Growth almost always means change. As a friend of mine says, growth without change is just swelling. That doesn’t sound healthy to me. As business owners, we should be deliberate about this. Is it worth putting our company, our clients, our team, our vendors, and partners through the stress of change?
I was just chatting with a lawyer about this who had a legitimate argument to not grow his practice. He is a well sought out lawyer on a national scale. The question was: Does he take on more cases? He acknowledged he’d need to step away from some aspects of his cases as he couldn’t do it all himself.
It does put his current cases at least a little bit of risk as his team does not know as much as he does. His other option is to stay the size he is and maintain control over every aspect of the case. He is the best in the world at what he does. Is it unethical not to give current clients the best possible shot at success?
What about delegation?
Delegation is important for a team’s health. You could argue this lawyer should just delegate the non-critical stuff. Rob Glazer talks about mistakes above the waterline – ie, delegating the type of tasks where a failure won’t sink your ship. But what if you’re in a submarine? ie, a scenario where every detail could mean the difference between success or failure. This lawyer gave me a few examples of seemingly innocuous details hidden in the “busy work” aspects of a case that made the difference in major cases.
I’m glad I was talking to a lawyer and not my doctor. I would tell you that in both cases, if I was the client, I would want that person focused on my positive outcome at all costs. However, if I was a member of their team, I would feel disempowered. Over time, I’d show up as either defiant or evading. I would try to keep my my boss the dark (for fear of losing it or of him doing it behind my back). I would eventually either leave, or settle in, accept that my boss is going to do my work for me, and get real good at interneting.
Why did I pick those emotions in particular? They are from a matrix of how we show up to learning environments based on feelings of efficacy, perception of value, and perception of support. I cribbed it from Susan A. Ambrose et. al.'s book, How Learning Works.
Which is more honorable?
Does he stay the size he is and give his existing clients the best possible service possible? Is he doing the people he can’t serve an injustice by not scaling enough to support them? Is he doing his team an injustice by not giving them the space to grow?
There is no right answer other than the one in his heart.
I guess this goes to the crux of this issue. When you get to the straining point of growth, it’s almost a guarantee that you are the blocker. You need that heart to heart with yourself. Do you want to stay where you are and honor the current business? Or do you want to change and grow and honor the vision of what the business could be?
This “grow or die” mentality people talk about is bogus. Not growing or growing are both totally acceptable choices as long as you make the decision thoughtfully. Just put in the effort to make your choice and commit. Change is uncomfortable, painful, not always necessary. When we do it, we should do it deliberately.
Thanks to Tim Mossholder for his photo of a Californian Redwood Forest