarter, and provide cover when the leader pushes back. Without that support, coaching asks the leader to behave differently in conditions that continue to reinforce old habits. Coaching the leader alone may sharpen their skills, but it cannot fix the job they return to.

Questions to ask before coaching begins

Before coaching starts, a boss should answer three questions:

1. What did I add to this job this year?
2. What did I take away?
3. What would the impact be on the organization and me if I lost this leader tomorrow?

Most bosses can answer the first question easily. The second is harder: it can be difficult to see what you have not taken away. Yet that matters, because the work may have grown while the job stayed overloaded.

Look closely at the job the leader is doing now. It may not be the job you gave them. Coaching the leader without changing the job sends them back into the same system, where old habits can return as work piles up and frustration grows.

Fix the job and the leader together. The boss has the authority to redesign the role and the leverage to change priorities or hand decisions back. If nothing changes, the answer to the third question may arrive in a resignation letter.