Ownership is powerful. In our team, we lean into it hard - minimal hand-holding, maximum space for people to make their own calls. Most of the time, it works beautifully. But there are edge cases where ownership slips into something else entirely.
One former teammate stands out in my memory. Brilliant mind, but he often over-engineered his solutions. Feedback came late, after days of work, when the code had sprawled into hundreds of lines across dozens of files. What should have been a simple fix ballooned into a tangle of complexity that testing inevitably sent right back.
As a lead, this was one of the hardest balancing acts I've faced. I could see where he was veering off course, and the urge to step in was strong. But my instinct is to guide through questions rather than directives. I know if I state an answer outright, my team tends to agree too quickly - and we lose the benefit of their independent thinking.
Still, accountability doesn't vanish just because you believe in ownership. In one case, after we had already aligned on a simple plan, the “fix” returned days later as a massive rewrite that didn't even solve the root issue. At that point, I had to step in and block the work. He asked me, almost exasp“Whatd, “what do you want me to do?” Not the kind of moment any leader loves, but a reminder: guiding has limits. Sometimes, you have to draw a line.
That tension is real. Letting people struggle long enough to learn, without letting the team or product suffer. Asking the better question, without abdicating your role. Ownership is a gift, but guidance is still a responsibility. The art is in knowing where one ends and the other must begin.
Next time: The Courage to Let Silence Do the Work
Top comments (0)