Three #managers have changed in just over six months. It’s not bad luck. It’s a sign.
When a manager comes and goes within a few weeks, the problem doesn’t lie with their profile. It lies with the company structure. The manager arrives to find #vague roles, #shifting objectives, and delegated responsibilities on paper but with no operational power. They try to take action: they hit a brick wall. They realise one simple thing. The position promised authority, the organisation granted exposure, and that’s where it all falls apart. Three managers in six months point to a #management team incapable of defining the remit. They point to a #selection process based on the prestige of the #CV, not on #actual responsibilities. They point to a lack of #onboarding. They point to a #company ready to demand results, not to support #decisions. The real cost isn’t about the next hire. It’s about internal #trust.
When I look at company data, and
– Every departure reinforces the teams’ cynicism.
– Every change reduces alignment.
– Every failure makes #leadership less credible.
The useful question isn’t about blame. It’s about the #system. What structure makes it inevitable that new hires will leave? Until we have an answer to this, managerial #turnover becomes the norm. Managerial stability depends on clarity of #role, consistent #governance, and a solid relationship with senior management. It does not depend on individual talent. #Kotter links #leadership failures to organisations lacking strategic alignment. If this pattern repeats itself, stopping is better than hiring again.