New Leads Are Handed the Role, Not the Decision

Situation

A lead promoted from within already knows the system better than anyone. They are handed a new contract with the new role and are expected to start performing. A lead hired from outside completes the onboarding every new starter does: the HR modules, and training on the system.

Neither route covers the role itself: its responsibilities, and the unresolved issues that come with it. Those arrive through the handover, as a list of open items: a stock variance, a provider whose failures keep coming back, a sales plan and a production plan that don’t agree. Even when an item is on that list, the decision behind it is not.

The lead knows the work, but not the history behind each item. With a stock variance, for example, they may not know whether provisions were made for the write-off. So they wait for the manager or the next review, or until a deadline or an audit forces the decision. The item is explained and carried over.

Next cycle, the same item is back on the list.

Operational Insight

Changing the format doesn’t change what is left out. The gap is the content of development, not its format.

Most of the industry conversation about supply chain training is about format: online, hybrid or in person. A Supply Chain Management Review piece on supply chain education, drawing on ASCM, weighs the cost, flexibility and networking of each. It concludes that whichever option an organisation chooses, continuing education pays off for company and employee alike.

New leads are rarely shown four things:

• What information is relevant to a decision.
• How to engage the right people to get that information.
• How to make the decision.
• Once the information is known, whether they feel empowered to decide, or know how to.

Each of these is a different stage of the same decision: seeing what matters, bringing in the right people, weighing the options and making the call. The decisions a new lead inherits are rarely alike. That is why leads need to be prepared for decision-making before the role is handed over.

Where This Shows Up

This shows up as the same items on the list, review after review. The explanation is ready before the question is asked. A stock variance, a provider’s repeat failure, a plan gap: each is described accurately and carried forward.

It shows up as decisions that wait for someone else — the manager, the next meeting, one more report — until a deadline or an audit makes them.

It shows up as items set aside by a lead who knows the work better than anyone, because it isn’t clear the decision is theirs to make.

And it shows up at every handover, in two questions nobody asks when the role changes hands: what should the new lead do with the existing list of open items, and are they equipped to make the decisions that come with the position?

Key Takeaway

Next cycle, the list is shorter. The lead knows which items are theirs to decide and which to escalate, and decides them before they are carried over again. An item left on the list doesn’t stay small. Two to three months later, it comes back as a stockout, a missed product launch, or a lost opportunity to acquire another customer. Learning to make decisions is also learning the cost of not making one.

Continue the Conversation

Look at the open items you inherited. Which one is waiting for a decision — and is it yours to make?