When the volume of work exceeds capacity, teams often stall. HBR subscribers reported this recurring issue in recent surveys, noting that the sheer quantity of tasks creates a sense of futility. Whether the cause is layoffs, budget cuts, or artificial intelligence, leaders frequently try to absorb the excess workload themselves. This approach usually leads to burnout rather than progress.
Free Up Your Team
Executive coach Melody Wilding suggests leaders stop trying to manage every detail. She advises executives to make decision criteria explicit. Leaders should list the factors they prioritize and explain why certain tasks are dropped. This transparency allows teams to act without waiting for constant approval. Wilding also recommends pushing authority down, not just tasks. If employees manage people or work across functions, they should be empowered to ask what work could be handed to others.
One practical strategy involves changing how meetings are run. Matviak and Gardiner suggest making the “mute” button the default on calls. This simple change reduces the chance of dominating conversations or micromanaging without realizing it. It also encourages quieter team members to speak up. Leaders often underestimate how often they interrupt or take over discussions. Honest feedback from peers can reveal these blind spots.
Check the Source of Stress
Leaders must ensure the problem is actually workload. Gargi Sawhney and Mallory McCord analyzed data from 515 studies over 60 years. They found that role overload is a major stressor, but it is not the only one. Role ambiguity and role conflict can be equally damaging. Focusing on the wrong source of stress makes fixing it impossible.
Read Also: AI Agents Coordinate Cross-Departmental Business Decisions
While high volume causes stress, the way a leader manages it determines the outcome. If the manager creates role conflict, the team becomes disengaged. If the manager provides clarity, the team can work through the load.
Rethinking AI in the Workplace
The integration of artificial intelligence requires a shift in mindset. Instead of asking when the technology bubble will pop, leaders should examine the current investment boom. The focus should be on how this capital relates to the broader economy. A common mistake is simply automating old processes. Instead, organizations should design new workflows that account for human authority. When an AI model is uncertain, a human must make the final call.
The Cost of Bad Collaboration
Effective collaboration requires balance between stepping back and stepping in. Ivan Matviak and Heidi K. Gardiner identify two detrimental behaviors: dominating conversations and micromanaging. These actions often appear together and reinforce each other. They frustrate team members and shut down open dialogue. The more senior a leader becomes, the more likely they are to underestimate how often they engage in these habits.
Leaders can address this by collecting honest data. A 360-degree instrument or an anonymous survey can reveal blind spots. Questions should ask if the leader steps back enough or gets too involved in others’ work. Once these patterns are identified, behavioral substitutions can be made.
